freebeacon--2020-06-10--Jon Ossoff Fails Upward, Avoids Loss in Georgia Senate Primary

Ossoff , the doe-eyed , twig-bodied former national security aide to the U.S. congressman who once warned that Guam would capsize and compared Jewish settlers to `` termites , '' got the most votes in Georgia 's Democratic Senate primary on Tuesday .
It remained to be seen , however , if Ossoff would surpass the 50 percent threshold to avoid a runoff election against the second-place candidate , former Columbus mayor Teresa Tomlinson .
As of early Wednesday , Ossoff had won 48.6 percent of the vote , with 93 percent of precincts reporting .
The Georgia election was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lines that forced a number of polling sites to remain open late into the evening .
`` Complete Meltdown , '' read the front-page headline of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution .
Democrats were quick to blame Gov .
Brian Kemp ( R. ) for engaging in `` voter suppression , '' even though the elections were conducted at the county level and most of the affected precincts were in Democrat-controlled areas .
Ossoff , 33 , hopes to face off against incumbent Sen. David Purdue ( R. ) in the general election .
Despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ races , Ossoff raised more than $ 4 million for his primary campaign , almost double the amount his two closest opponents raised .
He 'll need to raise many times that for the general election .
He probably wo n't have trouble finding donors , even if most of them are out of state .
The Georgia Democrat rose to national prominence in 2017 , when he raised more than $ 30 million from celebrities and other rich libs during his unsuccessful special election campaign in Georgia 's Sixth Congressional District , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ossoff was the original Beto O'Rourke—a young , scrawny , handsome ( for a politician ) , privately educated , upwardly failing white dude beloved by the # Resistance whose inevitable defeat was hailed as a `` moral victory . ''
`` There 's no doubt that having run and narrowly lost the biggest congressional race of all time has given me perspective that 's valuable , '' Ossoff said in a recent interview with Politico .
`` A fight well fought can be worth what you build in the process , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ossoff did n't run again in the sixth district when the seat became open again in 2018 , but the Republican who beat him did n't serve for long .
Former representative Karen Handel was ousted by Lucy McBath during the midterm wave election in which Democrats regained control of the House .
National Democrats , who have become increasingly obsessed with the idea of `` turning Georgia blue , '' are hungry for a victory in a statewide election after falling short in 2018 .
Millions of dollars in out-of-state funding could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the gubernatorial election , though Abrams still refuses to concede .
Her loss to Gov .
Kemp was also celebrated as a moral victory and propelled Abrams to national stardom .
Some Democrats had been hoping Abrams would run for Senate this year , given the party 's alleged commitment to diversity .
But she declined and has instead focused most of her energy on trying to bully Joe Biden into picking her as a running mate .
Ossoff has said his goal is to beat Republicans `` so bad you can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in public . ''

For once, Jon Ossoff didn't lose.
Ossoff, the doe-eyed, twig-bodied former national security aide to the U.S. congressman who once warned that Guam would capsize and compared Jewish settlers to "termites," got the most votes in Georgia's Democratic Senate primary on Tuesday.
It remained to be seen, however, if Ossoff would surpass the 50 percent threshold to avoid a runoff election against the second-place candidate, former Columbus mayor Teresa Tomlinson. As of early Wednesday, Ossoff had won 48.6 percent of the vote, with 93 percent of precincts reporting.
The Georgia election was marred by technical problems resulting in long lines that forced a number of polling sites to remain open late into the evening. "Complete Meltdown," read the front-page headline of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Democrats were quick to blame Gov. Brian Kemp (R.) for engaging in "voter suppression," even though the elections were conducted at the county level and most of the affected precincts were in Democrat-controlled areas.
Ossoff, 33, hopes to face off against incumbent Sen. David Purdue (R.) in the general election. Despite Democratic unwillingness to spend money on Georgia races, Ossoff raised more than $4 million for his primary campaign, almost double the amount his two closest opponents raised. He'll need to raise many times that for the general election. He probably won't have trouble finding donors, even if most of them are out of state.
The Georgia Democrat rose to national prominence in 2017, when he raised more than $30 million from celebrities and other rich libs during his unsuccessful special election campaign in Georgia's Sixth Congressional District, in which he did not reside. Ossoff was the original Beto O'Rourke—a young, scrawny, handsome (for a politician), privately educated, upwardly failing white dude beloved by the #Resistance whose inevitable defeat was hailed as a "moral victory."
"There's no doubt that having run and narrowly lost the biggest congressional race of all time has given me perspective that's valuable," Ossoff said in a recent interview with Politico. "A fight well fought can be worth what you build in the process, even if you lose that battle."
Ossoff didn't run again in the sixth district when the seat became open again in 2018, but the Republican who beat him didn't serve for long. Former representative Karen Handel was ousted by Lucy McBath during the midterm wave election in which Democrats regained control of the House.
National Democrats, who have become increasingly obsessed with the idea of "turning Georgia blue," are hungry for a victory in a statewide election after falling short in 2018. Millions of dollars in out-of-state funding couldn't buy a win for Stacey Abrams in the gubernatorial election, though Abrams still refuses to concede. Her loss to Gov. Kemp was also celebrated as a moral victory and propelled Abrams to national stardom.
Some Democrats had been hoping Abrams would run for Senate this year, given the party's alleged commitment to diversity. But she declined and has instead focused most of her energy on trying to bully Joe Biden into picking her as a running mate.
Ossoff has said his goal is to beat Republicans "so bad you can never run or show your face again in public."


freebeacon--2020-06-10--‘Cops’ Canceled in Wake of Protests Against Police

Cops , the long-running reality show that already survived one cancellation , will officially end in the wake of nationwide protests against police brutality .
`` Cops is not on the Paramount Network and we don ’ t have any current or future plans for it to return , '' a network spokesman told Entertainment Weekly on Tuesday .
Progressive groups celebrated the cancellation immediately , with the group Color of Change saying the show was ended `` after our conversation with [ Paramount Network ] this week and after millions of our members raised their voices . ''
Protests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ death of George Floyd at the hands of officers from the Minneapolis Police Department , and some critics have argued depictions of police work on television have contributed to police brutality .
Cops premiered in March 1989 and aired 33 seasons and over 1,100 episodes .
Prior to its first cancellation on Fox , Cops was the longest running show in the channel 's history .
In 2013 , Fox cancelled the show after 25 seasons .
Spike TV immediately picked up the show , and in 2018 the channel was rebranded as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already pulled the remaining episodes of the show 's current season from the schedule prior to Tuesday 's announcement of the show 's cancellation .
Reruns air on WGN America , but the channel does n't plan on renewing its commitment to the show when it expires at the end of this month , according to the Hollywood Reporter .
Cops had expanded to cover different cops from all over the world during its run , even having a crossover episode with Fox 's sci-fi series The X-Files .
But it also came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impoverished subjects and for being unrealistic , and it was the subject of an investigative podcast titled `` Running From Cops . ''
Its trademark style was the subject of parody , including an episode of The Late Show With Stephen Colbert in a segment titled `` Whatcha gon na do when Mueller comes for you ? ''
The segment depicted cops arresting political consultant Roger Stone .

Cops, the long-running reality show that already survived one cancellation, will officially end in the wake of nationwide protests against police brutality.
"Cops is not on the Paramount Network and we don’t have any current or future plans for it to return," a network spokesman told Entertainment Weekly on Tuesday.
Progressive groups celebrated the cancellation immediately, with the group Color of Change saying the show was ended "after our conversation with [Paramount Network] this week and after millions of our members raised their voices."
Protests have raged around the world since the death of George Floyd at the hands of officers from the Minneapolis Police Department, and some critics have argued depictions of police work on television have contributed to police brutality.
Cops premiered in March 1989 and aired 33 seasons and over 1,100 episodes. Prior to its first cancellation on Fox, Cops was the longest running show in the channel's history. In 2013, Fox cancelled the show after 25 seasons.
Spike TV immediately picked up the show, and in 2018 the channel was rebranded as the Paramount Network.
The network had already pulled the remaining episodes of the show's current season from the schedule prior to Tuesday's announcement of the show's cancellation. Reruns air on WGN America, but the channel doesn't plan on renewing its commitment to the show when it expires at the end of this month, according to the Hollywood Reporter.
Cops had expanded to cover different cops from all over the world during its run, even having a crossover episode with Fox's sci-fi series The X-Files. But it also came under criticism for focusing too much on impoverished subjects and for being unrealistic, and it was the subject of an investigative podcast titled "Running From Cops."
Its trademark style was the subject of parody, including an episode of The Late Show With Stephen Colbert in a segment titled "Whatcha gonna do when Mueller comes for you?" The segment depicted cops arresting political consultant Roger Stone.


Fund the Police

The progressive left is increasingly agitating for the defunding of America 's police departments , even as decades of research indicate that better-funded cops make communities better while cutting back would see crime spike .
Prominent Democrats , spurred on by protests of the killing of George Floyd , have started to call for the nation 's police forces to be `` defunded . ''
Police departments , Democratic legislators and leaders have argued , eat up far too large a share of public spending .
That money , they have said in recent days , could instead be diverted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ programs that target the `` root causes '' of crime .
A closer look at the data , however , challenges this story .
Policing , official statistics show , accounts for less than 5 percent of state and local budgets—a share that has shrunk annually as a percentage of GDP since 2010 .
That low level of spending may have trickle-down effects , leading to lower salaries , more stressed-out officers , and lots of unsolved crime .
What is more , decades of research find that more spending on and hiring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with one study concluding that each dollar of spending creates $ 1.63 of social benefit .
Spending more on police officers could also help make a more professional police force , in line with reforms now weighed by the White House and both congressional Democrats and Republicans .
In short , the weight of the evidence suggests that defunding the police could be a disaster for American society—and that giving them more funds would be a substantial boon to public welfare .
Defunding advocates have pointed to the seemingly large share of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Over half of Los Angeles 's , for example , went to police in FY 2019 .
Sen. Kamala Harris ( D. , Calif. ) made this point during an appearance on The View , noting that `` in many cities in America , over one-third of their city budget goes to police . ''
These estimates are misleading , however , confusing the budget responsibilities of different levels of government .
Cities spend a lot on police , but that 's because counties , states , and the federal government pick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while spending surprisingly little on cops .
According to an Urban Institute analysis , state and local governments combined spent $ 115 billion on the police in 2017 .
That may sound like a lot of dough , but it 's only about 4 percent of total spending—less than public welfare ( 22 percent ) , primary and secondary education ( 21 percent ) , and health and hospitals ( 10 percent ) .
State and local spending on police has hovered between 4 and 5 percent of budgets since at least 1960 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the federal government than other programs .
Federal dollars approximately match state spending on education ; by contrast , federal spending accounts for only about 20 percent of police funding .
The Department of Justice earmarked just $ 13.8 billion for police in 2017 , about half a percent of the federal budget .
Those stingy rates trickle down .
The median police officer makes $ 65,000 a year—on par with high school teachers , a group many believe is underpaid .
Half of cops necessarily make less , and many struggle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funding has contributed to the crises police departments currently face .
After peaking before the Great Recession , police forces are shrinking , leaving fewer hands to do more work .
At the same time , policing has become deadlier : Not only are over 150 officers killed in the line of duty every year , but police suicides are on the rise .
Cops are 40 percent more likely than the general population to take their own lives , evidence of the heavy mental health toll taken by frontline work .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Do Police give Americans a lot for their money .
Innovations in and increased funding for policing are widely considered to have contributed to the 30-year decline in violent crime .
At the same time , crime statistics testify to police 's lack of resources .
In 2018 , less than half of violent crimes and less than 20 percent of property crimes were solved ; four in 10 murders are not cleared .
The problem might be bigger than that—less than half of violent victimizations are ever reported to the police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the late-80s highs , violent crime is still more than twice as common today than in 1960 .
This , former Obama DOJ official and criminologist Thomas Abt has argued , is a remarkable failure , the effects of which are felt disproportionately by the Latino and black men most at risk for homicide .
Advocates of defunding point to these numbers as evidence that policing does n't work .
But study after study shows that hiring more cops drives down crime—a sign that low clearance rates are a reason to spend more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Community Oriented Policing Services ( COPS ) office was established in 1994 to direct federal funds to President Bill Clinton 's goal of hiring 100,000 new police officers .
That spending paid off .
Analysis of data from 1990 through 2001 found that COPS-hired police cut `` auto thefts , burglaries , robberies , and aggravated assaults . ''
When the 2008 federal stimulus infused $ 2 billion into COPS , cities that received money saw a 3.6 percent increase in police , resulting in a 4.8 percent decrease in violent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ property crimes .
For each 11 added cops , there was one fewer homicide .
The evidence goes further .
One 2006 paper found that when police unions lose salary negotiations—and police pay suffers— '' arrest rates and average sentence length decline and crime reports rise relative to when they win . ''
It even shows up in other countries : Adding resources to help cops fight street crime in parts of England and Wales caused a significant decline in robbery rates .
One statistical survey sought to quantify the effect of policing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 50 years of data , that each additional dollar spent on police added $ 1.63 in social welfare— '' implying , '' they wrote , `` that U.S. cities are in fact underpoliced . ''
In short : There is strong evidence to support the idea that America could lower its crime rate further—an enormous boon to every community , especially disadvantaged ones—by spending more on police than the relatively paltry sum we currently do .
Hiring more cops is actually quite popular : A 2019 Vox survey found that 60 percent or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support increasing the number of police officers .
Other polling finds support for cutting police budgets consistently below 20 percent .
Even Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I. , Vt. ) called for an increase to police wages as part of a reform plan put forward earlier this month , writing that the nation 's police forces need to be able to `` attract the top-tier officers we need to do the difficult work of policing . ''
Joe Biden has also promised to spend $ 300 million on community policing across the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that improving the quality of American policing likely means spending and hiring more , not less .
Low wages attract fewer well-educated employees : Only 30 percent of police have a four-year degree .
The increasing relevance of technology to policing , however , requires a more educated workforce , according to the Police Executive Research Forum .
More generally , paying more money for better employees is a bedrock principle of civil service reform , explaining why the highly effective government of Singapore pays its top officials millions of dollars a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police officers may also reduce instances of police misconduct by reducing the strain on individual officers and increasing police capacity to interact constructively with the community .
One success story is Camden , N.J. , where the department was disbanded and reconstituted with more officers on the beat .
Seven years later , violent crime is down , while public support is up .
Sanders and Biden , in other words , seem to have cottoned on to what the research says .
If leaders want safer communities and better officers , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not less , on the police .

The progressive left is increasingly agitating for the defunding of America's police departments, even as decades of research indicate that better-funded cops make communities better while cutting back would see crime spike.
Prominent Democrats, spurred on by protests of the killing of George Floyd, have started to call for the nation's police forces to be "defunded." Police departments, Democratic legislators and leaders have argued, eat up far too large a share of public spending. That money, they have said in recent days, could instead be diverted to schools, therapists, and other programs that target the "root causes" of crime.
A closer look at the data, however, challenges this story. Policing, official statistics show, accounts for less than 5 percent of state and local budgets—a share that has shrunk annually as a percentage of GDP since 2010. That low level of spending may have trickle-down effects, leading to lower salaries, more stressed-out officers, and lots of unsolved crime.
What is more, decades of research find that more spending on and hiring of police are potent anti-crime measures, with one study concluding that each dollar of spending creates $1.63 of social benefit. Spending more on police officers could also help make a more professional police force, in line with reforms now being weighed by the White House and both congressional Democrats and Republicans.
In short, the weight of the evidence suggests that defunding the police could be a disaster for American society—and that giving them more funds would be a substantial boon to public welfare.
Cops Don't Cost a Lot
Defunding advocates have pointed to the seemingly large share of their budgets that cities spend on the police. Over half of Los Angeles's, for example, went to police in FY 2019. Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.) made this point during an appearance on The View, noting that "in many cities in America, over one-third of their city budget goes to police."
These estimates are misleading, however, confusing the budget responsibilities of different levels of government. Cities spend a lot on police, but that's because counties, states, and the federal government pick up the tab for most other things while spending surprisingly little on cops.
According to an Urban Institute analysis, state and local governments combined spent $115 billion on the police in 2017. That may sound like a lot of dough, but it's only about 4 percent of total spending—less than public welfare (22 percent), primary and secondary education (21 percent), and health and hospitals (10 percent). State and local spending on police has hovered between 4 and 5 percent of budgets since at least 1960.
Police also receive far less support from the federal government than other programs. Federal dollars approximately match state spending on education; by contrast, federal spending accounts for only about 20 percent of police funding. The Department of Justice earmarked just $13.8 billion for police in 2017, about half a percent of the federal budget.
Those stingy rates trickle down. The median police officer makes $65,000 a year—on par with high school teachers, a group many believe is underpaid. Half of cops necessarily make less, and many struggle at poverty levels of income.
Low funding has contributed to the crises police departments currently face. After peaking before the Great Recession, police forces are shrinking, leaving fewer hands to do more work. At the same time, policing has become deadlier: Not only are over 150 officers killed in the line of duty every year, but police suicides are on the rise. Cops are 40 percent more likely than the general population to take their own lives, evidence of the heavy mental health toll taken by frontline work.
There's a Lot Police Can't Afford to Do
Police give Americans a lot for their money. Innovations in and increased funding for policing are widely considered to have contributed to the 30-year decline in violent crime.
At the same time, crime statistics testify to police's lack of resources. In 2018, less than half of violent crimes and less than 20 percent of property crimes were solved; four in 10 murders are not cleared.
The problem might be bigger than that—less than half of violent victimizations are ever reported to the police.
Even as it has dropped from the late-80s highs, violent crime is still more than twice as common today than in 1960. This, former Obama DOJ official and criminologist Thomas Abt has argued, is a remarkable failure, the effects of which are felt disproportionately by the Latino and black men most at risk for homicide.
Advocates of defunding point to these numbers as evidence that policing doesn't work. But study after study shows that hiring more cops drives down crime—a sign that low clearance rates are a reason to spend more, not less, on the police.
More Cops Means Less Crime
The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) office was established in 1994 to direct federal funds to President Bill Clinton's goal of hiring 100,000 new police officers.
That spending paid off. Analysis of data from 1990 through 2001 found that COPS-hired police cut "auto thefts, burglaries, robberies, and aggravated assaults." When the 2008 federal stimulus infused $2 billion into COPS, cities that received money saw a 3.6 percent increase in police, resulting in a 4.8 percent decrease in violent crimes and a 3 percent decrease in property crimes. For each 11 added cops, there was one fewer homicide.
The evidence goes further. One 2006 paper found that when police unions lose salary negotiations—and police pay suffers—"arrest rates and average sentence length decline and crime reports rise relative to when they win." It even shows up in other countries: Adding resources to help cops fight street crime in parts of England and Wales caused a significant decline in robbery rates.
One statistical survey sought to quantify the effect of policing. The authors concluded, based on 50 years of data, that each additional dollar spent on police added $1.63 in social welfare—"implying," they wrote, "that U.S. cities are in fact underpoliced."
In short: There is strong evidence to support the idea that America could lower its crime rate further—an enormous boon to every community, especially disadvantaged ones—by spending more on police than the relatively paltry sum we currently do.
More Cops Means Better Cops
Hiring more cops is actually quite popular: A 2019 Vox survey found that 60 percent or more of respondents of all races would support increasing the number of police officers. Other polling finds support for cutting police budgets consistently below 20 percent.
Even Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) called for an increase to police wages as part of a reform plan put forward earlier this month, writing that the nation's police forces need to be able to "attract the top-tier officers we need to do the difficult work of policing." Joe Biden has also promised to spend $300 million on community policing across the country.
Sanders and Biden's key insight is that improving the quality of American policing likely means spending and hiring more, not less.
Low wages attract fewer well-educated employees: Only 30 percent of police have a four-year degree. The increasing relevance of technology to policing, however, requires a more educated workforce, according to the Police Executive Research Forum. More generally, paying more money for better employees is a bedrock principle of civil service reform, explaining why the highly effective government of Singapore pays its top officials millions of dollars a year.
Increasing the actual number of police officers may also reduce instances of police misconduct by reducing the strain on individual officers and increasing police capacity to interact constructively with the community. One success story is Camden, N.J., where the department was disbanded and reconstituted with more officers on the beat. Seven years later, violent crime is down, while public support is up.
Sanders and Biden, in other words, seem to have cottoned on to what the research says. If leaders want safer communities and better officers, they need to prepare to spend more, not less, on the police.


freebeacon--2020-06-11--China Used Nearly 200,000 Fake Twitter Accounts to Boost Communist Party

Twitter disclosed on Thursday that China used nearly 200,000 fake accounts to boost Communist Party propaganda .
Russia , which @ @ @ @ @ trying to influence the 2016 elections , waged similar campaigns using just under 1,200 state-linked @ @ @ @ @ , which said that Turkey also conducted similar campaigns .
China is by far the @ @ @ @ @ website .
Twitter said that it removed all of the accounts it found to be @ @ @ @ @ ’ s massive propaganda effort .
`` Today we are disclosing 32,242 accounts to our @ @ @ @ @ only one of its kind in the industry , '' Twitter reported on its official @ @ @ @ @ of those accounts comprised the core of China ’ s propaganda network .
Another 150,000 @ @ @ @ @ this propaganda across Twitter ’ s platform .
As for Russia , the accounts suspended @ @ @ @ @ have boosted `` the United Russia party and [ attacked ] political dissidents . ''
@ @ @ @ @ Turkey to promote positive information about President Recep Tayyip Erdogan .

Twitter disclosed on Thursday that China used nearly 200,000 fake accounts to boost Communist Party propaganda.
Russia, which played a central role in trying to influence the 2016 elections, waged similar campaigns using just under 1,200 state-linked accounts, according to Twitter, which said that Turkey also conducted similar campaigns.
China is by far the largest state-backed influencer on the website. Twitter said that it removed all of the accounts it found to be part of the Communist regime’s massive propaganda effort.
"Today we are disclosing 32,242 accounts to our archive of state-linked information operations—the only one of its kind in the industry," Twitter reported on its official blog.
At least 23,750 of those accounts comprised the core of China’s propaganda network. Another 150,000 accounts were used to promote this propaganda across Twitter’s platform.
As for Russia, the accounts suspended by Twitter were found to have boosted "the United Russia party and [attacked] political dissidents."
Another 7,340 were used by Turkey to promote positive information about President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.


freebeacon--2020-06-11--EXCLUSIVE: Free Beacon Poll Finds Strong, Powerful Support for Trump

A majority of the American people proudly and enthusiastically support President Donald J. Trump and are eager to see him reelected in November , a recent poll found .
The exclusive survey , conducted by the Institute for Fact-Based Analytics ( IFBA ) on behalf of the Washington Free Beacon , was based on phone interviews with more than 6,000 verified American citizens who described themselves as `` extremely likely '' to vote in the fall .
The poll 's findings , which were strongly based on science , are curiously divergent from the findings of polls conducted by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ television network CNN , for example , recently received a powerful legal statement from the Trump campaign demanding the retraction of a `` phony poll '' intended to `` cause voter suppression , stifle momentum and enthusiasm for the President , and present a false view generally of the actual support across America for the President . ''
The Free Beacon/IFBA poll , on the other hand , is unlikely to be threatened with legal action due to its strict adherence to scientific methodology and its unprecedented margin of error of +/- 0.1776 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ findings , bolstered by truth , are listed below .
1 ) If the election were held today , for whom would you vote ?
2 ) How would you rate the job President Trump has done during his first term ?
3 ) In your opinion , which American president was the greatest of all time ?
4 ) In your opinion , what is an appropriate height for the beautiful wall President Trump is building on the southern border ?
5 ) Which of President Trump 's adult sons do you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) What do you consider the greatest threat to the United States ?
7 ) Would you support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would allow President Trump to serve more than two terms in office ?
9 ) [ Democratic voters only ] Which of the following best describes your understanding of the phrase `` abolish the police '' ?
• Abolish the police , empty the prisons , and burn society to the ground : 72.6 % 10 ) [ Democratic voters only ] If Joe Biden is elected president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be his top priority ?

A majority of the American people proudly and enthusiastically support President Donald J. Trump and are eager to see him reelected in November, a recent poll found.
The exclusive survey, conducted by the Institute for Fact-Based Analytics (IFBA) on behalf of the Washington Free Beacon, was based on phone interviews with more than 6,000 verified American citizens who described themselves as "extremely likely" to vote in the fall.
The poll's findings, which were strongly based on science, are curiously divergent from the findings of polls conducted by the so-called "mainstream" media. Left-wing television network CNN, for example, recently received a powerful legal statement from the Trump campaign demanding the retraction of a "phony poll" intended to "cause voter suppression, stifle momentum and enthusiasm for the President, and present a false view generally of the actual support across America for the President."
The Free Beacon/IFBA poll, on the other hand, is unlikely to be threatened with legal action due to its strict adherence to scientific methodology and its unprecedented margin of error of +/- 0.1776 percent. The poll's most notable findings, bolstered by truth, are listed below.
1) If the election were held today, for whom would you vote?
Donald Trump: 61.2%
Joe Biden: 18.6%
Hillary Clinton: 11.5%
Melania Trump: 7.0%
Justin Amash: 0.1%
Other/Don't know: 1.6%
2) How would you rate the job President Trump has done during his first term?
Perfect: 12.4%
Excellent: 25.7%
Very Good: 33.1%
Good: 18.5%
Other: 10.3%
3) In your opinion, which American president was the greatest of all time?
Donald Trump: 21.2%
Abraham Lincoln: 16.5%
George Washington: 13.1%
Franklin D. Roosevelt: 12.6%
Ronald Reagan: 11.2%
George W. Bush: 8.6%
Richard Nixon: 6.9%
Martin Van Buren: 5.4%
Barack H. Obama: 4.5%
4) In your opinion, what is an appropriate height for the beautiful wall President Trump is building on the southern border?
25 feet: 16.8%
50 feet: 18.5%
100 feet: 26.3%
Higher: 24.0%
I don't believe in walls: 14.4%
5) Which of President Trump's adult sons do you consider the most physically attractive?
Donald J. Trump Jr.: 33.6%
Eric Trump: 34.1%
Both are equally attractive: 32.3%
6) What do you consider the greatest threat to the United States?
Corrupt media: 24.8%
Hillary Clinton: 20.5%
Socialism: 15.1%
Antifa: 12.3%
Democrat collusion: 9.7%
Joe Biden: 8.3%
The Deep State: 7.6%
Donald Trump: 1.7%
7) Would you support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would allow President Trump to serve more than two terms in office?
Yes: 52.8%
No: 36.5%
Don't know: 10.7%
8) Who killed Jeffrey Epstein?
Hillary Clinton: 64.6%
Bill Clinton: 34.3%
Jeffrey Epstein: 1.1%
9) [Democratic voters only] Which of the following best describes your understanding of the phrase "abolish the police"?
Reform the police: 27.4%
Abolish the police, empty the prisons, and burn society to the ground: 72.6%
10) [Democratic voters only] If Joe Biden is elected president, which of the following issues should be his top priority?
Abolish the police: 36.6%
High-speed rail: 13.7%
Eliminate banks: 9.3%
Maximum wage: 10.6%
Mandate Drag Queen Story Hour in public schools: 24.1%
Mandate salary parity between NBA and WNBA: 5.7%


freebeacon--2020-06-11--Academics Demand Econ Journal Purge Prof For Criticizing Defund Police Movement

Students and professors are demanding that an academic journal fire a professor who criticized efforts to defund the police .
Activists submitted a petition accusing University of Chicago economics professor Harald Uhlig of `` trivializing the Black Lives Matter movement '' on his Twitter account .
The campaign came after Uhlig wrote that Black Lives Matter `` torpedoed itself with its full-fledged support of # defundthepolice . ''
Max Auffhammer , an economics professor at the University of California , Berkeley , and University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers created the petition to oust Uhlig from his position of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Economy .
Uhlig 's comments `` hurt and marginalize people of color and their allies in the economics profession , '' the petition said .
`` We do not question the right of Prof. Uhlig to make such comments , but we are strongly opposed to him holding a position of power as the editor of a prominent journal in our discipline . ''
Uhlig did not respond to request for comment .
In a tweet thread , Uhlig criticized the `` # defundthepolice '' movement and called for a serious conversation on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the proposal—which is gaining traction on the left even as an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose it .
A YouGov poll found that only 16 percent of Americans support decreasing law enforcement funding in the wake of nationwide protests ; 65 percent oppose the idea .
`` Time for sensible adults to enter back into the room and have serious , earnest , respectful conversations about it all : e.g .
policy reform proposals by [ the Democrats ] and national healing .
We need more police , we need to pay them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better , '' Uhlig said .
The petition , which is no longer active , allegedly urged Uhlig to resign his position as lead editor of the Journal of Political Economy .
Uhlig has made comments on controversial topics in the past , including the riots and looting that followed the murder of George Floyd 's death at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer , as well as the 2017 Charlottesville protest that left one dead .
Uhlig 's comments sparked condemnation from liberal economists , journalists , and activists across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ City University of New York professor Paul Krugman called Uhlig a `` privileged white man who evidently ca n't control his urge to belittle the concerns of those less fortunate . ''
Wolfers , another contributor to the New York Times , said he was angered by Uhlig 's tweets and claimed that the professor was engaged in `` a sophomoric debate about language '' in order to `` condescendingly try to ridicule the movement . ''
After the petition gained traction , Uhlig offered an apology for not choosing his words and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people . ''
Wolfers called the apology an `` a**-covering , followed by [ Uhlig ] speaking on behalf of communities of color in a way he has no business doing . ''
Online petitions and propositions to fire professors for offensive speech have gained traction in the wake of Floyd 's death .
The University of California , Los Angeles placed an accounting professor on a leave of absence and launched an investigation into his conduct after he refused to give minority students exemptions from the scheduled final exam .
The incoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her job revoked after she called some police officers `` good '' in a tweet .
The letter was submitted to the editors of the Journal of Political Economy and the University of Chicago president on June 10 .
Neither the journal nor the university returned requests for comment .

Students and professors are demanding that an academic journal fire a professor who criticized efforts to defund the police.
Activists submitted a petition accusing University of Chicago economics professor Harald Uhlig of "trivializing the Black Lives Matter movement" on his Twitter account. The campaign came after Uhlig wrote that Black Lives Matter "torpedoed itself with its full-fledged support of #defundthepolice." Max Auffhammer, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, and University of Michigan economics professor Justin Wolfers created the petition to oust Uhlig from his position of editor of the prestigious Journal of Political Economy.
Uhlig's comments "hurt and marginalize people of color and their allies in the economics profession," the petition said. "We do not question the right of Prof. Uhlig to make such comments, but we are strongly opposed to him holding a position of power as the editor of a prominent journal in our discipline."
Uhlig did not respond to request for comment.
In a tweet thread, Uhlig criticized the "#defundthepolice" movement and called for a serious conversation on police brutality and policy reforms instead of the proposal—which is gaining traction on the left even as an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose it. A YouGov poll found that only 16 percent of Americans support decreasing law enforcement funding in the wake of nationwide protests; 65 percent oppose the idea.
"Time for sensible adults to enter back into the room and have serious, earnest, respectful conversations about it all: e.g. policy reform proposals by [the Democrats] and national healing. We need more police, we need to pay them more, we need to train them better," Uhlig said.
The petition, which is no longer active, allegedly urged Uhlig to resign his position as lead editor of the Journal of Political Economy. Uhlig has made comments on controversial topics in the past, including the riots and looting that followed the murder of George Floyd's death at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer, as well as the 2017 Charlottesville protest that left one dead.
Uhlig's comments sparked condemnation from liberal economists, journalists, and activists across the country. New York Times columnist and City University of New York professor Paul Krugman called Uhlig a "privileged white man who evidently can't control his urge to belittle the concerns of those less fortunate." Wolfers, another contributor to the New York Times, said he was angered by Uhlig's tweets and claimed that the professor was engaged in "a sophomoric debate about language" in order to "condescendingly try to ridicule the movement."
After the petition gained traction, Uhlig offered an apology for not choosing his words and comparisons more carefully and for "irritating people." Wolfers called the apology an "a**-covering, followed by [Uhlig] speaking on behalf of communities of color in a way he has no business doing."
Online petitions and propositions to fire professors for offensive speech have gained traction in the wake of Floyd's death. The University of California, Los Angeles placed an accounting professor on a leave of absence and launched an investigation into his conduct after he refused to give minority students exemptions from the scheduled final exam. The incoming journalism dean at Arizona State University had her job revoked after she called some police officers "good" in a tweet.
The letter was submitted to the editors of the Journal of Political Economy and the University of Chicago president on June 10. The journal did not respond to a request for comment.
*The university is standing by the professor. A University of Chicago spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon on Friday that the school is committed to not only combatting racism, but preserving academic freedom and "open inquiry."
"This commitment to an inclusive and just society is essential to our abiding commitment to free and open inquiry as the cornerstone of our academic mission," a University of Chicago spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon on Friday. "The University does not speak for individual faculty members, and it does not take a position in the debates and discussions in which faculty members are involved. At the same time, faculty members do not speak for the University. The University seeks to foster an environment of dialogue that is both challenging and respectful."
Economics department chair Robert Shimer echoed that sentiment in a blog post addressed to University of Chicago economics professors. It warned that certain speech—referencing Uhlig's comments—could hinder the reputation of the university. While noting that the department would not police the speech of academics, he cautioned his colleagues that "the right to free speech comes responsibilities."
"I urge each of us to remember that with the right to free speech comes responsibilities. What we write affects public policy. What we write and how we write it affects how scholars and the broader public view us," Shimer wrote. "It also affects how people view our colleagues, the Kenneth C. Griffin Department of Economics, and the broader community of economists at the University of Chicago and elsewhere, as well as our ability to attract the best scholars to our department."
*This story has been updated to include comment from the university


freebeacon--2020-06-11--SURGE BEFORE SURRENDER: Trump’s Premature Retreat from D.C. Endangers Allies in the Region

Ombudsman 's Note : This opinion column was published with the express written consent of every member of the Washington Free Beacon staff .
Anything less would , in our view , violate the free-speech principles on which our country was founded .
It has not been fact-checked or edited for tone .
President Donald J. Trump 's poll numbers are plummeting .
He has only himself to blame .
If he wants to have any chance of winning reelection in November , the president must rediscover his passion for the exercise of U.S. military might .
Roughly two weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chief launched Operation American Freedom .
The goal : to take back the riot-plagued streets of our nation 's capitol .
Thanks to a formidable coalition of Nation Guardsmen and mercenaries loyal to Roger Stone , the mission was accomplished .
Now what ?
As soon as the threat was neutralized , President Trump decided to cut and run .
That 's cowardice , not leadership , and the premature withdrawal of U.S. forces threatens to destabilize the region , threatening our allies .
Trump was elected to restore America 's commitment to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for surrender .
Now is the time for a surge .
A recent poll from the Project for the Militant Restoration of the Last American Century ( PFTMROTLAC ) found that more than 40 percent of D.C. residents considered the riots `` a cathartic , violent cleansing of America ’ s racist soul . ''
This does n't mean the National Guard has to occupy the entire city .
The next deployment can strategically focus on suspected Antifa cells : Kalorama , Woodley Park , and Cleveland Park would be a good start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take military action unilaterally , it may be advisable to seek a coalition force of military units from neighboring states—the ones with actual statehood—to protect vulnerable populations , such as D.C. residents who do n't support total police abolition .
They need our support , Mr. President .
Now that the nationwide protests have definitively proved that coronavirus was a hoax , many patriotic Americans would like to tour our nation 's capitol this summer in support of President Trump 's reelection .
How are they supposed to do that in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accosted by gender-nonbinary radicals demanding an apology for their whiteness ?
Do their vacations matter or not ?
No one knows if there will be more riots .
But we do know this : When Donald Trump sent in the troops , the riots stopped .
It 's time for Lil ' Donny to step out of his bunker and into his Big Boy pants .
The future of the republic is at stake .

Ombudsman's Note: This opinion column was published with the express written consent of every member of the Washington Free Beacon staff. Anything less would, in our view, violate the free-speech principles on which our country was founded. It has not been fact-checked or edited for tone.
President Donald J. Trump's poll numbers are plummeting. He has only himself to blame. If he wants to have any chance of winning reelection in November, the president must rediscover his passion for the exercise of U.S. military might.
Roughly two weeks have passed since the so-called commander in chief launched Operation American Freedom. The goal: to take back the riot-plagued streets of our nation's capitol. Thanks to a formidable coalition of Nation Guardsmen and mercenaries loyal to Roger Stone, the mission was accomplished. Now what?
As soon as the threat was neutralized, President Trump decided to cut and run. That's cowardice, not leadership, and the premature withdrawal of U.S. forces threatens to destabilize the region, threatening our allies. Trump was elected to restore America's commitment to winning. Now is not the time for surrender. Now is the time for a surge.
A recent poll from the Project for the Militant Restoration of the Last American Century (PFTMROTLAC) found that more than 40 percent of D.C. residents considered the riots "a cathartic, violent cleansing of America’s racist soul." This doesn't mean the National Guard has to occupy the entire city. The next deployment can strategically focus on suspected Antifa cells: Kalorama, Woodley Park, and Cleveland Park would be a good start.
Though the president has the authority to take military action unilaterally, it may be advisable to seek a coalition force of military units from neighboring states—the ones with actual statehood—to protect vulnerable populations, such as D.C. residents who don't support total police abolition. They need our support, Mr. President.
Now that the nationwide protests have definitively proved that coronavirus was a hoax, many patriotic Americans would like to tour our nation's capitol this summer in support of President Trump's reelection. How are they supposed to do that in a city where they're likely to be accosted by gender-nonbinary radicals demanding an apology for their whiteness? Do their vacations matter or not?
No one knows if there will be more riots. But we do know this: When Donald Trump sent in the troops, the riots stopped. It's time for Lil' Donny to step out of his bunker and into his Big Boy pants. The future of the republic is at stake.


freebeacon--2020-06-11--De Blasio: Playgrounds Pose Greater Health Risk Than Mass Demonstrations

New York City mayor Bill de Blasio ( D. ) on Thursday said he would not reopen playgrounds to families because it is `` too much of a risk '' but said large protest gatherings may continue .
`` Out of an abundance of caution , the playgrounds just created too much of a risk to families , of the spread of the disease , '' de Blasio said during a press briefing .
Hamodia journalist Reuvain Borchardt had asked de Blasio how it was fair to allow protests to continue amid the coronavirus pandemic while families are prohibited from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ promote equality , Mr. Mayor , when protesters , who have already had nearly two weeks to be out in the street , are continually allowed to gather ? ''
Borchardt asked .
The mayor defended his decision , saying the protests are a demand for change during a painful and challenging period .
`` I do think the moment that this city , this nation has gone through in the last two weeks or so is something very particular , very painful , very intense , very challenging , '' de Blasio @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where literally decades and centuries of the demand for change came forward , and real change is happening as a result . ''
De Blasio said he sympathized with frustrated parents and it was n't a decision he made lightly .
Last week , de Blasio tangled with Borchardt over the prohibition of prayer services while mass protests were allowed to continue .
`` Four hundred years of American racism , I 'm sorry , that is not the same question as the understandably aggrieved store owner or the devout religious person who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' de Blasio said at the time .
The mayor also criticized Borchardt for asking if de Blasio 's solidarity with the protesters affected his decision .

New York City mayor Bill de Blasio (D.) on Thursday said he would not reopen playgrounds to families because it is "too much of a risk" but said large protest gatherings may continue.
"Out of an abundance of caution, the playgrounds just created too much of a risk to families, of the spread of the disease," de Blasio said during a press briefing.
Hamodia journalist Reuvain Borchardt had asked de Blasio how it was fair to allow protests to continue amid the coronavirus pandemic while families are prohibited from using playgrounds.
"How does it promote equality, Mr. Mayor, when protesters, who have already had nearly two weeks to be out in the street, are continually allowed to gather?" Borchardt asked.
The mayor defended his decision, saying the protests are a demand for change during a painful and challenging period.
"I do think the moment that this city, this nation has gone through in the last two weeks or so is something very particular, very painful, very intense, very challenging," de Blasio said. "But also a moment where literally decades and centuries of the demand for change came forward, and real change is happening as a result."
De Blasio said he sympathized with frustrated parents and it wasn't a decision he made lightly.
Last week, de Blasio tangled with Borchardt over the prohibition of prayer services while mass protests were allowed to continue.
"Four hundred years of American racism, I'm sorry, that is not the same question as the understandably aggrieved store owner or the devout religious person who wants to go back to services," de Blasio said at the time.
The mayor also criticized Borchardt for asking if de Blasio's solidarity with the protesters affected his decision.


freebeacon--2020-06-11--Fired State Department IG Sent Confidential Info to His Personal Email Accounts

The State Department inspector general whose recent dismissal ignited a political firestorm sent copies detailing a sensitive investigation to his personal email account , according to a probe into his conduct run by the Defense Department 's inspector general .
The inquiry report , dated March 17 , confirms that fired State Department inspector general Steve Linick was the subject of a broad investigation related to the leaks of politically charged materials to journalists , specifically a draft evaluation report into Brian Hook , the State Department ’ s top Iran official .
The report , which was provided to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that while Linick was permitted to send information to his personal email account to facilitate access while traveling , he was the only official in that office to have done so .
The disclosure is likely to raise new questions about Linick ’ s suspected role in leaking sensitive information to the press .
Linick ’ s firing generated harsh criticism from Democrats and many in the media , with opponents of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo alleging the former IG was canned for his efforts to investigate allegations of impropriety related to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration , however , has maintained that Linick ’ s firing was justified .
Details of the highly sensitive investigation into Hook—involving unsubstantiated allegations that Hook fired officials he saw as insufficiently hawkish on Iran—were leaked to the media without authorization , according to the DOD investigation .
The DOD investigation into Linick found that between March 2019 and September 2019 Linick sent 23 emails containing confidential work products from inside the State Department email system to his personal Gmail account .
Eight of the emails Linick sent to himself , which were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ copies of the incomplete probe into Hook .
Linick was the only State Department employee from the IG ’ s office to email drafts of the evaluation outside the department , according to the report .
The DOD IG did not find evidence that Linick leaked the evaluation to journalists .
Nevertheless , the revelation is likely to fuel criticism of Linick ’ s conduct .
State Department officials close to Pompeo said that Linick was fired in part for refusing to allow an independent probe to be conducted into his actions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the unauthorized leaks to the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency , according to Brian Bulatao , the undersecretary of state for management and a close ally of Pompeo ’ s .
Bulatao alleged that Linick did not obey this order , instead selecting his own peer reviewer .
Additionally , Linick allegedly refused to share the results of this investigation with the State Department .
A Republican congressional staffer familiar with the investigation said there is increasing evidence that Linick was the source of the unauthorized leaks about Hook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ channels to make sure the report into Hook was flagged for multiple parties on and off the Hill , guaranteeing that it would eventually leak , '' according to the source , who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon on background about the investigation .
`` They used private accounts that ensured they could cover their tracks .
This was a hit job . ''
Federal employees are generally prohibited from moving official documents into their personal email accounts for security concerns and the potential for unauthorized leaks .
The State Department investigated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hillary Clinton , who violated department rules by using a homebrewed server to store sensitive and confidential information .
Parts of the DOD ’ s IG report , including the names of over a dozen officials interviewed in connection with the investigation into Linick , remain redacted .

The State Department inspector general whose recent dismissal ignited a political firestorm sent copies detailing a sensitive investigation to his personal email account, according to a probe into his conduct run by the Defense Department's inspector general.
The inquiry report, dated March 17, confirms that fired State Department inspector general Steve Linick was the subject of a broad investigation related to the leaks of politically charged materials to journalists, specifically a draft evaluation report into Brian Hook, the State Department’s top Iran official. The report, which was provided to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, concluded that while Linick was permitted to send information to his personal email account to facilitate access while traveling, he was the only official in that office to have done so. The disclosure is likely to raise new questions about Linick’s suspected role in leaking sensitive information to the press.
Linick’s firing generated harsh criticism from Democrats and many in the media, with opponents of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo alleging the former IG was canned for his efforts to investigate allegations of impropriety related to Pompeo and his staff. The Trump administration, however, has maintained that Linick’s firing was justified.
Details of the highly sensitive investigation into Hook—involving unsubstantiated allegations that Hook fired officials he saw as insufficiently hawkish on Iran—were leaked to the media without authorization, according to the DOD investigation.
The DOD investigation into Linick found that between March 2019 and September 2019 Linick sent 23 emails containing confidential work products from inside the State Department email system to his personal Gmail account. Eight of the emails Linick sent to himself, which were forwarded over a six-day period, contained copies of the incomplete probe into Hook. Linick was the only State Department employee from the IG’s office to email drafts of the evaluation outside the department, according to the report.
The DOD IG did not find evidence that Linick leaked the evaluation to journalists. Nevertheless, the revelation is likely to fuel criticism of Linick’s conduct.
State Department officials close to Pompeo said that Linick was fired in part for refusing to allow an independent probe to be conducted into his actions.
Linick was ordered by superiors to report the unauthorized leaks to the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, according to Brian Bulatao, the undersecretary of state for management and a close ally of Pompeo’s.
Bulatao alleged that Linick did not obey this order, instead selecting his own peer reviewer.
Additionally, Linick allegedly refused to share the results of this investigation with the State Department.
A Republican congressional staffer familiar with the investigation said there is increasing evidence that Linick was the source of the unauthorized leaks about Hook.
"They used official and unofficial channels to make sure the report into Hook was flagged for multiple parties on and off the Hill, guaranteeing that it would eventually leak," according to the source, who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon on background about the investigation. "They used private accounts that ensured they could cover their tracks. This was a hit job."
Federal employees are generally prohibited from moving official documents into their personal email accounts for security concerns and the potential for unauthorized leaks. The State Department investigated similar claims about former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who violated department rules by using a homebrewed server to store sensitive and confidential information.
Parts of the DOD’s IG report, including the names of over a dozen officials interviewed in connection with the investigation into Linick, remain redacted.


freebeacon--2020-06-11--Why Is Laurene Powell Jobs Funding Fake News?

Laurene Powell Jobs has portrayed herself as a defender of the free press , but while journalistic projects she supports have laid off employees and turned to the government for help , the billionaire has funded a political group that built sham local news sites to push Democratic talking points .
Powell Jobs—worth over $ 26 billion thanks to her late husband , Apple founder Steve Jobs—has spent big on major media properties like the Atlantic , Axios , and Mother Jones through her `` social change '' investment firm , Emerson Collective .
But many of those outlets appear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis , taking government loans and laying off staff .
Powell Jobs 's attention , however , appears focused more on sending Joe Biden to the White House .
Multiple reports have indicated the billionaire has funneled money into liberal media operation ACRONYM , which in turn operates Courier Newsroom , an umbrella over seven different sites that pose as local news outlets while distributing what one critic called `` hyperlocal partisan propaganda . ''
This mismatch between Powell Jobs 's public image and political spending raises questions about how seriously the self-professed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially when they might conflict with her political goals .
Neither a representative for ACRONYM nor for Emerson Collective responded to multiple requests for comment for this article .
Powell Jobs has more than once been listed as a major backer of ACRONYM .
A March New York Times story described her as such , as did a May story from Vox .
There is also some evidence of a connection between Powell Jobs and ACRONYM CEO Tara McGowan : Emerson Collective gave $ 2 million to Priorities USA Action during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the PAC 's digital director .
McGowan has also tweeted appreciatively at Powell Jobs .
The exact relationship between Powell Jobs , Emerson , and ACRONYM , however , remains murky .
That 's thanks in large part to Emerson 's status as an LLC , which unlike a more traditional 501 ( c ) designation , protects the organization from having to make public finance disclosures .
Courier is similarly structured .
It is clear , however , that both ACRONYM and Courier are doing well .
Since February , Courier 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to seven .
One of these , North Carolina-based Cardinal & Pine , spent over $ 20,000 on digital advertising in March alone , according to a Center for Responsive Politics investigation .
ACRONYM reported more than $ 9 million in receipts in FY 2018 , according to documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon .
Many of the news sites funded by Emerson Collective , meanwhile , are struggling amid a massive economic downturn .
The Atlantic , in which Emerson owns a controlling stake , laid off 17 percent of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ owns the Emerson-backed NowThis , dropped 7 percent of its workforce .
Many Powell Jobs-supported outlets have turned to the federal government for a bailout .
Axios , which has received Emerson money , returned a $ 5 million loan from the Paycheck Protection Program amid backlash .
The Marshall Project , an outlet focused on criminal justice reform , confirmed to the Free Beacon that it had taken a previously disclosed PPP loan .
So did left-leaning news site Mother Jones , which does not appear to have previously disclosed this information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a number of Powell Jobs-backed outlets to ask about whether they had sought additional funding from outside sources .
Most did not respond or declined to comment , but Marshall Project director of strategy and communications Ruth Baldwin said , `` We have naturally been in touch with all our major donors since the pandemic began .
Not all of them have been able to continue at the same level of support , but we have felt encouraged overall . ''
The state of Powell Jobs 's investments—media properties faltering as a fake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her carefully curated image as a friend to the free press .
In a column penned in the Atlantic in 2019 , Powell Jobs referred to journalists as `` the world 's most valuable troublemakers , '' writing , `` in a struggle for the soul of this nation , in a battle for justice around the world , I am honored to be on the side of those who are fighting for the truth . ''
That sentiment was echoed by Peter Lattman , the managing director of media at Emerson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a flattering profile of Powell Jobs that `` broadly , we invest in and support super high-quality journalism , '' adding `` we are looking at innovative approaches to media and storytelling . ''
Jobs 's carefully crafted image has extended to media coverage , not only in the Times , but also in the Washington Post .
All of this support for `` independent media , '' as a Times interview put it , seems at odds with the mission of Courier , whose parent Powell Jobs funds .
Courier functions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win elections for Democrats .
McGowan framed its outlets as part of combating President Donald Trump 's massive 2016 social media campaign , telling Bloomberg of criticisms that her coverage is slanted , `` balance does not exist anymore . ''
Courier sites disclose only a hint of their larger political purpose , with a mention at the bottom of their pages that they are `` owned by Courier Newsroom , Inc. '' This , the Center for Responsive Politics noted , means that their ads—which primarily target President Donald Trump— '' are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The project 's goal is to , as Bloomberg put it , `` deliver the facts favorable to Democrats that [ McGowan ] thinks voters are missing , and counter right-wing spin . ''
Gabby Deutch , who works for misinformation outlet NewsGuard , stated it more harshly : `` Courier and Acronym are exploiting the widespread loss of local journalism to create and disseminate something we really don ’ t need : hyperlocal partisan propaganda . ''
Her organization gave all of Courier 's sites failing grades for `` undisclosed partisan Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any definition of `` independent media . ''

Laurene Powell Jobs has portrayed herself as a defender of the free press, but while journalistic projects she supports have laid off employees and turned to the government for help, the billionaire has funded a political group that built sham local news sites to push Democratic talking points.
Powell Jobs—worth over $26 billion thanks to her late husband, Apple founder Steve Jobs—has spent big on major media properties like the Atlantic, Axios, and Mother Jones through her "social change" investment firm, Emerson Collective. But many of those outlets appear to be floundering amid the current economic crisis, taking government loans and laying off staff.
Powell Jobs's attention, however, appears focused more on sending Joe Biden to the White House. Multiple reports have indicated the billionaire has funneled money into liberal media operation ACRONYM, which in turn operates Courier Newsroom, an umbrella over seven different sites that pose as local news outlets while distributing what one critic called "hyperlocal partisan propaganda."
This mismatch between Powell Jobs's public image and political spending raises questions about how seriously the self-professed friend to independent media takes those commitments, especially when they might conflict with her political goals. Neither a representative for ACRONYM nor for Emerson Collective responded to multiple requests for comment for this article.
Powell Jobs has more than once been listed as a major backer of ACRONYM. A March New York Times story described her as such, as did a May story from Vox.
There is also some evidence of a connection between Powell Jobs and ACRONYM CEO Tara McGowan: Emerson Collective gave $2 million to Priorities USA Action during the 2016 cycle, when McGowan worked as the PAC's digital director. McGowan has also tweeted appreciatively at Powell Jobs.
The exact relationship between Powell Jobs, Emerson, and ACRONYM, however, remains murky. That's thanks in large part to Emerson's status as an LLC, which unlike a more traditional 501(c) designation, protects the organization from having to make public finance disclosures. Courier is similarly structured.
It is clear, however, that both ACRONYM and Courier are doing well. Since February, Courier's stable of sites has grown from three to seven. One of these, North Carolina-based Cardinal & Pine, spent over $20,000 on digital advertising in March alone, according to a Center for Responsive Politics investigation. ACRONYM reported more than $9 million in receipts in FY 2018, according to documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
Many of the news sites funded by Emerson Collective, meanwhile, are struggling amid a massive economic downturn. The Atlantic, in which Emerson owns a controlling stake, laid off 17 percent of its staff. Group Nine Media, which owns the Emerson-backed NowThis, dropped 7 percent of its workforce.
Many Powell Jobs-supported outlets have turned to the federal government for a bailout. Axios, which has received Emerson money, returned a $5 million loan from the Paycheck Protection Program amid backlash. The Marshall Project, an outlet focused on criminal justice reform, confirmed to the Free Beacon that it had taken a previously disclosed PPP loan. So did left-leaning news site Mother Jones, which does not appear to have previously disclosed this information.
The Free Beacon reached out to a number of Powell Jobs-backed outlets to ask about whether they had sought additional funding from outside sources. Most did not respond or declined to comment, but Marshall Project director of strategy and communications Ruth Baldwin said, "We have naturally been in touch with all our major donors since the pandemic began. Not all of them have been able to continue at the same level of support, but we have felt encouraged overall."
The state of Powell Jobs's investments—media properties faltering as a fake news operation takes off—flies in the face of her carefully curated image as a friend to the free press.
In a column penned in the Atlantic in 2019, Powell Jobs referred to journalists as "the world's most valuable troublemakers," writing, "in a struggle for the soul of this nation, in a battle for justice around the world, I am honored to be on the side of those who are fighting for the truth."
That sentiment was echoed by Peter Lattman, the managing director of media at Emerson, who told the New York Times for a flattering profile of Powell Jobs that "broadly, we invest in and support super high-quality journalism," adding "we are looking at innovative approaches to media and storytelling."
Jobs's carefully crafted image has extended to media coverage, not only in the Times, but also in the Washington Post. All of this support for "independent media," as a Times interview put it, seems at odds with the mission of Courier, whose parent Powell Jobs funds.
Courier functions as part of ACRONYM's campaign to win elections for Democrats. McGowan framed its outlets as part of combating President Donald Trump's massive 2016 social media campaign, telling Bloomberg of criticisms that her coverage is slanted, "balance does not exist anymore."
Courier sites disclose only a hint of their larger political purpose, with a mention at the bottom of their pages that they are "owned by Courier Newsroom, Inc." This, the Center for Responsive Politics noted, means that their ads—which primarily target President Donald Trump—"are not considered political by Facebook."
The project's goal is to, as Bloomberg put it, "deliver the facts favorable to Democrats that [McGowan] thinks voters are missing, and counter right-wing spin." Gabby Deutch, who works for misinformation outlet NewsGuard, stated it more harshly: "Courier and Acronym are exploiting the widespread loss of local journalism to create and disseminate something we really don’t need: hyperlocal partisan propaganda." Her organization gave all of Courier's sites failing grades for "undisclosed partisan Democratic perspective"—far out of line with any definition of "independent media."


freebeacon--2020-06-11--Missouri Dem Will Toast to Abortion With Liberal Mega-Donor

Missouri Democrat Nicole Galloway is headlining an event with abortion lobbyist and liberal megadonor NARAL , which opposes any restrictions on late-term abortion .
Galloway , who is running to unseat Missouri governor Mike Parson ( R. ) , is set to toast to abortion at a virtual brunch scheduled for Sunday .
The event will see Galloway speak alongside Planned Parenthood of St. Louis chief medical officer Colleen McNicholas and includes a complimentary cocktail delivered to the doors of all attendees .
NARAL endorsed the Missouri Democrat on Wednesday , calling her a `` reproductive freedom champion . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ will likely benefit Galloway 's campaign coffers—NARAL has spent more than $ 14.5 million directly backing Democrats since 2000—it could alienate voters in the Show Me State .
A March 2019 poll commissioned by Susan B. Anthony List showed that 82 percent of Missouri voters oppose late-term abortion , including 66 percent of Democrats and 83 percent of independents .
The event sparked criticism from some party activists , who contrasted Galloway 's embrace of radical abortion with the success of Democrat John Bel Edwards , who was elected governor in conservative Louisiana @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Life of America executive director Kristen Day admonished Galloway for her participation in the event , arguing that NARAL 's extreme views on abortion are out of touch with Missouri voters .
`` We are disturbed that Nicole Galloway is headlining an event for NARAL , an organization whose mission is to violate human rights .
If she makes abortion a focus of her campaign , she 'll lose , '' Day told the Washington Free Beacon .
`` All polling shows that Missouri is a pro-life state .
We encourage Ms. Galloway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in her party and make her approach to abortion more in line with the beliefs of her state . ''
Day also highlighted former Democratic state legislator Joan Barry 's thwarted attempt to invite pro-life voters to the party .
In 2018 , Barry proposed adding language to the state party platform that recognized the `` diversity of views '' on abortion and welcomed `` all Missourians who may hold different positions on this issue . ''
The resolution initially passed but was `` overturned by the Democratic State Committee , who were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extreme pro-abortion direction , '' Day said .
Former Democratic Missouri senator Claire McCaskill initially called Barry to praise her for the resolution but remained silent when it was overturned .
She went on to lose to Sen. Josh Hawley ( R. , Mo . )
by more than 140,000 votes in November 2018 .
Parson signed a bill in May 2019 limiting abortion in the state after eight weeks of pregnancy .
Galloway , who currently serves as the state 's auditor , condemned the legislation a month later in a speech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accountable . ''
She went on to launch her gubernatorial bid in August 2019 .
Susan B. Anthony List vice president Mallory Quigley contrasted Parson 's record as a `` longtime pro-life leader '' with Galloway 's support for `` abortion on demand . ''
`` It is no surprise NARAL endorsed Galloway , an abortion extremist .
If elected , she would promote their radical agenda of abortion on demand , paid for by Missouri taxpayers , '' Quigley said .
`` Her support for abortion—even taxpayer-funded , late-term abortion , up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ morally wrong , it is a political liability for her in a strong pro-life state like Missouri .
Missourians deserve a governor who shares their pro-life values . ''
While Galloway is the likely Democratic nominee for Missouri governor , she will have to defeat four challengers in the state 's August primary before facing Parson in November .
She has consistently trailed the Republican in polling of the race , including a May 28 We Ask America survey showing Galloway with 39 percent support to Parson 's 47 percent .
Parson also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign holds $ 1.4 million on hand to Galloway 's $ 1 million , and the Parson-aligned Uniting Missouri PAC has an additional $ 5.1 million on hand .
Keep Government Accountable , a PAC supporting Galloway , held just $ 940,000 on hand as of April 15 .
Galloway did not respond to a request for comment .
Update 6/11/2020 , 3:05 p.m. : This article was updated with a statement from Susan B. Anthony List .

Missouri Democrat Nicole Galloway is headlining an event with abortion lobbyist and liberal megadonor NARAL, which opposes any restrictions on late-term abortion.
Galloway, who is running to unseat Missouri governor Mike Parson (R.), is set to toast to abortion at a virtual brunch scheduled for Sunday. The event will see Galloway speak alongside Planned Parenthood of St. Louis chief medical officer Colleen McNicholas and includes a complimentary cocktail delivered to the doors of all attendees.
NARAL endorsed the Missouri Democrat on Wednesday, calling her a "reproductive freedom champion." While the support of far-left abortion groups will likely benefit Galloway's campaign coffers—NARAL has spent more than $14.5 million directly backing Democrats since 2000—it could alienate voters in the Show Me State. A March 2019 poll commissioned by Susan B. Anthony List showed that 82 percent of Missouri voters oppose late-term abortion, including 66 percent of Democrats and 83 percent of independents.
The event sparked criticism from some party activists, who contrasted Galloway's embrace of radical abortion with the success of Democrat John Bel Edwards, who was elected governor in conservative Louisiana by embracing pro-life views. Democrats for Life of America executive director Kristen Day admonished Galloway for her participation in the event, arguing that NARAL's extreme views on abortion are out of touch with Missouri voters.
"We are disturbed that Nicole Galloway is headlining an event for NARAL, an organization whose mission is to violate human rights. If she makes abortion a focus of her campaign, she'll lose," Day told the Washington Free Beacon. "All polling shows that Missouri is a pro-life state. We encourage Ms. Galloway to embrace the position of pro-life Democrats in her party and make her approach to abortion more in line with the beliefs of her state."
Day also highlighted former Democratic state legislator Joan Barry's thwarted attempt to invite pro-life voters to the party. In 2018, Barry proposed adding language to the state party platform that recognized the "diversity of views" on abortion and welcomed "all Missourians who may hold different positions on this issue." The resolution initially passed but was "overturned by the Democratic State Committee, who were set on taking the party in an extreme pro-abortion direction," Day said.
Former Democratic Missouri senator Claire McCaskill initially called Barry to praise her for the resolution but remained silent when it was overturned. She went on to lose to Sen. Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) by more than 140,000 votes in November 2018.
Parson signed a bill in May 2019 limiting abortion in the state after eight weeks of pregnancy. Galloway, who currently serves as the state's auditor, condemned the legislation a month later in a speech pledging to "hold [Republicans] accountable." She went on to launch her gubernatorial bid in August 2019.
Susan B. Anthony List vice president Mallory Quigley contrasted Parson's record as a "longtime pro-life leader" with Galloway's support for "abortion on demand."
"It is no surprise NARAL endorsed Galloway, an abortion extremist. If elected, she would promote their radical agenda of abortion on demand, paid for by Missouri taxpayers," Quigley said. "Her support for abortion—even taxpayer-funded, late-term abortion, up until the moment of birth—is not only morally wrong, it is a political liability for her in a strong pro-life state like Missouri. Missourians deserve a governor who shares their pro-life values."
While Galloway is the likely Democratic nominee for Missouri governor, she will have to defeat four challengers in the state's August primary before facing Parson in November. She has consistently trailed the Republican in polling of the race, including a May 28 We Ask America survey showing Galloway with 39 percent support to Parson's 47 percent.
Parson also boasts a strong financial advantage. His campaign holds $1.4 million on hand to Galloway's $1 million, and the Parson-aligned Uniting Missouri PAC has an additional $5.1 million on hand. Keep Government Accountable, a PAC supporting Galloway, held just $940,000 on hand as of April 15.
Galloway did not respond to a request for comment.
Update 6/11/2020, 3:05 p.m.: This article was updated with a statement from Susan B. Anthony List.


freebeacon--2020-06-11--Stacey Abrams Fails Possible VP Vetting Test

Former state legislator and self-declared Georgia governor Stacey Abrams is desperate to be Joe Biden 's running mate in 2020 .
Unfortunately , she may have just failed a vetting test orchestrated by the former vice president 's campaign .
As Abrams explained in an interview with MSNBC 's Chris Hayes on Wednesday , she encountered difficulties attempting to vote by mail in Georgia 's primary election earlier this week .
`` I filled [ the ballot ] out and when I got ready to put it in the return envelope , it was sealed shut , '' Abrams said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it open because I watch too many mystery shows .
It did not work , and so yesterday I went to stand in line with fellow Georgians to cast my ballot . ''
Abrams and other Democrats argued the long lines and technical glitches that plagued the Georgia election on Tuesday were the result of Republican-orchestrated `` malfeasance '' intended to suppress the vote and put `` voters of color at risk of not being heard in our democracy . ''
Abrams elaborated during an interview with Stephen Colbert on CBS .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ November involved hiring `` off-duty officers , off-duty ICE officers to challenge the legitimacy of voters and try to scare them into leaving . ''
Just as disturbingly , Abrams told Colbert that Joe Biden might not be considering Stacey Abrams for the vice presidential nomination .
`` I have said many times if called I will answer , but I have not received any calls , '' Abrams said when asked whether she was being vetted by Biden 's campaign .
However , one explanation for Abrams 's ballot mishap , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that the sealed envelope was actually a test administered at the behest of Biden 's vice presidential vetting committee .
It would explain why the campaign has n't reached out to her .
Abrams has been one of the loudest voices urging Biden to pick Stacey Abrams as his running mate and has expressed `` concern '' that Biden will make the wrong choice by not selecting her .
Biden has already pledged that his vice presidential candidate will be a woman .
His running mate will likely face heightened scrutiny due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decline .

Former state legislator and self-declared Georgia governor Stacey Abrams is desperate to be Joe Biden's running mate in 2020. Unfortunately, she may have just failed a vetting test orchestrated by the former vice president's campaign.
As Abrams explained in an interview with MSNBC's Chris Hayes on Wednesday, she encountered difficulties attempting to vote by mail in Georgia's primary election earlier this week.
"I filled [the ballot] out and when I got ready to put it in the return envelope, it was sealed shut," Abrams said. "I then attempted to steam it open because I watch too many mystery shows. It did not work, and so yesterday I went to stand in line with fellow Georgians to cast my ballot."
Abrams and other Democrats argued the long lines and technical glitches that plagued the Georgia election on Tuesday were the result of Republican-orchestrated "malfeasance" intended to suppress the vote and put "voters of color at risk of not being heard in our democracy."
Abrams elaborated during an interview with Stephen Colbert on CBS. She suggested the GOP voter suppression plan for November involved hiring "off-duty officers, off-duty ICE officers to challenge the legitimacy of voters and try to scare them into leaving."
Just as disturbingly, Abrams told Colbert that Joe Biden might not be considering Stacey Abrams for the vice presidential nomination. "I have said many times if called I will answer, but I have not received any calls," Abrams said when asked whether she was being vetted by Biden's campaign.
However, one explanation for Abrams's ballot mishap, according to at least one expert analysis, is that the sealed envelope was actually a test administered at the behest of Biden's vice presidential vetting committee. It would explain why the campaign hasn't reached out to her.
Abrams has been one of the loudest voices urging Biden to pick Stacey Abrams as his running mate and has expressed "concern" that Biden will make the wrong choice by not selecting her.
Biden has already pledged that his vice presidential candidate will be a woman. His running mate will likely face heightened scrutiny due to Biden's advanced age and cognitive decline.


freebeacon--2020-06-11--Biden Calls for Facebook to Fact-Check and Remove Political Ads

( Reuters ) – Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden ’ s campaign published an open letter to Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg on Thursday , calling for the company to fact-check politicians ’ ads in the two weeks ahead of the U.S. presidential election in November .
The letter ’ s other demands included that Facebook promptly remove false , viral information and that there be clear rules `` applied to everyone , including Donald Trump — that prohibit threatening behavior and lies about how to participate in the election . ''
The move adds to pressure faced by Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its third-party fact-checking program , to alter its policies on political ads and speech .
Zuckerberg last week promised a review of its content policies after the company faced backlash over taking no action on a post by Republican President Trump that were labeled by Twitter Inc for violating the smaller rival ’ s rules .
Twitter also for the first time last month used a fact-checking label on a tweet by Trump about mail-in ballots .
The Biden campaign also emailed supporters asking them to sign a petition for Facebook to crack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its website used the hashtag # MOVEFASTFIXIT , a play on Facebook ’ s early `` move fast and break things '' motto .
In a blog post , Facebook said it would continue to protect political speech .
`` We live in a democracy , where the elected officials decide the rules around campaigns , '' the company said .
`` Two weeks ago the President of the United States issued an executive order directing Federal agencies to prevent social media sites from engaging in activities like fact-checking political statements .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ President started a petition calling on us to do the exact opposite , '' it said , referring to an executive order signed by Trump .
The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment .

By Elizabeth Culliford
(Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign published an open letter to Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg on Thursday, calling for the company to fact-check politicians’ ads in the two weeks ahead of the U.S. presidential election in November.
The letter’s other demands included that Facebook promptly remove false, viral information and that there be clear rules "applied to everyone, including Donald Trump — that prohibit threatening behavior and lies about how to participate in the election."
The move adds to pressure faced by Facebook, which exempts politicians’ content from its third-party fact-checking program, to alter its policies on political ads and speech.
Zuckerberg last week promised a review of its content policies after the company faced backlash over taking no action on a post by Republican President Trump that were labeled by Twitter Inc for violating the smaller rival’s rules. Twitter also for the first time last month used a fact-checking label on a tweet by Trump about mail-in ballots.
The Biden campaign also emailed supporters asking them to sign a petition for Facebook to crack down on misinformation in ads. Materials on its website used the hashtag #MOVEFASTFIXIT, a play on Facebook’s early "move fast and break things" motto.
In a blog post, Facebook said it would continue to protect political speech.
"We live in a democracy, where the elected officials decide the rules around campaigns," the company said.
"Two weeks ago the President of the United States issued an executive order directing Federal agencies to prevent social media sites from engaging in activities like fact-checking political statements. This week, the Democratic candidate for President started a petition calling on us to do the exact opposite," it said, referring to an executive order signed by Trump.
The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.
(Reporting by Elizabeth Culliford; Editing by David Gregorio and Jonathan Oatis)


freebeacon--2020-06-11--NRA Sets September Date for Scaled-Back Members Meeting

The National Rifle Association canceled its largest gathering of the year at the start of the coronavirus outbreak , but the organization said it will move forward with a limited members ' meeting scheduled for September .
The gun-rights group said the meeting will now be held on Saturday , September 5 , at the Springfield Expo Center in Springfield , Missouri .
The news comes after the NRA was forced to cancel its April conference scheduled to take place in Nashville , Tennessee , due to coronavirus stay-at-home orders .
The Springfield event appears to be scaled back as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the course of a single Saturday , rather than the three-day event that typically draws tens of thousands of gun enthusiasts , retailers , and manufacturers .
The NRA said the meeting where members provide feedback to the organization 's leadership would begin at 9 a.m. on the September 5 .
However , officials were n't able to confirm whether or not there would be events taking place beyond that meeting .
Traditionally , the members ' meeting is part of the NRA 's greater Annual Meeting , which includes a large exhibit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offerings as well as speeches from politicians and the group 's leadership .
The meeting has drawn up to 80,000 attendees in recent years .
The NRA has long used its Annual Meeting as a fundraising vehicle .
While the group reported a rebound in donations and contributions in 2018 , it has been forced to furlough and lay off staff amidst the coronavirus pandemic .
A reduced convention may contribute to the financial struggles facing the group in the lead up to the 2020 election .
It is unlikely the September event @ @ @ @ @ @ @ features about 112,000 square feet of floor space and has no confirmed exhibitors , will be able to match the fundraising performance of the previously planned event at the Music City Center ; a 2.1 million-square-foot facility where the NRA had planned to house more than 575 exhibitors , several fundraising dinners , and fundraising auctions .
This year 's event may be focused more on meeting the group 's bylaw requirements for having a members ' meeting than the traditional focus of fundraising and celebration of the group 's accomplishments .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has also long presented the leadership forum during the Annual Meeting .
That event features speeches from House members and senators who are supportive of the group 's mission and has long been one of the most influential gun-rights events in the country .
Donald Trump has spoken at every forum since becoming president .
This year , there are no announced plans to hold the forum or have the president speak to those gathered at the members ' meeting .
The annual conference has been the site of controversy and internal fighting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oliver North accused NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre of financial impropriety and LaPierre accused North of attempting to extort him into resigning .
The controversy spilled over into the members ' meeting where a group of members attempted to force resignations of LaPierre and certain board members over leaked memos detailing questionable spending practices within the organization , but were ultimately unsuccessful .
The controversy bled into the group 's relationship with its longtime media contractor Ackerman McQueen .
The two eventually parted ways and are now locked in an ongoing legal battle over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the company allegedly on behalf of NRA leadership—especially LaPierre .
Whatever the outcome of this year 's meeting , the NRA has already announced plans for an annual meeting in 2021 .
The full-scale , three-day event will take place at the 1.9 million-square-foot George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston , Texas .

The National Rifle Association canceled its largest gathering of the year at the start of the coronavirus outbreak, but the organization said it will move forward with a limited members' meeting scheduled for September.
The gun-rights group said the meeting will now be held on Saturday, September 5, at the Springfield Expo Center in Springfield, Missouri. The news comes after the NRA was forced to cancel its April conference scheduled to take place in Nashville, Tennessee, due to coronavirus stay-at-home orders. The Springfield event appears to be scaled back as it is scheduled to take place over the course of a single Saturday, rather than the three-day event that typically draws tens of thousands of gun enthusiasts, retailers, and manufacturers.
The NRA said the meeting where members provide feedback to the organization's leadership would begin at 9 a.m. on the September 5. However, officials weren't able to confirm whether or not there would be events taking place beyond that meeting. Traditionally, the members' meeting is part of the NRA's greater Annual Meeting, which includes a large exhibit floor featuring the gun industry's latest offerings as well as speeches from politicians and the group's leadership. The meeting has drawn up to 80,000 attendees in recent years.
The NRA has long used its Annual Meeting as a fundraising vehicle. While the group reported a rebound in donations and contributions in 2018, it has been forced to furlough and lay off staff amidst the coronavirus pandemic. A reduced convention may contribute to the financial struggles facing the group in the lead up to the 2020 election.
It is unlikely the September event at the Springfield Expo Center, which features about 112,000 square feet of floor space and has no confirmed exhibitors, will be able to match the fundraising performance of the previously planned event at the Music City Center; a 2.1 million-square-foot facility where the NRA had planned to house more than 575 exhibitors, several fundraising dinners, and fundraising auctions. This year's event may be focused more on meeting the group's bylaw requirements for having a members' meeting than the traditional focus of fundraising and celebration of the group's accomplishments.
The political advocacy side of the gun-rights group has also long presented the leadership forum during the Annual Meeting. That event features speeches from House members and senators who are supportive of the group's mission and has long been one of the most influential gun-rights events in the country. Donald Trump has spoken at every forum since becoming president. This year, there are no announced plans to hold the forum or have the president speak to those gathered at the members' meeting.
The annual conference has been the site of controversy and internal fighting. In 2019, former NRA president Oliver North accused NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre of financial impropriety and LaPierre accused North of attempting to extort him into resigning. The controversy spilled over into the members' meeting where a group of members attempted to force resignations of LaPierre and certain board members over leaked memos detailing questionable spending practices within the organization, but were ultimately unsuccessful.
The controversy bled into the group's relationship with its longtime media contractor Ackerman McQueen. The two eventually parted ways and are now locked in an ongoing legal battle over the breakup as well as expenses charged by the company allegedly on behalf of NRA leadership—especially LaPierre.
Whatever the outcome of this year's meeting, the NRA has already announced plans for an annual meeting in 2021. The full-scale, three-day event will take place at the 1.9 million-square-foot George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, Texas.