bonginoreport--2020-08-14--Kurt Schlichter: Would the Military Side With Leftist Tyranny or With America?

The Democrats are wargaming how to steal the 2020 election , and after Grandpa Badfinger selected Lady Mac ( Willie ) Brown , their last best hope seems to be the military marching in and removing Donald Trump from the White House after he wins and they refuse to accept the election results .
But will the military actually do the bidding of the coterie of Marxist Muppet masters with their fingers , ironically , up inside Joe Biden like he is a crusty , senile Kermit ?
Which he is , except the real Mr. Miss Piggy isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Frog .
And don ’ t even get me started on his veep , Botoxic K. Between the perma-coup against the American people , the mainstream media ’ s myriad and shameless lies , and the Democrats ’ election fraud agenda ( including the Golden Ticket to anarchy that is mail-in voting ) , it is absolutely clear that the Democrats will not accept Donald Trump ’ s impending victory .
It is also clear that their plan is to sow chaos when they lose , with outright ballot box-stuffing , riots , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they can obscure Trump ’ s win enough to create a patina of fake doubt about the result .
Then they will rush into some Hawaiian courtroom and get some Hawaiian judge to announce that the Delaware Basement Crustacean won the election .
The idea is to then have a deus ex militaria where somehow the establishment gets reestablished forever at gunpoint .
And the liberal elite is said establishment .
But it ’ s not completely crazy , unfortunately , to consider whether the military , or at least a portion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal attempt to seize power .
Here ’ s the troubling truth : the generals will absolutely fall in line with the liberal elite .
“ Wait , ” the reader asks .
“ Aren ’ t generals and majors and stuff conservative ?
” Well , in temperament , yes .
But they are not conservative in terms of American politics .
And for that reason , it is entirely possible , if not likely , that many of them would take the side of the leftist establishment if called upon to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the politicians to decide the matter themselves .
Wow .
Just writing that is scary .
But these are scary times , and we are blessed with what Instapundit Glenn Reynolds tells Americans is “ the worst ruling class in your history.
” The generals are absolutely a part of that failed caste .
The generals – a term I ’ ll use to describe the majority of senior active duty officers ( Colonel/Captain O6 and up ; note that reserve officers have a slightly different perspective , being civilians most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the establishment .
Yes , it is absolutely true that many of them showed great courage in battle against foreign enemies and made great personal sacrifices .
It is also true that in the culture war they have been entirely AWOL .
They are terrified of crossing the establishment by doubting its preferred mores , and that is why they accept every bizarre modern SJW trope regardless of its effect on combat readiness .
They will charge a jihadi with a bayonet and wet themselves in the face of an irate Kirsten Gillibrand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s true .
Here , Trump and his populist movement are agents of rapid and disruptive change .
The military , in which these generals grew up and which gives them their identities , is the least disruptive institution in American society .
The lengthy and laudable tradition of civilian authority over the military , as well as the hierarchical nature of the military itself , makes it instinctively against rapid , disruptive change .
Though the Democrats have moved left , they maintain a headlock on the institutions , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loyal to even if the leaders of those institutions have morphed into rabidly anti-American aspiring dictators .
To embrace Trump and populism is to repudiate the whole establishment hothouse that grew their power and prestige .
They would be opposing themselves .
Look at CNN and see the endless parade of fully semi-automatic Obama generals babbling like idiots about how Trump is ruining their sweet gigs , though they don ’ t put it quite that way .
Look at the appalling Chairman of the Joint Chiefs apologizing for following the elected president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , look at their horror that America is ending those endless wars .
Those are the generals , and they have the elite ’ s back , not yours .
A general who said “ all lives matter ” or refused to buy the ridiculous but fashionable notion that America ’ s greatest strategic threat is the weather a century hence or uttered some other heresy would not be a general much longer – and certainly not cash in on a sweet post-retirement gig at Boeing .
But most Americans don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military of 30 years ago that could actually win a war in a reasonable period of time ( as we did in Desert Storm ) , today ’ s generals benefit from residual respect for yesterday ’ s Cold War military .
Americans are unaware of the devastated culture cultivated by our military senior leadership .
Here ’ s the ruinous legacy of today ’ s generals : Afghanistan is a disaster and still not won , ships colliding and catching fire due to gross failures of leadership , boats of sailors on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iranian Navy , senior officers leaking to the media , colonels , generals and admirals getting court-martialed , massive prosecutorial misconduct by JAGs , woke West Point ( which recently graduated an open communist ) , and troops kneeling before rioters .
It ’ s a military that puts Diversity Day before D-Day .
Unfortunately , the first 24 hours of war with China would make the rot agonizingly apparent – at the cost of thousands of our warriors ’ precious lives .
They ’ ll deny it , of course , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But I fear I ’ m not , because none of the incentives in today ’ s military are aimed toward achieving combat readiness instead of achieving ideological conformity .
So , count on the active duty generals to fall in line when the New York Times trumpets the Democrats ’ line that Trump ’ s victory is illegitimate .
That ’ s the voice of the people they really take their orders from .
Good question , but remember that the military is not just the generals .
The military includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers as well as the enlisted troops .
And while the woke poison has spread into these ranks too , there is a real question about whether those leaders , who are where the tank treads meet the road , would follow an order to make war on American citizens .
That ’ s a harsh way of putting it , but making war is what the military does – it uses fire and maneuver to destroy the enemy , and to the liberal establishment , those of us who refuse to allow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be undone will be the enemy .
Intervention by the military necessarily means America forces killing American patriots .
And no , the New York Times ’ Marxist newsroom will not be exploding in protests over that domestic use of military force ; it will be loudly cheering it .
We know we can not trust this generation of generals to stand up for freedom , but I ’ d like to think that a good portion of the troops would refuse to enter civilian politics in favor of the anti-American left .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to think that we ’ d never see law enforcement officers eagerly obeying the fascist decrees of liberal poohbahs .
The sight of overeager Barney Fifes hassling citizens about piehole thongs made it clear that for some people oaths come behind the giddy joy of power and keeping their pensions .
So , the question is , what will our troops do ?
Will they make war on the American people so that Basement Biden ’ s puppet masters can turn America into Venezuela 2 : The Quickening ?
Or will they say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dictatorship , which is what the Democrats ’ Revenge Agenda proposes ?
Our troops are loved in large part because they don ’ t take a side in domestic politics ; if they do , and turn on the people for the benefit of a senile old puppet and the Truancy Avenger , well , that affection evaporates .
Sadly , we can not rely on the generals to not make the error .
Let ’ s just hope that the danger is mooted because Trump ’ s margin of victory is so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Join Townhall VIP , and get my spectacular new book The 21 Biggest Lies about Donald Trump ( and You ! )
, now in audiobook format as read by the great Tony Katz !

The Democrats are wargaming how to steal the 2020 election, and after Grandpa Badfinger selected Lady Mac (Willie) Brown, their last best hope seems to be the military marching in and removing Donald Trump from the White House after he wins and they refuse to accept the election results. But will the military actually do the bidding of the coterie of Marxist Muppet masters with their fingers, ironically, up inside Joe Biden like he is a crusty, senile Kermit?
Which he is, except the real Mr. Miss Piggy isn’t a manifestly mentally incompetent socialist Trojan Frog.
And don’t even get me started on his veep, Botoxic K.
Between the perma-coup against the American people, the mainstream media’s myriad and shameless lies, and the Democrats’ election fraud agenda (including the Golden Ticket to anarchy that is mail-in voting), it is absolutely clear that the Democrats will not accept Donald Trump’s impending victory. It is also clear that their plan is to sow chaos when they lose, with outright ballot box-stuffing, riots, and endless counts and recounts, so that they can obscure Trump’s win enough to create a patina of fake doubt about the result. Then they will rush into some Hawaiian courtroom and get some Hawaiian judge to announce that the Delaware Basement Crustacean won the election. The idea is to then have a deus ex militaria where somehow the establishment gets reestablished forever at gunpoint. And the liberal elite is said establishment.
But it’s not completely crazy, unfortunately, to consider whether the military, or at least a portion of it, would cooperate in a liberal attempt to seize power. Here’s the troubling truth: the generals will absolutely fall in line with the liberal elite.
“Wait,” the reader asks. “Aren’t generals and majors and stuff conservative?”
Well, in temperament, yes. But they are not conservative in terms of American politics. And for that reason, it is entirely possible, if not likely, that many of them would take the side of the leftist establishment if called upon to resolve a disputed election instead of demurring to the politicians to decide the matter themselves.
Wow. Just writing that is scary. But these are scary times, and we are blessed with what Instapundit Glenn Reynolds tells Americans is “the worst ruling class in your history.” The generals are absolutely a part of that failed caste.
The generals – a term I’ll use to describe the majority of senior active duty officers (Colonel/Captain O6 and up; note that reserve officers have a slightly different perspective, being civilians most of the time) – are creatures of the establishment. Yes, it is absolutely true that many of them showed great courage in battle against foreign enemies and made great personal sacrifices. It is also true that in the culture war they have been entirely AWOL. They are terrified of crossing the establishment by doubting its preferred mores, and that is why they accept every bizarre modern SJW trope regardless of its effect on combat readiness. They will charge a jihadi with a bayonet and wet themselves in the face of an irate Kirsten Gillibrand. It’s weird, but it’s true.
Here, Trump and his populist movement are agents of rapid and disruptive change. The military, in which these generals grew up and which gives them their identities, is the least disruptive institution in American society. The lengthy and laudable tradition of civilian authority over the military, as well as the hierarchical nature of the military itself, makes it instinctively against rapid, disruptive change.
Though the Democrats have moved left, they maintain a headlock on the institutions, and the institutions are what the generals are loyal to even if the leaders of those institutions have morphed into rabidly anti-American aspiring dictators. To embrace Trump and populism is to repudiate the whole establishment hothouse that grew their power and prestige. They would be opposing themselves.
Look at CNN and see the endless parade of fully semi-automatic Obama generals babbling like idiots about how Trump is ruining their sweet gigs, though they don’t put it quite that way. Look at the appalling Chairman of the Joint Chiefs apologizing for following the elected president’s lead. And, especially, look at their horror that America is ending those endless wars.
Those are the generals, and they have the elite’s back, not yours. A general who said “all lives matter” or refused to buy the ridiculous but fashionable notion that America’s greatest strategic threat is the weather a century hence or uttered some other heresy would not be a general much longer – and certainly not cash in on a sweet post-retirement gig at Boeing.
But most Americans don’t see that. Because America remembers the military of 30 years ago that could actually win a war in a reasonable period of time (as we did in Desert Storm), today’s generals benefit from residual respect for yesterday’s Cold War military. Americans are unaware of the devastated culture cultivated by our military senior leadership. Here’s the ruinous legacy of today’s generals: Afghanistan is a disaster and still not won, ships colliding and catching fire due to gross failures of leadership, boats of sailors on tape whimpering as they surrender to the Iranian Navy, senior officers leaking to the media, colonels, generals and admirals getting court-martialed, massive prosecutorial misconduct by JAGs, woke West Point (which recently graduated an open communist), and troops kneeling before rioters. It’s a military that puts Diversity Day before D-Day.
Unfortunately, the first 24 hours of war with China would make the rot agonizingly apparent – at the cost of thousands of our warriors’ precious lives. They’ll deny it, of course, and I fervently hope I’m wrong. But I fear I’m not, because none of the incentives in today’s military are aimed toward achieving combat readiness instead of achieving ideological conformity.
So, count on the active duty generals to fall in line when the New York Times trumpets the Democrats’ line that Trump’s victory is illegitimate. That’s the voice of the people they really take their orders from.
Then what?
Good question, but remember that the military is not just the generals. The military includes the middle-grade and junior officers and non-commissioned officers as well as the enlisted troops. And while the woke poison has spread into these ranks too, there is a real question about whether those leaders, who are where the tank treads meet the road, would follow an order to make war on American citizens.
That’s a harsh way of putting it, but making war is what the military does – it uses fire and maneuver to destroy the enemy, and to the liberal establishment, those of us who refuse to allow the election victory of our candidate to be undone will be the enemy. Intervention by the military necessarily means America forces killing American patriots.
And no, the New York Times’ Marxist newsroom will not be exploding in protests over that domestic use of military force; it will be loudly cheering it.
We know we cannot trust this generation of generals to stand up for freedom, but I’d like to think that a good portion of the troops would refuse to enter civilian politics in favor of the anti-American left. Yet, I would have also liked to think that we’d never see law enforcement officers eagerly obeying the fascist decrees of liberal poohbahs. The sight of overeager Barney Fifes hassling citizens about piehole thongs made it clear that for some people oaths come behind the giddy joy of power and keeping their pensions.
So, the question is, what will our troops do? Will they make war on the American people so that Basement Biden’s puppet masters can turn America into Venezuela 2: The Quickening? Or will they say “No” to imposing a leftist dictatorship, which is what the Democrats’ Revenge Agenda proposes? Our troops are loved in large part because they don’t take a side in domestic politics; if they do, and turn on the people for the benefit of a senile old puppet and the Truancy Avenger, well, that affection evaporates.
Sadly, we cannot rely on the generals to not make the error. Let’s just hope that the danger is mooted because Trump’s margin of victory is so great that the Democrats cannot cheat.
Join Townhall VIP, and get my spectacular new book The 21 Biggest Lies about Donald Trump (and You!), now in audiobook format as read by the great Tony Katz!


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--Cal Thomas: Law(lessness) and (dis)order in Seattle and Elsewhere

What would you think if local politicians decided to cut the size of their fire department while buildings in their city were ablaze ?
What about a general who orders his soldiers to stop fighting and surrender to the enemy ?
Something similar has occurred in the once tranquil city of Seattle , Washington , where in the midst of riots and over the objections of the mayor and police chief , the city council has voted to defund the police and reduce by 100 the number of officers on the force .
The city council added to the indignity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best resigned in her own form of protest .
Seattle has about 1,400 police officers , clearly not enough given the ongoing lawlessness .
The council vote to reduce the force is far less than the 50 percent cut demanded by the Black Lives Matter organization , which increasingly seems to be running -- and ruining -- Seattle and other cities .
This decision could be seen as a victory for mob rule and could encourage more cities to take a knee before criminals .
Not that more evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but in Chicago , which has become an almost daily shooting gallery , Cook County Prosecutor Kim Foxx has decided to drop felony cases , including charges of murder and other serious offenses .
An analysis by the Chicago Tribune found that during Foxx 's tenure , `` 25,183 people have had their felony cases dismissed through November 2019 , up from 18,694 '' under her predecessor .
Last weekend , overnight , rampaging looters streamed into Downtown Chicago by caravan and then proceeded to smash their way into businesses along the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything else they could get their hands on .
Why do n't reporters investigate who organized the raid ?
Where did these people come from ?
Who , what , when , where and why ?
Are n't those the questions every good journalist should ask ?
Journalism was once a proud profession .
What happened ?
Deep beneath the lawlessness spreading like coronavirus across the land is a moral and spiritual drought that politicians do not have the power to fix .
In previous generations , fiery preachers would remind citizens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives .
They called it `` sin , '' but that diagnosis has virtually disappeared , along with the generation of Billy Graham , and we are left with the current moral desert .
We ca n't say we have not been warned by history and experience about the dangers inherent in unrestrained living .
America 's second president , John Adams , said , `` Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people .
It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other . ''
Which begs the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution and our nation when a growing number of those among us become immoral and irreligious ?
That great sage , Benjamin Franklin , remarked at the end of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia : `` I agree to this Constitution ... and I believe , further , that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years , and can only end in despotism , as other forms have done before it , when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government , being incapable of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ philosophy of sound government was that personal and national freedom are in jeopardy if the people become wicked and immoral .
He believed that when such behavior becomes widespread and people fear for their lives and property , demands for a police state become almost inevitable so that order might be restored .
Given what is occurring in Seattle and elsewhere , it would appear we are edging closer to the day when Franklin 's prophecy is fulfilled .

What would you think if local politicians decided to cut the size of their fire department while buildings in their city were ablaze? What about a general who orders his soldiers to stop fighting and surrender to the enemy?
Something similar has occurred in the once tranquil city of Seattle, Washington, where in the midst of riots and over the objections of the mayor and police chief, the city council has voted to defund the police and reduce by 100 the number of officers on the force.
The city council added to the indignity by cutting the chief's salary. Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best resigned in her own form of protest.
Seattle has about 1,400 police officers, clearly not enough given the ongoing lawlessness. The council vote to reduce the force is far less than the 50 percent cut demanded by the Black Lives Matter organization, which increasingly seems to be running -- and ruining -- Seattle and other cities.
This decision could be seen as a victory for mob rule and could encourage more cities to take a knee before criminals. Not that more evidence is needed that the mob is winning, but in Chicago, which has become an almost daily shooting gallery, Cook County Prosecutor Kim Foxx has decided to drop felony cases, including charges of murder and other serious offenses. An analysis by the Chicago Tribune found that during Foxx's tenure, "25,183 people have had their felony cases dismissed through November 2019, up from 18,694" under her predecessor.
Last weekend, overnight, rampaging looters streamed into Downtown Chicago by caravan and then proceeded to smash their way into businesses along the Magnificent Mile, stealing high-end merchandise and anything else they could get their hands on. Why don't reporters investigate who organized the raid? Where did these people come from? Who, what, when, where and why? Aren't those the questions every good journalist should ask? Journalism was once a proud profession. What happened?
Deep beneath the lawlessness spreading like coronavirus across the land is a moral and spiritual drought that politicians do not have the power to fix. In previous generations, fiery preachers would remind citizens of the consequences of living unrestrained and unaccountable lives. They called it "sin," but that diagnosis has virtually disappeared, along with the generation of Billy Graham, and we are left with the current moral desert.
We can't say we have not been warned by history and experience about the dangers inherent in unrestrained living. America's second president, John Adams, said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Which begs the question as to what happens to our Constitution and our nation when a growing number of those among us become immoral and irreligious?
That great sage, Benjamin Franklin, remarked at the end of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia: "I agree to this Constitution ... and I believe, further, that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic government, being incapable of any other."
Franklin's basic philosophy of sound government was that personal and national freedom are in jeopardy if the people become wicked and immoral. He believed that when such behavior becomes widespread and people fear for their lives and property, demands for a police state become almost inevitable so that order might be restored.
Given what is occurring in Seattle and elsewhere, it would appear we are edging closer to the day when Franklin's prophecy is fulfilled.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--Larry Elder: Liberal and Conservative Agree That Fathers Matter

America has witnessed months of civil unrest in cities around America following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis .
Many of the protesters decry income and net worth `` inequality . ''
But the most serious `` inequality '' is the unequal percentage of fathers in Black households , a phenomenon that has been encouraged by government policies that normalize and reward out-of-wedlock births .
In 1965 , Daniel Patrick Moynihan , who was assistant secretary of Labor to President Lyndon B. Johnson , published `` The Negro Family : The Case for National Action . ''
At that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ born outside of wedlock , a number that this former adviser to President John F. Kennedy , future adviser to President Richard Nixon , future U.S. ambassador and future Democratic senator from New York said was catastrophic to the Black community .
Moynihan wrote : `` A community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken homes , dominated by women , never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority , never acquiring any rational expectations about the future — that community asks for and gets chaos .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ lashing out at the whole social structure — that is not only to be expected , it is very near to inevitable . ''
Moynihan , according to his daughter , `` was crucified by the left , '' many of whom considered the book racist .
Maura Moynihan said : `` To this day members of the New York and DC elite insult and attack me at cocktail parties for being his daughter . ''
But since the publication of her father 's controversial report , the percent of Black children entering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home has almost tripled .
One of the most prominent , if not the most prominent , liberal think tanks in America is the Brookings Institute .
On the right , one of the most prominent , if not the most prominent , conservative think tanks is the Heritage Foundation .
Yet despite their ideological differences , they agree on America 's most important domestic issue : Fathers matter .
In 2015 , Isabel V. Sawhill , a senior fellow at Brookings , wrote `` Purposeful Parenthood '' and said : '' The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ single parents is no longer much debated .
They do less well in school , are less likely to graduate , and are more likely to be involved in crime , teen pregnancy , and other behaviors that make it harder to succeed in life .
Not every child raised by a single parent will suffer from the experience , but , on average , a lone parent has fewer resources — both time and money — with which to raise a child .
Poverty rates for single-parent families are five times those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of such families since 1970 has increased the overall child poverty rate by about 5 percentage points ( from 20 to 25 percent ) .
... '' Recent research suggests that boys are indeed more affected than girls by the lack of a male role model in the family .
If true , this sets the stage for a cycle of poverty in which mother-headed families produce boys who go on to father their own children outside marriage . ''
In 2014 , Brookings also published `` The Unequal Burden of Crime and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former Brookings expert Benjamin H. Harris and nonresident senior fellow Melissa Kearney .
They wrote : `` ( F ) or an African American child whose father does not have a high school diploma , there is roughly a 50 percent chance that his or her father will be in prison by the time of the child 's fourteenth birthday .
That so many of our nation 's children — poor , minority children , in particular — grow up with an incarcerated parent makes their chances of success that much harder .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation , wrote in 2012 `` Marriage : America 's Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty , '' in which he made the same case as did the researchers from Brookings : `` Child poverty is an ongoing national concern , but few are aware of its principal cause : the absence of married fathers in the home .
According to the U.S. Census , the poverty rate for single parents with children in the United States in 2009 was 37.1 percent .
The rate for married couples with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a married family reduced a child 's probability of living in poverty by about 82 percent .
`` Some of this difference in poverty is due to the fact that single parents tend to have less education than married couples , but even when married couples are compared to single parents with the same level of education , the married poverty rate will still be more than 75 percent lower .
Marriage is a powerful weapon in fighting poverty .
In fact , being married has the same effect in reducing poverty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a parent 's level of education has . ''
Rapper T.I .
recently said : `` If ( Blacks ) make up for 13 % of this nation 's population , we should make up for 13 % of the ownership of land .
We should be representing at least 13 % , 14 % on boards ( of ) financial institutions , and so on and so forth . ''
Does this 13 % rule apply to the NBA , where three-quarters of the players are Black ?
Does this apply to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America 's homicide victims are Black ?
More importantly , does this apply to the percentage of Black kids born outside of marriage ?
Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk show host .
His latest book , `` The New Trump Standard , '' is available in paperback from Amazon.com and for Nook , Kindle , iBooks and GooglePlay .
To find out more about Larry Elder , or become an `` Elderado , '' visit www.LarryElder.com .
Follow Larry on Twitter @ LarryElder .
To read features @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com .

America has witnessed months of civil unrest in cities around America following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Many of the protesters decry income and net worth "inequality." But the most serious "inequality" is the unequal percentage of fathers in Black households, a phenomenon that has been encouraged by government policies that normalize and reward out-of-wedlock births.
In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who was assistant secretary of Labor to President Lyndon B. Johnson, published "The Negro Family: The Case for National Action." At that time, 25% of Blacks were born outside of wedlock, a number that this former adviser to President John F. Kennedy, future adviser to President Richard Nixon, future U.S. ambassador and future Democratic senator from New York said was catastrophic to the Black community.
Moynihan wrote: "A community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken homes, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any rational expectations about the future — that community asks for and gets chaos. Crime, violence, unrest, unrestrained lashing out at the whole social structure — that is not only to be expected, it is very near to inevitable."
Moynihan, according to his daughter, "was crucified by the left," many of whom considered the book racist. Maura Moynihan said: "To this day members of the New York and DC elite insult and attack me at cocktail parties for being his daughter." But since the publication of her father's controversial report, the percent of Black children entering the world without a father in the home has almost tripled.
One of the most prominent, if not the most prominent, liberal think tanks in America is the Brookings Institute. On the right, one of the most prominent, if not the most prominent, conservative think tanks is the Heritage Foundation. Yet despite their ideological differences, they agree on America's most important domestic issue: Fathers matter.
In 2015, Isabel V. Sawhill, a senior fellow at Brookings, wrote "Purposeful Parenthood" and said:
"The effects on children of the increase in single parents is no longer much debated. They do less well in school, are less likely to graduate, and are more likely to be involved in crime, teen pregnancy, and other behaviors that make it harder to succeed in life. Not every child raised by a single parent will suffer from the experience, but, on average, a lone parent has fewer resources — both time and money — with which to raise a child. Poverty rates for single-parent families are five times those for married-parent families. ... The growth of such families since 1970 has increased the overall child poverty rate by about 5 percentage points (from 20 to 25 percent). ...
"Recent research suggests that boys are indeed more affected than girls by the lack of a male role model in the family. If true, this sets the stage for a cycle of poverty in which mother-headed families produce boys who go on to father their own children outside marriage."
In 2014, Brookings also published "The Unequal Burden of Crime and Incarceration on America's Poor" by former Brookings expert Benjamin H. Harris and nonresident senior fellow Melissa Kearney. They wrote: "(F)or an African American child whose father does not have a high school diploma, there is roughly a 50 percent chance that his or her father will be in prison by the time of the child's fourteenth birthday. That so many of our nation's children — poor, minority children, in particular — grow up with an incarcerated parent makes their chances of success that much harder."
Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, wrote in 2012 "Marriage: America's Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty," in which he made the same case as did the researchers from Brookings: "Child poverty is an ongoing national concern, but few are aware of its principal cause: the absence of married fathers in the home. According to the U.S. Census, the poverty rate for single parents with children in the United States in 2009 was 37.1 percent. The rate for married couples with children was 6.8 percent. Being raised in a married family reduced a child's probability of living in poverty by about 82 percent.
"Some of this difference in poverty is due to the fact that single parents tend to have less education than married couples, but even when married couples are compared to single parents with the same level of education, the married poverty rate will still be more than 75 percent lower. Marriage is a powerful weapon in fighting poverty. In fact, being married has the same effect in reducing poverty that adding five to six years to a parent's level of education has."
Rapper T.I. recently said: "If (Blacks) make up for 13% of this nation's population, we should make up for 13% of the ownership of land. We should be representing at least 13%, 14% on boards (of) financial institutions, and so on and so forth." Does this 13% rule apply to the NBA, where three-quarters of the players are Black? Does this apply to homicides, given that almost half of America's homicide victims are Black? More importantly, does this apply to the percentage of Black kids born outside of marriage?
Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk show host. His latest book, "The New Trump Standard," is available in paperback from Amazon.com and for Nook, Kindle, iBooks and GooglePlay. To find out more about Larry Elder, or become an "Elderado," visit www.LarryElder.com. Follow Larry on Twitter @LarryElder. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--Giuliani-Linked Charity Steps in After 9/11 “Tribute in Light” Cancellation

The Stephen Siller Tunnel to Towers Charity is stepping up with their own 9/11 commemorations as New York ’ s official , regular commemorations are halted by De Blasio ’ s New York City .
The city ’ s regular and iconic light tribute in memory of those who lost their lives in the September 11th terror attacks in 2001 was cancelled because of the CCP-virus pandemic , officials announced on Thursday .
“ This incredibly difficult decision was reached in consultation with our partners after concluding the health risks during the pandemic were far too great for the large @ @ @ @ @ @ @ website read .
Now , a charity founded to assist 9/11 victims and their families as well as U.S. combat veterans is stepping up to ensure the memorial continues .
Tunnel to Towers announced Friday that they will hold a special memorial ceremony in lower Manhattan in a bid to keep the 9/11 commemorations uninterrupted .
“ The twin beams of light that shine over lower Manhattan in silent tribute to those lost on 9/11 are an iconic symbol of hope visibly showing that light will always triumph over darkness , ” said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Tunnel to Towers Foundation .
He added : “ We will do everything that is humanly possible to make sure that on September 11 , the night sky at Ground Zero will be illuminated with our Towers of Light tribute.
” Tunnel to Towers , which counts former Mayor Rudy Giuliani among its honorary leadership , say they will take every possible precaution to ensure the safety of those attending this ceremony .
They say masks will be provided on-site and will be mandatory for all in attendance , social distancing will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ available .
The Foundation is also inviting family members of 9/11 victims wishing to take part in the ceremony to register at Tunnel2Towers.org .
Members of the public can donate to the charity and its efforts here .

The Stephen Siller Tunnel to Towers Charity is stepping up with their own 9/11 commemorations as New York’s official, regular commemorations are halted by De Blasio’s New York City.
The city’s regular and iconic light tribute in memory of those who lost their lives in the September 11th terror attacks in 2001 was cancelled because of the CCP-virus pandemic, officials announced on Thursday.
“This incredibly difficult decision was reached in consultation with our partners after concluding the health risks during the pandemic were far too great for the large crew required,” the 9/11 Museum website read.
Now, a charity founded to assist 9/11 victims and their families as well as U.S. combat veterans is stepping up to ensure the memorial continues.
Tunnel to Towers announced Friday that they will hold a special memorial ceremony in lower Manhattan in a bid to keep the 9/11 commemorations uninterrupted.
“The twin beams of light that shine over lower Manhattan in silent tribute to those lost on 9/11 are an iconic symbol of hope visibly showing that light will always triumph over darkness,” said Frank Siller, Chairman and CEO of the Tunnel to Towers Foundation.
He added: “We will do everything that is humanly possible to make sure that on September 11, the night sky at Ground Zero will be illuminated with our Towers of Light tribute.”
Tunnel to Towers, which counts former Mayor Rudy Giuliani among its honorary leadership, say they will take every possible precaution to ensure the safety of those attending this ceremony. They say masks will be provided on-site and will be mandatory for all in attendance, social distancing will be enforced and hand sanitizer will be available.
The Foundation is also inviting family members of 9/11 victims wishing to take part in the ceremony to register at Tunnel2Towers.org.
Members of the public can donate to the charity and its efforts here.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--Former Obama Speechwriter Mocks Notion That Kamala Is a Moderate

Former staffers to President Barack Obama are mocking the idea California Sen. Kamala Harris is a `` moderate '' choice on presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden 's ticket .
In the latest episode of the Pod Save America podcast , Jon Favreau , a former speechwriter to Obama , spoke with fellow Obama staffers Daniel Pfeiffer and Alyssa Mastromonaco on Biden 's selection of Harris as his running mate , criticizing liberals and reporters who have deemed her a `` moderate '' or `` centrist . ''
`` It was hilarious to me that she 's being called , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ' like Joe Biden has found a fellow moderate or centrist .
She supports something extremely close to 'Medicare for All , ' which Bernie Sanders acknowledged in his statement supporting her .
She 's for the Green New Deal .
She has one of the most liberal records in the U.S. Senate , '' Favreau said .
`` If you want to call ... Kamala Harris 's record in the Senate and her policies that she 's supporting now centrist or moderate , great .
If that 's where the Overton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the progressive activists , because you have f -- -ing moved the shit out of that window , that supporting the Green New Deal and basically Medicare for All is now moderate and centrist .
Fantastic , I 'll take it , '' He continued .
Earlier , Mastromonaco told liberals to `` come the f -- - on , '' encouraging them to focus entirely on the general election and then protest a Biden-Harris administration on their promises .
`` Let 's just get elected , and then ... let 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you want to do .
But let 's just keep our eye on the ball here , '' she said .
Pfeiffer agreed with his colleagues but noted it 's hard to tell liberals not to be disappointed with the Democratic nominee .
He added that Biden shifted to the left during the campaign on a variety of issues and that shift should serve as a sign that liberal activists will have `` an opportunity to have a real influence on the agenda in a Biden-Harris administration . ''

Former staffers to President Barack Obama are mocking the idea California Sen. Kamala Harris is a "moderate" choice on presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's ticket.
In the latest episode of the Pod Save America podcast, Jon Favreau, a former speechwriter to Obama, spoke with fellow Obama staffers Daniel Pfeiffer and Alyssa Mastromonaco on Biden's selection of Harris as his running mate, criticizing liberals and reporters who have deemed her a "moderate" or "centrist."
"It was hilarious to me that she's being called, in all this coverage, a 'moderate,' like Joe Biden has found a fellow moderate or centrist. She supports something extremely close to 'Medicare for All,' which Bernie Sanders acknowledged in his statement supporting her. She's for the Green New Deal. She has one of the most liberal records in the U.S. Senate," Favreau said.
"If you want to call ... Kamala Harris's record in the Senate and her policies that she's supporting now centrist or moderate, great. If that's where the Overton window has moved, then congratulations to all the progressive activists, because you have f---ing moved the shit out of that window, that supporting the Green New Deal and basically Medicare for All is now moderate and centrist. Fantastic, I'll take it," He continued.
Earlier, Mastromonaco told liberals to "come the f--- on," encouraging them to focus entirely on the general election and then protest a Biden-Harris administration on their promises. "Let's just get elected, and then ... let's go ahead and protest or do whatever you want to do. But let's just keep our eye on the ball here," she said.
Pfeiffer agreed with his colleagues but noted it's hard to tell liberals not to be disappointed with the Democratic nominee. He added that Biden shifted to the left during the campaign on a variety of issues and that shift should serve as a sign that liberal activists will have "an opportunity to have a real influence on the agenda in a Biden-Harris administration."


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--D.C. Circuit Court Spares Hillary From Deposition in Email Scandal

Four-plus years after the James Comey-led FBI chose not to file charges against Hillary Clinton , despite evidence she transmitted classified information on an insecure email server , a federal appeals court Friday gave the former secretary of state another legal pass in the case .
A three-judge panel of the D.C .
Circuit Court of Appeals granted a writ of mandamus requested by Clinton 's lawyers overturning a judge 's order that she submit to a sworn deposition in a Freedom of Information Act case brought by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch .
The court ruled that U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the deposition in the first place .
`` Discovery in FOIA cases is not a punishment , and the district court has no basis to order further inquiry into Secretary Clinton ’ s state of mind , '' the appeals court ruled .
Judicial Watch had sought to secure the deposition to explore whether Clinton 's use of the private server to transmit government documents was an effort to evade the legal requirements of the FOIA law .
The group said Friday afternoon it is reviewing whether to appeal .
`` We 're @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Judicial Watch 's Tom Fitton told Just the News .
The court ruling comes four years and one month after Comey announced on July 5 , 2016 that he had unilaterally decided not to seek criminal charges against Clinton for transmitting highly classified information on her private email server .
Comey was later fired from his post and an inspector general ruled the FBI director had wrongly `` usurped '' the Justice Department 's authority to decide whether charges should have been filed .
It was that very same day that former MI-6 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Clinton 's opposition research efforts -- walked the first piece of information of his now infamous anti-Trump dossier into the FBI office in London .
You can read the court 's full decision here .

Four-plus years after the James Comey-led FBI chose not to file charges against Hillary Clinton, despite evidence she transmitted classified information on an insecure email server, a federal appeals court Friday gave the former secretary of state another legal pass in the case.
A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a writ of mandamus requested by Clinton's lawyers overturning a judge's order that she submit to a sworn deposition in a Freedom of Information Act case brought by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.
The court ruled that U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth erred in ordering the deposition in the first place.
"Discovery in FOIA cases is not a punishment, and the district court has no basis to order further inquiry into Secretary Clinton’s state of mind," the appeals court ruled.
Judicial Watch had sought to secure the deposition to explore whether Clinton's use of the private server to transmit government documents was an effort to evade the legal requirements of the FOIA law.
The group said Friday afternoon it is reviewing whether to appeal.
"We're disappointed and considering our options," Judicial Watch's Tom Fitton told Just the News.
The court ruling comes four years and one month after Comey announced on July 5, 2016 that he had unilaterally decided not to seek criminal charges against Clinton for transmitting highly classified information on her private email server.
Comey was later fired from his post and an inspector general ruled the FBI director had wrongly "usurped" the Justice Department's authority to decide whether charges should have been filed.
It was that very same day that former MI-6 agent Christopher Steele -- working on behalf of Clinton's opposition research efforts -- walked the first piece of information of his now infamous anti-Trump dossier into the FBI office in London.
You can read the court's full decision here.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--9th Circuit Rules Large-Capacity Magazine Bans Violate Second Amendment

In a move that could ultimately have legal ramifications nationwide , a three judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has invalidated a California law banning the sale and possession of ammunition magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition , ruling that the state law violates the Second Amendment rights of residents .
Judge Kenneth Lee , writing for the majority , declared that “ even well intentioned laws must pass constitutional muster , ” arguing that California ’ s ban on so-called large capacity magazines should be invalidated because it “ strikes at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to armed self defense.
” California ’ s law imposes a substantial burden on this right to self-defense .
The ban makes it criminal for Californians to own magazines that come standard in Glocks , Berettas , and other handguns that are staples of self-defense .
Its scope is so sweeping that half of all magazines in America are now unlawful to own in California .
Even law-abiding citizens , regardless of their training and track record , must alter or turn over to the state any LCMs that they may have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up to a year in jail .
The state of California has latitude in enacting laws to curb the scourge of gun violence , and has done so by imposing waiting periods and many other limitations .
But the Second Amendment limits the state ’ s ability to second guess a citizen ’ s choice of arms if it imposes a substantial burden on her right to self-defense .
Many Californians may find solace in the security of a handgun equipped with an LCM : those who live in rural areas where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law-abiding citizens trapped in high crime areas , communities that distrust or depend less on law enforcement , and many more who rely on their firearms to protect themselves and their families .
California ’ s almost blanket ban on LCMs goes too far in substantially burdening the people ’ s right to self-defense .
California Rifle & Pistol Association president Chuck Michel calls today ’ s decision a huge victory for gun owners , and he ’ s absolutely right , even though California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has a couple of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The AG could ask an en banc panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit to rehear the case , or he could appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court .
Of course , SCOTUS has been reluctant to hear any Second Amendment cases in recent years , and there ’ s a great deal of speculation that Chief Justice John Roberts wants to avoid taking up any hot-button cases dealing with the right to keep and bear arms .
An en banc review of the case by a broader panel of judges on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Becerra , given the shift in the balance of the court .
Long considered to be the most left-leaning of all the circuits , thanks to President Donald Trump ’ s judicial appointments over the past four years the Ninth Circuit has become much more balanced , and there ’ s a strong possibility than an en banc review would have a majority of Republican-appointed judges on the panel .
That doesn ’ t guarantee that the panel would uphold today ’ s decision , but generally speaking , the odds of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are far lower than what they would have been just a couple of years ago .
As for the national implications for today ’ s decision , the Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction not only over California law , but a number of other western states ; Hawaii , Alaska , Arizona , Oregon , Washington , Nevada , Idaho , and Montana .
Today ’ s ruling will immediately impact the ban on handgun magazines over ten rounds that ’ s currently law in Hawaii , but it also creates a split among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of which have previously upheld magazine capacity restrictions .
That increases the odds that the Supreme Court would agree to hear this case , because the Court tends to wait until there ’ s conflict between lower courts before weighing in .
Second Amendment groups are already sounding off on today ’ s court victory , with the NRA noting the potential national implications for the decision .
The Second Amendment Foundation ’ s Alan Gottlieb is also praising the decision , noting that while the organization didn ’ t bring the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all gun owners , and the majority opinion reflects our arguments in an amicus brief we submitted along with several other organizations .
Most importantly , the panel majority used strict scrutiny to make its determination , and that is a huge milestone.
” That ’ s actually a hugely important point .
Since the Heller and McDonald decisions a decade ago , too many federal courts have upheld gun control laws by relying on intermediate scrutiny in determining whether or not various gun laws are constitutional .
That vague and fuzzy standard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Ninth Circuit in today ’ s decision in Duncan v. Becerra .
Judge Lee writes in his opinion that the reason the panel adopted a strict scrutiny standard of review is simple ; the law in question strikes at the core of the Second Amendment and poses a substantial burden on law-abiding gun owners who may want more a ten round magazine for self-defense .
The nub of the state ’ s position is that even though it bars Californians from owning one of every two magazines in the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because Californians can still possess other magazines .
But no court would hold that the First Amendment allows the government to ban “ extreme ” artwork from Mapplethorpe just because the people can still enjoy Monet or Matisse .
Nor would a court ever allow the government to outlaw so-called “ dangerous ” music by , say , Dr. Dre , merely because the state has chosen not to outlaw Debussy .
And we would never sanction governmental banning of allegedly “ inflammatory ” views expressed in Daily Kos or Breitbart on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal… Law-abiding citizens trapped in high-crime areas where the law enforcement is overtaxed may defend themselves in their homes with a handgun outfitted with LCMs .
And in incidents of mass chaos and unrest , law enforcement simply may be unable to protect the people , leaving them solely responsible for their own safety in a seemingly Hobbesian world .
Finally , many citizens will not take any chances or compromise their ability to defend themselves and their families , and they may place their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a last resort .
Simply put , the guardrails found in our precedent that limit the government ’ s intrusion on the Second Amendment right do not exist in California ’ s near-categorical ban of LCMs .
It imposes a substantial burden on the people ’ s Second Amendment rights .
Strict scrutiny applies .
So when can California residents go out and purchase a 20-round magazine ?
It may be soon , but we ’ re not quite there yet .
Today ’ s decision affirms the original decision by District Judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own decision a week or so after he originally released his opinion .
It will be up to Benitez to lift that stay , which would allow for the sale of magazines over ten rounds .
I think it ’ s likely that Benitez will keep the stay in place , at least for now , while he waits for California Attorney General Xavier Becerra to decide if he ’ ll appeal en banc to the Ninth Circuit or try to take the case directly to SCOTUS .
Even though Californians may not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new 20-round magazine this weekend , this is still a hugely important decision and a reminder of the importance of the Second Amendment in this year ’ s elections .
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris want to take California ’ s magazine ban nationwide , and if they win in November they ’ re likely to do just that as quickly as they possibly can .
Today ’ s ruling cuts against their argument that a ban on so-called large capacity magazines is just common sense , because the Ninth Circuit says it @ @ @ @ @

In a move that could ultimately have legal ramifications nationwide, a three judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has invalidated a California law banning the sale and possession of ammunition magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition, ruling that the state law violates the Second Amendment rights of residents.
Judge Kenneth Lee, writing for the majority, declared that “even well intentioned laws must pass constitutional muster,” arguing that California’s ban on so-called large capacity magazines should be invalidated because it “strikes at the core of the Second Amendment – the right to armed self defense.”
California’s law imposes a substantial burden on this right to self-defense. The ban makes it criminal for Californians to own magazines that come standard in Glocks, Berettas, and other handguns that are staples of self-defense. Its scope is so sweeping that half of all magazines in America are now unlawful to own in California. Even law-abiding citizens, regardless of their training and track record, must alter or turn over to the state any LCMs that they may have legally owned for years — or face up to a year in jail. The state of California has latitude in enacting laws to curb the scourge of gun violence, and has done so by imposing waiting periods and many other limitations. But the Second Amendment limits the state’s ability to second guess a citizen’s choice of arms if it imposes a substantial burden on her right to self-defense. Many Californians may find solace in the security of a handgun equipped with an LCM: those who live in rural areas where the local sheriff may be miles away, law-abiding citizens trapped in high crime areas, communities that distrust or depend less on law enforcement, and many more who rely on their firearms to protect themselves and their families. California’s almost blanket ban on LCMs goes too far in substantially burdening the people’s right to self-defense.
California Rifle & Pistol Association president Chuck Michel calls today’s decision a huge victory for gun owners, and he’s absolutely right, even though California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has a couple of options available to him on appeal. The AG could ask an en banc panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit to rehear the case, or he could appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. Of course, SCOTUS has been reluctant to hear any Second Amendment cases in recent years, and there’s a great deal of speculation that Chief Justice John Roberts wants to avoid taking up any hot-button cases dealing with the right to keep and bear arms.
An en banc review of the case by a broader panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit also carries some risk for Becerra, given the shift in the balance of the court. Long considered to be the most left-leaning of all the circuits, thanks to President Donald Trump’s judicial appointments over the past four years the Ninth Circuit has become much more balanced, and there’s a strong possibility than an en banc review would have a majority of Republican-appointed judges on the panel. That doesn’t guarantee that the panel would uphold today’s decision, but generally speaking, the odds of California prevailing in an en banc review are far lower than what they would have been just a couple of years ago.
As for the national implications for today’s decision, the Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction not only over California law, but a number of other western states; Hawaii, Alaska, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Idaho, and Montana. Today’s ruling will immediately impact the ban on handgun magazines over ten rounds that’s currently law in Hawaii, but it also creates a split among the federal courts of appeals, some of which have previously upheld magazine capacity restrictions. That increases the odds that the Supreme Court would agree to hear this case, because the Court tends to wait until there’s conflict between lower courts before weighing in.
Second Amendment groups are already sounding off on today’s court victory, with the NRA noting the potential national implications for the decision.
BREAKING NEWS: @NRA scores a HUGE win in California today. The 9th Circuit, led by a Trump-appointed judge, rules that ban on magazines with more than 10 rounds is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. This case will have repercussions nationwide. — NRA (@NRA) August 14, 2020
The Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottlieb is also praising the decision, noting that while the organization didn’t bring the case, it is “a victory for all gun owners, and the majority opinion reflects our arguments in an amicus brief we submitted along with several other organizations. Most importantly, the panel majority used strict scrutiny to make its determination, and that is a huge milestone.”
That’s actually a hugely important point. Since the Heller and McDonald decisions a decade ago, too many federal courts have upheld gun control laws by relying on intermediate scrutiny in determining whether or not various gun laws are constitutional. That vague and fuzzy standard is lower than the strict scrutiny used by the Ninth Circuit in today’s decision in Duncan v. Becerra. Judge Lee writes in his opinion that the reason the panel adopted a strict scrutiny standard of review is simple; the law in question strikes at the core of the Second Amendment and poses a substantial burden on law-abiding gun owners who may want more a ten round magazine for self-defense.
The nub of the state’s position is that even though it bars Californians from owning one of every two magazines in the United States, that restriction is not substantially burdensome because Californians can still possess other magazines. But no court would hold that the First Amendment allows the government to ban “extreme” artwork from Mapplethorpe just because the people can still enjoy Monet or Matisse. Nor would a court ever allow the government to outlaw so-called “dangerous” music by, say, Dr. Dre, merely because the state has chosen not to outlaw Debussy. And we would never sanction governmental banning of allegedly “inflammatory” views expressed in Daily Kos or Breitbart on the grounds that the people can still read the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal… Law-abiding citizens trapped in high-crime areas where the law enforcement is overtaxed may defend themselves in their homes with a handgun outfitted with LCMs. And in incidents of mass chaos and unrest, law enforcement simply may be unable to protect the people, leaving them solely responsible for their own safety in a seemingly Hobbesian world. Finally, many citizens will not take any chances or compromise their ability to defend themselves and their families, and they may place their trust in guns equipped with LCMs as a last resort. Simply put, the guardrails found in our precedent that limit the government’s intrusion on the Second Amendment right do not exist in California’s near-categorical ban of LCMs. It imposes a substantial burden on the people’s Second Amendment rights. Strict scrutiny applies.
So when can California residents go out and purchase a 20-round magazine? It may be soon, but we’re not quite there yet. Today’s decision affirms the original decision by District Judge Robert Benitez, but Benitez stayed his own decision a week or so after he originally released his opinion. It will be up to Benitez to lift that stay, which would allow for the sale of magazines over ten rounds. I think it’s likely that Benitez will keep the stay in place, at least for now, while he waits for California Attorney General Xavier Becerra to decide if he’ll appeal en banc to the Ninth Circuit or try to take the case directly to SCOTUS.
Even though Californians may not yet be able to legally purchase a new 20-round magazine this weekend, this is still a hugely important decision and a reminder of the importance of the Second Amendment in this year’s elections. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris want to take California’s magazine ban nationwide, and if they win in November they’re likely to do just that as quickly as they possibly can. Today’s ruling cuts against their argument that a ban on so-called large capacity magazines is just common sense, because the Ninth Circuit says it’s actually unconstitutional.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--President Trump’s Brother Hospitalized in New York

Shortly after Trump 's interview with The Post , Attorney General William ...

President Trump’s younger brother was fighting for his life against a mystery ailment in a Manhattan hospital Friday — just weeks after battling a niece in court over her controversial memoir that claims their family is riddled with dysfunction.
The president rushed to Robert Trump’s bedside following a White House news conference at which he openly expressed concern over his brother’s condition.
Trump called Robert, 71, a “wonderful brother” and said they’d had a “great relationship from Day One.
“Hopefully he’ll be all right, but he’s having a hard time,” the president said of Robert’s health battle.
A pool photo showed Trump arriving at NewYork-Presbyterian’s campus on the Upper East Side to see his brother around 4:15 p.m.
He left in a motorcade about 45 minutes later, headed for his country club in Bedminster, New Jersey.
Robert is reportedly “very ill.”
His medical crisis came a month after an upstate judge ruled against him in a suit to block publication of niece Mary Trump’s book, “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man.”
Robert also had been hospitalized in June, when he spent more than a week in the intensive-care unit of Manhattan’s Mount Sinai Hospital.
Previous 1 of 5 Next Advertisement Donald Trump, Robert Trump and Ivanka Trump Ron Galella Collection via Getty Images Donald Trump (right) hugs his brother Robert Trump Getty Images Advertisement Donald Trump and Robert Trump Ron Galella Collection via Getty Images Advertisement
According to a July 7 report by the Daily Beast, the Trump scion spent at least 11 days in the hospital’s neurosciences ICU, where he was treated for “a serious condition.”
As per Mount Sinai’s Web site, the NSICU specializes in the “compassionate care of patients who suffer from subarachnoid hemorrhage, acute ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, subdural hematomas, coma, tumors of the brain and spine, severe or prolonged seizures, neuro-infections, spinal cord injury among others.”
Just days after being released from the hospital, Robert fired off a lawsuit attempting to block the sale of his niece’s scathing tell-all family expose.
Robert argued that the book was a violation of a nondisclosure agreement Mary Trump signed more than two decades ago, and in a statement to the New York Times, he said he was “deeply disappointed” in his niece.
“Her attempt to sensationalize and mischaracterize our family relationship after all these years for her own financial gain is both a travesty and injustice to the memory of my late brother, Fred, and our beloved parents,” he wrote.
“I and the rest of my entire family are so proud of my wonderful brother, the president, and feel that Mary’s actions are truly a disgrace,” he continued.
A court ruled that publication of the book could go ahead and the bombshell flew off the shelves.
Robert Trump was an executive in the family business and like his older brother, Donald, was a fixture on the Big Apple high society circuit.
The Post’s Cindy Adams reported in March that the president’s brother had tied the knot with Ann Marie Pallan, his former secretary, and the pair were living in a million-dollar home on Long Island.
Robert reportedly decamped to Long Island when his 25-year marriage to wife Blaine Trump dissolved in 2008.
He is one of five children of Fred and Mary Trump. Fred Trump Jr. died of alcoholism in 1981, Maryanne Trump Barry retired as a senior judge on the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and Elizabeth Trump is a retired Chase Manhattan Bank executive.
In an interview with Page Six in 2016, Robert said he supported his older brother’s presidential bid “one thousand percent.”
“If he were to need me in any way, I’d be there,” Robert said. “Anything I could do to help.”


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--The Left’s War on Words Continues

The Left’s War on Words Continues

Master bedroom is going the way of Negro and Oriental .
The real estate industry is increasingly replacing the term with primary bedroom or owner 's suite , to avoid using a term that can be taken as summoning the memory of masters owning slaves .
This will not be the only way that our national reckoning changes how we use language in America .
Some calls will be easy .
The obscure word niggardly serves little purpose when it sounds so uncomfortably like the n-word ; stingy is fine as an alternate .
Kaffir is a slur for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thus we need not call the interesting fruit a kaffir lime .
For Rhode Island to disavow its original name as the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations will confuse no one , since the name is all but unknown to most anyway .
But in many cases , there are two lessons to keep in mind : One is linguistic , about how metaphor works .
The other is sociohistorical , about whether our present-day consciousness can plausibly encompass the entire progression of past stages that preceded it—despite William Faulkner 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past .
On metaphor , master is a useful example .
The basic concept of the master as a leader or person of authority has extended into a great many metaphorical usages .
One of them was its use as a title on plantations worked by slaves .
That makes sensible the elimination of certain other uses of the word , which parallel and summon the slavery one .
When I went to a Quaker school in the 1970s , such schools had just begun a call to stop having male teachers called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` teacher , '' in favor of having all instructors called simply `` teacher '' ( i.e .
`` Teacher Bill '' and `` Teacher Lisa '' ) .
This meant that young subordinates had been calling white men in positions of authority `` master , '' after all—including , by the 1970s , more than a few black students .
And today 's call to stop referring to technology parts as `` master '' versus `` slave '' attachments follows in the same vein , as it directly channels what was so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , other extensions of the word master do not meaningfully resemble the plantation one , and only a kind of obsession could explain spraying for them now .
Are we to consider it racist to refer simply to mastering a skill ?
To master tape as opposed to dupes ?
One could even question eliminating the bedroom term .
No one thinks of the children 's bedrooms and guest rooms as `` subservient '' or as existing in some unsavory relationship to the master bedroom .
The plantation meaning of master was one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the word ; it should go , but we need not fill in the entire delta .
You might not like bagpipes , but you would n't as a result hold your ears upon hearing other wind instruments like clarinets and flutes .
To be human is to make distinctions .
Things are the same with the word black .
Its application to a group of people was , again , one of countless extensions of an original word .
What worries many is that not only the racial meaning but so many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , this was true long before Africans were yoked into slavery .
Worldwide , the color is often associated with negative concepts , because of the connection with nighttime and thus obscurity , mystery and even misdeeds , while white is often associated with positive ones .
Hence look black , black market , blacklist , black magic , black humor , and so on .
Some may suppose that even if the racial meaning developed later , these days the other uses of black carry a racially loaded meaning by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
One is plausibility : Upon what evidence can we say that the word blacklist has a racial association , when what comes most readily to most of our minds is the witch hunt against Communists after World War II ?
Another is that many of the black terms are simply neutral : To be in the black is a good thing .
Or , one current call suggests banning `` Baa , Baa , Black Sheep '' because , well , you know .
But no one knows why the sheep is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no one considers it a problem .
Finally , with black there are simply so very many extensions—dozens by conservative count .
To ban all uses of black beyond the fundamental reference to color would result in most people constantly slipping up , with endless opportunities to call people out for the tort—a nice recapitulation of today 's problems with the likes of irregardless and between you and I except with an added tinge of supposed racism .
The word and its metaphors are simply too big to fail , as it were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether to discontinue a word because of historical origins previously known to few .
Here , the actual purpose beyond virtue signaling is unclear .
An example is the tune `` Turkey in the Straw , '' which is played by some ice cream trucks .
It emerged almost 200 years ago , sung by white minstrels made up as black people , with different lyrics referring to dancing .
One call has suggested that we always reflect on the tune 's unsavory origins , and in today 's climate there is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ piously discontinued in public usage .
However , at this point , almost no living person has seen a minstrel show .
More to the point , while minstrel shows existed , pretty much all popular music OF THE ERA was played in them .
How much music will we let go on the basis of being connected with a phenomenon so antique that it is directly recalled by essentially no one , and is largely known through a few photos and some animated cartoon sequences themselves now long censored for public consumption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Straw '' has also been unearthed with the title `` Nigger Love A Watermelon , Ha !
Ha !
Ha !
`` —but this was not only over 100 years ago itself , but was one of many parody lyrics on this tune , forgotten almost as soon as it was published .
There is room for allowing , a century later , the tune to just be a catchy tune .
Stephen Foster 's songs were minstrel staples as well .
But to render them `` problematic '' —as the directive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sheep '' also suggests—would mean no more `` Camptown Races '' and `` Oh , Susanna . ''
It is one thing for us to know the context these things emerged in , and even to know that such songs often had racist alternate verses now forgotten .
But to treat them in their current state as outright contraband for origins no longer even known to anyone but scholars and now vast eons behind us is more about gesture than anything else , and for unclear purpose .
Such songs , in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assumptions about racial hierarchy .
They are neither hurting nor mentally polluting children ( or anyone else ) .
The same goes for the Massachusetts Appeals Court 's ban of the use of grandfather clause in its documents because the expression emerged as a strategy to deny black people the vote .
If no one but a few historians knew this , no purpose is served by proscribing a now faceless expression .
Language history , as a part of social history , is messy .
Signals fade over time ; material is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bones in our inner ear started out as jaw bones in reptiles and moved gradually inward .
What a language was once like is always vastly different from what it is like now .
Certainly it should be promulgated , then , that `` Eeny , meeny , miny , moe/Catch a tigger by the toe '' originally included a distinctly unpleasant word for which tigger was a rhyming euphemism .
However , should our racial reckoning reanimate claims that the rhyme be considered an insult to black people as in cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ placed on a list of things we should keep from our children , as has actually been proposed ?
Looking at ourselves from a distance sheds some light .
People of another culture might learn of the original word and consider simply changing it to be the solution .
They might wonder why we would consider primly eliminating the verse as a kind of middle finger turned up to the way things were in a time now vastly past .
The past ca n't see us .
It 's okay to look back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The impulse will remain for ( white ) America to look inward and consider its participation in racism , which will include lexical matters .
But engaging in some understandable housecleaning is different than reclassifying dozens of innocent-seeming words , expressions , and songs on the tips of our tongues as slurs , so that anyone who mentions black humor or grandfathering is taken aside or reported on Twitter , day care teachers get reprimanded for teaching their charges `` Baa Baa Black Sheep , '' and parents of a certain demographic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' that they just saw their kids using `` Eeny , meeny '' to decide who gets to go first in a game .

Master bedroom is going the way of Negro and Oriental. The real estate industry is increasingly replacing the term with primary bedroom or owner's suite, to avoid using a term that can be taken as summoning the memory of masters owning slaves.
This will not be the only way that our national reckoning changes how we use language in America. Some calls will be easy. The obscure word niggardly serves little purpose when it sounds so uncomfortably like the n-word; stingy is fine as an alternate. Kaffir is a slur for a person of color in South Africa and thus we need not call the interesting fruit a kaffir lime. For Rhode Island to disavow its original name as the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations will confuse no one, since the name is all but unknown to most anyway.
But in many cases, there are two lessons to keep in mind: One is linguistic, about how metaphor works. The other is sociohistorical, about whether our present-day consciousness can plausibly encompass the entire progression of past stages that preceded it—despite William Faulkner's counsel, sometimes the past really is past.
On metaphor, master is a useful example. The basic concept of the master as a leader or person of authority has extended into a great many metaphorical usages. One of them was its use as a title on plantations worked by slaves.
That makes sensible the elimination of certain other uses of the word, which parallel and summon the slavery one. When I went to a Quaker school in the 1970s, such schools had just begun a call to stop having male teachers called "master" and female teachers called "teacher," in favor of having all instructors called simply "teacher" (i.e. "Teacher Bill" and "Teacher Lisa"). This meant that young subordinates had been calling white men in positions of authority "master," after all—including, by the 1970s, more than a few black students. And today's call to stop referring to technology parts as "master" versus "slave" attachments follows in the same vein, as it directly channels what was so offensive about the slavery usage.
However, other extensions of the word master do not meaningfully resemble the plantation one, and only a kind of obsession could explain spraying for them now. Are we to consider it racist to refer simply to mastering a skill? To master tape as opposed to dupes? One could even question eliminating the bedroom term. No one thinks of the children's bedrooms and guest rooms as "subservient" or as existing in some unsavory relationship to the master bedroom. The plantation meaning of master was one tributary of a delta of extensions of the word; it should go, but we need not fill in the entire delta. You might not like bagpipes, but you wouldn't as a result hold your ears upon hearing other wind instruments like clarinets and flutes. To be human is to make distinctions.
Things are the same with the word black. Its application to a group of people was, again, one of countless extensions of an original word. What worries many is that not only the racial meaning but so many other meanings of black have negative associations. However, this was true long before Africans were yoked into slavery. Worldwide, the color is often associated with negative concepts, because of the connection with nighttime and thus obscurity, mystery and even misdeeds, while white is often associated with positive ones. Hence look black, black market, blacklist, black magic, black humor, and so on.
Some may suppose that even if the racial meaning developed later, these days the other uses of black carry a racially loaded meaning by association. There are three problems here.
One is plausibility: Upon what evidence can we say that the word blacklist has a racial association, when what comes most readily to most of our minds is the witch hunt against Communists after World War II?
Another is that many of the black terms are simply neutral: To be in the black is a good thing. Or, one current call suggests banning "Baa, Baa, Black Sheep" because, well, you know. But no one knows why the sheep is black, and in the nursery rhyme no one considers it a problem.
Finally, with black there are simply so very many extensions—dozens by conservative count. To ban all uses of black beyond the fundamental reference to color would result in most people constantly slipping up, with endless opportunities to call people out for the tort—a nice recapitulation of today's problems with the likes of irregardless and between you and I except with an added tinge of supposed racism. The word and its metaphors are simply too big to fail, as it were.
There is also the question of whether to discontinue a word because of historical origins previously known to few. Here, the actual purpose beyond virtue signaling is unclear. An example is the tune "Turkey in the Straw," which is played by some ice cream trucks. It emerged almost 200 years ago, sung by white minstrels made up as black people, with different lyrics referring to dancing. One call has suggested that we always reflect on the tune's unsavory origins, and in today's climate there is a short step from that to it being piously discontinued in public usage.
However, at this point, almost no living person has seen a minstrel show. More to the point, while minstrel shows existed, pretty much all popular music OF THE ERA was played in them. How much music will we let go on the basis of being connected with a phenomenon so antique that it is directly recalled by essentially no one, and is largely known through a few photos and some animated cartoon sequences themselves now long censored for public consumption? A version of "Turkey in the Straw" has also been unearthed with the title "Nigger Love A Watermelon, Ha! Ha! Ha!"—but this was not only over 100 years ago itself, but was one of many parody lyrics on this tune, forgotten almost as soon as it was published. There is room for allowing, a century later, the tune to just be a catchy tune.
Stephen Foster's songs were minstrel staples as well. But to render them "problematic"—as the directive on "Baa, Baa, Black Sheep" also suggests—would mean no more "Camptown Races" and "Oh, Susanna." It is one thing for us to know the context these things emerged in, and even to know that such songs often had racist alternate verses now forgotten. But to treat them in their current state as outright contraband for origins no longer even known to anyone but scholars and now vast eons behind us is more about gesture than anything else, and for unclear purpose.
Such songs, in their current state, foster no thoughts or assumptions about racial hierarchy. They are neither hurting nor mentally polluting children (or anyone else). The same goes for the Massachusetts Appeals Court's ban of the use of grandfather clause in its documents because the expression emerged as a strategy to deny black people the vote. If no one but a few historians knew this, no purpose is served by proscribing a now faceless expression. Language history, as a part of social history, is messy. Signals fade over time; material is eternally repurposed in the same way that the bones in our inner ear started out as jaw bones in reptiles and moved gradually inward. What a language was once like is always vastly different from what it is like now.
Certainly it should be promulgated, then, that "Eeny, meeny, miny, moe/Catch a tigger by the toe" originally included a distinctly unpleasant word for which tigger was a rhyming euphemism. However, should our racial reckoning reanimate claims that the rhyme be considered an insult to black people as in cases such as this and this, or placed on a list of things we should keep from our children, as has actually been proposed?
Looking at ourselves from a distance sheds some light. People of another culture might learn of the original word and consider simply changing it to be the solution. They might wonder why we would consider primly eliminating the verse as a kind of middle finger turned up to the way things were in a time now vastly past. The past can't see us. It's okay to look back as long as you don't stare.
The impulse will remain for (white) America to look inward and consider its participation in racism, which will include lexical matters. But engaging in some understandable housecleaning is different than reclassifying dozens of innocent-seeming words, expressions, and songs on the tips of our tongues as slurs, so that anyone who mentions black humor or grandfathering is taken aside or reported on Twitter, day care teachers get reprimanded for teaching their charges "Baa Baa Black Sheep," and parents of a certain demographic muse over whether it's "problematic" that they just saw their kids using "Eeny, meeny" to decide who gets to go first in a game.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--Trump Appoints Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee to Council of Governors

President Trump will nominate Tennessee Gov .
Bill Lee to the Council of Governors .
The president announced a number @ @ @ @ @ in his administration this week .
The Council of Governors consists of 10 governors , @ @ @ @ @ party , appointed by the president .
“ I ’ m very honored to be @ @ @ @ @ be on the Council of Governors , ” Lee said Thursday afternoon during a news @ @ @ @ @ s a small group of governors who advise on policy at a national level , @ @ @ @ @ honored to have been nominated , and I look forward to the opportunity to serve @ @ @ @ @ Governors was established in 2010 as a mechanism of collaboration between governors and federal officials @ @ @ @ @ National Guard and homeland defense .

President Trump will nominate Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee to the Council of Governors.
The president announced a number of key nominations for positions in his administration this week. The Council of Governors consists of 10 governors, five from each major political party, appointed by the president.
“I’m very honored to be nominated by the president to be on the Council of Governors,” Lee said Thursday afternoon during a news conference. “It’s a small group of governors who advise on policy at a national level, so I’m very honored to have been nominated, and I look forward to the opportunity to serve there.”
The Council of Governors was established in 2010 as a mechanism of collaboration between governors and federal officials on issues pertaining to the National Guard and homeland defense.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--What Would Biden’s SCOTUS Pick Look Like?

If Democratic candidate Joe Biden wins the presidency this fall , he will almost certainly have the opportunity to nominate one or more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court during his first term .
( Whether he 'll have the votes to confirm a nominee in the Senate is another story . )
So what sort of judicial pick can we expect from Biden ?
It 's safe to assume that any Biden nominee will hold standard liberal legal views on hot-button issues like abortion and gay rights .
A Biden SCOTUS pick might also be eager to eschew stare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservative '' precedents , such as the Supreme Court 's Second Amendment ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller ( 2008 ) and its First Amendment ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ( 2010 ) .
The real wildcard is criminal justice .
Just as Republican appointees to the federal bench are sharply divided in criminal justice cases , so too are their Democratic counterparts .
Justice Sonia Sotomayor , for example , has an admirable record as a Fourth Amendment defender .
Justice Stephen Breyer does not .
Breyer 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judicial deference to law enforcement officers and agencies .
In short , it makes a big difference if Biden picks a jurist in the mold of Sotomayor or one in the mold of Breyer .
Libertarians should hope for the former .
Some Democrats might like to see Biden avenge past wrongs by re-nominating federal Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court .
A member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit , Garland was President Barack Obama 's choice to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at every turn , refusing even to hold a hearing on his nomination .
If Biden does resurrect the Garland nod , he would leave criminal justice reform advocates in the lurch .
Garland has a Breyer-like record of judicial deference to law enforcement .
In fact , Neil Gorsuch , who ultimately got the seat that Garland was first nominated to fill , is more `` liberal '' than Garland on criminal justice matters .
If Biden wants to make criminal justice reformers happy , he might consider nominating federal Judge Paul @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Obama 's SCOTUS shortlist and who has stood out for his pro–Fourth Amendment rulings while serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit .
The liberal group Demand Justice has been lobbying in recent months for the next Democratic president to pick a SCOTUS justice from a list `` that prioritizes unabashedly progressive lawyers and legal thinkers , who have all too often been pushed aside . ''
The group proudly boasts that `` none of the lawyers on our list are corporate lawyers . ''
Barring `` corporate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean that Justice Sotomayor—who represented corporate clients earlier in her legal career—would never have been nominated for the seat she now fills .
Biden will probably ignore that self-defeating litmus test .

If Democratic candidate Joe Biden wins the presidency this fall, he will almost certainly have the opportunity to nominate one or more justices to the U.S. Supreme Court during his first term. (Whether he'll have the votes to confirm a nominee in the Senate is another story.) So what sort of judicial pick can we expect from Biden?
It's safe to assume that any Biden nominee will hold standard liberal legal views on hot-button issues like abortion and gay rights. A Biden SCOTUS pick might also be eager to eschew stare decisis in favor of overturning recent "conservative" precedents, such as the Supreme Court's Second Amendment ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and its First Amendment ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010).
The real wildcard is criminal justice. Just as Republican appointees to the federal bench are sharply divided in criminal justice cases, so too are their Democratic counterparts. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, for example, has an admirable record as a Fourth Amendment defender. Justice Stephen Breyer does not. Breyer's record features routine votes to grant broad judicial deference to law enforcement officers and agencies. In short, it makes a big difference if Biden picks a jurist in the mold of Sotomayor or one in the mold of Breyer. Libertarians should hope for the former.
Some Democrats might like to see Biden avenge past wrongs by re-nominating federal Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. A member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Garland was President Barack Obama's choice to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016. But Senate Republicans blocked Garland at every turn, refusing even to hold a hearing on his nomination.
If Biden does resurrect the Garland nod, he would leave criminal justice reform advocates in the lurch. Garland has a Breyer-like record of judicial deference to law enforcement. In fact, Neil Gorsuch, who ultimately got the seat that Garland was first nominated to fill, is more "liberal" than Garland on criminal justice matters.
If Biden wants to make criminal justice reformers happy, he might consider nominating federal Judge Paul Watford, who was rumored to be on Obama's SCOTUS shortlist and who has stood out for his pro–Fourth Amendment rulings while serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
The liberal group Demand Justice has been lobbying in recent months for the next Democratic president to pick a SCOTUS justice from a list "that prioritizes unabashedly progressive lawyers and legal thinkers, who have all too often been pushed aside." The group proudly boasts that "none of the lawyers on our list are corporate lawyers."
Barring "corporate lawyers" from serving on SCOTUS would mean that Justice Sotomayor—who represented corporate clients earlier in her legal career—would never have been nominated for the seat she now fills. Biden will probably ignore that self-defeating litmus test.


bonginoreport--2020-08-14--Survey Shows Majority of Russian Doctors Wary of Rapidly Approved Coronavirus Vaccine

MOSCOW ( Reuters ) - A majority of Russian doctors would not feel comfortable being injected with Russia ’ s new COVID-19 vaccine due to the lack of sufficient data about it and its super-fast approval , a survey of more than 3,000 medical professionals showed on Friday .
Russia has said that the world ’ s first vaccine for the novel coronavirus will be rolled out by the end of this month , with doctors among those set to be administered with it on a voluntary basis .
The vaccine , called “ Sputnik V ” in homage to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Soviet Union in 1957 , has yet to complete its final trials and some scientists said they fear Moscow may be putting national prestige before safety .
A survey of 3,040 doctors and health specialists , conducted by the “ Doctor ’ s Handbook ” mobile application and quoted on Friday by the RBC daily , showed 52 % were not ready to be vaccinated , while 24.5 % said they would agree to be given the vaccine .
Just a fifth of respondents said they would recommend the vaccine to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misgivings are shared by some Russians who say they are too scared to try the vaccine , while others agree with their government that scepticism expressed by foreign experts is driven by jealousy .
The Russian vaccine ’ s approval comes before trials that would normally involve thousands of participants , commonly known as Phase III .
Such trials are usually considered essential precursors for a vaccine to secure regulatory approval .
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said the vaccine , developed by Moscow ’ s Gamaleya Institute , was safe and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his daughters .
Health Minister Mikhail Murashko rejected safety concerns aired by some experts over Moscow ’ s rapid approval of the drug as “ groundless ” .

FILE PHOTO: A handout photo provided by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) shows samples of a vaccine against the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) developed by the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, in Moscow, Russia August 6, 2020. The Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF)/Handout via REUTERS
MOSCOW (Reuters) - A majority of Russian doctors would not feel comfortable being injected with Russia’s new COVID-19 vaccine due to the lack of sufficient data about it and its super-fast approval, a survey of more than 3,000 medical professionals showed on Friday.
Russia has said that the world’s first vaccine for the novel coronavirus will be rolled out by the end of this month, with doctors among those set to be administered with it on a voluntary basis.
The vaccine, called “Sputnik V” in homage to the world’s first satellite launched by the Soviet Union in 1957, has yet to complete its final trials and some scientists said they fear Moscow may be putting national prestige before safety.
A survey of 3,040 doctors and health specialists, conducted by the “Doctor’s Handbook” mobile application and quoted on Friday by the RBC daily, showed 52% were not ready to be vaccinated, while 24.5% said they would agree to be given the vaccine.
Just a fifth of respondents said they would recommend the vaccine to patients, colleagues or friends.
Their misgivings are shared by some Russians who say they are too scared to try the vaccine, while others agree with their government that scepticism expressed by foreign experts is driven by jealousy.
The Russian vaccine’s approval comes before trials that would normally involve thousands of participants, commonly known as Phase III. Such trials are usually considered essential precursors for a vaccine to secure regulatory approval.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said the vaccine, developed by Moscow’s Gamaleya Institute, was safe and that it had been administered to one of his daughters.
Health Minister Mikhail Murashko rejected safety concerns aired by some experts over Moscow’s rapid approval of the drug as “groundless”.


bonginoreport--2020-08-15--NYPD Union Endorses Trump

NYPD Union Endorses Trump

City police unions slammed the Police Department for retreating from ...

The New York City Police Benevolent Association personally endorsed President Trump on Friday night for the next election as the commander in chief leans into his “law and order” platform.
The Post exclusively reported earlier Friday that the PBA planned to back him amid the city’s increase in crime and clashes with protesters.
“I cannot remember when we’ve ever endorsed for the president of the United States until now — that’s how important this is,” said Pat Lynch, the combative PBA president at an event with Trump in his Bedminster club Friday evening.
“We need your strong voice across the country,” Lynch added.
After the union stayed neutral in the 2016 election, Lynch has since lambasted the Democratic-controlled city and state for passing laws that increase transparency around cops’ disciplinary records and ban chokeholds like the one that led to the death of Eric Garner.
In a speech that also featured an appearance by Rudy Giuliani, Trump attacked Democrats for waging “a left-wing war on cops” and called out Mayor Bill de Blasio specifically for launching a so-called “crusade against the police.”
“We have to bring law and order back to our cities, back to our country,” Trump said.
At midnight, Trump tweeted his thanks.
“Today, it was my great honor to proudly accept the endorsement of the @NYTCPBA!” he posted.
“I have deeply and profoundly admired the brave men and women of the #NYPD for my entire life. New York’s Finest are truly the best of the best — I will NEVER let you down!”
The president at one point informally polled the cops in attendance on the best disrespectful nickname for Democratic nominee Joe Bide: “Sleepy Joe” or “Slow Joe.”
The cops cheered louder for Sleepy Joe.
“That’s what I thought!” Trump responded.
Trump was in New York City earlier to visit his seriously ill brother, Robert, at New York-Presbyterian Hospital before the event.
Trump claimed he had a long-shot bid to actually win New York state, which hasn’t voted for a Republican president in 36 years — since Ronald Reagan’s reelection in 1984.
“We’re gonna give New York a real shot,” he said on Friday, a promise he’d first made in an exclusive Oval Office interview with The Post on Thursday.
“I think we have a real chance is winning New York.”