freebeacon--2020-05-14--Woke Talking Points Cost Gillibrand Primary Support

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand 's ( D. , N.Y. ) campaign trail discussion of `` white privilege '' likely hurt her chances among voters , a new study from several prominent scholars argues .
The study—authors of which include noted political demographers George Hawley and Eric Kaufmann—found that the New York senator 's explicit allusion to the protective power of her son 's `` whiteness '' made self-identified moderates and conservatives less likely to say they would back her .
While the comments earned rave reviews in the media , they reduced overall support for Gillibrand by a third in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the authors , exposure to the comments did not make respondents more likely to identify as conservative or to identify with other whites .
Those results suggest that voters ' distaste for progressive rhetoric is , contrary to critics ' claims , decoupled from their ideology and ethnicity .
The findings serve as a cautionary tale for Democratic politicians , including presumptive 2020 nominee Joe Biden : While `` woke '' language choices may help with the party 's far-left base , they likely hurt among more moderate voters .
To conduct their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead author Richard Hanania assembled a sample of 817 white Americans .
The respondents were each asked to read and respond to three Gillibrand quotes , with the quotes they received randomized to be more `` neutral '' or more explicit in their progressive racial rhetoric .
One of those quotes was drawn from a widely covered response Gillibrand offered during the 2020 primary , in which she explained the concept of `` white privilege '' to a Youngstown , Ohio , voter .
Half of the study respondents were asked to assess @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and unity , '' while the other half were told that Gillibrand had promised to tell white parents that `` when their son is walking down a street with a bag of M & M ’ s in his pocket wearing a hoodie , his whiteness is what protects him from not being shot '' —a line from her much-lauded Youngstown response .
The other two sets of quotes indicated that Gillibrand was or was not in favor of `` radical redistribution , '' and favored or was neutral about reparations for slavery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how likely they were to support Gillibrand on a six-point scale .
Those exposed to the `` bag of M & Ms '' quote were significantly less likely to back her : About 36 percent of those in the `` kindness and unity '' group were supportive , compared with 24 percent in the `` M & Ms '' group .
That decline , the authors noted , was mostly due to the statement turning off respondents who identified as moderate and conservative .
Surprisingly , the other two quotes had a much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In separate tests , the study found that the quotes from Gillibrand did not make the respondents more likely to identify as conservative or to identify with their `` white identity . ''
`` Our results show that white Americans were less likely to support a candidate promoting an explicitly progressive agenda on race , '' the authors write .
`` At the same time , we find no evidence that calls for such an agenda actually provoke a backlash in racial attitudes . ''
This , the authors argue , militates against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which increasingly progressive elite rhetoric prompted white Americans to become racially conscious and right-leaning—leading , the argument goes , to the election of President Donald Trump .
The authors are scrupulously silent on what does explain the negative reaction to Gillibrand 's invocation of the protective power of `` whiteness , '' calling only for further research .
But the finding seems to suggest that such rhetoric is unpopular with voters , even as it becomes increasingly mandatory for Democrats trying to win the support of the party 's progressive activist base @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for failed 2020 contenders such as Beto O'Rourke—who told audiences that he `` acknowledge [ d ] the truth of the criticism that I have enjoyed white privilege '' —or Pete Buttigieg , who told Vanity Fair that `` I try to check myself '' on his white and male privilege .
While the media seemed concerned by the whiteness of candidates like O'Rourke , Buttigieg , and eventual winner Biden , the Gillibrand study is just the latest evidence that progressive shibboleths may hurt a candidate among the general public .
Polling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that fully 80 percent of Americans believe `` political correctness is a problem in our country , '' including 79 percent under 24 .
Biden , for his part , has struggled to catch up with his party 's rapidly evolving lexicon and was widely panned after he stumbled over a question about the legacy of slavery in an early primary debate .
Since clinching the nomination , however , Biden has moved to embrace the progressive wing of the party , most recently joining with defeated opponent Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic platform .
Such alliances mean it is only a matter of time before the infamously gaffe-prone Biden ventures into the minefield of `` wokeness '' —a move which will inevitably hurt him with his base and , the new study indicates , with more moderate voters as well .

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's (D., N.Y.) campaign trail discussion of "white privilege" likely hurt her chances among voters, a new study from several prominent scholars argues.
The study—authors of which include noted political demographers George Hawley and Eric Kaufmann—found that the New York senator's explicit allusion to the protective power of her son's "whiteness" made self-identified moderates and conservatives less likely to say they would back her. While the comments earned rave reviews in the media, they reduced overall support for Gillibrand by a third in a hypothetical race.
In a surprise to the authors, exposure to the comments did not make respondents more likely to identify as conservative or to identify with other whites. Those results suggest that voters' distaste for progressive rhetoric is, contrary to critics' claims, decoupled from their ideology and ethnicity.
The findings serve as a cautionary tale for Democratic politicians, including presumptive 2020 nominee Joe Biden: While "woke" language choices may help with the party's far-left base, they likely hurt among more moderate voters.
To conduct their study, Hawley, Kaufmann, and lead author Richard Hanania assembled a sample of 817 white Americans. The respondents were each asked to read and respond to three Gillibrand quotes, with the quotes they received randomized to be more "neutral" or more explicit in their progressive racial rhetoric.
One of those quotes was drawn from a widely covered response Gillibrand offered during the 2020 primary, in which she explained the concept of "white privilege" to a Youngstown, Ohio, voter. Half of the study respondents were asked to assess a quote from Gillibrand "stressing kindness and unity," while the other half were told that Gillibrand had promised to tell white parents that "when their son is walking down a street with a bag of M&M’s in his pocket wearing a hoodie, his whiteness is what protects him from not being shot"—a line from her much-lauded Youngstown response. The other two sets of quotes indicated that Gillibrand was or was not in favor of "radical redistribution," and favored or was neutral about reparations for slavery.
Respondents were then asked to rate how likely they were to support Gillibrand on a six-point scale. Those exposed to the "bag of M&Ms" quote were significantly less likely to back her: About 36 percent of those in the "kindness and unity" group were supportive, compared with 24 percent in the "M&Ms" group. That decline, the authors noted, was mostly due to the statement turning off respondents who identified as moderate and conservative.
Surprisingly, the other two quotes had a much smaller, mostly insignificant, effect. In separate tests, the study found that the quotes from Gillibrand did not make the respondents more likely to identify as conservative or to identify with their "white identity."
"Our results show that white Americans were less likely to support a candidate promoting an explicitly progressive agenda on race," the authors write. "At the same time, we find no evidence that calls for such an agenda actually provoke a backlash in racial attitudes."
This, the authors argue, militates against the popular "backlash" narrative, in which increasingly progressive elite rhetoric prompted white Americans to become racially conscious and right-leaning—leading, the argument goes, to the election of President Donald Trump.
The authors are scrupulously silent on what does explain the negative reaction to Gillibrand's invocation of the protective power of "whiteness," calling only for further research. But the finding seems to suggest that such rhetoric is unpopular with voters, even as it becomes increasingly mandatory for Democrats trying to win the support of the party's progressive activist base.
Such language was a common prop for failed 2020 contenders such as Beto O'Rourke—who told audiences that he "acknowledge[d] the truth of the criticism that I have enjoyed white privilege"—or Pete Buttigieg, who told Vanity Fair that "I try to check myself" on his white and male privilege.
While the media seemed concerned by the whiteness of candidates like O'Rourke, Buttigieg, and eventual winner Biden, the Gillibrand study is just the latest evidence that progressive shibboleths may hurt a candidate among the general public. Polling from 2018, for example, found that fully 80 percent of Americans believe "political correctness is a problem in our country," including 79 percent under 24.
Biden, for his part, has struggled to catch up with his party's rapidly evolving lexicon and was widely panned after he stumbled over a question about the legacy of slavery in an early primary debate. Since clinching the nomination, however, Biden has moved to embrace the progressive wing of the party, most recently joining with defeated opponent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) to craft the 2020 Democratic platform.
Such alliances mean it is only a matter of time before the infamously gaffe-prone Biden ventures into the minefield of "wokeness"—a move which will inevitably hurt him with his base and, the new study indicates, with more moderate voters as well.


freebeacon--2020-05-14--Chinese State Media Warn Country Will Interfere in U.S. Election

China is threatening to meddle in the upcoming U.S. presidential election as retribution for a flurry of American lawsuits seeking @ @ @ @ @ the spread of the coronavirus .
The Communist Party `` wo n't just strike back @ @ @ @ @ countermeasures that will make them feel pain , '' according to the Global Times , @ @ @ @ @ regime .
The threats come as outrage grows over China 's handling of the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ the subsequent global spread of the virus .
China also is threatening to sanction several @ @ @ @ @ Tom Cotton ( Ark . )
and Josh Hawley ( Mo . )
, for @ @ @ @ @ country responsible .
`` Republicans who have been groundlessly accusing China and inflaming the ‘ @ @ @ @ @ farce will face severe consequences , sources said , noting that the aftermath will also @ @ @ @ @ , while business and trade between Missouri and China will be further soured , '' @ @ @ @

China is threatening to meddle in the upcoming U.S. presidential election as retribution for a flurry of American lawsuits seeking to hold Beijing accountable for the spread of the coronavirus.
The Communist Party "won't just strike back symbolically, but will impose countermeasures that will make them feel pain," according to the Global Times, an outlet controlled by the regime.
The threats come as outrage grows over China's handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the country and the subsequent global spread of the virus.
China also is threatening to sanction several leading Republican senators, including Tom Cotton (Ark.) and Josh Hawley (Mo.), for their efforts to hold the country responsible.
"Republicans who have been groundlessly accusing China and inflaming the 'holding China accountable' political farce will face severe consequences, sources said, noting that the aftermath will also impact the upcoming November elections, while business and trade between Missouri and China will be further soured," the paper reported.


freebeacon--2020-05-14--Palestinian Rams Israeli Soldier With Car and Is Shot Dead

JERUSALEM ( Reuters ) – An Israeli soldier shot dead a Palestinian on Thursday who drove deliberately at high speed towards troops in the occupied West Bank , injuring one of them , the military said .
Violence has flared in the territory in the past week in the run-up to the planned inauguration later on Thursday of a new Israeli `` unity '' government headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu .
Its agenda includes possible de facto annexation of Jewish settlements and the Jordan Valley in the West Bank , with cabinet deliberations on the move , vehemently opposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in July .
Palestinians seek to establish a state in the West Bank , land captured by Israel in a 1967 Middle East war , and regard Israeli settlements in the territory as illegal , as do many countries .
The military said that a vehicle driven by a Palestinian hit a soldier in a car-ramming attack at an army post outside Negohot settlement near the city of Hebron and that he was shot dead by another soldier .
The injured soldier was taken to hospital .
The Palestinian Health Ministry first confirmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the military originally said only that he had been `` neutralized '' .
There was no immediate Palestinian comment on the circumstances of the incident .
On Wednesday , Israeli soldiers shot dead a 15-year-old Palestinian in Fawwar refugee camp in the West Bank .
The military said soldiers , on an arrest raid , had responded with live fire after being attacked with rocks and fire-bombs .
On Tuesday , a rock thrown from a rooftop in the West Bank village of Yabad killed an Israeli soldier taking part in an operation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separate incident in the West Bank that day , a Palestinian was shot and wounded by police after he tried to stab security staff at a checkpoint , a police spokesman said .
There was no immediate official Palestinian comment on the Fawwar refugee camp or checkpoint incidents .
U.S.-backed peacemaking between Israel and the Palestinians broke down in 2014 .

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - An Israeli soldier shot dead a Palestinian on Thursday who drove deliberately at high speed towards troops in the occupied West Bank, injuring one of them, the military said.
Violence has flared in the territory in the past week in the run-up to the planned inauguration later on Thursday of a new Israeli "unity" government headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Its agenda includes possible de facto annexation of Jewish settlements and the Jordan Valley in the West Bank, with cabinet deliberations on the move, vehemently opposed by the Palestinians, set to begin in July.
Palestinians seek to establish a state in the West Bank, land captured by Israel in a 1967 Middle East war, and regard Israeli settlements in the territory as illegal, as do many countries.
The military said that a vehicle driven by a Palestinian hit a soldier in a car-ramming attack at an army post outside Negohot settlement near the city of Hebron and that he was shot dead by another soldier. The injured soldier was taken to hospital.
The Palestinian Health Ministry first confirmed the driver’s death, after the military originally said only that he had been "neutralized". There was no immediate Palestinian comment on the circumstances of the incident.
On Wednesday, Israeli soldiers shot dead a 15-year-old Palestinian in Fawwar refugee camp in the West Bank. The military said soldiers, on an arrest raid, had responded with live fire after being attacked with rocks and fire-bombs.
On Tuesday, a rock thrown from a rooftop in the West Bank village of Yabad killed an Israeli soldier taking part in an operation to detain suspected militants.
In a separate incident in the West Bank that day, a Palestinian was shot and wounded by police after he tried to stab security staff at a checkpoint, a police spokesman said.
There was no immediate official Palestinian comment on the Fawwar refugee camp or checkpoint incidents.
U.S.-backed peacemaking between Israel and the Palestinians broke down in 2014.
(Writing by Jeffrey Heller; Editing by Mark Heinrich)


freebeacon--2020-05-14--U.S. Judge Asks If Ex-Trump Aide Flynn Should Be Held in Contempt

WASHINGTON ( Reuters ) – A U.S. judge on Wednesday signaled reluctance to allow the Justice Department to drop its criminal prosecution of Michael Flynn , tasking a retired judge with advising on whether the former Trump administration official should face an additional criminal contempt charge for perjury .
In a short written order , U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington asked John Gleeson , a former federal judge in New York , to present arguments in the case as an amicus curiae , or friend of the court .
Sullivan said he was seeking Gleeson 's recommendation on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ charge for perjury because he testified under oath that he was guilty of lying to the FBI but then reversed course and said he had never lied .
Sullivan also said he wanted Gleeson to make the case for why a motion to dismiss the Flynn case filed by the Justice Department last week should be rejected .
The Justice Department 's bombshell May 7 decision to drop its case against Flynn came on the heels of growing pressure from Trump and Trump 's political allies who repeatedly accused the FBI of improprieties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Up until that point , the Justice Department had staunchly defended the FBI 's actions in the case .
Flynn , a retired Army lieutenant general who served as an adviser to Trump during the 2016 campaign , pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his interactions with Russia ’ s U.S. ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the weeks before Trump took office .
However , later in the case he switched lawyers and tactics , accusing the FBI of tricking him and seeking to have his guilty plea withdrawn .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had tapped Jeffrey Jensen , a federal prosecutor in Missouri , to work alongside career prosecutors to help review the case .
Jensen ultimately recommended that Barr abandon the case , which the department did in a filing on May 7 , saying that the FBI ’ s Jan. 24 , 2017 Flynn interview that underpinned the charges was conducted without a `` legitimate investigative basis '' and that Flynn 's statements were not `` material even if untrue . ''
Since then , Barr has met with staunch criticism by Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who said his actions amount to improper political meddling and harm the integrity of the Justice Department .

By Jan Wolfe and Sarah N. Lynch
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Wednesday signaled reluctance to allow the Justice Department to drop its criminal prosecution of Michael Flynn, tasking a retired judge with advising on whether the former Trump administration official should face an additional criminal contempt charge for perjury.
In a short written order, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington asked John Gleeson, a former federal judge in New York, to present arguments in the case as an amicus curiae, or friend of the court.
Sullivan said he was seeking Gleeson's recommendation on whether Flynn should face a criminal contempt charge for perjury because he testified under oath that he was guilty of lying to the FBI but then reversed course and said he had never lied.
Sullivan also said he wanted Gleeson to make the case for why a motion to dismiss the Flynn case filed by the Justice Department last week should be rejected.
A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment.
The Justice Department's bombshell May 7 decision to drop its case against Flynn came on the heels of growing pressure from Trump and Trump's political allies who repeatedly accused the FBI of improprieties in how it handled the investigation.
Up until that point, the Justice Department had staunchly defended the FBI's actions in the case.
Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general who served as an adviser to Trump during the 2016 campaign, pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his interactions with Russia’s U.S. ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the weeks before Trump took office.
However, later in the case he switched lawyers and tactics, accusing the FBI of tricking him and seeking to have his guilty plea withdrawn.
Attorney General William Barr in February revealed he had tapped Jeffrey Jensen, a federal prosecutor in Missouri, to work alongside career prosecutors to help review the case.
Jensen ultimately recommended that Barr abandon the case, which the department did in a filing on May 7, saying that the FBI’s Jan. 24, 2017 Flynn interview that underpinned the charges was conducted without a "legitimate investigative basis" and that Flynn's statements were not "material even if untrue."
Since then, Barr has met with staunch criticism by Democrats as well as former career prosecutors, who said his actions amount to improper political meddling and harm the integrity of the Justice Department.
(Reporting by Jan Wolfe and Sarah N. Lynch; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)


The Teflon Campaign

It was congresswoman Pat Schroeder , Democrat from Colorado , who labeled Ronald Reagan the `` Teflon '' president in a fit of exasperation in August 1983 .
What frustrated Schroeder was that nothing `` stuck '' to Reagan—not the recession , not his misadventures in Lebanon , not his seeming detachment from his own administration .
Reagan 's job approval had plunged to a low of 35 percent at the beginning of that year , but his numbers were rising and his personal favorability remained high .
`` He is just the master of ceremonies at someone else 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the one thing that did stick to Reagan was Schroeder 's nickname .
The phrase was so catchy that writers applied it to mobsters ( `` Teflon Don '' John Gotti ) and to Bill Clinton , Barack Obama , and Donald Trump .
Teflon presidents , gangsters , candidates—we have had them all .
What we have not experienced until now is a Teflon campaign .
Between March 11 , when the coronavirus prompted the NBA to suspend its season , and May 14 , some 84,000 Americans died of coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jobs , and Congress appropriated $ 3.6 trillion in new spending .
It is not foolish to suppose that these world-shaking events would affect the presidential election .
On the contrary : One would expect a dramatic swing toward either the incumbent or the challenger .
But look at the polls .
Not only has there been no big shift .
There has been no shift .
On March 11 , Joe Biden led Donald Trump by 7 points in the RealClearPolitics average .
On May 14 , he led Trump by 5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' says Harry Enten of CNN , `` is the steadiest in a race with an incumbent running since at least 1944 . ''
He has never been behind .
His share of the vote has been impervious to external events .
Neither good nor bad news has an effect .
Bernie Sanders ended his campaign on April 8 and endorsed Biden on April 13 .
Biden received no bump from this display of party unity .
Tara Reade accused Biden of sexual assault on March 25 , and Biden did not respond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His margin over Trump did not shrink .
It remained the same .
Why ?
The incidents of this election cycle are not the reason .
Epidemics , depressions , and sex scandals have happened before .
What is distinct are the candidates .
One in particular .
If this race has been the steadiest in memory , it is because public opinion of the incumbent has been the most consistent in memory .
`` Trump 's approval rating has the least variation of any post-World War II president , '' notes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the headlines matters less than one 's view of the president .
And he is a subject on which most people 's views are ironclad .
When the crisis began , Trump 's approval rating was 44 percent in the RealClearPolitics average .
On May 14 , it is 46 percent .
A social and economic calamity befell the country , and Trump 's approval ticked up .
Not enough for him to win , necessarily .
But enough to keep him in contention .
Americans feel more strongly about Trump , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any other candidate since polling began .
His supporters give his approval ratings a floor , and his detractors give his ratings a ceiling .
There is not a lot of room in between .
For years , Trump voters have said that they are willing to overlook his faults because they believe the stakes in his victory and success are so high .
Heard from less often have been Trump 's opponents , who are so desperate to see him gone that they dismiss the failings and vulnerabilities of whoever happens to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Recently the feminist author Linda Hirshman wrote in the New York Times that she believes Tara Reade 's story but will vote for Joe Biden anyway .
`` Better to just own up to what you are doing , '' she wrote .
`` Sacrificing Ms. Reade for the good of the many . ''
Hirshman is the mirror-image of the Trump supporter who , as the president once said , would not be bothered if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue .
Intensifying tribalism makes this election a nonstick surface .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there are more people who feel negatively than positively about Donald Trump .
What gives Trump a chance is the uneven distribution of these people across the country .
That was the case before coronavirus .
It is still the case today .
Watching the numbers hardly budge over these past months , I have sometimes wondered what could move them .
War ?
Spiritual revival ?
Space aliens ?
Do n't think so .
Throw anything at it .
Nothing adheres to this Teflon campaign .

It was congresswoman Pat Schroeder, Democrat from Colorado, who labeled Ronald Reagan the "Teflon" president in a fit of exasperation in August 1983. What frustrated Schroeder was that nothing "stuck" to Reagan—not the recession, not his misadventures in Lebanon, not his seeming detachment from his own administration. Reagan's job approval had plunged to a low of 35 percent at the beginning of that year, but his numbers were rising and his personal favorability remained high. "He is just the master of ceremonies at someone else's dinner," she said.
Ironically, the one thing that did stick to Reagan was Schroeder's nickname. The phrase was so catchy that writers applied it to mobsters ("Teflon Don" John Gotti) and to Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump. Teflon presidents, gangsters, candidates—we have had them all. What we have not experienced until now is a Teflon campaign.
Between March 11, when the coronavirus prompted the NBA to suspend its season, and May 14, some 84,000 Americans died of coronavirus, more than 36 million lost their jobs, and Congress appropriated $3.6 trillion in new spending. It is not foolish to suppose that these world-shaking events would affect the presidential election. On the contrary: One would expect a dramatic swing toward either the incumbent or the challenger. But look at the polls. Not only has there been no big shift. There has been no shift.
On March 11, Joe Biden led Donald Trump by 7 points in the RealClearPolitics average. On May 14, he led Trump by 5 points. "Biden's advantage," says Harry Enten of CNN, "is the steadiest in a race with an incumbent running since at least 1944." He has never been behind. His share of the vote has been impervious to external events.
Neither good nor bad news has an effect. Bernie Sanders ended his campaign on April 8 and endorsed Biden on April 13. Biden received no bump from this display of party unity. Tara Reade accused Biden of sexual assault on March 25, and Biden did not respond directly to the allegation until May 1. His margin over Trump did not shrink. It remained the same.
Why? The incidents of this election cycle are not the reason. Epidemics, depressions, and sex scandals have happened before. What is distinct are the candidates. One in particular.
If this race has been the steadiest in memory, it is because public opinion of the incumbent has been the most consistent in memory. "Trump's approval rating has the least variation of any post-World War II president," notes Geoffrey Skelley of FiveThirtyEight. Whatever is in the headlines matters less than one's view of the president. And he is a subject on which most people's views are ironclad.
When the crisis began, Trump's approval rating was 44 percent in the RealClearPolitics average. On May 14, it is 46 percent. A social and economic calamity befell the country, and Trump's approval ticked up. Not enough for him to win, necessarily. But enough to keep him in contention.
Americans feel more strongly about Trump, either for or against, than about any other candidate since polling began. His supporters give his approval ratings a floor, and his detractors give his ratings a ceiling. There is not a lot of room in between.
For years, Trump voters have said that they are willing to overlook his faults because they believe the stakes in his victory and success are so high. Heard from less often have been Trump's opponents, who are so desperate to see him gone that they dismiss the failings and vulnerabilities of whoever happens to be challenging him at the moment.
Recently the feminist author Linda Hirshman wrote in the New York Times that she believes Tara Reade's story but will vote for Joe Biden anyway. "Better to just own up to what you are doing," she wrote. "Sacrificing Ms. Reade for the good of the many." Hirshman is the mirror-image of the Trump supporter who, as the president once said, would not be bothered if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue. Intensifying tribalism makes this election a nonstick surface.
What gives Biden the upper hand is that there are more people who feel negatively than positively about Donald Trump. What gives Trump a chance is the uneven distribution of these people across the country. That was the case before coronavirus. It is still the case today.
Watching the numbers hardly budge over these past months, I have sometimes wondered what could move them. War? Spiritual revival? Space aliens?
Don't think so. Throw anything at it. Nothing adheres to this Teflon campaign.


freebeacon--2020-05-15--Qatar Waging Stealth Influence Operations Across U.S. Academic System, Documents Show

Qatar is spending billions of dollars to infiltrate the American education system as part of a propaganda effort that legal advocates say violates federal statutes and warrants a full-scale investigation , according to a nonpublic memorandum sent from an investigative group to the State Department and obtained by the Washington Free Beacon .
The Qatar Foundation ( QF ) , a state-controlled entity tasked with promoting the country 's interests , has spent at least $ 1.5 billion since 2012 to fund a range of educational initiatives at 28 universities across America , making it one of the education system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to information obtained by the Lawfare Project , a U.S.-based legal group that has been petitioning American universities to turn over information about their financial relationships with Qatar .
Foreign funding of American universities has been a concern for some time , with countries such as Qatar , Russia , China , Saudi Arabia , and others injecting billions into their budgets .
The Education Department found in late 2019 that several schools failed to report more than $ 1.3 billion in foreign funds .
Qatar 's emergence as one of the leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and anti-Semitic bias working its way into the classroom .
The Lawfare Project 's investigation , which has been provided to the Trump administration , `` reveals considerable Qatari infiltration in the American education system and the media , '' according to a copy of the investigative materials viewed by the Free Beacon .
`` This infiltration , funded and organized through QF and [ Qatar Foundation International ] , has turned American universities and primary and secondary school teachers into de facto agents of the Qatari government , conveying its political ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the general population without any acknowledgment of the origins of these views . ''
Major universities have declined to provide the Lawfare Project with detailed information about their financial relationships with Qatar , leading the group to call for a Trump administration investigation into these schools—including at the University of North Carolina and Duke University , which have both been at the forefront of controversy over foreign funding .
The Lawfare Project maintains Qatar is violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act ( FARA ) , which requires people and entities acting `` as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to register with the American government and disclose foreign influence in the domestic political process .
Legal experts with the group also maintain the schools should be subject to FARA disclosure .
These financial relationships are of particular interest given public information about the Qatar Foundation 's educational materials , which paints a biased portrait of the Middle East , particularly when it comes to Israel .
Teachers selected for these programs vow to implement the lessons learned in their classrooms .
The lack of transparency into these programs has only heightened concerns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for these schools is just one piece of Qatar 's efforts to peddle influence in America .
The country funds prominent think tanks such as the Brookings Institution and was recently alleged to have funded hack attacks on some 1,500 individuals , including political operatives based in Washington , D.C. Additionally , Republican members of Congress petitioned the Justice Department in June 2019 to investigate Qatar 's Al Jazeera network for potential FARA violations .
`` Our preliminary review of publicly available documents suggests that FARA applies to Qatar 's activities , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from its funding register as agents of Qatar , '' the Lawfare Project wrote in its report .
Such a mandate would force any university taking Qatar 's money to register as an agent of a foreign nation , which these schools are likely to reject .
Qatar 's influence operations in the United States have caught the attention of federal investigators in recent years .
The Department of Education has been investigating how some $ 235,000 in federal funds were used in 2018 to organize a series of anti-Israel events held jointly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ North Carolina .
Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show the Qatar Foundation to be closely involved in UNC 's educational initiatives .
The Lawfare Project suspects this is the case with many other universities that have so far rebuffed the group 's requests for documentation .
The Lawfare Project has threatened to take legal action against these schools to compel the release of this financial information .
Qatar is known to spend at least $ 405 million a year to cover the expenses for six U.S. universities that operate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Texas A & M , Georgetown , Virginia Commonwealth , Cornell , and Carnegie Mellon .
Qatar also spends more than $ 30 million on Middle Eastern-oriented training programs for American students in various schools across the United States .
`` Schools that accept money from [ Qatar Foundation International ] are required to give over a degree of access and control to the Qatari organization , '' according to Lawfare 's findings .
The group says this cash is part of an `` extensive influence operation in America '' that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virulent anti-Semitism that continues to spread in American society . ''
The amount of control that Qatar exerts over the school programs and participants is particularly concerning to investigators with the Lawfare Project and other experts .
`` The U.S. Congress just launched an inquiry into efforts by the Chinese government to influence American universities , '' said Brooke Goldstein , executive director of the Lawfare Project .
`` They should expand the scope to include Qatar , a country that has been playing this game for a long time with almost no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requests reveal that the U.S. government lacks basic information about Qatar 's attempts to infiltrate American academia . ''
At Duke , for instance , Qatar spent $ 110,000 in 2019 on an `` immersion program for teachers of grades 6-12 . ''
Teachers from school districts in North Carolina , Illinois , and Virginia who participated in this program were `` hand-selected '' by QFI , rather than Duke .
An internal copy of the training agenda shows `` the curriculum appears to minimize and downplay , if not outright ignore , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( including Jews and Christians ) in the Middle East , '' according to the Lawfare Project .
Several of the instructors selected for this program later participated in the joint Duke-UNC initiative now being investigated by the Education Department for anti-Israel bias .
`` Qatar has given over $ 1.7 billion to American universities—that we know of .
Apparently , not all contributions have been reported , and this sum does not seem to include money given to K-12 programs or money funneled through organizations like Qatar Foundation International , '' said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lawfare Project .
`` The American people are entitled to know what this money is being used for and what specific programs it is funding . ''
The Lawfare Project has issued document requests to several universities , including UNC and Northwestern .
It also issued a FOIA to the Education Department for information relating to Qatar 's funding of Northwestern .
The DOE could not produce substantial documentation .
`` The absence of any documentation connected with this funding is very troubling because it shows that the government lacks information about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Northwestern , which even operates a campus in Qatar , '' Lawfare reported in its findings .
The group is pressuring the Trump administration to aid its ongoing investigations , including by forcing the schools in question to turn over relevant documentation about their ties to Qatar .
The State Department declined to comment on Lawfare 's investigation .
The Education Department did not respond to a request for comment on the report .

Qatar is spending billions of dollars to infiltrate the American education system as part of a propaganda effort that legal advocates say violates federal statutes and warrants a full-scale investigation, according to a nonpublic memorandum sent from an investigative group to the State Department and obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
The Qatar Foundation (QF), a state-controlled entity tasked with promoting the country's interests, has spent at least $1.5 billion since 2012 to fund a range of educational initiatives at 28 universities across America, making it one of the education system's most prolific foreign funders, according to information obtained by the Lawfare Project, a U.S.-based legal group that has been petitioning American universities to turn over information about their financial relationships with Qatar.
Foreign funding of American universities has been a concern for some time, with countries such as Qatar, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and others injecting billions into their budgets. The Education Department found in late 2019 that several schools failed to report more than $1.3 billion in foreign funds. Qatar's emergence as one of the leading foreign funders has generated concerns about anti-Israel and anti-Semitic bias working its way into the classroom.
The Lawfare Project's investigation, which has been provided to the Trump administration, "reveals considerable Qatari infiltration in the American education system and the media," according to a copy of the investigative materials viewed by the Free Beacon. "This infiltration, funded and organized through QF and [Qatar Foundation International], has turned American universities and primary and secondary school teachers into de facto agents of the Qatari government, conveying its political (and anti-Semitic) views to students and the general population without any acknowledgment of the origins of these views."
Major universities have declined to provide the Lawfare Project with detailed information about their financial relationships with Qatar, leading the group to call for a Trump administration investigation into these schools—including at the University of North Carolina and Duke University, which have both been at the forefront of controversy over foreign funding. The Lawfare Project maintains Qatar is violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which requires people and entities acting "as an agent of a foreign principal" to register with the American government and disclose foreign influence in the domestic political process. Legal experts with the group also maintain the schools should be subject to FARA disclosure.
These financial relationships are of particular interest given public information about the Qatar Foundation's educational materials, which paints a biased portrait of the Middle East, particularly when it comes to Israel. Teachers selected for these programs vow to implement the lessons learned in their classrooms. The lack of transparency into these programs has only heightened concerns about Qatar's agenda.
The funding for these schools is just one piece of Qatar's efforts to peddle influence in America. The country funds prominent think tanks such as the Brookings Institution and was recently alleged to have funded hack attacks on some 1,500 individuals, including political operatives based in Washington, D.C. Additionally, Republican members of Congress petitioned the Justice Department in June 2019 to investigate Qatar's Al Jazeera network for potential FARA violations.
"Our preliminary review of publicly available documents suggests that FARA applies to Qatar's activities, and requires that the institutions and individuals benefitting from its funding register as agents of Qatar," the Lawfare Project wrote in its report. Such a mandate would force any university taking Qatar's money to register as an agent of a foreign nation, which these schools are likely to reject.
Qatar's influence operations in the United States have caught the attention of federal investigators in recent years. The Department of Education has been investigating how some $235,000 in federal funds were used in 2018 to organize a series of anti-Israel events held jointly by Duke University and the University of North Carolina.
Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show the Qatar Foundation to be closely involved in UNC's educational initiatives. The Lawfare Project suspects this is the case with many other universities that have so far rebuffed the group's requests for documentation. The Lawfare Project has threatened to take legal action against these schools to compel the release of this financial information.
Qatar is known to spend at least $405 million a year to cover the expenses for six U.S. universities that operate campuses in Doha. They include Northwestern, Texas A&M, Georgetown, Virginia Commonwealth, Cornell, and Carnegie Mellon.
Qatar also spends more than $30 million on Middle Eastern-oriented training programs for American students in various schools across the United States. "Schools that accept money from [Qatar Foundation International] are required to give over a degree of access and control to the Qatari organization," according to Lawfare's findings.
The group says this cash is part of an "extensive influence operation in America" that has advanced Qatar's agenda "while inculcating virulent anti-Semitism that continues to spread in American society."
The amount of control that Qatar exerts over the school programs and participants is particularly concerning to investigators with the Lawfare Project and other experts.
"The U.S. Congress just launched an inquiry into efforts by the Chinese government to influence American universities," said Brooke Goldstein, executive director of the Lawfare Project. "They should expand the scope to include Qatar, a country that has been playing this game for a long time with almost no transparency and oversight. Our recent FOIA requests reveal that the U.S. government lacks basic information about Qatar's attempts to infiltrate American academia."
At Duke, for instance, Qatar spent $110,000 in 2019 on an "immersion program for teachers of grades 6-12." Teachers from school districts in North Carolina, Illinois, and Virginia who participated in this program were "hand-selected" by QFI, rather than Duke.
An internal copy of the training agenda shows "the curriculum appears to minimize and downplay, if not outright ignore, the history and contributions of non-Muslim people (including Jews and Christians) in the Middle East," according to the Lawfare Project.
Several of the instructors selected for this program later participated in the joint Duke-UNC initiative now being investigated by the Education Department for anti-Israel bias.
"Qatar has given over $1.7 billion to American universities—that we know of. Apparently, not all contributions have been reported, and this sum does not seem to include money given to K-12 programs or money funneled through organizations like Qatar Foundation International," said Gerard Filitti, senior counsel at the Lawfare Project. "The American people are entitled to know what this money is being used for and what specific programs it is funding."
The Lawfare Project has issued document requests to several universities, including UNC and Northwestern. It also issued a FOIA to the Education Department for information relating to Qatar's funding of Northwestern. The DOE could not produce substantial documentation.
"The absence of any documentation connected with this funding is very troubling because it shows that the government lacks information about the nature and extent of Qatar's influence at Northwestern, which even operates a campus in Qatar," Lawfare reported in its findings.
The group is pressuring the Trump administration to aid its ongoing investigations, including by forcing the schools in question to turn over relevant documentation about their ties to Qatar.
The State Department declined to comment on Lawfare's investigation. The Education Department did not respond to a request for comment on the report.


freebeacon--2020-05-15--State AGs Want in on Federal Coronavirus Probes

Republican attorneys general are proposing a new federal-state partnership to determine `` possible actions to take towards China , '' adding to a slew of state-level initiatives to hold China accountable for the coronavirus pandemic .
The top legal officers of 14 states urged the federal government to work with states to investigate China 's handling of the pandemic and evaluate possible remedial measures that could be taken against the Chinese government .
Florida attorney general Ashley Moody , who spearheaded the White House letter , said that a federal-state partnership is necessary to overcome legal obstacles that might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ handle .
`` We understand there may be limitations [ at the state level ] as we 're dealing with a foreign country , '' Moody told the Washington Free Beacon .
`` We want to make sure that we 're working through the federal government , and that we are working in a way that maximizes efficiency and resources among federal agencies and individual states . ''
Moody 's White House overture represents the latest attempt by states—led mostly by Republican officials—to hold China accountable for its botched handling of the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chinese government for damages in April .
Mississippi has pledged to do the same , while 16 other attorneys general said they are also considering legal action .
Moody and the other AGs said in a Wednesday letter to the Trump administration that bringing in states to aid with the federal investigation would help Americans deal with the fallout of the pandemic .
`` A coordinated effort between the federal government and our States is the most effective and efficient means of exploring a viable response to achieve the accountability our citizens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attorneys general wrote in a Wednesday letter to President Trump .
If implemented , the federal-state partnership will investigate whether China exacerbated the pandemic by concealing or misrepresenting information about the coronavirus , according to the letter .
After the conclusion of the investigation , the partnership will evaluate `` any remedy '' that can be used to hold China accountable for the destruction caused by the pandemic .
The White House did not respond to a request for comment about the proposed partnership .
`` As the administration evaluates the spectrum of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a comprehensive evaluation of the legal , economic , diplomatic , and security measures that can be employed must be undertaken , '' the letter read .
`` And for maximum effectiveness States should be included in that process to the extent possible . ''
Republican attorneys general submitted a similar letter to Congress requesting hearings on China 's coronavirus response .
The letter , submitted to both congressional Democrats and Republicans , said China `` appears to have intentionally misled the world over the last 6 months . ''
In a Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R. , Tex . )
praised state attorneys general for acting quickly to hold China accountable , adding that they are often ahead of federal action on legal issues .
`` State attorneys general often are the point of the spear , '' he said .
`` State AGs can be quick and nimble and aggressive and we 've seen them drive legal challenges—some good , some bad—but be aggressively out there at the front of the charge . ''
The federal government is debating several measures against the regime , including backing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump tweeted on Wednesday that `` 100 Trade Deals wouldn ’ t make up '' for the lives lost in the pandemic .
The Trump administration has also ordered a federal pension fund to halt investments into Chinese stocks , affecting billions of federal retirement dollars .

Republican attorneys general are proposing a new federal-state partnership to determine "possible actions to take towards China," adding to a slew of state-level initiatives to hold China accountable for the coronavirus pandemic.
The top legal officers of 14 states urged the federal government to work with states to investigate China's handling of the pandemic and evaluate possible remedial measures that could be taken against the Chinese government. Florida attorney general Ashley Moody, who spearheaded the White House letter, said that a federal-state partnership is necessary to overcome legal obstacles that might be too much for a single state to handle.
"We understand there may be limitations [at the state level] as we're dealing with a foreign country," Moody told the Washington Free Beacon. "We want to make sure that we're working through the federal government, and that we are working in a way that maximizes efficiency and resources among federal agencies and individual states."
Moody's White House overture represents the latest attempt by states—led mostly by Republican officials—to hold China accountable for its botched handling of the pandemic. Missouri attorney general Eric Schmitt sued the Chinese government for damages in April. Mississippi has pledged to do the same, while 16 other attorneys general said they are also considering legal action. Moody and the other AGs said in a Wednesday letter to the Trump administration that bringing in states to aid with the federal investigation would help Americans deal with the fallout of the pandemic.
"A coordinated effort between the federal government and our States is the most effective and efficient means of exploring a viable response to achieve the accountability our citizens demand," Moody and the other attorneys general wrote in a Wednesday letter to President Trump.
If implemented, the federal-state partnership will investigate whether China exacerbated the pandemic by concealing or misrepresenting information about the coronavirus, according to the letter. After the conclusion of the investigation, the partnership will evaluate "any remedy" that can be used to hold China accountable for the destruction caused by the pandemic. The White House did not respond to a request for comment about the proposed partnership.
"As the administration evaluates the spectrum of possible actions to take towards China … a comprehensive evaluation of the legal, economic, diplomatic, and security measures that can be employed must be undertaken," the letter read. "And for maximum effectiveness States should be included in that process to the extent possible."
Republican attorneys general submitted a similar letter to Congress requesting hearings on China's coronavirus response. The letter, submitted to both congressional Democrats and Republicans, said China "appears to have intentionally misled the world over the last 6 months."
In a Thursday press call, Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Tex.) praised state attorneys general for acting quickly to hold China accountable, adding that they are often ahead of federal action on legal issues.
"State attorneys general often are the point of the spear," he said. "State AGs can be quick and nimble and aggressive and we've seen them drive legal challenges—some good, some bad—but be aggressively out there at the front of the charge."
The federal government is debating several measures against the regime, including backing out of the phase-one trade deal. Trump tweeted on Wednesday that "100 Trade Deals wouldn’t make up" for the lives lost in the pandemic. The Trump administration has also ordered a federal pension fund to halt investments into Chinese stocks, affecting billions of federal retirement dollars.


freebeacon--2020-05-15--WinRed Sets Fundraising Record

WinRed Sets Fundraising Record

WinRed , the GOP 's digital fundraising platform , raised nearly $ 60 million in April , funneling more than $ 500,000 toward a Republican victory in a California congressional race widely seen as a bellwether for November .
WinRed raised $ 59.8 million from more than 1.6 million small donations in April , the largest monthly haul in its 10-month history , according to Axios .
Those efforts helped steer $ 503,087 to former Navy fighter pilot Mike Garcia , who became the first California Republican to flip a seat from the Democrats since 1998 .
Garcia won the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ congresswoman Katie Hill by double digits , despite the fact that the suburban district has 30,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans .
Republicans launched WinRed in June 2019 to compete with ActBlue , an online fundraising platform that has funneled millions of small donations to Democratic campaigns since 2004 .
WinRed has since played a major role in fundraising , particularly in special elections .
In September 2019 , it raised more than $ 300,000 for Rep. Dan Bishop 's successful campaign in a closely watched North Carolina special election .
WinRed fundraising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , helping to close the gap between Republican and Democratic grassroots fundraising efforts .
An effort to unite the party behind the platform remains a work in progress .
Republicans who oppose the president , including his primary rivals Joe Walsh and Bill Weld and upstart camdidate Justin Amash continue to use a different platform called Anedot .
Donations made through WinRed played a major role in Tuesday 's special election win , with money that flowed through the platform contributing Garcia 's victory .
Well-known Republicans with a proven donor base—such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dan Crenshaw ( Texas ) —used the platform to raise $ 245,498 for Garcia , or nearly half of the WinRed donations to the California Republican .
By using WinRed , Garcia was able to tap into a national network of grassroots donors , a crucial source of out-of-state funding for a Republican candidate in deep-blue California .
Nearly 16,000 donors contributed $ 28.93 on average to Garcia 's campaign .
The majority of the money raised by WinRed for Garcia 's campaign came in the closing days of the race , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most recent campaign disclosure report showed that Garcia collected $ 163,796 in donations made through WinRed before April 22 .
That means that about $ 340,000—accounting for more than two in three WinRed donations in the race—was raised between April 22 and the May 12 election .
The influx of cash came as Democratic heavyweights , including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton , publicly campaigned against Garcia .
WinRed was able to quickly grow in prominence because the platform is backed by both the Republican National Committee and President Donald Trump , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level in recent months .
The group also boosted state-level candidates in April by partnering with the Republican State Leadership Committee , which enjoyed its most lucrative fundraising totals of the 2020 election cycle , raising more than $ 5.5 million in April .

WinRed, the GOP's digital fundraising platform, raised nearly $60 million in April, funneling more than $500,000 toward a Republican victory in a California congressional race widely seen as a bellwether for November.
WinRed raised $59.8 million from more than 1.6 million small donations in April, the largest monthly haul in its 10-month history, according to Axios. Those efforts helped steer $503,087 to former Navy fighter pilot Mike Garcia, who became the first California Republican to flip a seat from the Democrats since 1998. Garcia won the race to replace disgraced "throuple" congresswoman Katie Hill by double digits, despite the fact that the suburban district has 30,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans.
Republicans launched WinRed in June 2019 to compete with ActBlue, an online fundraising platform that has funneled millions of small donations to Democratic campaigns since 2004. WinRed has since played a major role in fundraising, particularly in special elections. In September 2019, it raised more than $300,000 for Rep. Dan Bishop's successful campaign in a closely watched North Carolina special election. WinRed fundraising figures have continued to grow since then, helping to close the gap between Republican and Democratic grassroots fundraising efforts.
An effort to unite the party behind the platform remains a work in progress. Republicans who oppose the president, including his primary rivals Joe Walsh and Bill Weld and upstart candidate Justin Amash, continue to use a different platform called Anedot, as does the anti-Trump Lincoln project.
Donations made through WinRed played a major role in Tuesday's special election win, with money that flowed through the platform contributing to Garcia's victory. Well-known Republicans with a proven donor base—such as Reps. Elise Stefanik (N.Y.) and Dan Crenshaw (Texas)—used the platform to raise $245,498 for Garcia, or nearly half of the WinRed donations to the California Republican.
By using WinRed, Garcia was able to tap into a national network of grassroots donors, a crucial source of out-of-state funding for a Republican candidate in deep-blue California. Nearly 16,000 donors contributed $28.93 on average to Garcia's campaign. The majority of the money raised by WinRed for Garcia's campaign came in the closing days of the race, according to Federal Election Commission data. The most recent campaign disclosure report showed that Garcia collected $163,796 in donations made through WinRed before April 22. That means that about $340,000—accounting for more than two in three WinRed donations in the race—was raised between April 22 and the May 12 election. The influx of cash came as Democratic heavyweights, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, publicly campaigned against Garcia.
WinRed was able to quickly grow in prominence because the platform is backed by both the Republican National Committee and President Donald Trump, but its reach has extended beyond the federal level in recent months. The group also boosted state-level candidates in April by partnering with the Republican State Leadership Committee, which enjoyed its most lucrative fundraising totals of the 2020 election cycle, raising more than $5.5 million in April.


freebeacon--2020-05-15--You Can Run But You Can’t Hide From the Media Mask Police

The national political journalists who cover the Trump administration are heroes , frequently risking their lives to tweet out photos of the president giving a press conference on CNN .
Jim Acosta is one of the most courageous reporters in the business .
That goes without saying .
Nevertheless , this strange tweet , which might otherwise be described as `` s—posting , '' is part of a disturbing trend among members of the national media .
Political reporters have become obsessed with narcing people out for not wearing so-called protective masks on their faces .
Whether the alleged offenders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House press corps has been aggressively shaming maskless individuals with the vigilance of an aggrieved Karen demanding to speak to the manager .
`` Why are some of you wearing a mask and some of you not wearing a mask ? ''
CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins asked on Friday during a press conference with Trump and other administration officials .
She was not wearing her mask when she asked the question .
CNN 's coronavirus coverage has been particularly focused on whether President Trump or Vice President Mike Pence is wearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Earlier this week , a CNN photographer apparently hid in some bushes near the White House to snap a shot of Pence wearing a mask .
The entire media establishment previously lost its mind when Pence did n't wear a mask during a recent visit to the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and again , several days later , when the VP delivered personal protective equipment to a health care center in Virginia .
`` No mask , no gloves , no distancing , '' wrote Mother Jones Washington bureau chief David Corn .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' ABC News chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl went so far as to publicly shame a fellow journalist , John Roberts of Fox News .
`` Almost everybody in the Rose Garden is wearing a mask—almost everybody , '' Karl snarked on Twitter , the popular social networking website .
The tweet includes a series of images of reporters and White House staff members wearing masks , and one of Roberts , who was n't wearing a mask—but wore one shortly thereafter .
Karl was just doing what comes naturally .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House press secretary with questions about Trump 's mask-wearing habits .
Sure , he 's just doing his job—seeking out the truth .
But these political reporters should probably take a deep breath , so to speak .
They might want to consider the possibility that they have run afoul of one of the principal rules for existing in a prosperous society : Do n't be a narc .

The national political journalists who cover the Trump administration are heroes, frequently risking their lives to tweet out photos of the president giving a press conference on CNN.
Jim Acosta is one of the most courageous reporters in the business. That goes without saying. Nevertheless, this strange tweet, which might otherwise be described as "s—posting," is part of a disturbing trend among members of the national media.
Political reporters have become obsessed with narcing people out for not wearing so-called protective masks on their faces. Whether the alleged offenders are politicians or even fellow journos, the White House press corps has been aggressively shaming maskless individuals with the vigilance of an aggrieved Karen demanding to speak to the manager.
"Why are some of you wearing a mask and some of you not wearing a mask?" CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins asked on Friday during a press conference with Trump and other administration officials. She was not wearing her mask when she asked the question.
CNN's coronavirus coverage has been particularly focused on whether President Trump or Vice President Mike Pence is wearing a mask at any given moment. Earlier this week, a CNN photographer apparently hid in some bushes near the White House to snap a shot of Pence wearing a mask.
.@JayMcMichaelCNN captures VP Mike Pence arriving on the White House grounds today wearing a mask. pic.twitter.com/8PK7Ep64PG — Maegan Vazquez (@maeganvaz) May 12, 2020
The entire media establishment previously lost its mind when Pence didn't wear a mask during a recent visit to the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and again, several days later, when the VP delivered personal protective equipment to a health care center in Virginia. "No mask, no gloves, no distancing," wrote Mother Jones Washington bureau chief David Corn. "This is a dumb photo-op."
ABC News chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl went so far as to publicly shame a fellow journalist, John Roberts of Fox News. "Almost everybody in the Rose Garden is wearing a mask—almost everybody," Karl snarked on Twitter, the popular social networking website. The tweet includes a series of images of reporters and White House staff members wearing masks, and one of Roberts, who wasn't wearing a mask—but wore one shortly thereafter.
Facts - I was quietly seated more than 6' away from the closest person (adhering to CDC social distancing guidelines)
-When the press conference began, I put mask on.
So - what, exactly is the basis for this petty effort at shaming???? https://t.co/ctW4knjkyD — John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) May 11, 2020
Karl was just doing what comes naturally. Last week, he was peppering the White House press secretary with questions about Trump's mask-wearing habits. Sure, he's just doing his job—seeking out the truth. But these political reporters should probably take a deep breath, so to speak. They might want to consider the possibility that they have run afoul of one of the principal rules for existing in a prosperous society: Don't be a narc.


freebeacon--2020-05-15--VP Hopeful Susan Rice Shows Off Her Foreign Policy Chops

Former Obama administration official Susan Rice said she would be thrilled to be Joe Biden 's running mate on the @ @ @ @ @ Free Beacon looks back at some of the highlights of her tenure as national security @ @ @ @ @ .

Former Obama administration official Susan Rice said she would be thrilled to be Joe Biden's running mate on the 2020 ticket.
The Washington Free Beacon looks back at some of the highlights of her tenure as national security adviser and United Nations ambassador.


freebeacon--2020-05-15--Congressional Republicans Clash With Trump Admin Over Lebanon Aid

New legislation in Congress would block longstanding American aid to Lebanon over concerns the Iranian-backed terror organization Hezbollah is benefiting from U.S. taxpayer dollars .
Aid to Lebanon has emerged as a flashpoint between the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress , many of whom have sought to end the funding due to Hezbollah 's near-total control of the Lebanese political system .
U.S. officials have warned for some time that American civil and military aid has fallen into the terror group 's hands .
The new legislation , introduced this week by Sen. Ted Cruz ( R. , Tex @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 100 million in yearly contributions from going to Lebanon so long as Hezbollah controls the country .
The Washington Free Beacon reported in late 2019 that some hardliners in the Trump administration were pushing for this aid to be frozen .
However , career officials at the State Department dismissed their objections , leading to millions being ultimately unfrozen .
U.S. aid to Lebanon has totaled several billion dollars since it began in the mid-2000s .
A spokeswoman for Cruz told the Free Beacon the senator rejects efforts by some in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flowing .
`` Sen. Cruz believes the United States should stop sending American taxpayer money to governments controlled by terrorists , '' said Cruz spokeswoman Lauren Aronson .
`` The Lebanese government is controlled by Hezbollah , an Iran-backed terrorist group directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans .
There are some officials across the U.S. government who think we should continue sending money to governments that are controlled by American-murdering terrorists .
Sen. Cruz disagrees with that . ''
Cruz 's bill—the Stop Sending American Taxpayer Money to Governments Controlled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assistance to Lebanon until the president certifies that Hezbollah is not a member of the government , does not exercise influence over it , and does not have power in any government ministries , according to a copy of the bill obtained by the Free Beacon .
The bill is likely to garner GOP support , though its passage is not assured given widespread Democratic support for U.S. foreign aid .
Frustrations with the administration 's stance have been mounting in Congress as Hezbollah amplifies its operations along Israel 's northern border in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iranian forces for terrorism operations .
A recent uptick in Israeli military strikes in these areas is a sign Hezbollah may be planning larger-scale attacks that could ignite a full-blown war .
Disputes over the aid spilled into the public earlier this year , when proponents of the Trump administration 's maximum pressure campaign on Iran used their positions at the White House National Security Council and State Department to place a freeze on this aid .
However , the funding was only halted temporarily , after career officials raised objections .
David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of state for political affairs , was reported to have told his Lebanese counterparts that aid would be halted if Hezbollah were deemed to be in control of the government .
At the same time , Cruz leveraged the nomination of Dorothy Shea , the State Department nominee to be the next ambassador to Lebanon , to obtain a written commitment that the United States will ensure that `` assistance does not benefit Hezbollah , '' according to documents viewed by the Free Beacon in January .
Despite these commitments , aid dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The State Department did not respond to a request for comment on Cruz 's legislation .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the Free Beacon in February that the administration still views U.S. aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces as necessary .
Critics say the United States has little ability to stop Hezbollah from intercepting this aid .
`` The president and our administration has to date continued to believe that underwriting the institution that is least impacted by Hezbollah , the Lebanese Armed Forces , ultimately provided a security opportunity to give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .

New legislation in Congress would block longstanding American aid to Lebanon over concerns the Iranian-backed terror organization Hezbollah is benefiting from U.S. taxpayer dollars.
Aid to Lebanon has emerged as a flashpoint between the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress, many of whom have sought to end the funding due to Hezbollah's near-total control of the Lebanese political system. U.S. officials have warned for some time that American civil and military aid has fallen into the terror group's hands.
The new legislation, introduced this week by Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Tex.), would stop more than $100 million in yearly contributions from going to Lebanon so long as Hezbollah controls the country. The Washington Free Beacon reported in late 2019 that some hardliners in the Trump administration were pushing for this aid to be frozen. However, career officials at the State Department dismissed their objections, leading to millions being ultimately unfrozen. U.S. aid to Lebanon has totaled several billion dollars since it began in the mid-2000s.
A spokeswoman for Cruz told the Free Beacon the senator rejects efforts by some in the Trump administration to ensure the money keeps flowing.
"Sen. Cruz believes the United States should stop sending American taxpayer money to governments controlled by terrorists," said Cruz spokeswoman Lauren Aronson. "The Lebanese government is controlled by Hezbollah, an Iran-backed terrorist group directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans. There are some officials across the U.S. government who think we should continue sending money to governments that are controlled by American-murdering terrorists. Sen. Cruz disagrees with that."
Cruz's bill—the Stop Sending American Taxpayer Money to Governments Controlled by Terrorists Act of 2020—would prohibit any assistance to Lebanon until the president certifies that Hezbollah is not a member of the government, does not exercise influence over it, and does not have power in any government ministries, according to a copy of the bill obtained by the Free Beacon.
The bill is likely to garner GOP support, though its passage is not assured given widespread Democratic support for U.S. foreign aid.
Frustrations with the administration's stance have been mounting in Congress as Hezbollah amplifies its operations along Israel's northern border in Syrian territory that has been used by Iranian forces for terrorism operations. A recent uptick in Israeli military strikes in these areas is a sign Hezbollah may be planning larger-scale attacks that could ignite a full-blown war.
Disputes over the aid spilled into the public earlier this year, when proponents of the Trump administration's maximum pressure campaign on Iran used their positions at the White House National Security Council and State Department to place a freeze on this aid. However, the funding was only halted temporarily, after career officials raised objections.
David Hale, the State Department's undersecretary of state for political affairs, was reported to have told his Lebanese counterparts that aid would be halted if Hezbollah were deemed to be in control of the government.
At the same time, Cruz leveraged the nomination of Dorothy Shea, the State Department nominee to be the next ambassador to Lebanon, to obtain a written commitment that the United States will ensure that "assistance does not benefit Hezbollah," according to documents viewed by the Free Beacon in January.
Despite these commitments, aid dollars have continued to flow to Lebanon.
The State Department did not respond to a request for comment on Cruz's legislation.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the Free Beacon in February that the administration still views U.S. aid to the Lebanese Armed Forces as necessary. Critics say the United States has little ability to stop Hezbollah from intercepting this aid.
"The president and our administration has to date continued to believe that underwriting the institution that is least impacted by Hezbollah, the Lebanese Armed Forces, ultimately provided a security opportunity to give the next Lebanese government," Pompeo said.


freebeacon--2020-05-15--FACT CHECK: Pro-Biden Group Falsely Claims COVID-19 Endorsed Donald Trump

The mainstream media are obsessed with `` fact-checking '' President Donald J. Trump .
But they are n't quite as interested in holding the president 's Democratic opponents accountable .
Allies of former vice president Joe Biden have in recent days been particularly combative toward the truth and the hardworking professional journalists who are constantly seeking it out .
The Biden campaign 's ( male ) rapid response director , for example , attacked an award-winning ( female ) journalist—and the First Amendment that protects her freedom to do her job—simply because the journalist reported facts .
Biden allies continued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when the Biden War Room account tweeted out an altered and misleading image suggesting COVID-19 , the infectious disease caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2 , had officially endorsed President Trump for reelection in 2020 .
CLAIM : `` Nothing would make COVID-19 happier than a vote for Trump . ''
VERDICT : False .
Most scientific experts agree that infectious diseases like COVID-19 are incapable of experiencing emotions such as happiness .
Furthermore , many experts in the field of science say there just is n't enough evidence to suggest that the disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political system .
VERDICT : False .
Scientific experts have thus far been unable to communicate with COVID-19 , much less determine its preferred candidate in the upcoming presidential election .
Furthermore , because the disease originated in a foreign country ( China ) , any efforts to influence the results of an American election would be considered illegal under U.S. law .
CLAIM : `` Provided a sanctuary country for the virus to spread . ''
VERDICT : False .
There 's no evidence to suggest President Trump has legally designated the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' for COVID-19 .
In fact , legal experts are n't even sure that 's a thing .
New York City mayor Bill de Blasio , on the other hand , was extremely helpful in letting the virus spread throughout the country .
In any event , COVID-19 is not a virus .
It 's an infectious disease , idiot .

The mainstream media are obsessed with "fact-checking" President Donald J. Trump. But they aren't quite as interested in holding the president's Democratic opponents accountable.
Allies of former vice president Joe Biden have in recent days been particularly combative toward the truth and the hardworking professional journalists who are constantly seeking it out. The Biden campaign's (male) rapid response director, for example, attacked an award-winning (female) journalist—and the First Amendment that protects her freedom to do her job—simply because the journalist reported facts.
Biden allies continued their assault on the truth late Thursday when the Biden War Room account tweeted out an altered and misleading image suggesting COVID-19, the infectious disease caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2, had officially endorsed President Trump for reelection in 2020.
https://twitter.com/BidenWarRoom/status/1261126336996872193
FACT CHECK...
CLAIM: "Nothing would make COVID-19 happier than a vote for Trump."
VERDICT: False. Most scientific experts agree that infectious diseases like COVID-19 are incapable of experiencing emotions such as happiness. Furthermore, many experts in the field of science say there just isn't enough evidence to suggest that the disease possesses an adequate understanding of the American political system.
CLAIM: "COVID-19 endorses Trump for a second term."
VERDICT: False. Scientific experts have thus far been unable to communicate with COVID-19, much less determine its preferred candidate in the upcoming presidential election. Furthermore, because the disease originated in a foreign country (China), any efforts to influence the results of an American election would be considered illegal under U.S. law.
CLAIM: "Provided a sanctuary country for the virus to spread."
VERDICT: False. There's no evidence to suggest President Trump has legally designated the United States as a "sanctuary country" for COVID-19. In fact, legal experts aren't even sure that's a thing. New York City mayor Bill de Blasio, on the other hand, was extremely helpful in letting the virus spread throughout the country. In any event, COVID-19 is not a virus. It's an infectious disease, idiot.
FINAL VERDICT: FALSE, DANGEROUS, ABHORRENT


freebeacon--2020-05-15--U.S. Moves to Cut Huawei Off From Global Chip Suppliers

WASHINGTON ( Reuters ) – The Trump administration on Friday moved to block shipments of semiconductors to Huawei Technologies from global chipmakers , in an action ramping up tensions with China .
The U.S. Commerce Department said it was amending an export rule to `` strategically target Huawei ’ s acquisition of semiconductors that are the direct product of certain U.S. software and technology . ''
The reaction from China was swift with a report saying it was ready to put U.S. companies on an `` unreliable entity list , '' as part of countermeasures in response to the new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Global Times reported on Friday .
The measures include launching investigations and imposing restrictions on U.S. companies such as Apple Inc ( AAPL.O ) , Cisco Systems Inc ( CSCO.O ) , Qualcomm Inc ( QCOM.O ) as well as suspending purchase of Boeing Co ( BA.N ) airplanes , the report said here citing a source .
Reuters first reported the news ahead of the Commence Department ’ s release .
The department said its `` announcement cuts off Huawei ’ s efforts to undermine U.S. export controls . ''
The rule @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world ’ s no .
2 smartphone maker , as well as to Taiwan ’ s Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd , a major producer of chips for Huawei ’ s HiSilicon unit as well as mobile phone rivals Apple and Qualcomm .
TMSC announced late Thursday it would build a $ 12 billion chip factory in Arizona .
TSMC said Friday it is `` working with outside counsels to conduct legal analysis and ensure a comprehensive examination and interpretation of these rules .
We expect to have the assessment concluded before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , adding the `` semiconductor industry supply chain is extremely complex , and is served by a broad collection of international suppliers .
Huawei , which needs semiconductors for its widely used smartphones and telecoms equipment , is at the heart of a battle for global technological dominance between the United States and China .
Huawei , which has warned that the Chinese government would retaliate if the rule went into effect , did not immediately comment on Friday .
U.S. stock market futures turned negative on the Reuters report .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by and watch Huawei be slaughtered on the chopping board , '' Huawei Chairman Eric Xu told reporters on March 31 .
The United States is trying to convince allies to exclude Huawei gear from next generation 5G networks on grounds its equipment could be used by China for spying .
Huawei has repeatedly denied the claim .
Huawei has continued to use U.S. software and technology to design semiconductors , the Commerce Department said , despite being placed on a U.S. economic blacklist in May 2019 .
Under the rule change , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be required to obtain a U.S. license before supplying certain chips to Huawei , or an affiliate like HiSilicon .
The rule targets chips designed or custom-made for Huawei .
In order for Huawei to continue to receive some chipsets or use some semiconductor designs tied to certain U.S. software and technology , it would need to receive licenses from the Commerce Department .
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told Fox Business `` there has been a very highly technical loophole through which Huawei has been in able , in effect , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Ross called the rule change a `` highly tailored thing to try to correct that loophole . ''
Ross said in a written statement Huawei had `` stepped-up efforts to undermine these national security-based restrictions . ''
The Commerce Department said the rule will allow wafers already in production to be shipped to Huawei as long as the shipments are complete within 120 days from Friday .
Chipsets would need to be in production by Friday or they would be ineligible under the rule .
The United States placed Huawei and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national security concerns .
That forced some U.S. and foreign companies to seek special licenses from the Commerce Department to sell to it , but China hawks in the U.S. government have been frustrated by the vast number of supply chains beyond their reach .
Separately , the Commerce Department extended a temporary license that was set to expire Friday to allow U.S. companies , many of which operate wireless networks in rural America , to continue doing business with Huawei through Aug. 13 .
It warned it expected this would be the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration was considering changes to the Foreign Direct Product Rule , which subjects some foreign-made goods based on U.S. technology or software to U.S. regulations , in November .
Most chip manufacturers rely on equipment produced by U.S. companies like KLA ( KLAC.O ) , Lam Research ( LRCX.O ) and Applied Materials ( AMAT.O ) , according to a report last year from China ’ s Everbright Securities .
The Trump administration has taken a series of steps aimed at Chinese telecom firms in recent weeks .
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process of shutting down the U.S. operations of three state-controlled Chinese telecommunications companies , citing national security risks .
The FCC also in April approved Alphabet Inc unit Google ’ s ( GOOGL.O ) request to use part of an 8,000-mile undersea telecommunications cable between the United States and Taiwan , but not Hong Kong , after U.S. agencies raised national security concerns .
This week , President Donald Trump extended for another year a May 2019 executive order barring U.S. companies from using telecommunications equipment made by companies deemed to pose a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aimed at Huawei and peer ZTE Corp .

By David Shepardson and Karen Freifeld
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration on Friday moved to block shipments of semiconductors to Huawei Technologies from global chipmakers, in an action ramping up tensions with China.
The U.S. Commerce Department said it was amending an export rule to "strategically target Huawei’s acquisition of semiconductors that are the direct product of certain U.S. software and technology."
The reaction from China was swift with a report saying it was ready to put U.S. companies on an "unreliable entity list," as part of countermeasures in response to the new limits on Huawei, China’s Global Times reported on Friday.
The measures include launching investigations and imposing restrictions on U.S. companies such as Apple Inc (AAPL.O), Cisco Systems Inc (CSCO.O), Qualcomm Inc (QCOM.O) as well as suspending purchase of Boeing Co (BA.N) airplanes, the report said here citing a source.
Reuters first reported the news ahead of the Commence Department’s release. The department said its "announcement cuts off Huawei’s efforts to undermine U.S. export controls."
The rule change is a blow to Huawei, the world’s no. 2 smartphone maker, as well as to Taiwan’s Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd, a major producer of chips for Huawei’s HiSilicon unit as well as mobile phone rivals Apple and Qualcomm. TMSC announced late Thursday it would build a $12 billion chip factory in Arizona.
TSMC said Friday it is "working with outside counsels to conduct legal analysis and ensure a comprehensive examination and interpretation of these rules. We expect to have the assessment concluded before the effective date," the company said, adding the "semiconductor industry supply chain is extremely complex, and is served by a broad collection of international suppliers.
Huawei, which needs semiconductors for its widely used smartphones and telecoms equipment, is at the heart of a battle for global technological dominance between the United States and China.
Huawei, which has warned that the Chinese government would retaliate if the rule went into effect, did not immediately comment on Friday. U.S. stock market futures turned negative on the Reuters report.
"The Chinese government will not just stand by and watch Huawei be slaughtered on the chopping board," Huawei Chairman Eric Xu told reporters on March 31.
The United States is trying to convince allies to exclude Huawei gear from next generation 5G networks on grounds its equipment could be used by China for spying. Huawei has repeatedly denied the claim.
Huawei has continued to use U.S. software and technology to design semiconductors, the Commerce Department said, despite being placed on a U.S. economic blacklist in May 2019.
Under the rule change, foreign companies that use U.S. chipmaking equipment will be required to obtain a U.S. license before supplying certain chips to Huawei, or an affiliate like HiSilicon. The rule targets chips designed or custom-made for Huawei.
In order for Huawei to continue to receive some chipsets or use some semiconductor designs tied to certain U.S. software and technology, it would need to receive licenses from the Commerce Department.
NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told Fox Business "there has been a very highly technical loophole through which Huawei has been in able, in effect, to use U.S. technology with foreign fab producers." Ross called the rule change a "highly tailored thing to try to correct that loophole."
Ross said in a written statement Huawei had "stepped-up efforts to undermine these national security-based restrictions."
The Commerce Department said the rule will allow wafers already in production to be shipped to Huawei as long as the shipments are complete within 120 days from Friday. Chipsets would need to be in production by Friday or they would be ineligible under the rule.
The United States placed Huawei and 114 affiliates on its economic blacklist citing national security concerns. That forced some U.S. and foreign companies to seek special licenses from the Commerce Department to sell to it, but China hawks in the U.S. government have been frustrated by the vast number of supply chains beyond their reach.
Separately, the Commerce Department extended a temporary license that was set to expire Friday to allow U.S. companies, many of which operate wireless networks in rural America, to continue doing business with Huawei through Aug. 13. It warned it expected this would be the final extension.
Reuters first reported the administration was considering changes to the Foreign Direct Product Rule, which subjects some foreign-made goods based on U.S. technology or software to U.S. regulations, in November.
Most chip manufacturers rely on equipment produced by U.S. companies like KLA (KLAC.O), Lam Research (LRCX.O) and Applied Materials (AMAT.O), according to a report last year from China’s Everbright Securities.
The Trump administration has taken a series of steps aimed at Chinese telecom firms in recent weeks.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) last month began the process of shutting down the U.S. operations of three state-controlled Chinese telecommunications companies, citing national security risks. The FCC also in April approved Alphabet Inc unit Google’s (GOOGL.O) request to use part of an 8,000-mile undersea telecommunications cable between the United States and Taiwan, but not Hong Kong, after U.S. agencies raised national security concerns.
This week, President Donald Trump extended for another year a May 2019 executive order barring U.S. companies from using telecommunications equipment made by companies deemed to pose a national security risk, a move seen aimed at Huawei and peer ZTE Corp.