freebeacon--2020-08-14--McSally and Blackburn Demand China Repay $1.6 Trillion Debt to U.S.

Senators Martha McSally ( R. , Ariz. ) and Marsha Blackburn ( R. , Tenn. ) introduced a resolution Thursday that would demand China repay $ 1.6 trillion in sovereign debt with interest , compounding on debt existent since 1912 , before the creation of the Chinese Communist Party regime , Fox News reported .
Though the resolution would not be legally binding , it is intended to signpost the sentiment of Congress toward the People ’ s Republic of China .
With the Sino-American relationship at loggerheads , McSally cited the coronavirus and failing bilateral economic arrangements as justification @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeatedly failed to honor its obligations to America , taking American families ’ money and jobs , '' McSally said .
`` Well , the abuse ends here .
We are holding China accountable for their debt and for unleashing the coronavirus on the world .
We demand China pay back the $ 1.6 trillion it owes to American families . ''
`` This is not the first time China ’ s actions have had an outsized impact on the American people , '' Blackburn added .
`` What 2020 has made clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working when it comes to our relationship with China . ''
The resolution does have some historical precedent .
In 1987 , Beijing agreed to pay off over 20 million pounds in loans to the United Kingdom , and is accordingly in selective financial default by choosing not to pay back Washington .
McSally and Blackburn may join the ranks of the Senate ’ s China hawks with such a move .
Last week , the PRC issued sanctions on five Republican senators—Tom Cotton ( R. , Ark . )
, Josh Hawley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marco Rubio , ( R. , Fla. ) , Pat Toomey ( R. , Pa. ) , and Ted Cruz ( R. , Tex . )
—for their tough stances on Beijing .
`` The Chinese Communist Party imposed these impotent sanctions against me because I defend the real victims of Chinese Communism , '' Sen. Cotton said in a statement last week .
`` If China thinks my opposition to its communist tyranny to date warrants these sanctions , I have two words for them : Just wait . ''

Senators Martha McSally (R., Ariz.) and Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.) introduced a resolution Thursday that would demand China repay $1.6 trillion in sovereign debt with interest, compounding on debt existent since 1912, before the creation of the Chinese Communist Party regime, Fox News reported.
Though the resolution would not be legally binding, it is intended to signpost the sentiment of Congress toward the People’s Republic of China.
With the Sino-American relationship at loggerheads, McSally cited the coronavirus and failing bilateral economic arrangements as justification for her resolution.
"China has repeatedly failed to honor its obligations to America, taking American families’ money and jobs," McSally said. "Well, the abuse ends here. We are holding China accountable for their debt and for unleashing the coronavirus on the world. We demand China pay back the $1.6 trillion it owes to American families."
"This is not the first time China’s actions have had an outsized impact on the American people," Blackburn added. "What 2020 has made clear is that the status quo is not working when it comes to our relationship with China."
The resolution does have some historical precedent. In 1987, Beijing agreed to pay off over 20 million pounds in loans to the United Kingdom, and is accordingly in selective financial default by choosing not to pay back Washington.
McSally and Blackburn may join the ranks of the Senate’s China hawks with such a move.
Last week, the PRC issued sanctions on five Republican senators—Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), Josh Hawley (R., Mo.), Marco Rubio, (R., Fla.), Pat Toomey (R., Pa.), and Ted Cruz (R., Tex.)—for their tough stances on Beijing.
"The Chinese Communist Party imposed these impotent sanctions against me because I defend the real victims of Chinese Communism," Sen. Cotton said in a statement last week. "If China thinks my opposition to its communist tyranny to date warrants these sanctions, I have two words for them: Just wait."


freebeacon--2020-08-14--GOP Lawmakers Demand ‘Snapback’ of All Sanctions on Iran

Republican congressional leaders are pressuring the Trump administration to abandon its efforts to extend a United Nations arms embargo on Iran , and instead push the international body to reimpose all economic sanctions on Tehran that were lifted as part of the landmark nuclear accord .
The U.N. Security Council is expected to vote Friday on a U.S.-sponsored measure to indefinitely extend an arms embargo on Iran that is set to expire in mid-October .
The Trump administration has expended great capital in recent months pushing its allies to back the measure .
The administration earlier this week unveiled a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entice support from European allies such as France , Germany , and the United Kingdom .
But Russia and China—which both have veto power on the Security Council—are standing in the way .
The two countries want to see the arms ban expire so they can increase their sale of advanced weaponry and other military equipment to Iran .
Republican hawks in Congress are frustrated with the diplomatic battle , and are now calling on the Trump administration to invoke `` snapback , '' a mechanism written into the original nuclear deal that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ international sanctions on Iran that were lifted as part of the agreement .
The Trump administration maintains that it can legally invoke snapback , but has been unclear about whether it will exercise the right .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other senior U.S. officials said their focus is on the arms embargo resolution .
Rep. Joe Wilson ( R. , S.C. ) , chairman of the Republican Study Committee ’ s Foreign Affairs and National Security Task Force , told the Washington Free Beacon that his coalition of conservative lawmakers wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With Russia and China standing in the way of the arms embargo extension , snapback is the only way to stop Iran from engaging in a weapons buying spree .
`` The United States should exercise its legal right under international law to reimpose sanctions on Iran given its persistent threat to world peace , '' said Wilson , who also serves as the ranking member on the House ’ s Middle East , North Africa , and International Terrorism Subcommittee .
`` Snapping back sanctions on Iran is the only way to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran that was made temporary by the disastrous nuclear deal . ''
Wilson warned about capitulating to Russia and China at the U.N. , saying that `` Moscow and Beijing have already made it clear that they intend to sell Iran weapons after the termination of the embargo in October , continuing to fuel the terrorism and instability that has roiled the Middle East . ''
Congressional sources who spoke to the Free Beacon said Wilson is not alone .
Many Republican lawmakers have been privately urging the administration to invoke snapback as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and also increase economic pressure on Tehran .
`` It ’ s time to finally pull the plug on the harmful legacy of the Iranian nuclear deal which endangered our allies in the region , '' Wilson said .

Republican congressional leaders are pressuring the Trump administration to abandon its efforts to extend a United Nations arms embargo on Iran, and instead push the international body to reimpose all economic sanctions on Tehran that were lifted as part of the landmark nuclear accord.
The U.N. Security Council is expected to vote Friday on a U.S.-sponsored measure to indefinitely extend an arms embargo on Iran that is set to expire in mid-October. The Trump administration has expended great capital in recent months pushing its allies to back the measure. The administration earlier this week unveiled a revamped version of the measure meant to entice support from European allies such as France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. But Russia and China—which both have veto power on the Security Council—are standing in the way. The two countries want to see the arms ban expire so they can increase their sale of advanced weaponry and other military equipment to Iran.
Republican hawks in Congress are frustrated with the diplomatic battle, and are now calling on the Trump administration to invoke "snapback," a mechanism written into the original nuclear deal that allows member nations to unilaterally reapply all international sanctions on Iran that were lifted as part of the agreement. The Trump administration maintains that it can legally invoke snapback, but has been unclear about whether it will exercise the right. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other senior U.S. officials said their focus is on the arms embargo resolution.
Rep. Joe Wilson (R., S.C.), chairman of the Republican Study Committee’s Foreign Affairs and National Security Task Force, told the Washington Free Beacon that his coalition of conservative lawmakers wants the administration to invoke snapback immediately. With Russia and China standing in the way of the arms embargo extension, snapback is the only way to stop Iran from engaging in a weapons buying spree.
"The United States should exercise its legal right under international law to reimpose sanctions on Iran given its persistent threat to world peace," said Wilson, who also serves as the ranking member on the House’s Middle East, North Africa, and International Terrorism Subcommittee. "Snapping back sanctions on Iran is the only way to reinstitute the permanent U.N. arms embargo on Iran that was made temporary by the disastrous nuclear deal."
Wilson warned about capitulating to Russia and China at the U.N., saying that "Moscow and Beijing have already made it clear that they intend to sell Iran weapons after the termination of the embargo in October, continuing to fuel the terrorism and instability that has roiled the Middle East."
Congressional sources who spoke to the Free Beacon said Wilson is not alone. Many Republican lawmakers have been privately urging the administration to invoke snapback as a means to extend the arms embargo and also increase economic pressure on Tehran.
"It’s time to finally pull the plug on the harmful legacy of the Iranian nuclear deal which endangered our allies in the region," Wilson said.


freebeacon--2020-08-14--CNN Goes Nuts for Kamala

CNN Goes Nuts for Kamala

CNN reporters and anchors went wild for Sen. Kamala Harris ( D. , Calif. ) after she joined the Joe @ @ @ @ @ about her tremendous speech and `` celebrity '' factor .
David Rutz is senior writer @ @ @ @ @ .
He was previously a sports reporter for two years in Atlanta and has done @ @ @ @ @ Washington Post .
He graduated from Vanderbilt University in 2010 and lives in Marietta , @ @ @ @ @ @ DavidRutz .
He can be reached at rutz @ freebeacon.com .

CNN reporters and anchors went wild for Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.) after she joined the Joe Biden 2020 ticket, raving about her tremendous speech and "celebrity" factor.


freebeacon--2020-08-15--Kendra Horn, Awash in Big Cash From Wall Street Execs, Gets Six-Figure Boost From End Citizens Unite

Kendra Horn, Awash in Big Cash From Wall Street Execs, Gets Six-Figure Boost From End Citizens United

The premier left-wing group that works to reduce the influence of money and special interests in politics just gave a six-figure boost to Rep. Kendra Horn ( D. , Okla. ) , who once advocated against money in politics but now benefits from large checks from Wall Street executives .
The End Citizens United PAC poured $ 400,000 into an advertising blitz backing Horn , filings submitted to the Federal Election Commission on Thursday show .
The media buy is the group 's first 2020 foray into Oklahoma 's Fifth Congressional District race , which is slated to become one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this November .
End Citizens United first endorsed Horn in 2018 , when she pushed for sweeping campaign finance and ethics reform .
The ad buy shows the group is still supporting her campaign , even though she 's now benefiting from donations she vowed to combat .
Wealthy individuals who represent big monied interests are now giving large sums to Horn 's reelection efforts .
The House Victory Project , for example , a joint fundraising committee created and primarily funded by Wall Street executives to inject large sums into key House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's campaign this cycle .
Horn did not receive cash from the House Victory Project in 2018 .
The transfer is the largest the campaign has received this cycle .
It is not , however , the only sizable transfer from a committee fueled by donors that she once shunned .
The freshman Democrat also received $ 38,000 from the Hold the House Victory Fund , a joint fundraiser between the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and 30 Democratic candidates .
It is heavily bankrolled by deep-pocketed liberal donors who each have given up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Horn 's reformist mindset landed her the initial endorsement from End Citizens United in 2018 .
The group 's mission is getting large cash infusions from wealthy donors out of the political process , and their endorsements go to `` campaign finance reform champions '' who fight against `` corrupting influence '' and vow to pass legislation to tackle the issue .
The group has said that Wall Street executives only care about their `` bottom line and influence in Washington , '' not helping the American people .
Horn 's campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to requests for comment .
The race in Oklahoma ’ s Fifth Congressional District is rated as a toss-up by Sabato ’ s Crystal Ball .
Horn squeaked out a one-point victory in 2018 over former Rep. Steve Russell ( R. ) in a district Trump won by 13 points just two years prior .
Horn will face the winner of the Republican runoff scheduled for Aug. 25 between Terry Neese and Stephanie Bice .

The freshman Dem advocated for reducing big money in politics that she now benefits from
The premier left-wing group that works to reduce the influence of money and special interests in politics just gave a six-figure boost to Rep. Kendra Horn (D., Okla.), who once advocated against money in politics but now benefits from large checks from Wall Street executives.
The End Citizens United PAC poured $400,000 into an advertising blitz backing Horn, filings submitted to the Federal Election Commission on Thursday show. The media buy is the group's first 2020 foray into Oklahoma's Fifth Congressional District race, which is slated to become one of the most competitive in the country this November.
End Citizens United first endorsed Horn in 2018, when she pushed for sweeping campaign finance and ethics reform. The ad buy shows the group is still supporting her campaign, even though she's now benefiting from donations she vowed to combat.
Wealthy individuals who represent big monied interests are now giving large sums to Horn's reelection efforts. The House Victory Project, for example, a joint fundraising committee created and primarily funded by Wall Street executives to inject large sums into key House races, transferred $255,000 to Horn's campaign this cycle.
Horn did not receive cash from the House Victory Project in 2018. The transfer is the largest the campaign has received this cycle. It is not, however, the only sizable transfer from a committee fueled by donors that she once shunned.
The freshman Democrat also received $38,000 from the Hold the House Victory Fund, a joint fundraiser between the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and 30 Democratic candidates. It is heavily bankrolled by deep-pocketed liberal donors who each have given up to $350,000 for its 2020 efforts.
Horn's reformist mindset landed her the initial endorsement from End Citizens United in 2018. The group's mission is getting large cash infusions from wealthy donors out of the political process, and their endorsements go to "campaign finance reform champions" who fight against "corrupting influence" and vow to pass legislation to tackle the issue. The group has said that Wall Street executives only care about their "bottom line and influence in Washington," not helping the American people.
Horn's campaign and End Citizens United did not respond to requests for comment.
The race in Oklahoma’s Fifth Congressional District is rated as a toss-up by Sabato’s Crystal Ball. Horn squeaked out a one-point victory in 2018 over former Rep. Steve Russell (R.) in a district Trump won by 13 points just two years prior. Horn will face the winner of the Republican runoff scheduled for Aug. 25 between Terry Neese and Stephanie Bice.


freebeacon--2020-08-15--Church Challenges California’s Covid Restrictions in Religious Liberty Showdown

A California church is challenging Democratic governor Gavin Newsom 's restrictions on in-person worship in the state , arguing that the regulations unconstitutionally target religious groups .
The legal complaint draws a direct comparison between religious observances and Black Lives Matter protests that have occurred across the nation over the past months .
It claims that if the protests are allowed to proceed without government interference , then in-person worship should be able to as well .
`` When many went to the streets to engage in ‘ political protests ’ against ‘ racism ’ and ‘ police brutality , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pandemic restrictions , '' the complaint states .
`` Instead of enforcing the public health orders , public officials were all too eager to grant a de facto exception for these favored protesters . ''
The suit seeks to have the courts act to allow churches to resume in-person services without restrictions from state authorities .
`` We are simply continuing to do today what we have done for the past 63 years , that Grace Community Church has been open to welcome the Los Angeles community and serve their spiritual needs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , John MacArthur , said .
`` We will remain open and teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to all who decide they want to come worship with us . ''
After shutting its doors at the beginning of the coronavirus crisis , Grace Community Church decided to resume in-person indoor services .
The recommencement of services led the county to issue a letter on July 29 informing the church that resuming in-person services violated the county and state ’ s health orders .
`` The County requests that you immediately cease holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and adhere to the Health Officer Order directives governing activities at houses of worship , '' the letter stated .
The church launched the legal challenge with the assistance of the Thomas More Society , a religious liberty law firm .
Jenna Ellis , one of the lead attorneys behind the complaint , told the Washington Free Beacon that restrictions on religious observances should receive heightened scrutiny because of constitutional protections .
`` It ’ s the position of the church that like any other type of risk that other people may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re adults and can decide for themselves , '' Ellis said .
`` If people want to come back to church and they want to participate , then that ’ s their choice .
If they prefer to stay at home they can watch the livestream , but that ’ s their choice . ''
Grace Community Church ’ s decision to hold in-person services without mandating social distancing or masks provoked a response within the religious community in the state .
Gavin Ortlund , a pastor at a Baptist church in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places of worship to comply with the county ’ s health orders .
The response stated that while religious observance is vital , the complicated nature of the situation called for a deference to public health guidance .
`` There have been cases where churches have not been careful and it has led to an outbreak of the virus .
That does not do well for our witness , '' Ortlund told the Free Beacon .
`` We need to have more grace on one another in the judgments that we make because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation . ''
Governor Newsom ’ s office did not respond to an email request for comment .
This week , California became the first state to record more than 600,000 coronavirus cases .
The confirmed case fatality rate in Los Angeles County fell from 4 percent in May to 2 percent in August , according to the Los Angeles Times .
Doctors credited improved treatments , falling infection rates in elderly individuals , and controlling the spread in high-risk environments such as nursing homes .

A California church is challenging Democratic governor Gavin Newsom's restrictions on in-person worship in the state, arguing that the regulations unconstitutionally target religious groups.
The legal complaint draws a direct comparison between religious observances and Black Lives Matter protests that have occurred across the nation over the past months. It claims that if the protests are allowed to proceed without government interference, then in-person worship should be able to as well.
"When many went to the streets to engage in ‘political protests’ against ‘racism’ and ‘police brutality,’ these protesters refused to comply with the pandemic restrictions," the complaint states. "Instead of enforcing the public health orders, public officials were all too eager to grant a de facto exception for these favored protesters."
The suit seeks to have the courts act to allow churches to resume in-person services without restrictions from state authorities.
"We are simply continuing to do today what we have done for the past 63 years, that Grace Community Church has been open to welcome the Los Angeles community and serve their spiritual needs," the church’s pastor, John MacArthur, said. "We will remain open and teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to all who decide they want to come worship with us."
After shutting its doors at the beginning of the coronavirus crisis, Grace Community Church decided to resume in-person indoor services. The recommencement of services led the county to issue a letter on July 29 informing the church that resuming in-person services violated the county and state’s health orders.
"The County requests that you immediately cease holding indoor worship services or other indoor gatherings, and adhere to the Health Officer Order directives governing activities at houses of worship," the letter stated. The church scored a legal victory on Friday when a state court rejected Los Angeles County's petition to shut down indoor services while the case makes its way through court.
The church launched the legal challenge with the assistance of the Thomas More Society, a religious liberty law firm. Jenna Ellis, one of the lead attorneys behind the complaint, told the Washington Free Beacon that restrictions on religious observances should receive heightened scrutiny because of constitutional protections.
"It’s the position of the church that like any other type of risk that other people may take in coming to church, they’re adults and can decide for themselves," Ellis said. "If people want to come back to church and they want to participate, then that’s their choice. If they prefer to stay at home they can watch the livestream, but that’s their choice."
Grace Community Church’s decision to hold in-person services without mandating social distancing or masks provoked a response within the religious community in the state.
Gavin Ortlund, a pastor at a Baptist church in California, wrote a response arguing for places of worship to comply with the county’s health orders. The response stated that while religious observance is vital, the complicated nature of the situation called for a deference to public health guidance.
"There have been cases where churches have not been careful and it has led to an outbreak of the virus. That does not do well for our witness," Ortlund told the Free Beacon. "We need to have more grace on one another in the judgments that we make because it’s an unprecedented and complicated situation."
Governor Newsom’s office did not respond to an email request for comment. This week, California became the first state to record more than 600,000 coronavirus cases. The confirmed case fatality rate in Los Angeles County fell from 4 percent in May to 2 percent in August, according to the Los Angeles Times. Doctors credited improved treatments, falling infection rates in elderly individuals, and controlling the spread in high-risk environments such as nursing homes.
A hearing in the case is scheduled for September 4.


freebeacon--2020-08-16--This Week In Campus Insanity Vol. 6

This Week In Campus Insanity Vol. 6

Welcome back to Campus Insanity , a weekly roundup of the craziest developments at our nation 's 4,000-plus institutions of higher education .
A San Francisco State University professor said that the American Dream is a `` myth '' that justifies white supremacy .
The University of Connecticut will pay Robin DiAngelo , author of the controversial book White Fragility , $ 20,000 for a lecture on anti-racism .
An LGBT Health and Law professor at Georgetown University ’ s law school shared on Twitter an Atlantic article that claimed that the Senate filibuster was a `` monument '' to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Charges Student For Using President Trump as Zoom Background | College Fix Stockton University charged student Robert Dailyda with creating a `` hostile environment '' in a Zoom session for using an image of the president as his background .
2 .
Boston University Drops F-Bomb to Encourage Safe Behavior on Campus During Pandemic | WCVB 5 Boston University officials filed a trademark for the phrase `` F— IT WON ’ T CUT IT '' and created social media accounts under that name to encourage students to wear a mask , social distance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
1 .
The University of Georgia ’ s Response to COVID : Wear a Face Mask During Sex | Barstool Sports The University of Georgia ’ s Health Center released a list of `` considerations '' for students to practice safe sex during the coronavirus pandemic , including wearing a face mask since `` heavy breathing and panting can further spread the virus . ''
Want more Campus Insanity ?
Read Vol .
5 here .
If you have any suggestions for our Top 6 stories please email chrissy @ freebeacon.com & @ @ @ @

Welcome back to Campus Insanity, a weekly roundup of the craziest developments at our nation's 4,000-plus institutions of higher education.
6. Professor: American Dream is a ‘Damaging’ Ideology For Black People | College Fix
A San Francisco State University professor said that the American Dream is a "myth" that justifies white supremacy.
5. UConn Agrees to Pay 'White Fragility' Author $20K For 3.5 Hour Anti-Racism Lecture | Campus Reform
The University of Connecticut will pay Robin DiAngelo, author of the controversial book White Fragility, $20,000 for a lecture on anti-racism.
4. Georgetown Law Professor: Senate Filibuster is a 'White Supremacist Tool' | YAF
An LGBT Health and Law professor at Georgetown University’s law school shared on Twitter an Atlantic article that claimed that the Senate filibuster was a "monument" to white supremacy.
3. Public University Charges Student For Using President Trump as Zoom Background | College Fix
Stockton University charged student Robert Dailyda with creating a "hostile environment" in a Zoom session for using an image of the president as his background.
2. Boston University Drops F-Bomb to Encourage Safe Behavior on Campus During Pandemic | WCVB 5
Boston University officials filed a trademark for the phrase "F— IT WON’T CUT IT" and created social media accounts under that name to encourage students to wear a mask, social distance, and avoid parties while on campus.
1. The University of Georgia’s Response to COVID: Wear a Face Mask During Sex | Barstool Sports
The University of Georgia’s Health Center released a list of "considerations" for students to practice safe sex during the coronavirus pandemic, including wearing a face mask since "heavy breathing and panting can further spread the virus."
Want more Campus Insanity? Read Vol. 5 here.
If you have any suggestions for our Top 6 stories please email chrissy@freebeacon.com & nester@freebeacon.com.


freebeacon--2020-08-16--REVIEW: ‘The Cult of Smart’

REVIEW: ‘The Cult of Smart’

The central claim of The Cult of Smart , the first title from education commentator Fredrik deBoer , is that because some people are smarter than others , America must embrace socialism .
This paradox , a sort of inverse `` Harrison Bergeron , '' is typical of deBoer , who made a name for himself in the blogosphere as a gadfly of the progressive left , embracing their goals while pitilessly skewering their wokeness .
The Cult of Smart is of a kind with this reputation , attacking popular progressive foils like meritocracy and capitalism by arguing from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not everyone is naturally equal .
For decades , deBoer contends , political leaders have touted education as the solution to inequality and , simultaneously , as a fair allocator of success based on merit .
This dual mandate is plainly paradoxical—schools can not both `` function as vehicles of equality , '' deBoer writes , `` and as machines for sorting people into different ranks of merit '' because the latter function is , necessarily , contradictory to the former .
The usual solution to this conundrum is to appeal to `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equality insofar as they give every student an equal chance , so unequal outcomes are still fair .
But , deBoer responds , such an arrangement discounts the ways that kids come to school already unequal , specifically in their raw talent .
Some kids are simply smarter than others , and schools can do little to affect this inequality .
The Cult of Smart does eventually lay out the scientific evidence behind the cognitive inequality position , although it takes a good 100 pages to get there , stopping along the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tired critique of `` liberalism , '' and anecdote-laden grousing about charter schools .
These chapters feel like padding to an already slim volume .
The eventually presented evidence , however , makes a solid case that education has a minimal impact on students ' abilities and that the link between school quality and life outcomes is more about top schools filtering out already smart kids than about those schools making kids smart .
What the research shows is that most educational interventions do n't seem to change measures of kids ' intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high school has little cognitive effect .
Test prep , long blamed for giving rich kids a leg up , has an essentially negligible effect on scores .
Going to a highly selective university has essentially no effect , controlling for test scores .
In a large analysis of teaching techniques targeted at low-socioeconomic status students , 8 out of 14 had an effect statistically indistinguishable from zero , while just two had an average effect size above 0.3 standard deviations ( a small number in its own right ) .
So why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if not education quality ?
The answer , deBoer argues , is largely genetic .
He walks through the evidence from twin studies and genomic analysis that intelligence , like basically all other traits , is at least partially heritable .
Notably , the extent to which genetics determine IQ rises with age , peaking in adulthood , while the influence of environment declines—a sign that education 's impact fades out over time .
While deBoer 's research review is thorough , the reader is left wishing he had spent less time on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the substantive critiques of the `` hereditarian '' position , including the mutability of IQ post-birth but pre-school and the effects environmental toxins like lead can have on intellectual development .
Maybe schooling matters little , but other policy avenues can have some effect on intelligence .
Still , there is reasonable evidence behind the idea that educational outcomes are much less about school quality and much more about the raw intellectual material going in .
That implies school does n't so much level society but rather sorts along a preexisting intellectual spectrum—an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , through no fault of their own , less smart .
Is it just for the less smart to not prosper ?
And if not , what can we do about it ?
Other right-leaning reviewers have emphasized deBoer 's factual break from the left over his normative conclusions .
But that seems unfair to an author who spends so much more space telling us about his sterling socialist credentials than he does actually reviewing the literature .
In response to the ineffectiveness of school at creating a leveled society , deBoer floats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fantastical and nonsensical .
Some of the proposals seem weirdly at odds with deBoer 's stated goal of unlinking cognitive ability from economic outcomes .
He backs universal government childcare , which has been shown to make kids worse off , while daycare per se cuts IQs ( although more for rich children—cognitive equality by making everyone dumber ? )
.
Universal free college and student loan forgiveness would disproportionately benefit cognitively privileged college grads , yet deBoer advocates for them on `` humanitarian '' grounds .
And his advocacy for `` genuine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but an extended daydream , unmoored from political-economic reality .
It is hard not to conclude that deBoer 's personal preferences , rather than his beliefs about cognitive inequality , determine the specific policies he advocates for—his discussion of a Universal Basic Income and Jobs Guarantee are particularly starry-eyed and unnuanced .
It is worth noting that other skeptics of education , like AEI scholar Charles Murray or economist Bryan Caplan , are self-professed right-libertarians , not socialists .
That deBoer does not even countenance their conclusions suggests he is begging the question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more frustrating because deBoer is happy , like many leftists , to frame his arguments as a critique of broad structural concepts like `` meritocracy '' and `` capitalism , '' abdicating entirely any sustained analysis of the particulars of our economic situation .
One could write a book about the policy consequences of intelligence variation , but this one is not it .
Historically , smarts and economic success were less strongly linked than they are today .
The secular increase in IQ scores over time is , among other things , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grown increasingly salient to market ( and mating ) success .
As we have moved from an industrial to a skills-based economy , how smart you are matters more and more .
That has caused employers to expend more energy sorting the intellectual wheat from the chaff .
The former enjoy the spoils of the knowledge economy , and everyone gets the benefits of their smarts .
But the labor market opportunities for the latter have grown thinner and thinner thanks to automation , offshoring , and the pressures of low-skill immigration .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ has called the men without work : a growing segment of the population without a degree , dependent on disability payments for income , and often hooked on opioids and at risk for early death .
This is not a problem of capitalism or meritocracy per se but a challenge of ensuring that Americans left behind in the contemporary economy can still find remunerative employment and are not discouraged from doing so by poor policy design .
Natural variance in intelligence is a problem only if there are not enough jobs for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to read The Cult of Smart separate from deBoer 's policy prescriptions .
But doing so reduces the book to a recitation of research more ably , if less accessibly , summarized elsewhere .
What to do about variable intelligence , and its interactions with an increasingly brain-powered economy , is a real policy challenge for the 21st century .
But it is one to which deBoer 's socialist utopia is a profoundly unserious answer .

The central claim of The Cult of Smart, the first title from education commentator Fredrik deBoer, is that because some people are smarter than others, America must embrace socialism.
This paradox, a sort of inverse "Harrison Bergeron," is typical of deBoer, who made a name for himself in the blogosphere as a gadfly of the progressive left, embracing their goals while pitilessly skewering their wokeness. The Cult of Smart is of a kind with this reputation, attacking popular progressive foils like meritocracy and capitalism by arguing from the essentially unprogressive principle that, intellectually, not everyone is naturally equal.
For decades, deBoer contends, political leaders have touted education as the solution to inequality and, simultaneously, as a fair allocator of success based on merit. This dual mandate is plainly paradoxical—schools cannot both "function as vehicles of equality," deBoer writes, "and as machines for sorting people into different ranks of merit" because the latter function is, necessarily, contradictory to the former.
The usual solution to this conundrum is to appeal to "equality of opportunity." Schools promote equality insofar as they give every student an equal chance, so unequal outcomes are still fair. But, deBoer responds, such an arrangement discounts the ways that kids come to school already unequal, specifically in their raw talent. Some kids are simply smarter than others, and schools can do little to affect this inequality.
The Cult of Smart does eventually lay out the scientific evidence behind the cognitive inequality position, although it takes a good 100 pages to get there, stopping along the way for lots of biographical detail, a tired critique of "liberalism," and anecdote-laden grousing about charter schools. These chapters feel like padding to an already slim volume. The eventually presented evidence, however, makes a solid case that education has a minimal impact on students' abilities and that the link between school quality and life outcomes is more about top schools filtering out already smart kids than about those schools making kids smart.
What the research shows is that most educational interventions don't seem to change measures of kids' intelligence. Being randomly sorted into a better high school has little cognitive effect. Test prep, long blamed for giving rich kids a leg up, has an essentially negligible effect on scores. Going to a highly selective university has essentially no effect, controlling for test scores. In a large analysis of teaching techniques targeted at low-socioeconomic status students, 8 out of 14 had an effect statistically indistinguishable from zero, while just two had an average effect size above 0.3 standard deviations (a small number in its own right).
So why do some succeed and some fail, if not education quality? The answer, deBoer argues, is largely genetic. He walks through the evidence from twin studies and genomic analysis that intelligence, like basically all other traits, is at least partially heritable. Notably, the extent to which genetics determine IQ rises with age, peaking in adulthood, while the influence of environment declines—a sign that education's impact fades out over time.
While deBoer's research review is thorough, the reader is left wishing he had spent less time on personal asides and more time engaging with the substantive critiques of the "hereditarian" position, including the mutability of IQ post-birth but pre-school and the effects environmental toxins like lead can have on intellectual development. Maybe schooling matters little, but other policy avenues can have some effect on intelligence.
Still, there is reasonable evidence behind the idea that educational outcomes are much less about school quality and much more about the raw intellectual material going in. That implies school doesn't so much level society but rather sorts along a preexisting intellectual spectrum—an arrangement that systematically disadvantages those who are, through no fault of their own, less smart. Is it just for the less smart to not prosper? And if not, what can we do about it?
Other right-leaning reviewers have emphasized deBoer's factual break from the left over his normative conclusions. But that seems unfair to an author who spends so much more space telling us about his sterling socialist credentials than he does actually reviewing the literature. In response to the ineffectiveness of school at creating a leveled society, deBoer floats a political program that is at turns fantastical and nonsensical.
Some of the proposals seem weirdly at odds with deBoer's stated goal of unlinking cognitive ability from economic outcomes. He backs universal government childcare, which has been shown to make kids worse off, while daycare per se cuts IQs (although more for rich children—cognitive equality by making everyone dumber?). Universal free college and student loan forgiveness would disproportionately benefit cognitively privileged college grads, yet deBoer advocates for them on "humanitarian" grounds. And his advocacy for "genuine socialism" is not a policy program but an extended daydream, unmoored from political-economic reality.
It is hard not to conclude that deBoer's personal preferences, rather than his beliefs about cognitive inequality, determine the specific policies he advocates for—his discussion of a Universal Basic Income and Jobs Guarantee are particularly starry-eyed and unnuanced. It is worth noting that other skeptics of education, like AEI scholar Charles Murray or economist Bryan Caplan, are self-professed right-libertarians, not socialists. That deBoer does not even countenance their conclusions suggests he is begging the question, policy-wise.
This is all the more frustrating because deBoer is happy, like many leftists, to frame his arguments as a critique of broad structural concepts like "meritocracy" and "capitalism," abdicating entirely any sustained analysis of the particulars of our economic situation. One could write a book about the policy consequences of intelligence variation, but this one is not it.
Historically, smarts and economic success were less strongly linked than they are today. The secular increase in IQ scores over time is, among other things, consistent with the fact that intelligence has grown increasingly salient to market (and mating) success. As we have moved from an industrial to a skills-based economy, how smart you are matters more and more.
That has caused employers to expend more energy sorting the intellectual wheat from the chaff. The former enjoy the spoils of the knowledge economy, and everyone gets the benefits of their smarts. But the labor market opportunities for the latter have grown thinner and thinner thanks to automation, offshoring, and the pressures of low-skill immigration.
This is what AEI demographer Nicholas Eberstadt has called the men without work: a growing segment of the population without a degree, dependent on disability payments for income, and often hooked on opioids and at risk for early death. This is not a problem of capitalism or meritocracy per se but a challenge of ensuring that Americans left behind in the contemporary economy can still find remunerative employment and are not discouraged from doing so by poor policy design. Natural variance in intelligence is a problem only if there are not enough jobs for the less intelligent.
Perhaps it is possible to read The Cult of Smart separate from deBoer's policy prescriptions. But doing so reduces the book to a recitation of research more ably, if less accessibly, summarized elsewhere. What to do about variable intelligence, and its interactions with an increasingly brain-powered economy, is a real policy challenge for the 21st century. But it is one to which deBoer's socialist utopia is a profoundly unserious answer.


freebeacon--2020-08-16--BEASTMODE: O’Brien Says Only Opponents of Israel-UAE Deal Are Ayatollah and Ben Rhodes

National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien said Sunday that the only two people who opposed the historic agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates were the ayatollah of Iran and former Obama adviser Ben Rhodes .
`` I think getting out of the JCPOA was the predicate for this fantastic deal between UAE and Israel , '' he said on Meet the Press .
`` I never thought I would see President Trump being endorsed by Thomas Friedman on this deal and David Ignatius and others .
I think the only people who were against the deal were the ayatollah @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the deal to normalize relations between Israel and the UAE drew widespread praise , Rhodes numbered among its detractors .
He dismissed it in a tweet , writing , `` This agreement enshrines what has been the emerging status quo in the region for a long time ( including the total exclusion of Palestinians ) .
Dressed up as an election eve achievement from two leaders who want Trump to win . ''
Rhodes advised President Barack Obama on foreign policy and is best-known for his boasts to the New York Times about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nuclear deal .
He is now an NBC News and MSNBC contributor .
In a deal brokered by the Trump administration , the UAE this week became the third Arab nation—along with Egypt and Jordan—to officially recognize Israel and the first of the Gulf Arab states .
Iran , an enemy of both countries , called their accord a `` historic mistake . ''

National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien said Sunday that the only two people who opposed the historic agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates were the ayatollah of Iran and former Obama adviser Ben Rhodes.
"I think getting out of the JCPOA was the predicate for this fantastic deal between UAE and Israel," he said on Meet the Press. "I never thought I would see President Trump being endorsed by Thomas Friedman on this deal and David Ignatius and others. I think the only people who were against the deal were the ayatollah and maybe Ben Rhodes."
While the deal to normalize relations between Israel and the UAE drew widespread praise, Rhodes numbered among its detractors. He dismissed it in a tweet, writing, "This agreement enshrines what has been the emerging status quo in the region for a long time (including the total exclusion of Palestinians). Dressed up as an election eve achievement from two leaders who want Trump to win."
Rhodes advised President Barack Obama on foreign policy and is best-known for his boasts to the New York Times about lying to neophyte reporters about the Iran nuclear deal. He is now an NBC News and MSNBC contributor.
In a deal brokered by the Trump administration, the UAE this week became the third Arab nation—along with Egypt and Jordan—to officially recognize Israel and the first of the Gulf Arab states. Iran, an enemy of both countries, called their accord a "historic mistake."


freebeacon--2020-08-16--Sanders: We Must First Elect Biden, Then Keep Pushing Country Further Left

Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I. , Vt. ) said on Sunday that his supporters should elect presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden so they can keep pushing the country further to the left .
`` We 're going to do everything that we can to elect Biden and—after he 's elected—move this country in as progressive a way as we possibly can , '' Sanders said on CNN 's State of the Union .
He added that such lobbying would include his signature Medicare for All health care policy proposal , among other left-wing measures .
Since Sanders dropped out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his supporters have counted on Biden picking a progressive running mate to meet their policy goals .
While the media praised Biden 's announcement last week that Sen. Kamala Harris ( D. , Calif. ) will serve as his running mate , Democrats were divided about whether the California senator is a left-wing candidate .
Sanders 's former national press secretary , Briahna Joy Gray , said the Harris pick demonstrates the Democratic Party 's `` contempt for the base . ''
Former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau , however , mocked the media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' saying instead that Harris has `` one of the most liberal records in the U.S .
Senate . ''
For her own part , Harris has said that she is a `` progressive Democrat . ''
She has backed this up by being the first candidate on a presidential ticket to support gun confiscation through buyback programs .
She also co-sponsored a bill with far-left congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D. , N.Y. ) combating `` environmental racism , '' which some groups saw as a foundation for the Green New Deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considered a `` moderate , '' said last week that he intends to have `` the most progressive administration since FDR . ''

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) said on Sunday that his supporters should elect presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden so they can keep pushing the country further to the left.
"We're going to do everything that we can to elect Biden and—after he's elected—move this country in as progressive a way as we possibly can," Sanders said on CNN's State of the Union. He added that such lobbying would include his signature Medicare for All health care policy proposal, among other left-wing measures.
Since Sanders dropped out of the Democratic presidential primary in April, his supporters have counted on Biden picking a progressive running mate to meet their policy goals.
While the media praised Biden's announcement last week that Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.) will serve as his running mate, Democrats were divided about whether the California senator is a left-wing candidate.
Sanders's former national press secretary, Briahna Joy Gray, said the Harris pick demonstrates the Democratic Party's "contempt for the base."
Former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau, however, mocked the media for describing Harris as a "moderate," saying instead that Harris has "one of the most liberal records in the U.S. Senate."
For her own part, Harris has said that she is a "progressive Democrat." She has backed this up by being the first candidate on a presidential ticket to support gun confiscation through buyback programs. She also co-sponsored a bill with far-left congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) combating "environmental racism," which some groups saw as a foundation for the Green New Deal.
Joe Biden, who is also considered a "moderate," said last week that he intends to have "the most progressive administration since FDR."


freebeacon--2020-08-17--Legal Experts Skeptical of NY AG’s Attempt to Dissolve NRA

Experts across the political spectrum are skeptical of New York attorney general Letitia James 's ( D. ) attempt to dissolve the NRA , with some liberals even calling the move `` dangerous . ''
Legal scholars told the Washington Free Beacon it was hard to see the massive gun-rights group being dissolved over James 's investigation into its finances .
Cato Institute legal fellow Walter Olson said the case presented amounted to a Democrat attempting to shut down a key political opponent .
`` Closing down opposition organizations , traditionally , was something that you heard of going on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have going on in the United States , '' Olson said .
`` And that 's what she 's asking for is for : a major opposition organization to be closed down . ''
James , whose office did not respond to a request for comment , accused NRA executives such as Wayne LaPierre of diverting tens of millions of dollars of NRA money toward personal expenses including luxury suits , flights on private jets , and tropical vacations .
The accusations were first brought to light in 2019 during infighting at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LaPierre and three other current or former NRA executives as `` illegal , oppressive , and fraudulent '' when she announced the suit on Aug. 6 .
The gun-rights group has denied any wrongdoing and LaPierre called the suit an `` affront to democracy and freedom . ''
University of Pittsburgh law professor Philip Hackney , who worked at the Office of the Chief Counsel of the IRS overseeing the nonprofit sector from 2006 to 2011 , said the investigation was appropriate .
Hackney said he believed the alleged malfeasance by NRA executives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effort .
`` I think the NRA officers and directors forced her hand , '' he said .
Still , he said he would `` be surprised '' if a court considered the removal of some NRA executives an insufficient solution and instead opted for wholesale dissolution of the organization .
Hackney compared the NRA case to cases against the Kamehameha Schools and Adelphi University—both of which had their entire governing boards forcibly removed by government action and had to pay millions in back taxes .
Neither was dissolved , though , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the investigation of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters in the 1970s and 80s provided a useful example of how much more aggressive James is treating the NRA .
The Teamsters were alleged to have been host to an extensive mob-run racketeering effort that covered everything from money laundering to murder .
The union eventually agreed to a takeover by government officials that lasted 30 years , but there was no attempt to shut it down .
He said that James 's bid to dissolve the NRA amounted to overreach and could taint @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand to dissolve the organization immediately made me think she 's not treating this as a regular legal case .
She is pulling out demands that are very politically fraught that require us to mobilize against something new being tried , '' Olson said .
`` We did n't close down the Teamsters .
We said , ‘ this is America and even if the Teamsters campaigned against our candidates , we have to respect that their members have a legitimate political voice and we just want to make sure that honest people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has found unlikely allies in the aftermath of James 's announcement .
Liberal commentators and academics such as Washington Post editor Ruth Marcus , Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman , and University of Minnesota law professor Alan Z. Rozenshtein have written op-eds in recent days siding with the view that James 's dissolution effort is alarming .
The trio made their strong distaste for the NRA and its viewpoint clear in their writing but warned the attempt to dismantle it has `` disturbing implications , '' as Marcus said , and `` threatens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Olson said he has `` been heartened that the center is holding '' with `` a number of different liberal pro-gun control writers saying , ‘ let 's get an appropriate amount of justice but we ca n't just ask for it to be closed down . '
'' The NRA has filed a countersuit against James that alleges she is violating its First Amendment rights and attempting to have the group shut down for political reasons .
The group is in the midst of another lawsuit against New York over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from working with the group .

Experts across the political spectrum are skeptical of New York attorney general Letitia James's (D.) attempt to dissolve the NRA, with some liberals even calling the move "dangerous."
Legal scholars told the Washington Free Beacon it was hard to see the massive gun-rights group being dissolved over James's investigation into its finances. Cato Institute legal fellow Walter Olson said the case presented amounted to a Democrat attempting to shut down a key political opponent.
"Closing down opposition organizations, traditionally, was something that you heard of going on in strongman regimes and you did not have going on in the United States," Olson said. "And that's what she's asking for is for: a major opposition organization to be closed down."
James, whose office did not respond to a request for comment, accused NRA executives such as Wayne LaPierre of diverting tens of millions of dollars of NRA money toward personal expenses including luxury suits, flights on private jets, and tropical vacations. The accusations were first brought to light in 2019 during infighting at the organization. James described the spending by LaPierre and three other current or former NRA executives as "illegal, oppressive, and fraudulent" when she announced the suit on Aug. 6.
The gun-rights group has denied any wrongdoing and LaPierre called the suit an "affront to democracy and freedom."
University of Pittsburgh law professor Philip Hackney, who worked at the Office of the Chief Counsel of the IRS overseeing the nonprofit sector from 2006 to 2011, said the investigation was appropriate. Hackney said he believed the alleged malfeasance by NRA executives was the driving force behind her dissolution effort.
"I think the NRA officers and directors forced her hand," he said. Still, he said he would "be surprised" if a court considered the removal of some NRA executives an insufficient solution and instead opted for wholesale dissolution of the organization. Hackney compared the NRA case to cases against the Kamehameha Schools and Adelphi University—both of which had their entire governing boards forcibly removed by government action and had to pay millions in back taxes. Neither was dissolved, though, and both continue to operate today.
Olson said the investigation of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters in the 1970s and 80s provided a useful example of how much more aggressive James is treating the NRA. The Teamsters were alleged to have been host to an extensive mob-run racketeering effort that covered everything from money laundering to murder. The union eventually agreed to a takeover by government officials that lasted 30 years, but there was no attempt to shut it down. He said that James's bid to dissolve the NRA amounted to overreach and could taint an otherwise legitimate investigation.
"That demand to dissolve the organization immediately made me think she's not treating this as a regular legal case. She is pulling out demands that are very politically fraught that require us to mobilize against something new being tried," Olson said. "We didn't close down the Teamsters. We said, 'this is America and even if the Teamsters campaigned against our candidates, we have to respect that their members have a legitimate political voice and we just want to make sure that honest people represented it.'"
The NRA has found unlikely allies in the aftermath of James's announcement. Liberal commentators and academics such as Washington Post editor Ruth Marcus, Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman, and University of Minnesota law professor Alan Z. Rozenshtein have written op-eds in recent days siding with the view that James's dissolution effort is alarming. The trio made their strong distaste for the NRA and its viewpoint clear in their writing but warned the attempt to dismantle it has "disturbing implications," as Marcus said, and "threatens democratic norms," according to Rozenshtein.
Olson said he has "been heartened that the center is holding" with "a number of different liberal pro-gun control writers saying, 'let's get an appropriate amount of justice but we can't just ask for it to be closed down.'"
The NRA has filed a countersuit against James that alleges she is violating its First Amendment rights and attempting to have the group shut down for political reasons. The group is in the midst of another lawsuit against New York over the state's attempt to dissuade financial organizations from working with the group.


freebeacon--2020-08-17--Biden Approaches 500 Days Without a Boat Parade as MAGA Boaters Smash World Record for Trump

Joe Biden announced his presidential campaign on April 25 , 2019 .
Since then , not a single boat parade has been held in his honor .
For those keeping score at home , that 's a whopping 480 days without a boat parade .
When knowledgable pundits discuss the `` enthusiasm gap '' between Biden supporters and the MAGA faithful who ca n't wait to cast legitimate votes for President Donald J. Trump , this is precisely what they are talking about .
While Biden is approaching an unprecedented 500 days without a single boat parade in his honor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boats in epic fashion and recently broke the world record for largest boat parade in history .
Since Obama left office , the boaters can celebrate their patriotism without fearing arrest and imprisonment by government-backed `` climate militias . ''
As usual , the mainstream media decline to cover the historic boating event , probably because their elitist worldview refuses to acknowledge the existence of any watercraft too small to be classified as a yacht .
As usual , Trump was forced to subvert the media 's corruption by releasing his own content @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump , '' the president said in a video statement from the White House .
`` I just wish I had time .
I 'd get on one of those boats and I 'd be carrying a flag also . ''
Trump urged his boaters to keep up their enthusiasm until Election Day in November .
`` We ca n't let the Radical Left take over this country , '' he said of Biden and the Democratic Party .
`` These people are crazy , and we have to stop them . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Big Ketchup husband John Kerry finally accomplished something by winning a sailboat race around Martha 's Vineyard .

Joe Biden announced his presidential campaign on April 25, 2019. Since then, not a single boat parade has been held in his honor. For those keeping score at home, that's a whopping 480 days without a boat parade. When knowledgable pundits discuss the "enthusiasm gap" between Biden supporters and the MAGA faithful who can't wait to cast legitimate votes for President Donald J. Trump, this is precisely what they are talking about.
While Biden is approaching an unprecedented 500 days without a single boat parade in his honor, Trump supporters have been parading their boats in epic fashion and recently broke the world record for largest boat parade in history. Since Obama left office, the boaters can celebrate their patriotism without fearing arrest and imprisonment by government-backed "climate militias."
Talk about enthusiasm!
Interesting. Trump supporters just obliterated the previous boat parade record (1,180 in Malaysia) with a pro-Trump boat parade in Clearwater, Florida. Organizers say 2K boats participated. https://t.co/7P9ps7Ok8g — Mollie (@MZHemingway) August 17, 2020
As usual, the mainstream media declined to cover the historic boating event, probably because their elitist worldview refuses to acknowledge the existence of any watercraft too small to be classified as a yacht. As usual, Trump was forced to subvert the media's corruption by releasing his own content.
"I appreciate the boaters for Trump," the president said in a video statement from the White House. "I just wish I had time. I'd get on one of those boats and I'd be carrying a flag also." Trump urged his boaters to keep up their enthusiasm until Election Day in November. "We can't let the Radical Left take over this country," he said of Biden and the Democratic Party. "These people are crazy, and we have to stop them."
In other boating news, failed politician and Big Ketchup husband John Kerry finally accomplished something by winning a sailboat race around Martha's Vineyard.


freebeacon--2020-08-17--Biden and Harris Have Received $155 Million From Financial Sector

Anti-Wall Street crusader Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I. , Vt. ) is slated to give a speech tonight in support of the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris ticket , a political tandem that has benefited from more than $ 155 million in financial sector cash in the candidates ' respective careers .
Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden has benefited from more than $ 150 million in political contributions from the financial industry since his failed 1988 presidential bid , a Washington Free Beacon review of campaign finance data show .
Roughly 40 percent of the money—more than $ 60 million—has boosted Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Biden 's running mate , Sen. Kamala Harris ( D. , Calif. ) , has also benefited heavily from Wall Street 's deep-pocketed donors .
The California Democrat has received nearly $ 3.7 million from the financial sector since her first Senate run in 2016 .
Biden has far outpaced Trump in contributions from employees of the nation 's six largest banks , according to an August Politico report .
Biden has received more than $ 907,000 from JPMorgan Chase , Bank of America , Citigroup , Wells Fargo , Goldman Sachs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Trump 's roughly $ 293,000 .
Neither Sanders nor the Biden campaign returned requests for comment .
A slew of Wall Street titans have voiced support for the Biden-Harris ticket in recent days , including Citigroup vice chairman Ray McGuire .
According to the Wall Street Journal , Biden 's selection of Harris confirmed the notion among industry executives that stringent financial regulation would not be a `` top priority '' should Democrats take the White House .
Biden and Harris 's cozy relationships with finance executives help explain the industry 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MBNA—which merged with Bank of America in 2006—were Biden 's largest source of campaign funds as a senator .
The company also hired Hunter Biden to consult at the time the elder Biden rallied behind a bankruptcy bill favored by credit card issuers in 2005 .
Harris , meanwhile , tapped Jon Henes—a corporate restructuring partner at law firm Kirkland & Ellis—as national finance chair on her presidential campaign .
She went on to raise more than $ 183,000 in direct contributions from the financial sector during her nearly 11-month run , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ More than $ 6.8 million in financial sector funds have gone directly to Biden 's campaign against Trump .
The Biden Victory Fund has received roughly $ 13 million from the industry , as has the Democratic National Committee .
A pair of Biden-aligned super PACs , Priorities USA and Unite the Country , have also taken a combined $ 27.9 million from the financial sector .
Sanders once questioned how any candidate who had benefited from Wall Street donations could be trusted to help the American people .
`` You need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies , the insurance companies , and the fossil fuel industry .
You do n't take campaign contributions from them , '' Sanders said during the 2020 primary .
Campaign finance watchdogs agreed that the selection of Harris sends mixed messages if a candidate is attempting to woo Sanders supporters .
`` The Biden campaign , by picking Kamala , is essentially proving Trump 's simplest narrative , which is that these ‘ elitists ' are out for themselves and not for you , '' Scott Walter , president of the money-in-politics watchdog @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Beacon .
As a senator , Biden received more than $ 8.5 million in direct contributions from the financial industry from 1989 to 2008 .
He went on to receive more than $ 710,000 from the industry during his failed presidential bid in 2008 , and the Obama-Biden ticket took more than $ 10.1 million in financial sector cash four years later .
A trio of groups aligned with the ticket , including the DNC , Priorities USA , and Obama Victory Fund , took a combined $ 71.4 million .
Harris has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her time in the Senate .
She received more than $ 950,000 in direct contributions from the industry during her 2016 campaign to replace then-retiring senator Barbara Boxer ( D. , Calif. ) .
Harris 's congressional campaign also received a combined $ 2.5 million from the financial sector in the 2018 and 2020 cycles , according to the Center for Responsive Politics .
Biden 's VP announcement praised Harris for taking on the `` big banks '' as California attorney general .
The former prosecutor routinely touts the $ 20 billion settlement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of predatory lending practices in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis .
However , much of the settlement money—nearly $ 14 billion—went to short sales and second mortgage relief , meaning big banks were able to `` reimburse themselves for money they might have lost anyway , '' according to Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America founder Bruce Marks .
The Democratic National Convention will begin at 9 p.m. Monday .
Sanders is scheduled to speak during the 10 p.m. hour .

Anti-Wall Street crusader Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) is slated to give a speech tonight in support of the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris ticket, a political tandem that has benefited from more than $155 million in financial sector cash in the candidates' respective careers.
Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden has benefited from more than $150 million in political contributions from the financial industry since his failed 1988 presidential bid, a Washington Free Beacon review of campaign finance data show. Roughly 40 percent of the money—more than $60 million—has boosted Biden's bid to defeat President Donald Trump.
Biden's running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.), has also benefited heavily from Wall Street's deep-pocketed donors. The California Democrat has received nearly $3.7 million from the financial sector since her first Senate run in 2016. Biden has far outpaced Trump in contributions from employees of the nation's six largest banks, according to an August Politico report. Biden has received more than $907,000 from JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley employees, compared with Trump's roughly $293,000.
Neither Sanders nor the Biden campaign returned requests for comment.
A slew of Wall Street titans have voiced support for the Biden-Harris ticket in recent days, including Citigroup vice chairman Ray McGuire. According to the Wall Street Journal, Biden's selection of Harris confirmed the notion among industry executives that stringent financial regulation would not be a "top priority" should Democrats take the White House.
Biden and Harris's cozy relationships with finance executives help explain the industry's support. Employees at credit card issuer MBNA—which merged with Bank of America in 2006—were Biden's largest source of campaign funds as a senator. The company also hired Hunter Biden to consult at the time the elder Biden rallied behind a bankruptcy bill favored by credit card issuers in 2005.
Harris, meanwhile, tapped Jon Henes—a corporate restructuring partner at law firm Kirkland & Ellis—as national finance chair on her presidential campaign. She went on to raise more than $183,000 in direct contributions from the financial sector during her nearly 11-month run, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
More than $6.8 million in financial sector funds have gone directly to Biden's campaign against Trump. The Biden Victory Fund has received roughly $13 million from the industry, as has the Democratic National Committee. A pair of Biden-aligned super PACs, Priorities USA and Unite the Country, have also taken a combined $27.9 million from the financial sector. Sanders once questioned how any candidate who had benefited from Wall Street donations could be trusted to help the American people.
"You need to take on Wall Street, the drug companies, the insurance companies, and the fossil fuel industry. You don't take campaign contributions from them," Sanders said during the 2020 primary.
If you want to make real change and create an economy that works for all, you know what you need? You need to take on Wall Street, the drug companies, the insurance companies, and the fossil fuel industry. You don’t take campaign contributions from them. — Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) March 16, 2020
Campaign finance watchdogs agreed that the selection of Harris sends mixed messages if a candidate is attempting to woo Sanders supporters.
"The Biden campaign, by picking Kamala, is essentially proving Trump's simplest narrative, which is that these 'elitists' are out for themselves and not for you," Scott Walter, president of the money-in-politics watchdog Capital Research Center, told the Free Beacon.
As a senator, Biden received more than $8.5 million in direct contributions from the financial industry from 1989 to 2008. He went on to receive more than $710,000 from the industry during his failed presidential bid in 2008, and the Obama-Biden ticket took more than $10.1 million in financial sector cash four years later. A trio of groups aligned with the ticket, including the DNC, Priorities USA, and Obama Victory Fund, took a combined $71.4 million.
Harris has also benefited from financial industry money during her time in the Senate. She received more than $950,000 in direct contributions from the industry during her 2016 campaign to replace then-retiring senator Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.). Harris's congressional campaign also received a combined $2.5 million from the financial sector in the 2018 and 2020 cycles, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Biden's VP announcement praised Harris for taking on the "big banks" as California attorney general. The former prosecutor routinely touts the $20 billion settlement she helped secure from major banks accused of predatory lending practices in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. However, much of the settlement money—nearly $14 billion—went to short sales and second mortgage relief, meaning big banks were able to "reimburse themselves for money they might have lost anyway," according to Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America founder Bruce Marks.
The Democratic National Convention will begin at 9 p.m. Monday. Sanders is scheduled to speak during the 10 p.m. hour.


freebeacon--2020-08-17--Chinese State Media Celebrates Biden’s Choice of ‘Aggressive Woman’ Kamala Harris

China 's communist government is actively supporting Joe Biden 's campaign for president , so it makes sense that state-owned Chinese media outlets celebrated the announcement of Kamala Harris as his running mate and offered some insightful analysis on the significance of the pick .
`` First , the agenda of race is key , '' wrote Zhang Jiadong in the Global Times .
`` Harris is blessed with multiple characteristics of ethnic minorities . ''
Her father , for example , is `` an African American from Jamaica . ''
The Times report included some additional analysis regarding the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ticket .
Because Biden is often regarded as a moderate , the selection of Harris offers a suitable complement , given her reputation as a `` tough '' prosecutor with a record of putting criminals ( of all races ) in jail for minor offenses : When she was California 's attorney general , Harris punished criminality ruthlessly , regardless of the suspect 's racial background .
As a senator , she held a key committee position and made outstanding performances in the fight against Trump .
When she competed with Biden for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she also showed an aggressive attitude .
Harris 's toughness is what Biden lacks .
A mild and mature man with a young and aggressive woman constitutes a perfect match .
Because Democrats and their allies in the U.S. media remain largely undecided as to whether China is good , bad , or no different from the United States , it is unclear if the Chinese media 's misogynistic use of the phrase `` aggressive woman '' will invite a hysterical response .
Liberal activists preemptively warned all members of the media not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's female running mate .
The U.S. media has long enjoyed a cozy relationship with Chinese propaganda outlets .
The New York Times , for example , only recently stopped publishing Chinese government-sponsored content on its website .
The Times also employs Taylor Lorenz , a youth culture expert who reports almost exclusively on TikTok , a Chinese-owned social media app for sexy teens who know how to dance .
Lorenz recently praised a former colleague 's article that suggested the United States was no better than China , a country that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and holds millions of Muslims in concentration camps .

China's communist government is actively supporting Joe Biden's campaign for president, so it makes sense that state-owned Chinese media outlets celebrated the announcement of Kamala Harris as his running mate and offered some insightful analysis on the significance of the pick.
"First, the agenda of race is key," wrote Zhang Jiadong in the Global Times. "Harris is blessed with multiple characteristics of ethnic minorities." Her father, for example, is "an African American from Jamaica."
The Times report included some additional analysis regarding the political implications of Harris joining the Democratic ticket. Because Biden is often regarded as a moderate, the selection of Harris offers a suitable complement, given her reputation as a "tough" prosecutor with a record of putting criminals (of all races) in jail for minor offenses:
When she was California's attorney general, Harris punished criminality ruthlessly, regardless of the suspect's racial background. As a senator, she held a key committee position and made outstanding performances in the fight against Trump. When she competed with Biden for the Democratic Party's presidential candidacy, she also showed an aggressive attitude. Harris's toughness is what Biden lacks. A mild and mature man with a young and aggressive woman constitutes a perfect match.
Because Democrats and their allies in the U.S. media remain largely undecided as to whether China is good, bad, or no different from the United States, it is unclear if the Chinese media's misogynistic use of the phrase "aggressive woman" will invite a hysterical response. Liberal activists preemptively warned all members of the media not to use such terms when describing Biden's female running mate.
The U.S. media has long enjoyed a cozy relationship with Chinese propaganda outlets. The New York Times, for example, only recently stopped publishing Chinese government-sponsored content on its website. The Times also employs Taylor Lorenz, a youth culture expert who reports almost exclusively on TikTok, a Chinese-owned social media app for sexy teens who know how to dance. Lorenz recently praised a former colleague's article that suggested the United States was no better than China, a country that is currently engaged in an ethic cleansing campaign and holds millions of Muslims in concentration camps.


freebeacon--2020-08-17--Joe Biden Wants a Green New Deal

Joe Biden Wants a Green New Deal

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden believes that a `` Green New Deal '' is `` a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face , '' and many elements of his $ 2 trillion climate plan mirror the controversial proposal .
Biden , who on Thursday evening will formally accept the Democratic Party 's nomination for the presidency , has largely avoided the limelight , campaigning via teleconference from his home in Delaware .
But from that home , he has planned an administration on par with Franklin Roosevelt 's , including a massive investment of taxpayer dollars in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told the Washington Free Beacon , would be `` unachievable , fantastically expensive , and environmentally destructive . ''
That plan includes Green New Deal-style proposals such as a `` civilian climate corps '' and the mass retrofitting of America 's homes and vehicles .
It also reproduces key features of President Barack Obama 's environmental agenda , including a focus on regulating consumer products and the return of the questionably effective `` cash for clunkers '' program .
And it incorporates many of the concerns of the Democratic Party 's activist base @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` environmental justice '' by targeting federal subsidies to minority groups .
The proposal is clearly influenced by Biden 's more progressive 2020 challengers , particularly Washington governor Jay Inslee ( D. ) , who ran on a climate-focused platform .
It also broadly mirrors the recommendations of the climate section of the Biden-Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I. , Vt. ) unity task force , co-chaired by former secretary of state John Kerry and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D. , N.Y. ) .
Although Biden has not publicly endorsed Ocasio-Cortez or others ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elements of his climate platform indicate this major piece of his presidential agenda is heavily influenced by the Democratic Party 's far-left flank , one of the many places he 's been pulled left over the course of the year .
They also suggest that a Biden administration would see its ambit to fight climate change—and , as Biden recently put it , to `` rewrite our economy '' —as essentially unlimited .
Biden 's campaign has released three separate proposals pertaining to the environment , indicating the intensity with which he is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his original $ 1.7 trillion climate plan with a $ 2 trillion proposal released in July as part of his vision for the post-coronavirus economic recovery .
Both of the plans incorporate elements of his `` environmental justice '' plan , a separate slate of proposals focused on the intersection of climate policy and racism .
The plans all share a common goal : making the U.S. economy carbon neutral by 2050 .
They include several milestones along the way , including zero-emission public buses by 2030 and zero-emission power generation by 2035 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the end of Biden 's would-be term in 2025 , although he does indicate he will `` establish … an enforcement mechanism that includes milestone targets no later than the end of his first term in 2025 . ''
) Benjamin Zycher , an energy economist at the American Enterprise Institute , told the Free Beacon that Biden 's goals were `` pretty similar to the Green New Deal , '' labeling them `` unachievable , fantastically expensive , and environmentally destructive . ''
Zycher noted that a transition away from fossil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current conditions , because limited battery capacity and the constant demand for power means that grids would be subject to rolling blackouts when the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing .
( Biden 's plan does include the use of nuclear power to mitigate this problem , for which activists have criticized him . )
He also said that `` clean '' energy generation is not always environmentally friendly , citing heavy metal pollution and the generation of toxic waste .
The Biden plans float a number of approaches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Highlights include the imposition of new emission standards on vehicles and household appliances—a major focus of Obama 's EPA , which President Donald Trump has sought to roll back .
The plan also heavily emphasizes retrofitting American homes and other buildings as a major priority , a part of the broader `` green jobs '' mandate—including a `` Civilian Climate Corps '' —which the Biden plan shares with GND proposals .
Even changes at the scale Biden envisions are unlikely to have a major impact on the climate—Zycher has estimated net-zero emissions by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ degrees centigrade by 2100—in large part because the United States accounts for just 15 percent of global emissions , slightly more than half of China 's output .
In response to this reality , Biden 's plan also calls for added international cooperation , including rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement , from which Trump previously withdrew and which Zycher has estimated would cut global temperatures by just 0.17 degrees , at a cost of 1 percent of global GDP .
Smaller features of Biden 's plans surprisingly recall failed attempts at environmental interventions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ floats a `` consumer rebates '' plan to swap less efficient vehicles for more efficient ones , recalling the infamous `` Cash for Clunkers '' program , which an analysis from the left-leaning Brookings Institution found had little effect on either emissions or jobs .
Biden 's plan also features mass weatherization of American homes , which was included in the 2009 stimulus bill , but which led to only a fraction of the homes having been weatherized by 2010 .
In addition to his climate plans , Biden intends to crack down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infractions by the American business community , all in the name of combating `` racial injustice . ''
His `` environmental justice '' plan would set up an environmental justice division within the DOJ and substantially expand the ambit of the EPA 's External Civil Rights Compliance Office .
The environmental justice proposal also explicitly ties Biden 's climate goals to the Democratic party 's messaging on race .
Under his proposal , 40 percent of `` investment in a clean energy revolution '' would be earmarked for `` disadvantaged communities . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ more uncertainty for businesses , '' James Broughel , an expert on federal regulation at the libertarian-leaning Mercatus Center , told the Free Beacon .
`` I think right now , businesses feel like they have an ally in the White House , and that gives them confidence to go forward with their plans and invest , '' Broughel said .
`` If they feel like they are in an antagonistic relationship with the administration in power , then that tees us up for more uncertainty in the economy , that certainly adds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ burden and makes businesses less optimistic and less likely to invest and hire people . ''

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden believes that a "Green New Deal" is "a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face," and many elements of his $2 trillion climate plan mirror the controversial proposal.
Biden, who on Thursday evening will formally accept the Democratic Party's nomination for the presidency, has largely avoided the limelight, campaigning via teleconference from his home in Delaware. But from that home, he has planned an administration on par with Franklin Roosevelt's, including a massive investment of taxpayer dollars in a climate plan which, one expert told the Washington Free Beacon, would be "unachievable, fantastically expensive, and environmentally destructive."
That plan includes Green New Deal-style proposals such as a "civilian climate corps" and the mass retrofitting of America's homes and vehicles. It also reproduces key features of President Barack Obama's environmental agenda, including a focus on regulating consumer products and the return of the questionably effective "cash for clunkers" program. And it incorporates many of the concerns of the Democratic Party's activist base, including a separate plan for pursuing "environmental justice" by targeting federal subsidies to minority groups.
The proposal is clearly influenced by Biden's more progressive 2020 challengers, particularly Washington governor Jay Inslee (D.), who ran on a climate-focused platform. It also broadly mirrors the recommendations of the climate section of the Biden-Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) unity task force, co-chaired by former secretary of state John Kerry and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.).
Although Biden has not publicly endorsed Ocasio-Cortez or others' official Green New Deal proposals, the elements of his climate platform indicate this major piece of his presidential agenda is heavily influenced by the Democratic Party's far-left flank, one of the many places he's been pulled left over the course of the year. They also suggest that a Biden administration would see its ambit to fight climate change—and, as Biden recently put it, to "rewrite our economy"—as essentially unlimited.
Biden's campaign has released three separate proposals pertaining to the environment, indicating the intensity with which he is focused on the issue. Biden superseded his original $1.7 trillion climate plan with a $2 trillion proposal released in July as part of his vision for the post-coronavirus economic recovery. Both of the plans incorporate elements of his "environmental justice" plan, a separate slate of proposals focused on the intersection of climate policy and racism.
The plans all share a common goal: making the U.S. economy carbon neutral by 2050. They include several milestones along the way, including zero-emission public buses by 2030 and zero-emission power generation by 2035. (None of the targets come before the end of Biden's would-be term in 2025, although he does indicate he will "establish … an enforcement mechanism that includes milestone targets no later than the end of his first term in 2025.")
Benjamin Zycher, an energy economist at the American Enterprise Institute, told the Free Beacon that Biden's goals were "pretty similar to the Green New Deal," labeling them "unachievable, fantastically expensive, and environmentally destructive."
Zycher noted that a transition away from fossil fuels to renewables would be impossible under current conditions, because limited battery capacity and the constant demand for power means that grids would be subject to rolling blackouts when the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing. (Biden's plan does include the use of nuclear power to mitigate this problem, for which activists have criticized him.) He also said that "clean" energy generation is not always environmentally friendly, citing heavy metal pollution and the generation of toxic waste.
The Biden plans float a number of approaches to achieving the 2050 neutral goal. Highlights include the imposition of new emission standards on vehicles and household appliances—a major focus of Obama's EPA, which President Donald Trump has sought to roll back. The plan also heavily emphasizes retrofitting American homes and other buildings as a major priority, a part of the broader "green jobs" mandate—including a "Civilian Climate Corps"—which the Biden plan shares with GND proposals.
Even changes at the scale Biden envisions are unlikely to have a major impact on the climate—Zycher has estimated net-zero emissions by 2050 would cut global temperature by 0.2 degrees centigrade by 2100—in large part because the United States accounts for just 15 percent of global emissions, slightly more than half of China's output. In response to this reality, Biden's plan also calls for added international cooperation, including rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, from which Trump previously withdrew and which Zycher has estimated would cut global temperatures by just 0.17 degrees, at a cost of 1 percent of global GDP.
Smaller features of Biden's plans surprisingly recall failed attempts at environmental interventions staged by the Obama administration. He floats a "consumer rebates" plan to swap less efficient vehicles for more efficient ones, recalling the infamous "Cash for Clunkers" program, which an analysis from the left-leaning Brookings Institution found had little effect on either emissions or jobs. Biden's plan also features mass weatherization of American homes, which was included in the 2009 stimulus bill, but which led to only a fraction of the homes having been weatherized by 2010.
In addition to his climate plans, Biden intends to crack down aggressively on polluting and other perceived environmental infractions by the American business community, all in the name of combating "racial injustice." His "environmental justice" plan would set up an environmental justice division within the DOJ and substantially expand the ambit of the EPA's External Civil Rights Compliance Office.
The environmental justice proposal also explicitly ties Biden's climate goals to the Democratic party's messaging on race. Under his proposal, 40 percent of "investment in a clean energy revolution" would be earmarked for "disadvantaged communities."
This increased regulatory pressure would mean "more uncertainty for businesses," James Broughel, an expert on federal regulation at the libertarian-leaning Mercatus Center, told the Free Beacon.
"I think right now, businesses feel like they have an ally in the White House, and that gives them confidence to go forward with their plans and invest," Broughel said. "If they feel like they are in an antagonistic relationship with the administration in power, then that tees us up for more uncertainty in the economy, that certainly adds costs in terms of the overall regulatory burden and makes businesses less optimistic and less likely to invest and hire people."


freebeacon--2020-08-17--While Portland Police Responded to Riot, More Than 60 Calls to Dispatchers Left on Hold

More than 60 calls to Portland police were left on hold Saturday night as officers responded to a riot outside of a local police building .
Dozens of calls reporting theft , burglary , vandalism , hit and runs , suspicious activity , and other crimes were left unanswered while police responded to a crowd of hundreds who trespassed the Penumbra Kelly Building , which houses the Portland Police Bureau and other government agencies .
Rioters spray-painted security cameras around the building and gathered in its parking lot , where they launched mortars , rocks , and a slew of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Portland Police Bureau said in a statement Sunday .
Portland rioters have targeted local government buildings since anti-police protests began in late May .
Throughout June and July , rioters repeatedly attacked the Mark O. Hatfield U.S .
Courthouse with fireworks and other explosives—at one point , rioters barricaded a group of federal officers inside the courthouse and launched fireworks toward the building .
Earlier this month , rioters set fire to the Portland police union headquarters .
In June , the Portland City Council voted to cut 84 positions and $ 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's budget .
The measure also shifted $ 4.8 million to the Portland Street Response , a policing alternative that sends unarmed responders to some emergency calls .
After the budget cuts passed , Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty said the council intends to create a safety plan where Portlanders `` do n't have to worry about who shows up when you call 911 . ''
Saturday night marked the 80th consecutive night of protests in Portland , which began in late May following the death of George Floyd .
Last week , District @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecute most of those arrested for rioting-related crimes .

More than 60 calls to Portland police were left on hold Saturday night as officers responded to a riot outside of a local police building.
Dozens of calls reporting theft, burglary, vandalism, hit and runs, suspicious activity, and other crimes were left unanswered while police responded to a crowd of hundreds who trespassed the Penumbra Kelly Building, which houses the Portland Police Bureau and other government agencies. Rioters spray-painted security cameras around the building and gathered in its parking lot, where they launched mortars, rocks, and a slew of other objects toward police officers, the Portland Police Bureau said in a statement Sunday.
Portland rioters have targeted local government buildings since anti-police protests began in late May. Throughout June and July, rioters repeatedly attacked the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse with fireworks and other explosives—at one point, rioters barricaded a group of federal officers inside the courthouse and launched fireworks toward the building. Earlier this month, rioters set fire to the Portland police union headquarters.
In June, the Portland City Council voted to cut 84 positions and $15 million in funding from the police department's budget. The measure also shifted $4.8 million to the Portland Street Response, a policing alternative that sends unarmed responders to some emergency calls.
After the budget cuts passed, Commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty said the council intends to create a safety plan where Portlanders "don't have to worry about who shows up when you call 911."
Saturday night marked the 80th consecutive night of protests in Portland, which began in late May following the death of George Floyd. Last week, District Attorney Mike Schmidt said he would not prosecute most of those arrested for rioting-related crimes.