Chai Feldblum returns

Joe Biden , the devout Catholic who doesn ’ t know that the “ P ” in Psalms is silent , seems poised to carry on the left ’ s attack on religion .
That ’ s a fair inference from the fact that his transition team includes Chai Feldblum — the prominent LGBT activist who believes that in almost all cases where the “ sexual liberty ” of gays conflicts with religious belief , “ sexual liberty should win.
” Feldblum is part of the transition ’ s “ agencies review teams.
” These teams will evaluate the operations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ etc .
Feldblum is part of the group that will review the operations of the Department of Justice plus the Federal Election Commission , the U.S. Election Assistance Commission , the Commission on Civil Rights , the National Council on Disability , and more .
The press release announcing the members of the teams states that their purpose is to enable “ President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris and their cabinet to hit the ground running on Day One.
” But in which direction will the administration be running ?
With Feldblum on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the administration will be running in the direction of her radical LGBT agenda .
And it ’ s likely that it will be running over many people of faith in the process .
As Feldblum recognized in her infamous statement that LGBT rights trump religious belief , there are cases in which the aggressive LGBT agenda can ’ t be reconciled with freedom of religious conscious .
Gay and lesbian weddings are a good example .
A decent regard for religious freedom would dictate , at a minimum , a balancing of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decent regard for the Constitution as written might well favor religious rights .
After all , these rights are expressly protected by the First Amendment .
The “ right ” of same-sex couples to marry is a judicial invention .
But that ’ s not how left-wing LGBT activists see it .
To them , it doesn ’ t matter whether there are a dozen bake shops in town capable of making a wedding case in the shape of a phallus .
Strident gay couples can force a devout baker to produce that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nor does Feldblum ’ s agenda stop with coercing wedding vendors .
For example , she favors mandating that transgender individuals can use the restroom and locker room of their choice .
Feldblum ’ s extreme views caused Sen. Mike Lee and a few others to oppose her renomination for EEOC commissioner .
The nomination failed .
Would a Republican Senate block Feldblum ’ s nomination to an important job in the Biden administration ?
I don ’ t know .
Does Feldblum , who now practices law at a big D.C. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden administration ?
I don ’ t know that either .
It doesn ’ t matter much .
What matters is that the Biden team is looking to Feldblum to shape its policy on LGBT issues .
Even if Feldblum doesn ’ t take an official position , her acolytes will likely end up in key posts .
Feldblum ’ s selection for the Justice Department agency team is a clear indicator of the immoderation of the Biden-Harris administration .
An analysis of many other members of the agency teams would show the @ @ @

Joe Biden, the devout Catholic who doesn’t know that the “P” in Psalms is silent, seems poised to carry on the left’s attack on religion. That’s a fair inference from the fact that his transition team includes Chai Feldblum — the prominent LGBT activist who believes that in almost all cases where the “sexual liberty” of gays conflicts with religious belief, “sexual liberty should win.”
Feldblum is part of the transition’s “agencies review teams.” These teams will evaluate the operations of Cabinet-level departments, regulatory agencies, etc. Feldblum is part of the group that will review the operations of the Department of Justice plus the Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, the Commission on Civil Rights, the National Council on Disability, and more.
The press release announcing the members of the teams states that their purpose is to enable “President-elect Biden and Vice President-elect Harris and their cabinet to hit the ground running on Day One.” But in which direction will the administration be running?
With Feldblum on the team, it’s likely that the administration will be running in the direction of her radical LGBT agenda. And it’s likely that it will be running over many people of faith in the process.
As Feldblum recognized in her infamous statement that LGBT rights trump religious belief, there are cases in which the aggressive LGBT agenda can’t be reconciled with freedom of religious conscious. Gay and lesbian weddings are a good example.
A decent regard for religious freedom would dictate, at a minimum, a balancing of the two sets of rights. A decent regard for the Constitution as written might well favor religious rights. After all, these rights are expressly protected by the First Amendment. The “right” of same-sex couples to marry is a judicial invention.
But that’s not how left-wing LGBT activists see it. To them, it doesn’t matter whether there are a dozen bake shops in town capable of making a wedding case in the shape of a phallus. Strident gay couples can force a devout baker to produce that cake or else go out of business.
Nor does Feldblum’s agenda stop with coercing wedding vendors. For example, she favors mandating that transgender individuals can use the restroom and locker room of their choice.
Feldblum’s extreme views caused Sen. Mike Lee and a few others to oppose her renomination for EEOC commissioner. The nomination failed.
Would a Republican Senate block Feldblum’s nomination to an important job in the Biden administration? I don’t know. Does Feldblum, who now practices law at a big D.C. firm, want a job in the Biden administration? I don’t know that either.
It doesn’t matter much. What matters is that the Biden team is looking to Feldblum to shape its policy on LGBT issues. Even if Feldblum doesn’t take an official position, her acolytes will likely end up in key posts.
Feldblum’s selection for the Justice Department agency team is a clear indicator of the immoderation of the Biden-Harris administration. An analysis of many other members of the agency teams would show the same thing.


powerlineblog--2020-11-30--Biden Takes Lead In Hall of Fame Voting

Biden Takes Lead In Hall of Fame Voting

Robert Goldberg of The Goldberg Retort headlines : “ Biden Takes Early Lead in Baseball Hall of Fame Balloting.
” It ’ s pretty funny : President-elect Joe Biden has vaulted into a surprising early lead in voting for the 2021 candidates for the Baseball Hall of Fame .
With about 10 percent of all the ballots in , Biden leads early favorites , including former Yankees Gary Sheffield , Nick Swisher , Roger Clemens , and Andy Pettitte as well as more controversial nominees such as Curt Schilling and Barry Bonds .
Bonds is controversial for taking illegal peformance-enhancing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Biden received votes from the BBWAA and the Veterans Committee .
Despite never having played major league baseball , the President-elect ’ s name appears on every ballot over the past decade .
When asked about this , Biden campaign press secretary Bubba Bernstein stated : “ There is no evidence of voter fraud by or on behalf of the Biden campaign .
The president-elect ’ s baseball record at Archmere Academy speaks for itself .
While there is a long way to go in the race to the Hall , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are counted , Joe Biden will take his place there along with Shoeless Joe Jackson and Pete Rose.
” Separately the president-elect tweeted a photo with the caption : “ Here ’ s a photo of me playing the Great American Pastime .
”

Robert Goldberg of The Goldberg Retort headlines: “Biden Takes Early Lead in Baseball Hall of Fame Balloting.” It’s pretty funny:
President-elect Joe Biden has vaulted into a surprising early lead in voting for the 2021 candidates for the Baseball Hall of Fame. With about 10 percent of all the ballots in, Biden leads early favorites, including former Yankees Gary Sheffield, Nick Swisher, Roger Clemens, and Andy Pettitte as well as more controversial nominees such as Curt Schilling and Barry Bonds.
Bonds is controversial for taking illegal peformance-enhancing drugs, Schilling for being a conservative.
Biden received votes from the BBWAA and the Veterans Committee. Despite never having played major league baseball, the President-elect’s name appears on every ballot over the past decade. When asked about this, Biden campaign press secretary Bubba Bernstein stated: “There is no evidence of voter fraud by or on behalf of the Biden campaign. The president-elect’s baseball record at Archmere Academy speaks for itself. While there is a long way to go in the race to the Hall, we are confident that when all legal ballots are counted, Joe Biden will take his place there along with Shoeless Joe Jackson and Pete Rose.”
Separately the president-elect tweeted a photo with the caption: “Here’s a photo of me playing the Great American Pastime.”


House updates

Yesterday , I wrote about three races in which the outcome may still be in doubt .
Today , there is news about two of the races .
In Iowa ’ s second district , we have a winner — Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks , at least for now .
Today , the state canvass board certified her victory .
The margin was six votes , reportedly the slimmest in any House race since 1984 .
However , Miller-Meeks ’ opponent , Rita Hart , is likely to challenge the result in court .
It ’ s also possible , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlled House will refuse to seat Miller-Meeks .
I doubt the House would do so .
When the House Dems did this in 1984 , they were in the midst of a long period of control .
They probably never imagined that the shoe might one day be on the other foot ( and it wasn ’ t for ten more years ) .
These days , with control of the House swinging back and forth , I question whether the votes would be there to overturn a result , upheld under court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party is in charge .
But stranger things have happened — and undoubtedly will .
Meanwhile , in New York ’ s 22nd district , we have a lead change .
When I wrote my post last night , Democratic incumbent Anthony Brindisi led GOP challenger Claudia Tenney by 13 votes .
That number turned out to be unlucky .
Today , Tenney leads by 12 votes .
The current count is the first official tally , according to this report .
It encompasses all eight counties in the district .
The swing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result of Herkimer County correcting what officials say was a tabulation error .
An audit found that 45 ballots hadn ’ t been counted .
They broke 35 for Tenney and 10 for Brindisi .
As I discussed yesterday , the outcome of this election is being litigated .
The presiding judge , a Democrat , has asked the two campaigns to submit written arguments over how to handle disputed absentee and affidavit ballots by 4 p.m. Wednesday .
The next public hearing in the case will occur on Monday , December 7 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make a confident prediction of the final outcome in this race , which has been a procedural mess all along .
However , with the case now in the hands of a Democratic judge , maybe Brindisi has the edge .

Yesterday, I wrote about three races in which the outcome may still be in doubt. Today, there is news about two of the races.
In Iowa’s second district, we have a winner — Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks, at least for now. Today, the state canvass board certified her victory. The margin was six votes, reportedly the slimmest in any House race since 1984.
However, Miller-Meeks’ opponent, Rita Hart, is likely to challenge the result in court. It’s also possible, as Steve has said, that the Democrat controlled House will refuse to seat Miller-Meeks.
I doubt the House would do so. When the House Dems did this in 1984, they were in the midst of a long period of control. They probably never imagined that the shoe might one day be on the other foot (and it wasn’t for ten more years).
These days, with control of the House swinging back and forth, I question whether the votes would be there to overturn a result, upheld under court challenge, that will not determine which party is in charge. But stranger things have happened — and undoubtedly will.
Meanwhile, in New York’s 22nd district, we have a lead change. When I wrote my post last night, Democratic incumbent Anthony Brindisi led GOP challenger Claudia Tenney by 13 votes. That number turned out to be unlucky. Today, Tenney leads by 12 votes.
The current count is the first official tally, according to this report. It encompasses all eight counties in the district.
The swing in Tenney’s favor is the result of Herkimer County correcting what officials say was a tabulation error. An audit found that 45 ballots hadn’t been counted. They broke 35 for Tenney and 10 for Brindisi.
As I discussed yesterday, the outcome of this election is being litigated. The presiding judge, a Democrat, has asked the two campaigns to submit written arguments over how to handle disputed absentee and affidavit ballots by 4 p.m. Wednesday. The next public hearing in the case will occur on Monday, December 7.
I think it’s impossible to make a confident prediction of the final outcome in this race, which has been a procedural mess all along. However, with the case now in the hands of a Democratic judge, maybe Brindisi has the edge.


powerlineblog--2020-12-01--Garcia wins in California-25

Garcia wins in California-25

Yesterday , I wrote an update on two of the three House races I discussed on Sunday — Iowa-2 and New York-22 .
Today , there is definitive news about the third of these races .
In California-25 , Republican Mike Garcia is the winner .
Democrat Christy Smith has conceded .
This seat traditionally has been held by Republicans .
Katie Hill won it for the Democrats in the Democratic wave of 2018 , but resigned due to a sex scandal .
Garcia then won the seat in a special election earlier this year .
The Los Angeles Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , desert land and horse ranches north of downtown L.A. ” It includes Simi Valley , Santa Clarita , Palmdale and Lancaster .
According to the Times , “ Democrats have recently gained a voter registration advantage , but deep red pockets throughout the district helped secure Garcia ’ s seat.
” Garcia ’ s profile also helped .
He was a Navy fighter pilot .
His father is an immigrant from Mexico .
He has said : I was a first-generation immigrant .
My father and my grandfather came here and started @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great small business in the construction business .
We were taught to work hard , we were taught to earn every dollar that we make , take pride in our country , and be a patriot .
Garcia ’ s win in the special election this summer was the first time in more than 20 years that the GOP flipped a California congressional seat from blue to red .
Now the victory has been ratified , albeit by only 333 votes .
John McCormack says that all of the Republicans who flipped Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or women .
In many cases , like Garcia , they are two of three .
The GOP is changing , both ideologically and in the profile of its new candidates .

Yesterday, I wrote an update on two of the three House races I discussed on Sunday — Iowa-2 and New York-22. Today, there is definitive news about the third of these races. In California-25, Republican Mike Garcia is the winner. Democrat Christy Smith has conceded.
This seat traditionally has been held by Republicans. Katie Hill won it for the Democrats in the Democratic wave of 2018, but resigned due to a sex scandal. Garcia then won the seat in a special election earlier this year.
The Los Angeles Times describes the district as “sprawling suburbs, desert land and horse ranches north of downtown L.A.” It includes Simi Valley, Santa Clarita, Palmdale and Lancaster. According to the Times, “Democrats have recently gained a voter registration advantage, but deep red pockets throughout the district helped secure Garcia’s seat.”
Garcia’s profile also helped. He was a Navy fighter pilot. His father is an immigrant from Mexico. He has said:
I was a first-generation immigrant. My father and my grandfather came here and started from the ground up and created a great small business in the construction business. We were taught to work hard, we were taught to earn every dollar that we make, take pride in our country, and be a patriot.
Garcia’s win in the special election this summer was the first time in more than 20 years that the GOP flipped a California congressional seat from blue to red. Now the victory has been ratified, albeit by only 333 votes.
John McCormack says that all of the Republicans who flipped Democratic districts in 2020 are veterans, minorities, or women. In many cases, like Garcia, they are two of three.
The GOP is changing, both ideologically and in the profile of its new candidates.


Remembering Diego Maradona

Diego Maradona died last week of a heart attack at age 60 .
Maradona is generally considered the second greatest soccer player of all time , behind only Pele .
Some even rate him ahead of the magical Brazilian .
I never saw Maradona play in person , but did see him on television in four World Cups — 1982 ( where he was a petulant dud ) , 1986 , 1990 , and 1994 .
All things considered , I have never seen a soccer player perform as well as Maradona .
What a combination of skill , speed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in a short and stocky body .
I saw Pele in person twice , but after his prime , and watched Johan Cryuff play many times in the North American Soccer League .
Cruyff dazzled , but against inferior competition .
The one time I him saw against the best — on television in the 1974 final against West Germany — he came up a little short .
I ’ ve seen Lionel Messi , Maradona ’ s fellow Argentine , on television in big European club matches play as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ performing well at World Cups , has never come close to Maradona ’ s level on the biggest stage .
Messi himself has said he could play forever and never match Maradona .
1986 was Maradona ’ s signature World Cup .
He led a solid but largely unspectacular ( by World Cup standards ) collection of players to the championship .
Maradona is best remembered for his self-described “ hand of God ” goal against England in the quarterfinals .
( Video below . )
This was a blatant case of cheating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the great Peter Shilton .
Less well remembered is how , in the same match , Maradona slalomed through the English defense before beating Shilton .
( Video below ) Some consider this the greatest World Cup goal ever .
And almost entirely forgotten is Maradona ’ s performance in the next match — a semifinal against Belgium .
In that contest ( video below ) , Maradona got the better of Jean-Marie Pfaff , probably the best goalkeeper in the world at that time ( if Shilton wasn ’ t ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ quote from memory ) , “ I consider myself a great goalkeeper , but I wouldn ’ t even be a goalkeeper if I had to play against Maradona regularly.
” Maradona ’ s performance in the 1990 World Cup is also largely forgotten .
His teammates , again , were solid but unspectacular , and the opposition was gunning for Maradona .
Yet , he led Argentina all the way to the finals , where the team lost to West Germany .
That Cup was played in Italy .
At the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fans adored him .
Italy drew Argentina as its opponent in the semifinals .
As fate would have it , the match took place in Naples .
Playing off of southern Italian resentment of the north , along with the adoration of Napoli fans , Maradona claimed that the Naples crowd would be behind him , rather than the Italian national team .
It didn ’ t work out that way .
On match day , the Neapolitans hung up banners saying , “ Diego in our hearts , Italy in our chants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you , but Italy is our homeland.
” Maradona broke those hearts .
Argentina played its best match of the tournament against the favored “ Azzurri.
” Maradona assisted on Argentina ’ s one goal and delivered the winning kick in the penalty shootout that decided the match .
Nonetheless , Maradona is still revered in Naples , as I learned in visiting the city and the region in 2014 .
Our tour guide , a boy when Maradona played for Napoli , lit up at the mention of his name .
Maradona @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1994 .
He looked out of shape , but the magic was still there .
Some of it , though , might have been chemically induced .
Maradona was disqualified for failing a doping test after the team ’ s second match .
Argentina had won the first two contests by a combined scored of 6-1 .
Without Maradona , the team lost to Bulgaria and Romania by a combined score of 2-5 .
Soccer immortals like Pele , Cruyff , Franz Beckenbauer , and Sir Bobby Charlton became “ grand old men @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That was never in the cards for Maradona .
The “ hand of God ” goal , the attempt to hijack Napoli fans , and the failed drug test were the tip of the iceberg of an outrageous personality .
With his substance abuse , Maradona followed the “ bad boy ” model for retired superstars ( think of George Best ) .
He also added a malignant element , bad-mouthing Pele and cozying up to Fidel Castro .
However , like Cruyff and Beckenbauer , Maradona went into coaching at a high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of its 2010 World Cup effort .
Maradona went “ romantic.
” He played with five attackers , ala Brazil in 1970 ( typically , Messi , Carlos Tevez , Angel di Maria , Gonzalo Higuain , and Maxi Rodriguez ) .
His team rampaged through the early matches , winning the first four by a combined score of 10-2 .
However , modern soccer caught up with Maradona in the quarterfinal against Germany , which Argentina lost 0-4 in as poor a defensive display as one is likely to see in match @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was it for Maradona as manager of the national team .
However , he continued managing in the lower levels of soccer until his death .
Maradona was a face in the crowd at subsequent World Cups .
At times , he appeared to be deranged .
Given his life style and addictions , I doubt that anyone expected Maradona to live a long life .
Still , his death at age 60 stunned the soccer world .
The cause appears to have been straightforward — a heart attack .
Yet , perhaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter of controversy .
Meanwhile , the tributes have poured in .
Pope Francis , an Argentine , called Maradona “ a poet of soccer.
” That he was .
Even the English , victims of the rascally “ hand of God ” goal , joined in the tributes .
This weekend , each EPL match began with a minute of silence for Maradona .
Gary Lineker , star of the 1986 English World Cup team and now a “ grand old man ” of the game , said :

Diego Maradona died last week of a heart attack at age 60. Maradona is generally considered the second greatest soccer player of all time, behind only Pele. Some even rate him ahead of the magical Brazilian.
I never saw Maradona play in person, but did see him on television in four World Cups — 1982 (where he was a petulant dud), 1986, 1990, and 1994. All things considered, I have never seen a soccer player perform as well as Maradona. What a combination of skill, speed, and power — packaged, improbably, in a short and stocky body.
I saw Pele in person twice, but after his prime, and watched Johan Cryuff play many times in the North American Soccer League. Cruyff dazzled, but against inferior competition. The one time I him saw against the best — on television in the 1974 final against West Germany — he came up a little short.
I’ve seen Lionel Messi, Maradona’s fellow Argentine, on television in big European club matches play as well as Maradona. However, Messi, although performing well at World Cups, has never come close to Maradona’s level on the biggest stage. Messi himself has said he could play forever and never match Maradona.
1986 was Maradona’s signature World Cup. He led a solid but largely unspectacular (by World Cup standards) collection of players to the championship.
Maradona is best remembered for his self-described “hand of God” goal against England in the quarterfinals. (Video below.) This was a blatant case of cheating — using his hand to score against the great Peter Shilton.
Less well remembered is how, in the same match, Maradona slalomed through the English defense before beating Shilton. (Video below) Some consider this the greatest World Cup goal ever.
And almost entirely forgotten is Maradona’s performance in the next match — a semifinal against Belgium. In that contest (video below), Maradona got the better of Jean-Marie Pfaff, probably the best goalkeeper in the world at that time (if Shilton wasn’t).
After the match Pfaff commented (I quote from memory), “I consider myself a great goalkeeper, but I wouldn’t even be a goalkeeper if I had to play against Maradona regularly.”
Maradona’s performance in the 1990 World Cup is also largely forgotten. His teammates, again, were solid but unspectacular, and the opposition was gunning for Maradona. Yet, he led Argentina all the way to the finals, where the team lost to West Germany.
That Cup was played in Italy. At the time Maradona was starring for Napoli, whose fans adored him.
Italy drew Argentina as its opponent in the semifinals. As fate would have it, the match took place in Naples.
Playing off of southern Italian resentment of the north, along with the adoration of Napoli fans, Maradona claimed that the Naples crowd would be behind him, rather than the Italian national team. It didn’t work out that way.
On match day, the Neapolitans hung up banners saying, “Diego in our hearts, Italy in our chants” and “Maradona: Naples loves you, but Italy is our homeland.”
Maradona broke those hearts. Argentina played its best match of the tournament against the favored “Azzurri.” Maradona assisted on Argentina’s one goal and delivered the winning kick in the penalty shootout that decided the match.
Nonetheless, Maradona is still revered in Naples, as I learned in visiting the city and the region in 2014. Our tour guide, a boy when Maradona played for Napoli, lit up at the mention of his name.
Maradona also excelled at the World Cup in 1994. He looked out of shape, but the magic was still there.
Some of it, though, might have been chemically induced. Maradona was disqualified for failing a doping test after the team’s second match.
Argentina had won the first two contests by a combined scored of 6-1. Without Maradona, the team lost to Bulgaria and Romania by a combined score of 2-5.
Soccer immortals like Pele, Cruyff, Franz Beckenbauer, and Sir Bobby Charlton became “grand old men” of the sport after retirement. That was never in the cards for Maradona. The “hand of God” goal, the attempt to hijack Napoli fans, and the failed drug test were the tip of the iceberg of an outrageous personality.
With his substance abuse, Maradona followed the “bad boy” model for retired superstars (think of George Best). He also added a malignant element, bad-mouthing Pele and cozying up to Fidel Castro.
However, like Cruyff and Beckenbauer, Maradona went into coaching at a high level. Argentina put him in charge of its 2010 World Cup effort.
Maradona went “romantic.” He played with five attackers, ala Brazil in 1970 (typically, Messi, Carlos Tevez, Angel di Maria, Gonzalo Higuain, and Maxi Rodriguez).
His team rampaged through the early matches, winning the first four by a combined score of 10-2. However, modern soccer caught up with Maradona in the quarterfinal against Germany, which Argentina lost 0-4 in as poor a defensive display as one is likely to see in match between sides of this caliber.
That was it for Maradona as manager of the national team. However, he continued managing in the lower levels of soccer until his death.
Maradona was a face in the crowd at subsequent World Cups. At times, he appeared to be deranged.
Given his life style and addictions, I doubt that anyone expected Maradona to live a long life. Still, his death at age 60 stunned the soccer world.
The cause appears to have been straightforward — a heart attack. Yet, perhaps inevitably, the death has become a matter of controversy.
Meanwhile, the tributes have poured in. Pope Francis, an Argentine, called Maradona “a poet of soccer.” That he was.
Even the English, victims of the rascally “hand of God” goal, joined in the tributes. This weekend, each EPL match began with a minute of silence for Maradona.
Gary Lineker, star of the 1986 English World Cup team and now a “grand old man” of the game, said:
By some distance the best player of my generation and arguably the greatest of all time. After a blessed but troubled life, hopefully he’ll finally find some comfort in the hands of God.
RIP.


powerlineblog--2020-12-01--Biden’s hyper-partisan leftist OMB nominee

Joe Biden has selected Neera Tanden to head the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB ) .
She is the president of the Center for American Progress ( CAP ) , a leftist think tank .
Her selection was immediately touted by the mainstream media because she will be the first “ woman of color ” to lead the OMB .
Tanden ’ s parents came from India .
Thus , although she is deemed “ of color ” for purposes of having her nomination lauded by the left-liberals , Tanden is actually a member of group that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for example , to admission to college .
To Tanden ’ s credit , she was admitted to Yale Law School despite her ethnicity .
Tanden is the first nominee to come under serious public fire from Republican Senators .
If the GOP retains control of the Senate , Rob Portman will head the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee , one of two committees that will hold hearings on Tanden ’ s nomination .
Lindsey Graham will head the other .
Portman , who is hardly a flame thrower , says he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through with this nomination .
He explained : As for Graham , he chuckled when asked about the Tanden selection .
Then he commented : “ She had a lot to say .
It will be a long hearing .
Uphill.
” The Washington Post ’ s article on Republican opposition does not present the tweets in question , an interesting omission .
The tweets can no longer be found in Tanden ’ s account .
She has taken them down .
One tweet , from July 2019 , said : If Perdue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , all of these Senators except Gardner will vote on Tanden ’ s nomination .
And Collins ’ vote will probably be crucial .
Tanden ’ s hyper-partisan tweets might be what prevents her confirmation , but they are far from the only grounds for reservation .
Folks at the Center for American Progress have harshly criticized her management style .
A former senior employee says she used the company as “ an engine for her ambition ” at her colleagues ’ expense .
That ’ s probably par for the course among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the specifics of her tenure are less common , one hopes .
Her mishandling of a sexual harassment complaint came under fire , causing colleagues to describe Tanden as “ impossible to trust.
” In addition , Tanden was accused by an eyewitness of punching a top editor at ThinkProgress after he asked Hillary Clinton about the war in Iraq during a meeting at CAP .
Tanden denied punching the editor .
“ It was push , ” she said .
Ali Gharib , another former ThinkProgress journalist , tweeted yesterday that Tanden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wikilinks revealed more about her “ leadership and moral courage ” ( or lack thereof ) after it hacked the emails of John Podesta , the founder of CAP and longtime confidant of Tanden .
The emails showed that , in the words of The New Republic , Tanden has “ consistently prioritized politics over policy , and frozen out dissenters who might otherwise have ideas of value to contribute to the Democratic agenda.
” In one email , she wrote : In her capacity as a loyal soldier for Hillary , Tanden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I wrote about this here and here .
Jim Geraghty collects some of Tanden ’ s “ greatest hits ” here .
My view is that , within limits , a president has the right to be served by the top level officials of his choice .
Tanden will test these limits .
Rightly or wrongly , her emails attacking GOP Senators will probably test them the most .

Joe Biden has selected Neera Tanden to head the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). She is the president of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a leftist think tank.
Her selection was immediately touted by the mainstream media because she will be the first “woman of color” to lead the OMB. Tanden’s parents came from India.
Thus, although she is deemed “of color” for purposes of having her nomination lauded by the left-liberals, Tanden is actually a member of group that is disfavored by left-liberals when it comes, for example, to admission to college. To Tanden’s credit, she was admitted to Yale Law School despite her ethnicity.
Tanden is the first nominee to come under serious public fire from Republican Senators. If the GOP retains control of the Senate, Rob Portman will head the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, one of two committees that will hold hearings on Tanden’s nomination. Lindsey Graham will head the other.
Portman, who is hardly a flame thrower, says he hopes Biden will decide not to go through with this nomination. He explained:
The concern I have is both judgment, based on the tweets that I’ve been shown, just in the last 24 hours. . .and it’s the partisan nature. Of all the jobs, that’s one where I think you would need to be careful not to have someone who’s overtly partisan.
As for Graham, he chuckled when asked about the Tanden selection. Then he commented: “She had a lot to say. It will be a long hearing. Uphill.”
The Washington Post’s article on Republican opposition does not present the tweets in question, an interesting omission. The tweets can no longer be found in Tanden’s account. She has taken them down.
One tweet, from July 2019, said:
Can people on here please focus their ire on McConnell and the GOP senators who are Up This Cycle who enable him: Cory Gardner, Collins, Ernst, Cornyn, Perdue, Tillis And many more.
If Perdue wins next month’s runoff election, all of these Senators except Gardner will vote on Tanden’s nomination. And Collins’ vote will probably be crucial.
In another tweet, Tanden called Majority Leader McConnell “Moscow Mitch.”
Tanden’s hyper-partisan tweets might be what prevents her confirmation, but they are far from the only grounds for reservation. Folks at the Center for American Progress have harshly criticized her management style. A former senior employee says she used the company as “an engine for her ambition” at her colleagues’ expense.
That’s probably par for the course among Washington insiders. However, some of the specifics of her tenure are less common, one hopes.
Her mishandling of a sexual harassment complaint came under fire, causing colleagues to describe Tanden as “impossible to trust.”
In addition, Tanden was accused by an eyewitness of punching a top editor at ThinkProgress after he asked Hillary Clinton about the war in Iraq during a meeting at CAP. Tanden denied punching the editor. “It was push,” she said.
Ali Gharib, another former ThinkProgress journalist, tweeted yesterday that Tanden lacks “leadership and moral courage.”
Wikilinks revealed more about her “leadership and moral courage” (or lack thereof) after it hacked the emails of John Podesta, the founder of CAP and longtime confidant of Tanden. The emails showed that, in the words of The New Republic, Tanden has “consistently prioritized politics over policy, and frozen out dissenters who might otherwise have ideas of value to contribute to the Democratic agenda.”
In one email, she wrote:
I would do whatever Hillary needs always. I owe her a lot. And I’m a loyal soldier.
In her capacity as a loyal soldier for Hillary, Tanden incurred the wrath of Bernie Sanders. I wrote about this here and here.
Jim Geraghty collects some of Tanden’s “greatest hits” here.
My view is that, within limits, a president has the right to be served by the top level officials of his choice. Tanden will test these limits. Rightly or wrongly, her emails attacking GOP Senators will probably test them the most.


The Flynn outrage

The outrage perpetrated on General Michael Flynn should go down in the hall of shame along with the Dreyfus affair @ @ @ @ @ the rotten core of the Obama administration and the multidimensional corruption of our most trusted @ @ @ @ @ should live in infamy , and yet we have leftist hacks like former Star Tribune @ @ @ @ @ “ Mic drop on Jon Tevlin ” — celebrating the rank travesty of justice and @ @ @ @ @ The Flynn outrage awaits its own Émile Zola , but Margot Cleveland gets the ball @ @ @ @ @ column “ Trump ’ s Michael Flynn Pardon Is Only The Beginning Of The Justice @ @ @ @ @ : “ The corporate media has refused to tell Americans the truth , so I @ @ @ @ @ key aspects of the case that expose the Obama-Biden administration ’ s travesty of justice @ @

The outrage perpetrated on General Michael Flynn should go down in the hall of shame along with the Dreyfus affair. The Flynn outrage revealed the rotten core of the Obama administration and the multidimensional corruption of our most trusted institutions. The Flynn outrage should live in infamy, and yet we have leftist hacks like former Star Tribune columnist Jon Tevlin — see “Mic drop on Jon Tevlin” — celebrating the rank travesty of justice and suffering inflicted on Flynn.
The Flynn outrage awaits its own Émile Zola, but Margot Cleveland gets the ball rolling in the excellent Federalist column “Trump’s Michael Flynn Pardon Is Only The Beginning Of The Justice This Nation Deserves.” Subhead: “The corporate media has refused to tell Americans the truth, so I will. Here are six key aspects of the case that expose the Obama-Biden administration’s travesty of justice.”


Bruce Herschensohn, RIP

Sad news of the passing yesterday of Bruce Herschensohn , long time conservative activist , documentary filmmaker , and commentator in California .
I got to know him a bit in the mid-1980s when he was a commentator on a local TV news program in LA ( paired up for nightly debates with former Democratic Senator John Tunney—see the promotional ad below ) , and then when he ran for the Senate in 1992 , losing narrowly to Barbara Boxer while running a million votes ahead of President George H.W .
Bush .
( In the TV ad below , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year , Bruce attacks his liberal Republican rival , Tom Campbell . )
I suspect if you had asked Bruce what one word he ’ d have wanted used to describe him , he ’ d have unhesitatingly said , “ Anti-Communist.
” Foreign policy was his main interest , and in later years our paths crossed again at Pepperdine University , where he as a fellow at the same time I was teaching there , offering lunchtime seminars full of history lessons going back to his time as an aide to President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never wavered in his support for the Vietnam War , arguing in this brief video for Prager U that the blame for the ultimate defeat in Vietnam owed entirely to the cowardice of the Democratic Party , to the great shame of the United States .
Bruce was a very kind and friendly person .
While TV viewers saw him in fierce debates with John Tunney on TV , Bruce told me that he and Tunney had become good friends , and that he was personally fond of Tunney .
They don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more .
RIP .

Sad news of the passing yesterday of Bruce Herschensohn, long time conservative activist, documentary filmmaker, and commentator in California. I got to know him a bit in the mid-1980s when he was a commentator on a local TV news program in LA (paired up for nightly debates with former Democratic Senator John Tunney—see the promotional ad below), and then when he ran for the Senate in 1992, losing narrowly to Barbara Boxer while running a million votes ahead of President George H.W. Bush. (In the TV ad below, which aired during the GOP primary that year, Bruce attacks his liberal Republican rival, Tom Campbell.)
I suspect if you had asked Bruce what one word he’d have wanted used to describe him, he’d have unhesitatingly said, “Anti-Communist.” Foreign policy was his main interest, and in later years our paths crossed again at Pepperdine University, where he as a fellow at the same time I was teaching there, offering lunchtime seminars full of history lessons going back to his time as an aide to President Nixon. Among other matters, Bruce never wavered in his support for the Vietnam War, arguing in this brief video for Prager U that the blame for the ultimate defeat in Vietnam owed entirely to the cowardice of the Democratic Party, to the great shame of the United States.
Bruce was a very kind and friendly person. While TV viewers saw him in fierce debates with John Tunney on TV, Bruce told me that he and Tunney had become good friends, and that he was personally fond of Tunney.
They don’t make ’em like Bruce any more. RIP.


powerlineblog--2020-12-02--Coronavirus in one state (133)

Coronavirus in one state (133)

As I noted yesterday in part 132 , the authorities reported a single day record number of deaths on November 25 ( reported on November 27 ) .
The number was 101 .
As always , these fatalities swept up the infirm elderly in nursing homes and elsewhere .
Minnesota Department of Health Commissioner Jan Malcolm nevertheless refrained from express mention of this fact in her special November 27 statement : Thanksgiving Weekend is a sad time to have to report a new daily record for COVID-19 deaths in Minnesota .
Today ’ s total of 101 pushes us to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in our state nearly nine months ago .
This is a sad development , but it is not a surprising development .
For weeks we have been sounding the alarm about the dramatic growth in COVID-19 cases .
We know that more cases leads to more hospitalizations and deaths , and today ’ s news reinforces that tragic pattern .
As we make our way through the next few weeks and a holiday season unlike any we have experienced , we must redouble our efforts to protect each other – especially those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illness .
Every public activity now is more risky than it was even a few weeks ago , so the best way to slow this spread is for people to stay home and away from gatherings with those outside of our immediate household .
And we need everyone leaving their home to follow the basic recommendations every time .
That means staying 6 feet apart from others , wearing your mask over your nose and mouth , staying home when sick , and getting tested when appropriate .
This is painful and frustrating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to having safe and effective vaccines that should help resolve this crisis .
We anxiously await that day , and until then we all must do our part to ensure that all of our loved ones , friends and neighbors can celebrate those days with us .
Note Malcolm ’ s tactful reference to “ those who are at higher risk of developing severe illness.
” And who may they be ?
If you ’ ve been following this series , you know the answer .
“ This is painful and frustrating , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an interesting question .
How many excess deaths has COVID-19 caused in the United States ?
According to the spiked study by Johns Hopkins University ’ s Genevieve Briand , the answer is zero .
PJ Media ’ s Matt Margolis covered the study here and the AIER ’ s Ethan Yang had more here with relevant links to help interested readers sort it out .
Video of the related presentation is still accessible here .
Following Monday ’ s press briefing with Governor Walz , Malcolm held another press briefing yesterday with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one mostly to discuss issues related to the coming vaccines .
Given the air of crisis on which the shutdown decreed by Governor Walz is predicated — see Malcolm ’ s statement — Pioneer Press reporter Chris Magan innocently asked Malcolm ( audio below at 26:45 ) whether the state might need the use of the multimillion dollar refrigerated facility purchased by Governor Walz to accommodate possible morgue overflow .
Malcolm nervously hemmed and hawed .
She couldn ’ t bring herself to say “ no , ” but that is the obvious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We certainly hope not , ” she said .
Purchasing the facility was “ a matter of trying to think ahead.
” Still circling around a direct answer , Malcolm added : “ We will be prepared to use the facility if it ’ s needed.
” Kevin Roche takes one path to explaining why it ’ s not needed in the Star Tribune column “ COVID ’ s fall surge peaked before Walz order .
”

As I noted yesterday in part 132, the authorities reported a single day record number of deaths on November 25 (reported on November 27). The number was 101. As always, these fatalities swept up the infirm elderly in nursing homes and elsewhere. Minnesota Department of Health Commissioner Jan Malcolm nevertheless refrained from express mention of this fact in her special November 27 statement:
Thanksgiving Weekend is a sad time to have to report a new daily record for COVID-19 deaths in Minnesota. Today’s total of 101 pushes us to 3,476 deaths since the disease first arrived in our state nearly nine months ago. This is a sad development, but it is not a surprising development. For weeks we have been sounding the alarm about the dramatic growth in COVID-19 cases. We know that more cases leads to more hospitalizations and deaths, and today’s news reinforces that tragic pattern. As we make our way through the next few weeks and a holiday season unlike any we have experienced, we must redouble our efforts to protect each other – especially those who are at higher risk of developing severe illness. Every public activity now is more risky than it was even a few weeks ago, so the best way to slow this spread is for people to stay home and away from gatherings with those outside of our immediate household. And we need everyone leaving their home to follow the basic recommendations every time. That means staying 6 feet apart from others, wearing your mask over your nose and mouth, staying home when sick, and getting tested when appropriate. This is painful and frustrating, but every day we get closer to having safe and effective vaccines that should help resolve this crisis. We anxiously await that day, and until then we all must do our part to ensure that all of our loved ones, friends and neighbors can celebrate those days with us.
Note Malcolm’s tactful reference to “those who are at higher risk of developing severe illness.” And who may they be? If you’ve been following this series, you know the answer. “This is painful and frustrating,” indeed.
The answer nevertheless raises an interesting question. How many excess deaths has COVID-19 caused in the United States? According to the spiked study by Johns Hopkins University’s Genevieve Briand, the answer is zero.
PJ Media’s Matt Margolis covered the study here and the AIER’s Ethan Yang had more here with relevant links to help interested readers sort it out. Video of the related presentation is still accessible here.
Following Monday’s press briefing with Governor Walz, Malcolm held another press briefing yesterday with Infectious Disease Director Kris Ehresmann, this one mostly to discuss issues related to the coming vaccines. Given the air of crisis on which the shutdown decreed by Governor Walz is predicated — see Malcolm’s statement — Pioneer Press reporter Chris Magan innocently asked Malcolm (audio below at 26:45) whether the state might need the use of the multimillion dollar refrigerated facility purchased by Governor Walz to accommodate possible morgue overflow.
Malcolm nervously hemmed and hawed. She couldn’t bring herself to say “no,” but that is the obvious inference from Malcolm’s non-answer. “We certainly hope not,” she said. Purchasing the facility was “a matter of trying to think ahead.” Still circling around a direct answer, Malcolm added: “We will be prepared to use the facility if it’s needed.” Kevin Roche takes one path to explaining why it’s not needed in the Star Tribune column “COVID’s fall surge peaked before Walz order.”


powerlineblog--2020-12-02--NASDAQ Strikes a Blow For Discrimination

Today NASDAQ filed proposed rules with the Securities and Exchange Commission that would “ mandate diversity in the boardroom for companies listed on its stock exchange.
” Of course , the proposed rule would not provide an “ opportunity , ” which obviously exists already , but rather would represent a dictatorial order .
Delisting would be devastating to most companies that trade on NASDAQ .
Nevertheless , I assume that an SEC under Democratic control would approve these discriminatory rules .
The purpose of a board of directors is to manage a corporation for the benefit of its shareholders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collateral liberal agenda , which is what NASDAQ no doubt has in mind .
It is noteworthy that the American Civil Liberties Union , which once advocated for civil rights but now is on the other side , applauded NASDAQ ’ s crudely discriminatory initiative .
Unmentioned in liberal media accounts hailing NASDAQ ’ s proposed discrimination is the fact that it would be illegal .
Hans Bader pours cold water on the liberal parade : The stock exchange NASDAQ plans to impose racial quotas on companies that are listed on it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Under a proposed NASDAQ rule , corporations would have to put at least one minority and one woman on their board of directors .
Such racial quotas violate a federal statute , 42 U.S.C .
1981 , which forbids racial discrimination in contracts , and which has been interpreted by the Supreme Court as forbidding racial quotas even when such quotas are motivated by a desire for diversity .
*** [ R ] acial quotas are forbidden as a means of pursuing diversity , even in the unusual contexts where an applicant ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diversity .
That ’ s what the Supreme Court ruled when it struck down a racial quota in college admissions .
It ruled that violated both the Constitution and 42 U.S.C .
1981 , which bans racial discrimination in public and private contracts .
( See Gratz v. Bollinger , 539 U.S. 244 , 276 n.23 ( 2003 ) ) .
Moreover , corporate boards are not an area where diversity justifies the use of race at all .
Most courts say that in employment , as opposed to college admissions , diversity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applicant ’ s race .
An appeals court struck down a federal diversity regulation imposed on broadcasters for that reason , finding it unconstitutional .
( See Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod v. FCC ( 1998 ) ) .
Another appeals court ruled it violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to make layoff decisions based on race in order to maintain “ diversity.
” ( See Taxman v. Board of Education ( 1996 ) ) .
Much more at the link .
Liberals have a political agenda that lets nothing stand in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ essentially lawless .
Happily , we now have a Supreme Court , and more broadly a federal judiciary , that likely will stand up against these unconstitutional attempts at racial or gender discrimination .
This is one of many reasons why we should be grateful that for four years at least , Donald Trump has been our president .

Today NASDAQ filed proposed rules with the Securities and Exchange Commission that would “mandate diversity in the boardroom for companies listed on its stock exchange.”
[T]he new rules would require companies on the stock exchange to have at least one woman director and one who self-identifies as an “underrepresented minority” or member of the LGBTQ community — or face possible delisting.
NASDAQ’s president provided the usual spin:
Nelson Griggs, the president of Nasdaq Stock Exchange, added that the proposal “gives companies an opportunity to make progress toward increasing representation of women, underrepresented minorities and the LGBTQ+ community on their boards.”
Of course, the proposed rule would not provide an “opportunity,” which obviously exists already, but rather would represent a dictatorial order. Delisting would be devastating to most companies that trade on NASDAQ. Nevertheless, I assume that an SEC under Democratic control would approve these discriminatory rules.
The purpose of a board of directors is to manage a corporation for the benefit of its shareholders. It is not to advance a collateral liberal agenda, which is what NASDAQ no doubt has in mind. It is noteworthy that the American Civil Liberties Union, which once advocated for civil rights but now is on the other side, applauded NASDAQ’s crudely discriminatory initiative.
Unmentioned in liberal media accounts hailing NASDAQ’s proposed discrimination is the fact that it would be illegal. Hans Bader pours cold water on the liberal parade:
The stock exchange NASDAQ plans to impose racial quotas on companies that are listed on it, requiring them to violate federal law. Under a proposed NASDAQ rule, corporations would have to put at least one minority and one woman on their board of directors. Such racial quotas violate a federal statute, 42 U.S.C. 1981, which forbids racial discrimination in contracts, and which has been interpreted by the Supreme Court as forbidding racial quotas even when such quotas are motivated by a desire for diversity.
***
[R]acial quotas are forbidden as a means of pursuing diversity, even in the unusual contexts where an applicant’s race can be considered to promote diversity. That’s what the Supreme Court ruled when it struck down a racial quota in college admissions. It ruled that violated both the Constitution and 42 U.S.C. 1981, which bans racial discrimination in public and private contracts. (See Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 276 n.23 (2003)). Moreover, corporate boards are not an area where diversity justifies the use of race at all. Most courts say that in employment, as opposed to college admissions, diversity is not a reason to consider an applicant’s race. An appeals court struck down a federal diversity regulation imposed on broadcasters for that reason, finding it unconstitutional. (See Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod v. FCC (1998)). Another appeals court ruled it violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to make layoff decisions based on race in order to maintain “diversity.” (See Taxman v. Board of Education (1996)).
Much more at the link. Liberals have a political agenda that lets nothing stand in its way–certainly not the Constitution. Liberals are essentially lawless. Happily, we now have a Supreme Court, and more broadly a federal judiciary, that likely will stand up against these unconstitutional attempts at racial or gender discrimination. This is one of many reasons why we should be grateful that for four years at least, Donald Trump has been our president.


powerlineblog--2020-12-02--Durham Is Now a Special Counsel

Durham Is Now a Special Counsel

Attorney General William Barr notified Congress today that on October 19 , he appointed John Durham a Special Counsel under DOJ regulations .
He did this “ to provide him and his team with the assurance that they could complete their work , without regard to the outcome of the election.
” In other words , absent this appointment , Joe Biden ’ s Attorney General undoubtedly would have terminated Durham ’ s investigation and ordered that no report or indictments be issued .
As Special Counsel , DOJ regulations provide that Durham can be fired only for specified causes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disclose Durham ’ s appointment as Special Counsel to avoid any possible impact on the election .
Barr ’ s letter says that he originally expected that Durham would complete his investigation by the Summer of 2020 , but that proved impossible because the COVID epidemic , “ as well as additional information he uncovered.
” So maybe Durham has has found some dynamite info on Russiagate !
Sure .
This is the way we have been teased by this investigation for the last year .
I have pretty much given up on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is too late for such revelations to matter much .
I simply hope that Durham ’ s investigation will fill in the few missing pieces of Russiagate that are not yet public , and bring an end , finally , to that drawn-out saga .

Attorney General William Barr notified Congress today that on October 19, he appointed John Durham a Special Counsel under DOJ regulations. He did this “to provide him and his team with the assurance that they could complete their work, without regard to the outcome of the election.” In other words, absent this appointment, Joe Biden’s Attorney General undoubtedly would have terminated Durham’s investigation and ordered that no report or indictments be issued. As Special Counsel, DOJ regulations provide that Durham can be fired only for specified causes. Presumably Barr waited until now to disclose Durham’s appointment as Special Counsel to avoid any possible impact on the election.
Text of AG Barr's letter notifying Congress today that US Attorney John Durham will be special counsel reviewing FBI's Russia probe of Trump heading into Biden administration pic.twitter.com/M6eT9sbf6y — Steven Nelson (@stevennelson10) December 1, 2020
Barr’s letter says that he originally expected that Durham would complete his investigation by the Summer of 2020, but that proved impossible because the COVID epidemic, “as well as additional information he uncovered.” So maybe Durham has has found some dynamite info on Russiagate!
Sure. This is the way we have been teased by this investigation for the last year. I have pretty much given up on any blockbuster revelations, and anyway it is too late for such revelations to matter much. I simply hope that Durham’s investigation will fill in the few missing pieces of Russiagate that are not yet public, and bring an end, finally, to that drawn-out saga.


CNN Exposed

An unknown CNN insider apparently gave Project Veritas access to the phone call that senior executives at CNN conduct , I take it , every morning .
So Project Veritas has recorded the last two months ’ worth of calls .
I haven ’ t yet listened to all of the recordings that have been released , but this real-time video of James O ’ Keefe announcing himself to Jeff Zucker and the other CNN staffers is pretty entertaining : CNN ’ s conversations about the news are what you would expect .
Here , CNN ’ s Vice President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racism ” of the Tucker Carlson show : You can imagine a world in which key employees of a rival news channel examine America ’ s most popular cable news show to see why it is clobbering them in the ratings , with a view toward improving their own product .
But that , of course , is not CNN ’ s world .
Here , participants in CNN ’ s editorial call denounce the New York Post ’ s stories on Joe Biden ’ s corruption and vow not to mention them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Exposed , ” but speaking of exposure assumes that someone is trying to hide .
I don ’ t think anyone will be surprised by the Veritas tapes , because CNN has more or less admitted , for a long time , that it is an organ of the Democratic Party .
Certainly anyone who watches CNN would understand this .
Thus , its editorial conferences are just what one would expect : one long conspiracy against President Trump and the Republicans .
This is one of Project Veritas ’ s more entertaining @ @ @ @ @ @ @

An unknown CNN insider apparently gave Project Veritas access to the phone call that senior executives at CNN conduct, I take it, every morning. So Project Veritas has recorded the last two months’ worth of calls. I haven’t yet listened to all of the recordings that have been released, but this real-time video of James O’Keefe announcing himself to Jeff Zucker and the other CNN staffers is pretty entertaining:
CNN’s conversations about the news are what you would expect. Here, CNN’s Vice President and General counsel decries the “naked racism” of the Tucker Carlson show:
You can imagine a world in which key employees of a rival news channel examine America’s most popular cable news show to see why it is clobbering them in the ratings, with a view toward improving their own product. But that, of course, is not CNN’s world.
Here, participants in CNN’s editorial call denounce the New York Post’s stories on Joe Biden’s corruption and vow not to mention them:
I titled this post “CNN Exposed,” but speaking of exposure assumes that someone is trying to hide. I don’t think anyone will be surprised by the Veritas tapes, because CNN has more or less admitted, for a long time, that it is an organ of the Democratic Party. Certainly anyone who watches CNN would understand this. Thus, its editorial conferences are just what one would expect: one long conspiracy against President Trump and the Republicans. This is one of Project Veritas’s more entertaining, but least surprising, stings.


powerlineblog--2020-12-03--Britain authorizes use of the Pfizer vaccine

The United Kingdom has become the first Western nation to authorize a vaccine against the Wuhan coronavirus .
The UK granted emergency authorization for a vaccine produced by Pfizer , an American company , and BioNTech , its German partner .
The UK has ordered 40 million doses of the vaccine — enough to vaccinate 20 million people .
Apparently , 800,000 doses will delivered from Pfizer ’ s facilities in Belgium to the UK next week , with many millions more to follow before the end of the year .
Elderly people in care homes , those who care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other vulnerable people will be top of the priority list .
That makes sense to me .
Approval of the Pfizer vaccine by British authorities places pressure on other nations to approve the same vaccine .
Every nation should make an independent determination as to the safety of the vaccine .
But once a nation like the UK approves a vaccine , it ’ s fair to ask why , in light of that approval , one ’ s own authorities haven ’ t granted approval .
President Trump has already demanded to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approved the Pfizer vaccine .
To get an answer , his chief of staff , Mark Meadows , met with FDA commissioner Stephen Hahn yesterday .
Fine .
But are the FDA “ career scientists ” smarter than their counterparts in the UK ?
Are they more thorough ?
Or do they lack the same sense of urgency ?
The FDA says it ’ s more thorough .
Alone among the world ’ s regulators , it apparently reanalyzes thousands of pages of raw data from vaccine trials before granting approval , rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Reportedly , the FDA is waiting for a December 10 meeting of outside experts before making a decision .
That ’ s more than a week away .
Maybe the delay is necessary to reanalyze all the raw data or for some other purpose .
But Britain ’ s committee of specialists met for a total of 40 hours before making its decision .
No one wants the FDA to approve a vaccine that isn ’ t safe .
But with almost 200,000 new infections per day in America , if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the approval of a vaccine that is in fact safe , many lives will be lost as a result .

The United Kingdom has become the first Western nation to authorize a vaccine against the Wuhan coronavirus. The UK granted emergency authorization for a vaccine produced by Pfizer, an American company, and BioNTech, its German partner.
The UK has ordered 40 million doses of the vaccine — enough to vaccinate 20 million people. Apparently, 800,000 doses will delivered from Pfizer’s facilities in Belgium to the UK next week, with many millions more to follow before the end of the year.
Elderly people in care homes, those who care for them, health workers, and other vulnerable people will be top of the priority list. That makes sense to me.
Approval of the Pfizer vaccine by British authorities places pressure on other nations to approve the same vaccine. Every nation should make an independent determination as to the safety of the vaccine. But once a nation like the UK approves a vaccine, it’s fair to ask why, in light of that approval, one’s own authorities haven’t granted approval.
President Trump has already demanded to know why the FDA hasn’t approved the Pfizer vaccine. To get an answer, his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, met with FDA commissioner Stephen Hahn yesterday.
Hahn issued this statement:
Let me be clear — our career scientists have to make the decision and they will take the time that’s needed to make the right call on this important decision.
Fine. But are the FDA “career scientists” smarter than their counterparts in the UK? Are they more thorough? Or do they lack the same sense of urgency?
The FDA says it’s more thorough. Alone among the world’s regulators, it apparently reanalyzes thousands of pages of raw data from vaccine trials before granting approval, rather than accepting the findings of vaccine makers.
Reportedly, the FDA is waiting for a December 10 meeting of outside experts before making a decision. That’s more than a week away.
Maybe the delay is necessary to reanalyze all the raw data or for some other purpose. But Britain’s committee of specialists met for a total of 40 hours before making its decision.
No one wants the FDA to approve a vaccine that isn’t safe. But with almost 200,000 new infections per day in America, if the FDA delays for even just one week the approval of a vaccine that is in fact safe, many lives will be lost as a result.


powerlineblog--2020-12-02--Sweden gives up on the “Swedish experiment”

As we have noted often on Power Line , Sweden took a different approach to the Wuhan coronavirus than that of its neighbors and , pretty much , the rest of Europe .
It eschewed harsh lockdown measures .
The hope was that Sweden could avoid an economic meltdown .
There was also the hope that Swedes might fairly quickly develop herd immunity to the virus .
However , it ’ s important to note that Sweden did not go all in on achieving herd immunity .
Authorities strongly recommended social distancing , working from home , and avoiding unnecessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , compliance was fairly high .
Since embarking on its experiment , Sweden has been extremely hard hit by the pandemic , compared to its neighbors .
According to Worldometer , there have been 689 deaths from the virus per one million people in Sweden .
In Norway there have been only 65 ; in Denmark 147 ; in Finland 74 .
( However , Sweden ’ s per capita death number compares favorably to those of the U.S. and big European nations like the UK , Spain , France , and Italy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ herd immunity .
In the last two months , new reported cases have skyrocketed — from a previous high of around 1,500 new cases per day ( in July ) to around 6,500 per day now .
New cases are spiking almost everywhere .
However , Sweden ’ s spike is more pronounced than Norway ’ s , even though the Norwegians made no effort to achieve herd immunity .
Reportedly , hospitalizations are rising faster in Sweden than any other European country Dr. Anders Tegnell , the civil servant who pushed for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we see no signs of immunity in the population that are slowing down the infection right now.
” “ The issue of herd immunity , ” he adds , “ is difficult.
” What about the economic benefits of not shutting down the economy ?
According to Lars Calmfors , professor emeritus in International Economics at Stockholm University , Sweden ’ s decline in GDP is considerably smaller than the drop in southern European countries and the United Kingdom , and is one to three percentage points smaller than in Denmark , Germany @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sweden ’ s decline in GDP exceeds that of Finland and Norway .
Calmfors points out that such comparisons can be misleading due to differences in the structure of various national economies .
However , he concludes that the benefit Sweden ’ s economy accrued hasn ’ t been worth the excess ( in comparison to its neighbors ) loss of lives .
I think he ’ s right , absent evidence of other adverse health consequences ( e.g .
a spike in suicides or deaths and serious illnesses from medical procedures foregone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incurred and Sweden has avoided .
The Swedish government appears to agree .
Sweden has backed away from its experiment .
Authorities have banned gatherings of more than eight people .
Prime Minister Stefan Lofven is advising Swedes : “ Don ’ t go to the gym , don ’ t go the library , don ’ t have dinner out , don ’ t have parties — cancel !
” Swedes can be excused for saying “ now he tells us .
”

As we have noted often on Power Line, Sweden took a different approach to the Wuhan coronavirus than that of its neighbors and, pretty much, the rest of Europe. It eschewed harsh lockdown measures. The hope was that Sweden could avoid an economic meltdown.
There was also the hope that Swedes might fairly quickly develop herd immunity to the virus. However, it’s important to note that Sweden did not go all in on achieving herd immunity. Authorities strongly recommended social distancing, working from home, and avoiding unnecessary travel, among other precautions. Apparently, compliance was fairly high.
Since embarking on its experiment, Sweden has been extremely hard hit by the pandemic, compared to its neighbors. According to Worldometer, there have been 689 deaths from the virus per one million people in Sweden. In Norway there have been only 65; in Denmark 147; in Finland 74. (However, Sweden’s per capita death number compares favorably to those of the U.S. and big European nations like the UK, Spain, France, and Italy.)
Nor have the Swedes developed herd immunity. In the last two months, new reported cases have skyrocketed — from a previous high of around 1,500 new cases per day (in July) to around 6,500 per day now.
New cases are spiking almost everywhere. However, Sweden’s spike is more pronounced than Norway’s, even though the Norwegians made no effort to achieve herd immunity. Reportedly, hospitalizations are rising faster in Sweden than any other European country
Dr. Anders Tegnell, the civil servant who pushed for the Swedish experiment, now says “we see no signs of immunity in the population that are slowing down the infection right now.” “The issue of herd immunity,” he adds, “is difficult.”
What about the economic benefits of not shutting down the economy? According to Lars Calmfors, professor emeritus in International Economics at Stockholm University, Sweden’s decline in GDP is considerably smaller than the drop in southern European countries and the United Kingdom, and is one to three percentage points smaller than in Denmark, Germany and the United States. However, Sweden’s decline in GDP exceeds that of Finland and Norway.
Calmfors points out that such comparisons can be misleading due to differences in the structure of various national economies. However, he concludes that the benefit Sweden’s economy accrued hasn’t been worth the excess (in comparison to its neighbors) loss of lives. I think he’s right, absent evidence of other adverse health consequences (e.g. a spike in suicides or deaths and serious illnesses from medical procedures foregone) that Sweden’s neighbors have incurred and Sweden has avoided.
The Swedish government appears to agree. Sweden has backed away from its experiment. Authorities have banned gatherings of more than eight people. Prime Minister Stefan Lofven is advising Swedes: “Don’t go to the gym, don’t go the library, don’t have dinner out, don’t have parties — cancel!”
Swedes can be excused for saying “now he tells us.”


powerlineblog--2020-12-02--The Geek in Pictures (2)

The Geek in Pictures (2)

Time for another tour of the current scene by way of charts and graphs that have been piling up on my computer .
• Let ’ s start with COVID trends .
We keep getting told by the media and the “ experts ” that European countries are dealing with COVID so much better than we are , because Europeans !
, and Orange Man Bad .
But then how come : • Mark Perry strikes again at the narrative that skin color/racism is the primary determinant of success in America : • Graphic evidence that Democrats are now the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence that James Burnham was way ahead of his time in The Managerial Revolution : So it should be no surprise to see how campaign contributions from the law professoriate skews : • The stock market is at a record high .
But consumer confidence has broken with the stock market : No wonder the Federal Reserve is warning that rising COVID cases and renewed lockdown may slow down the economic recovery .
• But there are some bright spots in the COVID-related economic contraction : • Biden ’ s spending plans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote for the GOP candidates in Georgia next month : Chaser—not that the Trump years have been sterling :

Time for another tour of the current scene by way of charts and graphs that have been piling up on my computer.
• Let’s start with COVID trends. We keep getting told by the media and the “experts” that European countries are dealing with COVID so much better than we are, because Europeans!, and Orange Man Bad. But then how come:
A larger view:
• Mark Perry strikes again at the narrative that skin color/racism is the primary determinant of success in America:
• Graphic evidence that Democrats are now the party of the rich:
• Graphic evidence that James Burnham was way ahead of his time in The Managerial Revolution:
So it should be no surprise to see how campaign contributions from the law professoriate skews:
• The stock market is at a record high. But consumer confidence has broken with the stock market:
No wonder the Federal Reserve is warning that rising COVID cases and renewed lockdown may slow down the economic recovery.
• But there are some bright spots in the COVID-related economic contraction:
• Biden’s spending plans, if you’re looking for reasons to vote for the GOP candidates in Georgia next month:
Chaser—not that the Trump years have been sterling:
• Just for fun:
And finally. . .


powerlineblog--2020-12-02--The case of Stephanie Mohr

The case of Stephanie Mohr

Stephanie Mohr was a rookie police officer in Prince George ’ s County in 1995 .
A member of the canine unit , she and the dog she worked with responded to a call in an area plagued by burglaries .
Another officer had spotted two suspects on the roof of a store .
* Mohr released her dog on one of the suspects , Ricardo Mendez , an illegal immigrant who subsequently would be convicted on federal narcotics charges .
There was conflicting testimony as to why .
According to one version , Mohr released the dog after her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the officer in charge of the scene .
According to the other version , Mohr ’ s , she did so on her own because Mendez ignored repeated instructions to follow police orders .
Five years after this incident , the Washington Post ran a series of articles alleging police brutality in Prince George ’ s County .
In the meantime , Mohr had become something of a star in the canine unit .
She earned two awards for meritorious service and 25 letters of commendation .
Her superiors lauded her assistance in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She helped provide personal security at President Clinton ’ s second inaugural gala .
However , as a result of the Post ’ s series , the FBI launched an investigation that soon focused on the canine unit .
The investigation led to an indictment of Mohr on federal civil rights grounds for the 1995 incident .
She was charged one day before the statute of limitations on her alleged offenses expired .
Mohr pleaded not guilty .
The officer in charge of the scene pleaded guilty and testified on behalf of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Her training officer pleaded not guilty and was acquitted .
At the first trial , Mohr was acquitted on a “ conspiracy ” charge and nearly acquitted on the civil rights count .
Reportedly , only one juror held out for a conviction .
Normally that outcome would have ended the matter .
However , the government elected to retry Mohr .
At the second trial , the government was allowed to put on evidence of other alleged misdeeds by Mohr .
One witness , an African-American , testified that Mohr had threatened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black ass.
” Thanks , presumably , to prejudicial testimony like this , the jury this time convicted Mohr .
Mohr received the maximum sentence of ten years .
This , despite the fact that the dog bite required only ten stitches .
A year in prison per stich , as it turned out .
Mohr served her sentence .
After that , she went on to full-time employment as a county building inspector and has led a stable life .
I understand that her son , who was less than three years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now plans to become a law enforcement officer , notwithstanding the thanklessness , these days , of the job and the treatment of his mother .
Backed by the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund and the National Fraternal Order of the Police , Mohr seeks a pardon from President Trump .
A Washington Times op-ed by the head of the first of these organizations makes the case .
Pardons should not be granted lightly .
Generally , they require a thorough review of the facts and the equities .
In this case , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and equities favor a pardon .
First , Mohr ’ s guilt was always in doubt , as the outcome of the first trial suggests .
Second , Mohr served far more time than she deserved even if guilty .
A ten year sentence for a dog bite was wildly disproportionate to any offense .
Third , Mohr was a highly commended member of the police force before her conviction .
Fourth , her prosecution stemmed directly from a sensationalized Washington Post series .
The frenzy that followed apparently failed to produce any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one incident .
Fifth , Mohr ’ s post-conviction conduct , including the productive life she has led since her release from prison , speaks in her favor .
I hope President Trump will give serious consideration to pardoning Stephanie Mohr .
If he does , I believe he will agree that she deserves a pardon .
* The statements of fact set forth in this post come from ( 1 ) the Court of Appeals decision upholding Mohr ’ s conviction , ( 2 ) a letter from the National Fraternal Order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 3 ) the Washington Times editorial cited above .

Stephanie Mohr was a rookie police officer in Prince George’s County in 1995. A member of the canine unit, she and the dog she worked with responded to a call in an area plagued by burglaries. Another officer had spotted two suspects on the roof of a store.*
Mohr released her dog on one of the suspects, Ricardo Mendez, an illegal immigrant who subsequently would be convicted on federal narcotics charges. There was conflicting testimony as to why.
According to one version, Mohr released the dog after her training officer sought and obtained consent from the officer in charge of the scene. According to the other version, Mohr’s, she did so on her own because Mendez ignored repeated instructions to follow police orders.
Five years after this incident, the Washington Post ran a series of articles alleging police brutality in Prince George’s County. In the meantime, Mohr had become something of a star in the canine unit. She earned two awards for meritorious service and 25 letters of commendation. Her superiors lauded her assistance in bringing down burglary and homicide suspects. She helped provide personal security at President Clinton’s second inaugural gala.
However, as a result of the Post’s series, the FBI launched an investigation that soon focused on the canine unit. The investigation led to an indictment of Mohr on federal civil rights grounds for the 1995 incident. She was charged one day before the statute of limitations on her alleged offenses expired.
Mohr pleaded not guilty. The officer in charge of the scene pleaded guilty and testified on behalf of the government at Mohr’s trials. Her training officer pleaded not guilty and was acquitted.
At the first trial, Mohr was acquitted on a “conspiracy” charge and nearly acquitted on the civil rights count. Reportedly, only one juror held out for a conviction.
Normally that outcome would have ended the matter. However, the government elected to retry Mohr.
At the second trial, the government was allowed to put on evidence of other alleged misdeeds by Mohr. One witness, an African-American, testified that Mohr had threatened to release her dog on her “black ass.”
Thanks, presumably, to prejudicial testimony like this, the jury this time convicted Mohr.
Mohr received the maximum sentence of ten years. This, despite the fact that the dog bite required only ten stitches. A year in prison per stich, as it turned out.
Mohr served her sentence. After that, she went on to full-time employment as a county building inspector and has led a stable life.
I understand that her son, who was less than three years old when Mohr went to prison, now plans to become a law enforcement officer, notwithstanding the thanklessness, these days, of the job and the treatment of his mother.
Backed by the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund and the National Fraternal Order of the Police, Mohr seeks a pardon from President Trump. A Washington Times op-ed by the head of the first of these organizations makes the case.
Pardons should not be granted lightly. Generally, they require a thorough review of the facts and the equities.
In this case, from what I know, the facts and equities favor a pardon. First, Mohr’s guilt was always in doubt, as the outcome of the first trial suggests.
Second, Mohr served far more time than she deserved even if guilty. A ten year sentence for a dog bite was wildly disproportionate to any offense.
Third, Mohr was a highly commended member of the police force before her conviction.
Fourth, her prosecution stemmed directly from a sensationalized Washington Post series. The frenzy that followed apparently failed to produce any convictions other than those stemming from this one incident.
Fifth, Mohr’s post-conviction conduct, including the productive life she has led since her release from prison, speaks in her favor.
I hope President Trump will give serious consideration to pardoning Stephanie Mohr. If he does, I believe he will agree that she deserves a pardon.
* The statements of fact set forth in this post come from (1) the Court of Appeals decision upholding Mohr’s conviction, (2) a letter from the National Fraternal Order of Police to President Trump, and (3) the Washington Times editorial cited above.


powerlineblog--2020-12-03--Hail the Golden Turkey!

Hail the Golden Turkey!

Those of us who want less government need to get serious about government spending .
The Trump administration had many successes , but limiting spending was not one of them .
Government spending is never “ free ; ” it will always be paid for .
The only questions are when , by whom , and with how much interest .
In Minnesota , as in many other states , we have seen runaway growth in government spending .
My organization , Center of the American Experiment , is the principal voice for spending restraint and smaller government in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wanton wastefulness of government , we inaugurated the Golden Turkey Award , which I wrote about here .
The award takes its inspiration from Senator William Proxmire ’ s Golden Fleece , which garnered massive publicity some decades ago .
Many still remember the $ 400 hammer .
Spending is like murder : as Josef Stalin said , one death is a tragedy , a million deaths are a statistic .
( He would know , having caused 20 million or more deaths . )
Similarly , most people ’ s eyes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of dollars , but everyone knows a hammer doesn ’ t cost $ 400 .
In that spirit , we conducted a Golden Turkey Award competition over several weeks in November , with thousands of Minnesotans voting for one of four nominees .
They were all worthy candidates , I think , because Minnesota is a target-rich environment , with lavish government spending requiring ridiculous levels of taxation that are driving the state into a downward spiral .
A week ago today , I announced the winning Turkey in a press conference that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of Minnesotans voted , we had a clear winner .
Here is a video of the press conference .
( Be patient , it takes a minute or two to get going . )
: For liberals , there is no such thing as wasteful government spending .
All spending , regardless of whether it makes any sense , creates dependents and clients who have little choice but to vote for ever more government .
The great battle that conservatives must fight is to restore the Founders ’ vision of a government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That is the opposite of what we see today , when government at all levels is rolling in dough , expands inexorably , and flagrantly wastes taxpayers ’ money and the nation ’ s wealth .
The Golden Turkey Award is one small step toward restoring America to fiscal sanity .

Those of us who want less government need to get serious about government spending. The Trump administration had many successes, but limiting spending was not one of them. Government spending is never “free;” it will always be paid for. The only questions are when, by whom, and with how much interest.
In Minnesota, as in many other states, we have seen runaway growth in government spending. My organization, Center of the American Experiment, is the principal voice for spending restraint and smaller government in our state. As a way to dramatize the wanton wastefulness of government, we inaugurated the Golden Turkey Award, which I wrote about here. The award takes its inspiration from Senator William Proxmire’s Golden Fleece, which garnered massive publicity some decades ago. Many still remember the $400 hammer. Spending is like murder: as Josef Stalin said, one death is a tragedy, a million deaths are a statistic. (He would know, having caused 20 million or more deaths.) Similarly, most people’s eyes glaze over if you talk about billions of dollars, but everyone knows a hammer doesn’t cost $400.
In that spirit, we conducted a Golden Turkey Award competition over several weeks in November, with thousands of Minnesotans voting for one of four nominees. They were all worthy candidates, I think, because Minnesota is a target-rich environment, with lavish government spending requiring ridiculous levels of taxation that are driving the state into a downward spiral.
A week ago today, I announced the winning Turkey in a press conference that was broadcast live on Facebook. After thousands of Minnesotans voted, we had a clear winner. Here is a video of the press conference:
For liberals, there is no such thing as wasteful government spending. All spending, regardless of whether it makes any sense, creates dependents and clients who have little choice but to vote for ever more government. The great battle that conservatives must fight is to restore the Founders’ vision of a government that is limited, constrained and accountable. That is the opposite of what we see today, when government at all levels is rolling in dough, expands inexorably, and flagrantly wastes taxpayers’ money and the nation’s wealth. The Golden Turkey Award is one small step toward restoring America to fiscal sanity.


powerlineblog--2020-12-03--California Paid $400 Million to Incarcerated Criminals

How easy is it to defraud the State of California ?
This easy : The state of California sent roughly $ 400 million in fraudulent unemployment payments to state prisoners – nearly triple the amount disclosed last week , after nine district attorneys and a U.S. Attorney announced the state was impeding their investigation .
The state approved fraudulent applications submitted on behalf of roughly 31,000 inmates , prosecutors discovered , made possible in part by inmates working with individuals outside of prisons .
Governor Gavin Newsom naturally declined to take any responsibility : Newsom said he was “ deeply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress for expanding unemployment benefits to $ 600 a week .
“ While this helped many individuals in need during this pandemic , bad actors took advantage of the crisis to abuse the system , ” Newsom said .
But the fraud had nothing to do with the feds .
They simply contributed some of the money that was obtained fraudulently .
It was incompetence in Newsom ’ s administration that allowed the scams to take place .
Of the 31,000 inmates who filed for unemployment benefits or whose names were used to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payments .
Roughly $ 80 million worth of claims involving the other prisoners were not paid , Page said .
So two-thirds of the time , this naked theft worked .
As has frequently been noted , the more governments get involved in activities outside their core functions–climate change and plastic straws are good contemporary examples–the more incompetent they become at discharging their actual responsibilities .
And the fundamental reason why governments at all levels are so wasteful is that they are dealing , always , with other people ’ s money .

How easy is it to defraud the State of California? This easy:
The state of California sent roughly $400 million in fraudulent unemployment payments to state prisoners – nearly triple the amount disclosed last week, after nine district attorneys and a U.S. Attorney announced the state was impeding their investigation. The state approved fraudulent applications submitted on behalf of roughly 31,000 inmates, prosecutors discovered, made possible in part by inmates working with individuals outside of prisons.
Governor Gavin Newsom naturally declined to take any responsibility:
Newsom said he was “deeply alarmed” by the problem and blamed Congress for expanding unemployment benefits to $600 a week. “While this helped many individuals in need during this pandemic, bad actors took advantage of the crisis to abuse the system,” Newsom said.
But the fraud had nothing to do with the feds. They simply contributed some of the money that was obtained fraudulently. It was incompetence in Newsom’s administration that allowed the scams to take place.
Of the 31,000 inmates who filed for unemployment benefits or whose names were used to file for benefits, roughly 20,800 received payments. Roughly $80 million worth of claims involving the other prisoners were not paid, Page said.
So two-thirds of the time, this naked theft worked.
At least 132 death row inmates who have not worked in years and are ineligible to file for unemployment, including notorious serial killers, received unemployment benefits, prosecutors said.
As has frequently been noted, the more governments get involved in activities outside their core functions–climate change and plastic straws are good contemporary examples–the more incompetent they become at discharging their actual responsibilities. And the fundamental reason why governments at all levels are so wasteful is that they are dealing, always, with other people’s money.


powerlineblog--2020-12-03--Report:  Trump considering firing Barr

Report:  Trump considering firing Barr

The Washington Post reports that President Trump is “ livid ” at Attorney General Barr over his comments about election fraud and the fact that John Durham did not issue a report before the election .
According to the Post , “ one senior official indicat [ ed ] that there was a chance Barr could be fired.
” I don ’ t know whether Trump is thinking about firing Barr .
I find it believable that Trump is angry with him .
It ’ s important to note what Barr did ( and didn ’ t ) say about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was fraud .
He never denied that it was widespread .
All he said was that he “ has not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.
” Barr ’ s statement was fair .
There is no evidence in the public record of fraud on a scale that could have changed the outcome of the election .
And , apparently , no evidence of fraud at that level has come to the Attorney General ’ s attention , either .
Nonetheless , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complaints about its “ failure ” to contest the outcome of the election .
Thus , it was reasonable for Barr to say what he did .
Indeed , even in the absence of angry complaints to the DOJ , I think it would have been reasonable for Barr to address the question of whether there is evidence of fraud of a magnitude that tipped the election .
It ’ s a question of great moment to the nation , and the DOJ is in a position to address it knowledgeably .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take the time needed to complete them .
They shouldn ’ t be timed to coincide with the political calendar .
Once it became clear that Durham might not be able to complete his investigation before January 20 , 2001 , Barr appointed him special counsel to protect against Durham ’ s dismissal , for political reasons , by a new administration .
This was the right thing to do .
Forcing , or attempting to force , a preelection report would have been the wrong thing to do .
President Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department ’ s client is the United States , not the president .
Nor does he seem to understand that his political interests and the interests of the United States are not identical .
When Barr became Attorney General , I heard some Trump supporters hail him , by way of contrast to Jeff Sessions , as a “ wartime consigliere.
” But the U.S. Attorney General is not ( and should not be ) any kind of consigliere , and I doubt that Barr ever regarded himself as such .
( In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably did the right thing ” when he recused himself from the Russia investigation — the act that got Sessions permanently on the wrong side of Trump . )
In my opinion , William Barr has been the star of Trump ’ s cabinet .
Moreover , the DOJ is still actively pursuing important matters and making important decisions .
Barr remains an asset in both regards .
Firing him would be an act of pure petulance .

The Washington Post reports that President Trump is “livid” at Attorney General Barr over his comments about election fraud and the fact that John Durham did not issue a report before the election. According to the Post, “one senior official indicat[ed] that there was a chance Barr could be fired.”
I don’t know whether Trump is thinking about firing Barr. I find it believable that Trump is angry with him.
It’s important to note what Barr did (and didn’t) say about the election. Barr never denied that there was fraud. He never denied that it was widespread. All he said was that he “has not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”
Barr’s statement was fair. There is no evidence in the public record of fraud on a scale that could have changed the outcome of the election. And, apparently, no evidence of fraud at that level has come to the Attorney General’s attention, either.
Nonetheless, the Justice Department has been inundated with angry complaints about its “failure” to contest the outcome of the election. Thus, it was reasonable for Barr to say what he did.
Indeed, even in the absence of angry complaints to the DOJ, I think it would have been reasonable for Barr to address the question of whether there is evidence of fraud of a magnitude that tipped the election. It’s a question of great moment to the nation, and the DOJ is in a position to address it knowledgeably.
As for the Durham report, investigations should take the time needed to complete them. They shouldn’t be timed to coincide with the political calendar.
Once it became clear that Durham might not be able to complete his investigation before January 20, 2001, Barr appointed him special counsel to protect against Durham’s dismissal, for political reasons, by a new administration. This was the right thing to do. Forcing, or attempting to force, a preelection report would have been the wrong thing to do.
President Trump has never accepted the fact that the Justice Department’s client is the United States, not the president. Nor does he seem to understand that his political interests and the interests of the United States are not identical.
When Barr became Attorney General, I heard some Trump supporters hail him, by way of contrast to Jeff Sessions, as a “wartime consigliere.” But the U.S. Attorney General is not (and should not be) any kind of consigliere, and I doubt that Barr ever regarded himself as such. (In fact, Barr said that Sessions “probably did the right thing” when he recused himself from the Russia investigation — the act that got Sessions permanently on the wrong side of Trump.)
In my opinion, William Barr has been the star of Trump’s cabinet. Moreover, the DOJ is still actively pursuing important matters and making important decisions.
Barr remains an asset in both regards. Firing him would be an act of pure petulance.


powerlineblog--2020-12-03--How do you break your foot playing with a dog?

Joe Biden is old , frail , and mentally impaired .
My motto for him is I ’ ve got half a mind to be president .
His performative trot to the lectern on election night was obviously intended to persuade us that he is up to the task , but I thought he was putting himself at some risk , and that seems to be the case .
According to reports , such as this AP story , Biden sustained hairline fractures in his foot playing with one of his dogs over the weekend .
Team Biden , by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shield Biden from view as he entered the orthopedists ’ facility .
The AP reported , for example : “ Reporters covering the president-elect were not afforded the opportunity to see Biden enter the doctor ’ s office Sunday , despite multiple requests.
” There is a reason they mostly confined him to the basement during the campaign .
They didn ’ t want the public to get the impression that the guy is over the hill .
Biden gives the appearance of a synthetic creation .
He looks like he just walked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a tourist .
How do you break your foot playing with a dog ?
That ’ s the question that occurred to me as I read the stories .
It ’ s not entirely clear .
It must be illegal to drill down on the question with Biden spokesmen .
The enterprising folks at Entertainment Tonight tracked down an orthopedist and speculated on the incident in the report below .
I join President Trump in wishing him good health and a speedy recovery .

Joe Biden is old, frail, and mentally impaired. My motto for him is I’ve got half a mind to be president. His performative trot to the lectern on election night was obviously intended to persuade us that he is up to the task, but I thought he was putting himself at some risk, and that seems to be the case. According to reports, such as this AP story, Biden sustained hairline fractures in his foot playing with one of his dogs over the weekend.
Team Biden, by the way, did its best to shield Biden from view as he entered the orthopedists’ facility. The AP reported, for example: “Reporters covering the president-elect were not afforded the opportunity to see Biden enter the doctor’s office Sunday, despite multiple requests.” There is a reason they mostly confined him to the basement during the campaign. They didn’t want the public to get the impression that the guy is over the hill.
Biden gives the appearance of a synthetic creation. He looks like he just walked out of Madame Tussauds, and not as a tourist.
How do you break your foot playing with a dog? That’s the question that occurred to me as I read the stories. It’s not entirely clear. It must be illegal to drill down on the question with Biden spokesmen. The enterprising folks at Entertainment Tonight tracked down an orthopedist and speculated on the incident in the report below.
I join President Trump in wishing him good health and a speedy recovery.