hotair--2020-07-22--Video: New York City shuts down its "occupied" zone

While it hasn ’ t gained nearly as much media attention as the criminal occupation force in Portland , Oregon , New York City has had its own “ CHOP ” zone in place since June 21st .
Originally known as “ Occupy City Hall ” by organizers , the encampment was later renamed Abolition Park .
In a rather bold move , the occupiers set up camp almost literally on the Mayor ’ s doorstep in City Hall Park .
Despite the fact that the site quickly attracted all of the filth and sporadic crime we ’ ve grown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bill de Blasio spent the past month defending the occupiers and insisting that everyone needed to listen to their very important message .
But as of early this morning , it appears that even the Mayor ’ s patience had run out .
A massive force of NYPD officers arrived in riot gear and formed a thick blue wall to clear the area .
They were followed by sanitation trucks , with workers loading up all the detritus and debris from the encampment for a trip to the landfill .
And since this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hours of the morning , the protesters and rioters didn ’ t have much warning or time to mount any sort of resistance .
By the time the sun came up , Abolition Park was no more .
( Gothamist ) Hundreds of NYPD officers swept through the encampment outside City Hall in Lower Manhattan just before 4 a.m. on Wednesday , clearing out the month-long occupation without warning .
Lines of police were seen approaching the camp at around 3:45 a.m. , ripping down tents and tarps used by protesters and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ men were taken into custody with charges pending , according to an NYPD spokesperson .
Videos shows police officers with riot shields and tactical gear forming a line on the east side of the encampment , as another group of cops tosses the camp ’ s physical infrastructure into the back of a Department of Sanitation truck .
Here ’ s some of the video from Gothamist showing the NYPD moving in like a line of human bulldozers .
The phrase “ resistance if futile ” comes to mind .
One of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outlet picked up more of the action after the sun came up .
So what prompted the Mayor ’ s sudden change of heart ?
He obviously hasn ’ t always taken such a rough and tumble approach to rioters in the streets of the Big Apple .
In fact , his historical approach to such subjects predates his tenure as Mayor .
The Gothamist reminds us of how he reacted when Mayor Michael Bloomberg ordered the NYPD to clear the Occupy Wall Street protesters out of Zuccotti Park in 2011 .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg ’ s actions “ needlessly provocative and legally questionable , ” particularly since the park had been cleared “ in the dead of night.
” I suppose things look a little different when the shoe is on the other foot and you ’ re the one having to make the call , eh ?
I ’ m hesitant to give de Blasio too big of a pat on the back for taking this long overdue action .
You rarely see a leopard changing its spots this quickly .
But at least for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appears to have been restored and the NYPD was allowed to deploy their full power to take back control of the streets .
The problem is that this is only one single night and one morning .
The mob isn ’ t just going to go away after a brief bit of pushback after being allowed to run rampant for so long .
If things return to the previous status quo over the next 24 to 48 hours , this will wind up being a single headline for the Mayor and then we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s been consuming New York City for months .
But I do have to wonder if the prolonged , radical increase in shootings and murders were finally too much for Bill de Blasio to ignore any longer .
Perhaps he ’ s decided that Giuliani and Bloomberg weren ’ t so crazy after all .
We can only hope .

While it hasn’t gained nearly as much media attention as the criminal occupation force in Portland, Oregon, New York City has had its own “CHOP” zone in place since June 21st. Originally known as “Occupy City Hall” by organizers, the encampment was later renamed Abolition Park. In a rather bold move, the occupiers set up camp almost literally on the Mayor’s doorstep in City Hall Park. Despite the fact that the site quickly attracted all of the filth and sporadic crime we’ve grown used to in these encampments, Mayor Bill de Blasio spent the past month defending the occupiers and insisting that everyone needed to listen to their very important message.
But as of early this morning, it appears that even the Mayor’s patience had run out. A massive force of NYPD officers arrived in riot gear and formed a thick blue wall to clear the area. They were followed by sanitation trucks, with workers loading up all the detritus and debris from the encampment for a trip to the landfill. And since this was all taking place in the wee hours of the morning, the protesters and rioters didn’t have much warning or time to mount any sort of resistance. By the time the sun came up, Abolition Park was no more. (Gothamist)
Hundreds of NYPD officers swept through the encampment outside City Hall in Lower Manhattan just before 4 a.m. on Wednesday, clearing out the month-long occupation without warning. Lines of police were seen approaching the camp at around 3:45 a.m., ripping down tents and tarps used by protesters and the park’s homeless population. Seven men were taken into custody with charges pending, according to an NYPD spokesperson. Videos shows police officers with riot shields and tactical gear forming a line on the east side of the encampment, as another group of cops tosses the camp’s physical infrastructure into the back of a Department of Sanitation truck.
Here’s some of the video from Gothamist showing the NYPD moving in like a line of human bulldozers. The phrase “resistance if futile” comes to mind.
One of the reporters from the New York CBS Radio outlet picked up more of the action after the sun came up.
Tents, chairs, signs all getting thrown into DSNY trucks pic.twitter.com/hWYY0SLSf6 — Steve Burns (@StvBurns) July 22, 2020
So what prompted the Mayor’s sudden change of heart? He obviously hasn’t always taken such a rough and tumble approach to rioters in the streets of the Big Apple. In fact, his historical approach to such subjects predates his tenure as Mayor. The Gothamist reminds us of how he reacted when Mayor Michael Bloomberg ordered the NYPD to clear the Occupy Wall Street protesters out of Zuccotti Park in 2011. At that time he released a statement calling Bloomberg’s actions “needlessly provocative and legally questionable,” particularly since the park had been cleared “in the dead of night.”
I suppose things look a little different when the shoe is on the other foot and you’re the one having to make the call, eh? I’m hesitant to give de Blasio too big of a pat on the back for taking this long overdue action. You rarely see a leopard changing its spots this quickly. But at least for the moment, some measure of order appears to have been restored and the NYPD was allowed to deploy their full power to take back control of the streets.
The problem is that this is only one single night and one morning. The mob isn’t just going to go away after a brief bit of pushback after being allowed to run rampant for so long. If things return to the previous status quo over the next 24 to 48 hours, this will wind up being a single headline for the Mayor and then we’ll go back to the mayhem that’s been consuming New York City for months. But I do have to wonder if the prolonged, radical increase in shootings and murders were finally too much for Bill de Blasio to ignore any longer. Perhaps he’s decided that Giuliani and Bloomberg weren’t so crazy after all. We can only hope.


hotair--2020-07-22--Escalation: US orders China to close its Houston consulate

At least they had one last Texas barbecue at China ’ s consulate in Houston .
Late last night , a local news station — ironically , KPRC — noticed a bonfire in the back of the facility .
Workers at the consulate had already begun destroying sensitive material after the US ordered the People ’ s Republic of China to shut down the facility in 72 hours : The United States ordered China to close its diplomatic consulate in Houston within 72 hours , dealing another blow to the rapidly deteriorating relations between the two countries .
China promptly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal .
The State Department said the closure was made in response to repeated Chinese violations of American sovereignty , including “ massive illegal spying and influence operations.
” … The State Department spokeswoman , Morgan Ortagus , said the order to close the consulate showed that the United States would not tolerate China ’ s “ egregious behavior.
” “ The People ’ s Republic of China has engaged for years in massive illegal spying and influence operations throughout the United States against U.S. government officials and American citizens , ” Ms. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tinged statement .
The administration has escalated its fight against China , but a consulate closure puts this on another level .
Beijing responded angrily to the order and pledged to “ resolutely ” respond in kind : Beijing vowed to retaliate , calling the order “ an unprecedented escalation ” in a broader conflict between the world ’ s two biggest economies , which now encompasses trade and technology , freedom of the press and religion , and the novel coronavirus and the race for a vaccine .
“ The U.S. has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in China .
So if the U.S. is bent on going down this wrong path , we will resolutely respond , ” Wang Wenbin , a Foreign Ministry spokesman , told reporters Wednesday .
What prompted this escalation ?
The Department of Justice indicted two alleged hackers working for China yesterday in efforts to penetrate COVID-19 research , as well as wire fraud and conspiracy charges .
The indictment alleges that the PRC ’ s intelligence community was linked to the efforts : The indictment includes trade secret theft and wire fraud conspiracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at an electrical engineering college who prosecutors say worked together for more than a decade targeting high-tech companies in more than 10 countries .
The hackers , identified as Li Xiaoyu and Dong Jiazhi , stole information not only for their personal profit but also research and technology that they knew would be of value to the Chinese government , prosecutors say .
In some instances , the indictment says , they provided an officer for a Chinese intelligence service with whom they worked email accounts and passwords belonging to clergymen , dissidents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ targeted .
The officer gave help of his own , providing malicious software after one of the hackers struggled to compromise the mail server of a Burmese human rights group .
It ’ s the first specific case brought to back up the accusations , but don ’ t buy ringside seats for a trial .
The two hackers are in China , not the US , and it ’ s not likely they will ever be brought to trial .
The indictment does limit their ability to travel , however , at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the US : The two defendants are not in custody , and federal officials conceded Tuesday that they were not likely to step foot in an American courtroom .
But the indictment carries important symbolic and deterrence value for the Justice Department , which decided that publicly calling out the behavior was more worthwhile than waiting for the unlikely scenario in which the defendants would travel to the U.S. and risk arrest .
Clearly , the Trump administration doesn ’ t see the indictment as enough of a disincentive for the bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ message to China that the US will not sit quietly while hostile intelligence services attempt to plunder US assets and invade our computer systems .
Well , not any more , anyway ; China has spent the last decade-plus plundering US government systems such as OPM and economic targets like Equifax without any significant public penalty .
The State Department ’ s action is long overdue .
It ’ s timely in another way too , though : In the last two weeks , his administration has used a variety of methods — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numerous op-eds , high-profile speeches , overseas trips — to suddenly hit Beijing over long-standing issues the president often skirted in the past .
“ It ’ s only gotten worse for China in polls , ” said John McLaughlin , a Trump pollster .
“ People always saw China as an economic adversary that stole our jobs , but now they see China as a security threat.
” Trump and his administration have long bludgeoned China over specific issues .
The reality TV star relentlessly talked about the country ’ s trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his Cabinet has regularly warned that the country is trying to force technology companies to hand over data .
But the president has always balanced these admonitions with ample praise of Xi himself , at times largely side-stepping human rights concerns , such as Beijing ’ s infringement on Hong Kong ’ s separate legal system and its detention of Uighur Muslims , an ethnic minority group .
In recent weeks , however , the tone has changed .
And in the last two weeks , the speed and variety of punishments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ driven in part by politics ?
Probably , but it might be better to say that politics drove Trump ’ s earlier reluctance to stick with get-tough policies .
The trade war on China hurt economic growth , although we did so well in other ways that it was easy to overlook .
After COVID-19 and the shutdowns , though , economic war with China became much easier , both economically and politically .
China ’ s continuing espionage — industrial and otherwise — is too significant and blatant now to ignore .

At least they had one last Texas barbecue at China’s consulate in Houston. Late last night, a local news station — ironically, KPRC — noticed a bonfire in the back of the facility. Workers at the consulate had already begun destroying sensitive material after the US ordered the People’s Republic of China to shut down the facility in 72 hours:
A video captured by our crew outside the Consulate General of China in Houston shows people hosing down what appear to be flaming open containers in the courtyard of the property.
DETAILS: https://t.co/2cOeKoap96 pic.twitter.com/ToQitHjy2T — KPRC2Tulsi (@KPRC2Tulsi) July 22, 2020
The United States ordered China to close its diplomatic consulate in Houston within 72 hours, dealing another blow to the rapidly deteriorating relations between the two countries. China promptly vowed to retaliate, calling the move illegal. The State Department said the closure was made in response to repeated Chinese violations of American sovereignty, including “massive illegal spying and influence operations.” … The State Department spokeswoman, Morgan Ortagus, said the order to close the consulate showed that the United States would not tolerate China’s “egregious behavior.” “The People’s Republic of China has engaged for years in massive illegal spying and influence operations throughout the United States against U.S. government officials and American citizens,” Ms. Ortagus said in a pointed and politically tinged statement.
The administration has escalated its fight against China, but a consulate closure puts this on another level. Beijing responded angrily to the order and pledged to “resolutely” respond in kind:
Beijing vowed to retaliate, calling the order “an unprecedented escalation” in a broader conflict between the world’s two biggest economies, which now encompasses trade and technology, freedom of the press and religion, and the novel coronavirus and the race for a vaccine. “The U.S. has far more diplomatic missions and staff working in China. So if the U.S. is bent on going down this wrong path, we will resolutely respond,” Wang Wenbin, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, told reporters Wednesday.
What prompted this escalation? The Department of Justice indicted two alleged hackers working for China yesterday in efforts to penetrate COVID-19 research, as well as wire fraud and conspiracy charges. The indictment alleges that the PRC’s intelligence community was linked to the efforts:
The indictment includes trade secret theft and wire fraud conspiracy charges against the hackers, former classmates at an electrical engineering college who prosecutors say worked together for more than a decade targeting high-tech companies in more than 10 countries. The hackers, identified as Li Xiaoyu and Dong Jiazhi, stole information not only for their personal profit but also research and technology that they knew would be of value to the Chinese government, prosecutors say. In some instances, the indictment says, they provided an officer for a Chinese intelligence service with whom they worked email accounts and passwords belonging to clergymen, dissidents and pro-democracy activists who could then be targeted. The officer gave help of his own, providing malicious software after one of the hackers struggled to compromise the mail server of a Burmese human rights group.
It’s the first specific case brought to back up the accusations, but don’t buy ringside seats for a trial. The two hackers are in China, not the US, and it’s not likely they will ever be brought to trial. The indictment does limit their ability to travel, however, at least to any countries with extradition agreements with the US:
The two defendants are not in custody, and federal officials conceded Tuesday that they were not likely to step foot in an American courtroom. But the indictment carries important symbolic and deterrence value for the Justice Department, which decided that publicly calling out the behavior was more worthwhile than waiting for the unlikely scenario in which the defendants would travel to the U.S. and risk arrest.
Clearly, the Trump administration doesn’t see the indictment as enough of a disincentive for the bad behavior. They want to send a message to China that the US will not sit quietly while hostile intelligence services attempt to plunder US assets and invade our computer systems. Well, not any more, anyway; China has spent the last decade-plus plundering US government systems such as OPM and economic targets like Equifax without any significant public penalty. The State Department’s action is long overdue.
It’s timely in another way too, though:
In the last two weeks, his administration has used a variety of methods — press conferences, new legal judgments, numerous op-eds, high-profile speeches, overseas trips — to suddenly hit Beijing over long-standing issues the president often skirted in the past. “It’s only gotten worse for China in polls,” said John McLaughlin, a Trump pollster. “People always saw China as an economic adversary that stole our jobs, but now they see China as a security threat.” Trump and his administration have long bludgeoned China over specific issues. The reality TV star relentlessly talked about the country’s trade practices on the campaign trail in 2016 and his Cabinet has regularly warned that the country is trying to force technology companies to hand over data. But the president has always balanced these admonitions with ample praise of Xi himself, at times largely side-stepping human rights concerns, such as Beijing’s infringement on Hong Kong’s separate legal system and its detention of Uighur Muslims, an ethnic minority group. In recent weeks, however, the tone has changed. And in the last two weeks, the speed and variety of punishments targeting China has accelerated.
Is this driven in part by politics? Probably, but it might be better to say that politics drove Trump’s earlier reluctance to stick with get-tough policies. The trade war on China hurt economic growth, although we did so well in other ways that it was easy to overlook. After COVID-19 and the shutdowns, though, economic war with China became much easier, both economically and politically. China’s continuing espionage — industrial and otherwise — is too significant and blatant now to ignore.


hotair--2020-07-22--Should we just let Portland burn?

Should we just let Portland burn?

Unless you ’ re one of the people who get virtually all of their news by watching CNN or MSNBC , you ’ re probably aware that the situation in Portland , Oregon has gone from bad to worse to total crapstorm over the past month or two .
The police have lost control of various sections of the city , sometimes for weeks at a stretch .
The “ peaceful protests ” that our MSM talking heads love to go on about regularly spin-off violent mobs who smash in storefronts , loot everything that ’ s not nailed down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So the question before us today is whether or not we should allow this demented social experiment to run its full course and just see what happens .
That ’ s the proposal being put forth this week by Erick Erickson in a column with the rather unsubtle title of “ Let Portland Burn.
” The President has sent in federal troops to guard the federal buildings , but Erickson notes that this is the extent of his power .
The federal government doesn ’ t technically have any policing power .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kate Brown will not step in to rescue the law-abiding residents and business owners of Portland , there isn ’ t much more that can be done .
So with that in mind , he suggests that perhaps we should just let the city burn and allow the residents to sort out the debris ( both physical and political ) when it ’ s all over .
On top of that , any attempt at federal intervention offers an excuse for the people of Portland to shift the blame and escape the consequences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] he people of Portland have a history of outlandish displays of protest and behavior , including nudity .
The place is so bizarre there ’ s been an entire television show parodying Portland .
By sending federal troops to Portland , OR , the President and federal government are allowing Portland not just escape from their own democratic choices , but also allowing them a scapegoat to take the blame .
Portland can blame President Trump instead of the residents of the city .
They can blame Washington instead of their mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allow people to live with their choices and make it easy for those who want to escape to actually move .
If we allow Portland to fester as it wants , it will either figure out it must change , or live with its consequences .
Erickson ’ s proposal , while a bit blunter , is along the same lines as a conclusion I reached a while ago and have written about here .
And it applies not only to Portland , but New York City , Philadelphia , Baltimore , Chicago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major cities .
Whether we ’ re seeing destruction stemming from civil unrest of just gang violence on an industrial scale , such lawlessness can be beaten back and kept under control .
It ’ s been done before , with the startling transformation New York City underwent from the early 90s to the late 2000s being one of the best examples .
It just requires leadership with the spine required to do what must be done and a populace willing to support them .
Sadly , neither of those factors is in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today and those who would seek to dismantle our lawful society have taken notice .
And they ’ ve taken advantage .
But the people of these cities continue to elect the same group of Democratic hand-wringers year after year no matter how badly conditions on the ground deteriorate .
So does this mean that the rest of the nation and the federal government are out of options besides just waiting for the cities to implode ?
There ’ s clearly an argument to be made in favor of such a conclusion , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to contemplate .
As Erickson suggests , there must surely come a point where the remaining sane people in Portland and these other cities will look around at the shootings , the rapes , the arson and the looting and come to the conclusion that something isn ’ t working .
This relies on the old adage which holds that a liberal is just a conservative who hasn ’ t been mugged yet .
We ’ ve already covered stories here about the scores of liberals in California who supported insufferable gun control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( shocked , I say ! )
to discover how hard it was to quickly purchase a firearm when the riots approached their neighborhoods .
Perhaps something similar will happen on a larger scale in Portland ?
It ’ s too soon to say .
In the meantime , the federal government isn ’ t throwing in the towel entirely .
At least not yet .
Ted Cruz just introduced a new bill in the Senate that would hold Mayors and Governors accountable for not enforcing the rule of law and maintaining order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Wall Street Journal , subscription required ) This is not the American way .
Local leaders who allow rioters to destroy lives and businesses need to be held accountable .
That ’ s why I ’ m introducing the Restitution for Economic losses Caused by Leaders who Allow Insurrection and Mayhem Act—Reclaim for short .
The bill would hold state and local officials liable when they abdicate their legal duty to protect the public in cases where death , serious bodily harm or significant property damage have occurred .
Specifically , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , meaning a plaintiff could be awarded triple the amount of the damage done to his property .
It would also establish a federal cause of action , which would empower victims of violence in autonomous zones to take legal action against senior local or state lawmakers who have tolerated or encouraged radicals to take over the area .
Finally , when politicians refuse to defend innocent Americans , this bill would remove or limit federal funding under grant programs that supply important law-enforcement and crime-prevention programs for local governments .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t really impose any direct , individual punishment on the elected officials allowing this mayhem to fester .
When victims of this violence sue the city or the state , it ’ s the taxpayers who foot the bill for the increased damage settlements , not the Mayor or the Governor .
And cutting off grant funds that go to law enforcement just as the police are already being held back by their state or municipal elected executives only makes it harder for them to literally and figuratively put out the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what Senator Cruz is angling for in the long run .
Could he be echoing Erick Erickson in his own way and simply saying “ let it burn ?
”

Unless you’re one of the people who get virtually all of their news by watching CNN or MSNBC, you’re probably aware that the situation in Portland, Oregon has gone from bad to worse to total crapstorm over the past month or two. The police have lost control of various sections of the city, sometimes for weeks at a stretch. The “peaceful protests” that our MSM talking heads love to go on about regularly spin-off violent mobs who smash in storefronts, loot everything that’s not nailed down, and set fire to the rest. So the question before us today is whether or not we should allow this demented social experiment to run its full course and just see what happens.
That’s the proposal being put forth this week by Erick Erickson in a column with the rather unsubtle title of “Let Portland Burn.” The President has sent in federal troops to guard the federal buildings, but Erickson notes that this is the extent of his power. The federal government doesn’t technically have any policing power. And if Mayor Ted Wheeler and Governor Kate Brown will not step in to rescue the law-abiding residents and business owners of Portland, there isn’t much more that can be done. So with that in mind, he suggests that perhaps we should just let the city burn and allow the residents to sort out the debris (both physical and political) when it’s all over. On top of that, any attempt at federal intervention offers an excuse for the people of Portland to shift the blame and escape the consequences of their own decisions.
[T]he people of Portland have a history of outlandish displays of protest and behavior, including nudity. The place is so bizarre there’s been an entire television show parodying Portland. By sending federal troops to Portland, OR, the President and federal government are allowing Portland not just escape from their own democratic choices, but also allowing them a scapegoat to take the blame. Portland can blame President Trump instead of the residents of the city. They can blame Washington instead of their mayor. At some point, we must allow people to live with their choices and make it easy for those who want to escape to actually move. If we allow Portland to fester as it wants, it will either figure out it must change, or live with its consequences.
Erickson’s proposal, while a bit blunter, is along the same lines as a conclusion I reached a while ago and have written about here. And it applies not only to Portland, but New York City, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, and other large, predominantly blue major cities. Whether we’re seeing destruction stemming from civil unrest of just gang violence on an industrial scale, such lawlessness can be beaten back and kept under control. It’s been done before, with the startling transformation New York City underwent from the early 90s to the late 2000s being one of the best examples. It just requires leadership with the spine required to do what must be done and a populace willing to support them.
Sadly, neither of those factors is in place in most of our larger cities today and those who would seek to dismantle our lawful society have taken notice. And they’ve taken advantage. But the people of these cities continue to elect the same group of Democratic hand-wringers year after year no matter how badly conditions on the ground deteriorate. So does this mean that the rest of the nation and the federal government are out of options besides just waiting for the cities to implode?
There’s clearly an argument to be made in favor of such a conclusion, though it’s an ugly thought to contemplate. As Erickson suggests, there must surely come a point where the remaining sane people in Portland and these other cities will look around at the shootings, the rapes, the arson and the looting and come to the conclusion that something isn’t working. This relies on the old adage which holds that a liberal is just a conservative who hasn’t been mugged yet. We’ve already covered stories here about the scores of liberals in California who supported insufferable gun control laws for years and then were shocked (shocked, I say!) to discover how hard it was to quickly purchase a firearm when the riots approached their neighborhoods. Perhaps something similar will happen on a larger scale in Portland? It’s too soon to say.
In the meantime, the federal government isn’t throwing in the towel entirely. At least not yet. Ted Cruz just introduced a new bill in the Senate that would hold Mayors and Governors accountable for not enforcing the rule of law and maintaining order as they are constitutionally obligated to do. (Wall Street Journal, subscription required)
This is not the American way. Local leaders who allow rioters to destroy lives and businesses need to be held accountable. That’s why I’m introducing the Restitution for Economic losses Caused by Leaders who Allow Insurrection and Mayhem Act—Reclaim for short. The bill would hold state and local officials liable when they abdicate their legal duty to protect the public in cases where death, serious bodily harm or significant property damage have occurred. Specifically, my bill would allow for treble damages, meaning a plaintiff could be awarded triple the amount of the damage done to his property. It would also establish a federal cause of action, which would empower victims of violence in autonomous zones to take legal action against senior local or state lawmakers who have tolerated or encouraged radicals to take over the area. Finally, when politicians refuse to defend innocent Americans, this bill would remove or limit federal funding under grant programs that supply important law-enforcement and crime-prevention programs for local governments.
It’s an interesting thought, but it doesn’t really impose any direct, individual punishment on the elected officials allowing this mayhem to fester. When victims of this violence sue the city or the state, it’s the taxpayers who foot the bill for the increased damage settlements, not the Mayor or the Governor. And cutting off grant funds that go to law enforcement just as the police are already being held back by their state or municipal elected executives only makes it harder for them to literally and figuratively put out the fires.
Or maybe that’s what Senator Cruz is angling for in the long run. Could he be echoing Erick Erickson in his own way and simply saying “let it burn?”


hotair--2020-07-22--Politico wonders: Will Trump pardon ... Ghislaine Maxwell?

Naah .
I mean — naaah , can ’ t possibly happen .
Right ?
At least , not before the election … ?
Politico wonders whether a clemency action for Ghislaine Maxwell is in the cards after an exchange at the end of Donald Trump ’ s coronavirus press briefing yesterday .
A reporter asked about Maxwell ’ s case and tossed in the names of Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton as a sweetener .
Trump declined to talk about the other two men .
However , he had some kind words for Maxwell , who ’ s being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a sex ring for Jeffrey Epstein .
It might have been a good opportunity for a “ no comment ” instead : Q And my follow-up — my second question ; it ’ s a little bit different topic , but it ’ s one that a lot of people are talking about .
Ghislaine Maxwell is in prison , and so a lot of people want to know if she ’ s going to turn in powerful people .
And I know you ’ ve talked in the past about Prince @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bill Clinton ’ s behavior .
I ’ m wondering , do you feel that she ’ s going to turn in powerful men ?
How do you see that working out ?
THE PRESIDENT : I don ’ t know .
I haven ’ t really been following it too much .
I just wish her well , frankly .
I ’ ve met her numerous times over the years , especially since I lived in Palm Beach and I guess they lived in Palm Beach .
But I wish her well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t know the situation with Prince Andrew .
I just don ’ t know .
I ’ m not aware of it .
Ahem .
Trump does like to riff at the podium and marches to his own drummer at times , but this seems inexplicable .
He might be the only person in America , save Maxwell ’ s dwindling supply of friends , who would publicly “ wish her well.
” The most charitable impulse most Americans have toward Maxwell is to wish her justice — and probably more in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what ’ s coming to you .
If Trump wants to connect to voters , bon mots toward Maxwell isn ’ t going to cut it .
The exchange got Politico wondering whether Trump is one of that dwindling supply of Maxwell friends .
Trump has a habit of intervening in his friends ’ legal woes , Matthew Choi writes , and at least one federal prosecutor tells him that it sounds like Trump ’ s laying the groundwork for a pardon .
The unnamed prosecutor also speculated that friendship might not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s comment raised eyebrows at the Justice Department , with one prosecutor noting the president didn ’ t comment on the death of the son of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas in New Jersey , whose family was attacked on Sunday by a gunman dressed as a courier at their front door .
“ The president has nothing to say about a gun-toting madman who just murdered the son of a federal judge .
But he takes time out of his press conference to send well wishes to a woman accused of trafficking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecutor told POLITICO .
Referring to Trump ’ s granting clemency to his former adviser Roger Stone , the prosecutor said : “ That ’ s gross on its face , and in the aftermath of the Stone pardon , it reeks of the president indicating to her that he might reward her if she ’ ll stay silent about whatever she knows about him.
” That ’ s connecting up a whole lot of dots that likely don ’ t exist .
For one thing , Trump didn ’ t pardon Stone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A commutation would be months away if not years for Maxwell , and it wouldn ’ t do much for keeping Maxwell silent about whatever dirt she speculatively might have on Trump .
Stone ’ s happy enough about his commutation , but Trump still had him go through the trial first .
Also , this was a response to a question , not something Trump took “ time out of his press conference ” to address .
The reporter made it part of the press conference .
Trump should have declined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reporter was laying ) , but it wasn ’ t an unprompted part of a rambling rally speech either .
Neither did Trump argue that Maxwell was being treated unfairly by prosecutors , a point Trump made repeatedly in defense of Stone throughout the prosecution ( and with Michael Flynn as well ) .
Finally , there are a lot more dots connecting the Clintons to Maxwell and Epstein , including more than two dozen flights on the Lolita Express for Bill , than there are with Trump .
A pardon would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his base with Stone ’ s commutation , but he let the conviction stand .
Maxwell ’ s trial will drag out into next year , most likely , as the defense works on dismissals and other pretrial demands .
By that time , Trump will be past the election , which makes the risk of any disclosures more or less moot .
Maxwell has no connection to any political base , so where ’ s the political benefit for it ?
Still , this reminds us why the White House stopped having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would often go wildly off-topic , turning the events into rally speeches and opening up all sorts of other attacks on him .
Yesterday ’ s briefing was much more disciplined , but Trump still hasn ’ t learned to recognize a trap and keep from walking into it .
The best answer on questions regarding ongoing prosecutions is “ no comment .
”

Naah. I mean — naaah, can’t possibly happen. Right? At least, not before the election …?
Politico wonders whether a clemency action for Ghislaine Maxwell is in the cards after an exchange at the end of Donald Trump’s coronavirus press briefing yesterday. A reporter asked about Maxwell’s case and tossed in the names of Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton as a sweetener.
Trump declined to talk about the other two men. However, he had some kind words for Maxwell, who’s being prosecuted in connection for trafficking underage girls in a sex ring for Jeffrey Epstein. It might have been a good opportunity for a “no comment” instead:
Q And my follow-up — my second question; it’s a little bit different topic, but it’s one that a lot of people are talking about. Ghislaine Maxwell is in prison, and so a lot of people want to know if she’s going to turn in powerful people. And I know you’ve talked in the past about Prince Andrew, and you’ve criticized Bill Clinton’s behavior. I’m wondering, do you feel that she’s going to turn in powerful men? How do you see that working out? THE PRESIDENT: I don’t know. I haven’t really been following it too much. I just wish her well, frankly. I’ve met her numerous times over the years, especially since I lived in Palm Beach and I guess they lived in Palm Beach. But I wish her well, whatever it is. I don’t know the situation with Prince Andrew. I just don’t know. I’m not aware of it.
Ahem. Trump does like to riff at the podium and marches to his own drummer at times, but this seems inexplicable. He might be the only person in America, save Maxwell’s dwindling supply of friends, who would publicly “wish her well.” The most charitable impulse most Americans have toward Maxwell is to wish her justice — and probably more in the vein of I hope you get what’s coming to you. If Trump wants to connect to voters, bon mots toward Maxwell isn’t going to cut it.
The exchange got Politico wondering whether Trump is one of that dwindling supply of Maxwell friends. Trump has a habit of intervening in his friends’ legal woes, Matthew Choi writes, and at least one federal prosecutor tells him that it sounds like Trump’s laying the groundwork for a pardon. The unnamed prosecutor also speculated that friendship might not be the basis for it:
Trump’s comment raised eyebrows at the Justice Department, with one prosecutor noting the president didn’t comment on the death of the son of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas in New Jersey, whose family was attacked on Sunday by a gunman dressed as a courier at their front door. “The president has nothing to say about a gun-toting madman who just murdered the son of a federal judge. But he takes time out of his press conference to send well wishes to a woman accused of trafficking teenager girls for sex,” the prosecutor told POLITICO. Referring to Trump’s granting clemency to his former adviser Roger Stone, the prosecutor said: “That’s gross on its face, and in the aftermath of the Stone pardon, it reeks of the president indicating to her that he might reward her if she’ll stay silent about whatever she knows about him.”
That’s connecting up a whole lot of dots that likely don’t exist. For one thing, Trump didn’t pardon Stone — he commuted Stone’s sentence. A commutation would be months away if not years for Maxwell, and it wouldn’t do much for keeping Maxwell silent about whatever dirt she speculatively might have on Trump. Stone’s happy enough about his commutation, but Trump still had him go through the trial first.
Also, this was a response to a question, not something Trump took “time out of his press conference” to address. The reporter made it part of the press conference. Trump should have declined the question (and recognized the trap the reporter was laying), but it wasn’t an unprompted part of a rambling rally speech either. Neither did Trump argue that Maxwell was being treated unfairly by prosecutors, a point Trump made repeatedly in defense of Stone throughout the prosecution (and with Michael Flynn as well). Finally, there are a lot more dots connecting the Clintons to Maxwell and Epstein, including more than two dozen flights on the Lolita Express for Bill, than there are with Trump.
A pardon would be political suicide. Trump pandered to his base with Stone’s commutation, but he let the conviction stand. Maxwell’s trial will drag out into next year, most likely, as the defense works on dismissals and other pretrial demands. By that time, Trump will be past the election, which makes the risk of any disclosures more or less moot. Maxwell has no connection to any political base, so where’s the political benefit for it?
Still, this reminds us why the White House stopped having daily presidential briefings on COVID-19. Trump would often go wildly off-topic, turning the events into rally speeches and opening up all sorts of other attacks on him. Yesterday’s briefing was much more disciplined, but Trump still hasn’t learned to recognize a trap and keep from walking into it. The best answer on questions regarding ongoing prosecutions is “no comment.”


hotair--2020-07-23--The Mayor of Portland was just tear gassed... by federal officers

When some of the protesters and potential rioters showed up in downtown Portland , Oregon last night holding signs reading “ Tear Gas Ted , ” I ’ m pretty sure they were assigning that nickname to Mayor Wheeler , not issuing instructions to law enforcement .
But the DHS officers deployed to protect the federal courthouse may have taken their signage seriously .
In the wee hours of this morning , Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler was indeed tear-gassed by the feds while he stood at the front of the mob challenging the barrier erected around the courthouse .
From @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the gas pretty well .
Unfortunately , most of the mob charging the fence didn ’ t seem to like Wheeler any more than they liked the federal officers behind it .
( Associated Press ) The mayor of Portland , Oregon , was tear gassed by the U.S. government late Wednesday as he stood at a fence guarding a federal courthouse during another night of protest against the presence of federal agents sent by President Donald Trump to quell unrest in the city .
Mayor Ted Wheeler , a Democrat , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d been tear gassed and appeared slightly dazed and coughed as he put on a pair of goggles someone handed him and drank water .
He didn ’ t leave his spot at the front , however , and continued to take gas .
Around Wheeler , the protest raged , with demonstrators lighting a large fire in the space between the fence and the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse and the pop-pop-pop of federal agents deploying tear gas and stun grenades into the crowd .
It wasn ’ t immediately clear if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crowd when they used the tear gas .
So did the DHS officers know that it was Wheeler at the front of the crowd when they broke out the tear gas and non-lethal munitions ?
Nobody seems to know .
But as long as he was one of the crowd trying to knock down the barriers protecting the federal courthouse it doesn ’ t really matter .
At that point he was just another resident of Portland , threatening to damage the building and the officers were charged with protecting it from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying about making omelets , right ?
Sometimes you have to crack a few eggs .
The entire evening didn ’ t go very well for Wheeler by all accounts .
Long before he wound up being gassed , Wheeler had attempted to address the crowd , acting like he was just another member of the protests , if not their self-appointed leader .
But as the AP reports , most of the people out in the streets were jeering him .
As I mentioned above , some of them were holding up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the words “ Tear Gas Ted.
” That ’ s because his own police have been deploying tear gas on a regular basis to break up the mobs .
( Click on picture for full-size image . )
Another marcher held a sign saying “ Ted has never been gassed and it shows.
” ( They ’ ll probably have to ditch that one for tonight ’ s riots , sadly . )
People could be heard screaming at the Mayor , telling him that he needs to “ be out here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be taken seriously about supporting their efforts .
Whether or not Wheeler ’ s ruse will succeed remains to be seen , but what he ’ s attempting to do is rather obvious .
This is a strategy that was recently predicted by Erick Erickson .
With federal officers guarding the courthouse , Wheeler is trying to deflect criticism of his own administration and shift the blame ( and the anger ) toward President Trump and the federal government .
When he first arrived on the scene , he grabbed a bullhorn and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the thousands of you who have come out to oppose the Trump administration ’ s occupation of this city , ” Audible laughter could be heard from the crowd at that point .
Most of them were there to protest Wheeler and the Portland Police Department , holding signs indicating precisely that message .
True , a few of them wanted to go after the federal buildings ( and DHS officers ) as well , but it ’ s not as if they ’ d forgotten why they ’ ve been out in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months .
But if Wheeler keeps up this schtick long enough and the national media goes along with it ( as they already are ) , he might actually succeed in shifting public perceptions a bit , as if the feds are to blame for the misbehavior of a relative handful of cops around the country .
Does anyone have any predictions as to what Wheeler ’ s next performance will entail ?
He already got himself tear-gassed on the first night .
To up the ante at this point , he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrested tonight or beaten down with some riot shields and batons .
Do they have any holding cells in the Portland federal courthouse ?
Perhaps they could – dare I say it – lock him up ?

When some of the protesters and potential rioters showed up in downtown Portland, Oregon last night holding signs reading “Tear Gas Ted,” I’m pretty sure they were assigning that nickname to Mayor Wheeler, not issuing instructions to law enforcement. But the DHS officers deployed to protect the federal courthouse may have taken their signage seriously. In the wee hours of this morning, Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler was indeed tear-gassed by the feds while he stood at the front of the mob challenging the barrier erected around the courthouse. From the sound of things, he handled the gas pretty well. Unfortunately, most of the mob charging the fence didn’t seem to like Wheeler any more than they liked the federal officers behind it. (Associated Press)
The mayor of Portland, Oregon, was tear gassed by the U.S. government late Wednesday as he stood at a fence guarding a federal courthouse during another night of protest against the presence of federal agents sent by President Donald Trump to quell unrest in the city. Mayor Ted Wheeler, a Democrat, said it was the first time he’d been tear gassed and appeared slightly dazed and coughed as he put on a pair of goggles someone handed him and drank water. He didn’t leave his spot at the front, however, and continued to take gas. Around Wheeler, the protest raged, with demonstrators lighting a large fire in the space between the fence and the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse and the pop-pop-pop of federal agents deploying tear gas and stun grenades into the crowd. It wasn’t immediately clear if the federal agents knew Wheeler was in the crowd when they used the tear gas.
So did the DHS officers know that it was Wheeler at the front of the crowd when they broke out the tear gas and non-lethal munitions? Nobody seems to know. But as long as he was one of the crowd trying to knock down the barriers protecting the federal courthouse it doesn’t really matter. At that point he was just another resident of Portland, threatening to damage the building and the officers were charged with protecting it from the mob. You know the old saying about making omelets, right? Sometimes you have to crack a few eggs.
The entire evening didn’t go very well for Wheeler by all accounts. Long before he wound up being gassed, Wheeler had attempted to address the crowd, acting like he was just another member of the protests, if not their self-appointed leader. But as the AP reports, most of the people out in the streets were jeering him. As I mentioned above, some of them were holding up posters displaying a picture of the Mayor with the words “Tear Gas Ted.” That’s because his own police have been deploying tear gas on a regular basis to break up the mobs. (Click on picture for full-size image.)
Another marcher held a sign saying “Ted has never been gassed and it shows.” (They’ll probably have to ditch that one for tonight’s riots, sadly.) People could be heard screaming at the Mayor, telling him that he needs to “be out here every night” if he wants to be taken seriously about supporting their efforts.
Whether or not Wheeler’s ruse will succeed remains to be seen, but what he’s attempting to do is rather obvious. This is a strategy that was recently predicted by Erick Erickson. With federal officers guarding the courthouse, Wheeler is trying to deflect criticism of his own administration and shift the blame (and the anger) toward President Trump and the federal government. When he first arrived on the scene, he grabbed a bullhorn and said, “I want to thank the thousands of you who have come out to oppose the Trump administration’s occupation of this city,”
Audible laughter could be heard from the crowd at that point. Most of them were there to protest Wheeler and the Portland Police Department, holding signs indicating precisely that message. True, a few of them wanted to go after the federal buildings (and DHS officers) as well, but it’s not as if they’d forgotten why they’ve been out in the streets for the past couple of months. But if Wheeler keeps up this schtick long enough and the national media goes along with it (as they already are), he might actually succeed in shifting public perceptions a bit, as if the feds are to blame for the misbehavior of a relative handful of cops around the country.
Does anyone have any predictions as to what Wheeler’s next performance will entail? He already got himself tear-gassed on the first night. To up the ante at this point, he’ll probably need to either get himself arrested tonight or beaten down with some riot shields and batons. Do they have any holding cells in the Portland federal courthouse? Perhaps they could – dare I say it – lock him up?


hotair--2020-07-22--WSJ op-ed: Could Trump's great equalizer on Election Day be ... coronavirus?

Lotta grim takes about the election floating around lately , but one that imagines Trump winning because people are afraid to walk into a raging ‘ rona storm and catch their death in order to vote deserves some sort of award .
This is by Ted Rall , a left-wing bete noire of the early conservative blogosphere and not someone you ’ d expect to find in the Wall Street Journal gaming out Trump victory scenarios .
Some vestigial part of my memory of that era makes me wonder if he submitted this as a goof , just to see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But his argument is serious enough , and simple : Trump has the more enthusiastic base , ergo the more deterrents there are to voting this fall , the more you ’ d expect him to gain on Biden .
Hardcore MAGAites would inject themselves with the coronavirus if it would guarantee a second term for their guy .
There are zero Biden voters who ’ d do the same for Joe .
…but there are probably quite a few Biden voters who ’ d inject themselves to make Trump a one-term president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office .
That ’ s the important wrinkle to all the chatter about how motivated Trump ’ s base is to support him .
Unquestionably they love their candidate more than Democrats love theirs .
But it ’ s very much in question whether they love Trump more than the left hates him .
For the moment , this is an election entirely about the president .
And liberals are highly motivated to defeat him .
Highly enough to brave a second wave of COVID-19 to vote ?
We shall see .
Who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stand in long , socially distanced lines outside voting stations—Republicans , who are relatively unconcerned , or Democrats , terrified that going outdoors could kill them ?
A Pew Research Center poll from late June found that 61 % of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents believed “ the worst ” of the coronavirus crisis “ is behind us , ” compared with 38 % who thought the worst is yet to come .
Among Democrats , only 23 % thought it was mostly behind us ; 76 % said the worst is still to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him : There ’ s also a big enthusiasm gap , which works in the president ’ s favor , between Biden and Trump voters .
To be sure , unlike in 2016 , the Democratic nominee is far less widely disliked than Mr. Trump .
But a June USA Today poll found that “ half of Trump backers say they are ‘ very excited ’ about their candidate , almost double the 27 % of Biden backers who say that.
” … If you ’ re a Democrat , you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Mr. Biden .
You ’ re probably not thrilled about it .
Add fear of the virus and you might decide to skip voting entirely… Mr. Trump ’ s suggestions that Covid is no big deal mitigates the main reason his voters might otherwise stay home .
Democrats ’ emphasis on the danger may end up suppressing their own votes .
Points taken , but remember that we already had a trial run for this in April .
The virus was decimating New York at the time and every state feared it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wisconsin was set to vote on electing a new justice to the state supreme court on April 5 ; Democrats wanted the election postponed for safety reasons but Republicans resisted , expecting that the logic of Rall ’ s op-ed would help them hold the seat .
When push comes to shove , Republican voters are more motivated than Democrats are , right ?
So the election was held as scheduled , with masked-up Wisconsinites waiting in long lines to cast their ballots despite the threat of infection .
Result : Liberal Jill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points .
Maybe that had nothing to do with COVID and would have been the result even in normal times , but it ’ s possible that Democrats resented the GOP ’ s strategic insistence on holding the election in the middle of a pandemic and decided to take it out on them at the polls .
It ’ s easy to imagine Democrats nationally adapting that sort of mentality this fall as well , especially with the media hooting at them nonstop about Trump ’ s “ plot ” to use the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wanted the virus to spread so that you wouldn ’ t vote !
If you stay home his plan will succeed !
” Beyond that , it would be illogical on a basic level for an anti-Trump voter to skip the election over COVID .
The president ’ s biggest electoral liability right now is his handling of the pandemic , a subject on which he routinely polls poorly and lately has polled abysmally .
Not voting due to fear of infection would ensure that he continues to shape policy on the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit a snag with the vaccine .
It ’ s all too easy to imagine the Dem messaging machine warning their base in the fall that if they don ’ t suck it up and turn out , whatever the health risk to them personally , Trump ’ s incompetence will guarantee that the risk from COVID-19 will persist for them and their family far longer than it would under Biden .
“ You want to end this now , or you want to take your chances with corona circulating widely all next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interesting bit from a recent Fox poll : Read that again .
Contra the conventional wisdom , Biden leads big on enthusiasm — unless the virus is raging , in which case things get dicey .
Which way does that really cut for Trump , though ?
If the country is mired in a second wave in November that ’ s so horrifying that people don ’ t want to go outside , his approval on handling the pandemic ( and his approval overall ) will likely be in the toilet .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He can ’ t win in that scenario .
On the other hand , if America somehow gets the disease under control and averts a second wave whether through herd immunity or a wonder drug or what have you , Trump ’ s numbers may rise but the virus will no longer deter people from voting .
He ’ ll need to count on the surge of goodwill resulting from the low case counts to be so strong that it ’ ll undo all the damage that ’ s been done to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victory .
It ’ s a daunting scenario for him either way .
And then of course there ’ s mail-in voting .
Democrats are surely already thinking about the problem Rall identifies , especially given how competitive they ’ ve been among senior citizens this year .
They know some people might be spooked by the virus into not going out to vote .
So they ’ re going to do everything they can organizationally to make sure everyone who ’ s not rock-solid on voting in-person on November 3 is on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They don ’ t need to push hard : Democratic voters are quite attuned to voting by mail , thanks in part to Trump ranting about it every day .
It may be that the partisan imbalance detected by Fox among voters who ’ d stay home amid a raging epidemic is either totally offset or more than offset by the imbalance in mail-in voting .
Dems who anticipate that they ’ d rather not risk voting in person may apply for a mail ballot early but the same might not be true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Trump not to trust that method of voting .
( To the great protracted dismay of Republican strategists . )
To put that slightly differently , Democrats have a Plan B for a “ November COVID armageddon ” scenario .
The GOP doesn ’ t , thanks to Trump .
All of which is setting the stage for an unholy clusterfark that ’ s perfectly clear already from the graph above : Trump will win the in-person Election Day vote comfortably and then over the ensuing days Biden will cut further and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat-heavy mail-in vote .
And of course Trump will scream “ fraud !
” because he ’ s incapable of believing that he lost an election fair and square .
Everyone sees this coming from a mile away .
Jonathan Last at the Bulwark says it ’ s already shaping up to be the most dangerous constitutional crisis in a century .
Just this afternoon , WaPo is out with a piece wondering , “ What would happen if [ Trump ] refused to accept a loss ?
” But it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he loses the election by implausibly lopsided margins , he ’ ll refuse to accept it .
That doesn ’ t mean he won ’ t stand aside in the end , but I can all but guarantee that if he loses there ’ ll be moments in early November and possibly even December and January where there ’ s some doubt as to whether America ’ s about to full banana republic .
But that ’ ll also be motivation for Dems to turn out big for in-person voting as well .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ close of business on November 3 , the easier it ’ ll be to claim “ fraud ” if that lead evaporates as the mail-in ballots are counted .
I don ’ t think they ’ ll have a turnout problem , even if the health situation this fall is bad .
Here ’ s Nate Silver mulling the disadvantage the GOP is at due to its new allergy about voting by mail .

Lotta grim takes about the election floating around lately, but one that imagines Trump winning because people are afraid to walk into a raging ‘rona storm and catch their death in order to vote deserves some sort of award.
This is by Ted Rall, a left-wing bete noire of the early conservative blogosphere and not someone you’d expect to find in the Wall Street Journal gaming out Trump victory scenarios. Some vestigial part of my memory of that era makes me wonder if he submitted this as a goof, just to see if they’d print it. But his argument is serious enough, and simple: Trump has the more enthusiastic base, ergo the more deterrents there are to voting this fall, the more you’d expect him to gain on Biden. Hardcore MAGAites would inject themselves with the coronavirus if it would guarantee a second term for their guy. There are zero Biden voters who’d do the same for Joe.
…but there are probably quite a few Biden voters who’d inject themselves to make Trump a one-term president, irrespective of who replaced him in office. That’s the important wrinkle to all the chatter about how motivated Trump’s base is to support him. Unquestionably they love their candidate more than Democrats love theirs. But it’s very much in question whether they love Trump more than the left hates him. For the moment, this is an election entirely about the president. And liberals are highly motivated to defeat him.
Highly enough to brave a second wave of COVID-19 to vote? We shall see.
Who will turn out in greater numbers to stand in long, socially distanced lines outside voting stations—Republicans, who are relatively unconcerned, or Democrats, terrified that going outdoors could kill them? A Pew Research Center poll from late June found that 61% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents believed “the worst” of the coronavirus crisis “is behind us,” compared with 38% who thought the worst is yet to come. Among Democrats, only 23% thought it was mostly behind us; 76% said the worst is still to come… Which points to another problem for him: There’s also a big enthusiasm gap, which works in the president’s favor, between Biden and Trump voters. To be sure, unlike in 2016, the Democratic nominee is far less widely disliked than Mr. Trump. But a June USA Today poll found that “half of Trump backers say they are ‘very excited’ about their candidate, almost double the 27% of Biden backers who say that.”… If you’re a Democrat, you’re probably voting against Mr. Trump rather than for Mr. Biden. You’re probably not thrilled about it. Add fear of the virus and you might decide to skip voting entirely… Mr. Trump’s suggestions that Covid is no big deal mitigates the main reason his voters might otherwise stay home. Democrats’ emphasis on the danger may end up suppressing their own votes.
Points taken, but remember that we already had a trial run for this in April. The virus was decimating New York at the time and every state feared it would be next to be ravaged. Wisconsin was set to vote on electing a new justice to the state supreme court on April 5; Democrats wanted the election postponed for safety reasons but Republicans resisted, expecting that the logic of Rall’s op-ed would help them hold the seat. When push comes to shove, Republican voters are more motivated than Democrats are, right? So the election was held as scheduled, with masked-up Wisconsinites waiting in long lines to cast their ballots despite the threat of infection.
Result: Liberal Jill Karofsky whipped conservative Daniel Kelly by 10 points. Maybe that had nothing to do with COVID and would have been the result even in normal times, but it’s possible that Democrats resented the GOP’s strategic insistence on holding the election in the middle of a pandemic and decided to take it out on them at the polls. It’s easy to imagine Democrats nationally adapting that sort of mentality this fall as well, especially with the media hooting at them nonstop about Trump’s “plot” to use the virus to his advantage. “He wanted the virus to spread so that you wouldn’t vote! If you stay home his plan will succeed!”
Beyond that, it would be illogical on a basic level for an anti-Trump voter to skip the election over COVID. The president’s biggest electoral liability right now is his handling of the pandemic, a subject on which he routinely polls poorly and lately has polled abysmally. Not voting due to fear of infection would ensure that he continues to shape policy on the virus throughout 2021 and beyond, assuming we hit a snag with the vaccine. It’s all too easy to imagine the Dem messaging machine warning their base in the fall that if they don’t suck it up and turn out, whatever the health risk to them personally, Trump’s incompetence will guarantee that the risk from COVID-19 will persist for them and their family far longer than it would under Biden. “You want to end this now, or you want to take your chances with corona circulating widely all next year?”
Rall also notes this interesting bit from a recent Fox poll:
Biden is preferred over Trump among extremely motivated voters (+8 points), those extremely likely to vote (+9) and those who feel it is extremely important their candidate wins (+13). However, the number of Biden supporters who are extremely likely to vote drops 25 points if the virus is hitting so hard in November as to, for instance, close restaurants. Because the drop-off would just be 16 points among Trump supporters, that puts Biden’s lead at just 3 points over the president in that still-raging coronavirus scenario. The virus is a campaign issue — but it could also be a factor, like bad weather, that reduces turnout.
Read that again. Contra the conventional wisdom, Biden leads big on enthusiasm — unless the virus is raging, in which case things get dicey. Which way does that really cut for Trump, though? If the country is mired in a second wave in November that’s so horrifying that people don’t want to go outside, his approval on handling the pandemic (and his approval overall) will likely be in the toilet. He might be at 35 percent or worse. He can’t win in that scenario. On the other hand, if America somehow gets the disease under control and averts a second wave whether through herd immunity or a wonder drug or what have you, Trump’s numbers may rise but the virus will no longer deter people from voting. He’ll need to count on the surge of goodwill resulting from the low case counts to be so strong that it’ll undo all the damage that’s been done to him this year and sweep him to victory. It’s a daunting scenario for him either way.
And then of course there’s mail-in voting. Democrats are surely already thinking about the problem Rall identifies, especially given how competitive they’ve been among senior citizens this year. They know some people might be spooked by the virus into not going out to vote. So they’re going to do everything they can organizationally to make sure everyone who’s not rock-solid on voting in-person on November 3 is on track to receive a mail-in ballot. They don’t need to push hard: Democratic voters are quite attuned to voting by mail, thanks in part to Trump ranting about it every day.
It may be that the partisan imbalance detected by Fox among voters who’d stay home amid a raging epidemic is either totally offset or more than offset by the imbalance in mail-in voting. Dems who anticipate that they’d rather not risk voting in person may apply for a mail ballot early but the same might not be true of Republicans, who have been conditioned by Trump not to trust that method of voting. (To the great protracted dismay of Republican strategists.) To put that slightly differently, Democrats have a Plan B for a “November COVID armageddon” scenario. The GOP doesn’t, thanks to Trump.
All of which is setting the stage for an unholy clusterfark that’s perfectly clear already from the graph above: Trump will win the in-person Election Day vote comfortably and then over the ensuing days Biden will cut further and further into his lead thanks to the Democrat-heavy mail-in vote. And of course Trump will scream “fraud!” because he’s incapable of believing that he lost an election fair and square. Everyone sees this coming from a mile away. Jonathan Last at the Bulwark says it’s already shaping up to be the most dangerous constitutional crisis in a century. Just this afternoon, WaPo is out with a piece wondering, “What would happen if [Trump] refused to accept a loss?” But it’s not really an “if.” Unless he loses the election by implausibly lopsided margins, he’ll refuse to accept it. That doesn’t mean he won’t stand aside in the end, but I can all but guarantee that if he loses there’ll be moments in early November and possibly even December and January where there’s some doubt as to whether America’s about to full banana republic.
But that’ll also be motivation for Dems to turn out big for in-person voting as well. The larger Trump’s lead at close of business on November 3, the easier it’ll be to claim “fraud” if that lead evaporates as the mail-in ballots are counted. I don’t think they’ll have a turnout problem, even if the health situation this fall is bad. Here’s Nate Silver mulling the disadvantage the GOP is at due to its new allergy about voting by mail.


hotair--2020-07-22--Media hails Wall of Moms as Portland heroes. Here's why they are not.

Don ’ t believe the hype .
The mainstream media is playing usual idiots in a new narrative being promoted by the violent far left .
The story goes that a group of everyday moms has become so distraught over the violence in Portland that they have come together to form a Wall of Moms .
Here ’ s the twist- they show up to the protests that have been overtaken by Antifa and other agitators to protect the bad guys from the good guys , not the other way around .
I think we are getting a glimpse into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Antifa began in the city several years ago and apparently it flourishes there because of the support they get from locals .
It ’ s a generational problem .
Moms are joining their kids in acts of violence and destruction .
None of this started with the Black Lives Matter demonstrations after the death of George Floyd , nor will the group ’ s actions end when the summer of unrest comes to an end .
Antifa simply takes advantage of the political climate and adds to the strife .
Major news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are publishing pieces on the moms to pull at your heartstrings .
Gee , they are just moms who want to protect children of color and work against racism .
George Floyd cried out for his mom as he died .
I ’ m not making light of that .
I ’ m simply pointing out that it is one reason used as the last straw before some of them became active .
Many of the mothers say they were summoned when George Floyd , a black man who died in police custody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for his mother with his last breaths .
“ When you ’ re a mom you have this primal urge to protect kids , and not just your kids , all kids , ” said Wall of Moms organizer Jennie Vinson , 43 .
“ To see a grown man reaching out and calling for his mother — I think that was a transformational moment for so many of us .
It ’ s like : What choice do we have but to do this ?
” Angie Noriega , 43 , attended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group of seven other mothers who piled into two minivans and drove downtown .
Noriega , a health-care worker who has two black children , ages 3 and 7 , said after weeks of avoiding attending protests in person due to the coronavirus pandemic , seeing the moms of Portland mobilize inspired her to get more involved .
“ It ’ s been such a struggle to balance being afraid , but wanting to do the right thing for my kids , ” she said , her voice cracking with emotion .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for them , someone they can be proud of .
But I also want to make it home safely.
” Before she left home , Noriega ’ s 7-year-old daughter begged her not to leave .
She ’ s old enough to understand the risks of facing off with heavily armed police officers , Noriega said .
“ But we talked about that and I said , ‘ Sometimes we have to be brave and do the right thing even when it feels scary , ’ ” Noriega said .
As Rachel Weishaar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her home on Tuesday , she said , her 3-year-old offered this wish for her mother ’ s safety : “ Tell the police officers to be more gentle , ” the girl said .
So , Ms. Weishaar made a sign with the child ’ s quote and held it outside of Portland ’ s federal courthouse .
Feel all warm and fuzzy yet ?
Well , don ’ t .
While some of these women may have good intentions , I ’ ll give them the benefit of the doubt , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I won ’ t .
They know they are taking the side of the agitators .
They are Antifa .
Don ’ t let the bike helmet-wearing women fool you .
They are Momtifa , if you will .
Many of them wear yellow t-shirts and the Twitter account of Andy Ngo points out that they are recognizable members of Antifa with less than peaceful intentions .
You get the picture .
The Trump-hating , leftist-loving media is being used as a useful idiot for violent anarchists hell-bent on destroying America by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cities under violent attack by the left have formed Wall of Moms groups , too .
This is an orchestrated effort .
It is not as it is painted – just some concerned moms out to protect their children from racism .
WaPo reports that the night before this protest , the moms gathered to sing a “ lullaby ” outside the Multnomah County Justice Center , the site of the county jail and police headquarters .
“ Hands up , please don ’ t shoot me.
” Yes , the words long-ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ferguson , Missouri yet still used by protesters .
By the newspaper describing the action as singing a lullaby , it plays to emotions , not reality .
This rube fell for it : A group of men came together to come to the aid of the women , carrying leaf blowers .
No , really .
The leaf blowers were meant to be used “ to help stop tear gas from police from affecting other protesters , specifically the Wall of Moms organization.
” You can ’ t make this stuff up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wear orange shirts .
They call for safety .
I ’ ll let that bit of irony go , as images of law enforcement being battered and bloodied by violent thugs springs to mind .
This is why Portland and other cities are devolving into uninhabitable places .
The lunatics are running the asylum .
The next generation was raised by people who think law enforcement is the problem , not the criminals .
Anarchists infiltrate demonstrations and these “ moms ” normalize the civil disruption by softening their violent tendencies with images @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s disgusting .
Democrats and the media ( but I repeat myself ) have thrown in with Antifa and other anarchists for political reasons .
They hate President Trump and his attempts to promote law and order more than they care about their communities and the taxpayers there .
This is the worst kind of politics .
And , none of this has anything to do with George Floyd .

Don’t believe the hype. The mainstream media is playing usual idiots in a new narrative being promoted by the violent far left. The story goes that a group of everyday moms has become so distraught over the violence in Portland that they have come together to form a Wall of Moms. Here’s the twist- they show up to the protests that have been overtaken by Antifa and other agitators to protect the bad guys from the good guys, not the other way around.
I think we are getting a glimpse into the nature of the problems in Portland. Antifa began in the city several years ago and apparently it flourishes there because of the support they get from locals. It’s a generational problem. Moms are joining their kids in acts of violence and destruction. None of this started with the Black Lives Matter demonstrations after the death of George Floyd, nor will the group’s actions end when the summer of unrest comes to an end. Antifa simply takes advantage of the political climate and adds to the strife.
Major news outlets, like the Washington Post, are publishing pieces on the moms to pull at your heartstrings. Gee, they are just moms who want to protect children of color and work against racism. George Floyd cried out for his mom as he died. I’m not making light of that. I’m simply pointing out that it is one reason used as the last straw before some of them became active.
Many of the mothers say they were summoned when George Floyd, a black man who died in police custody in Minneapolis in May, cried out for his mother with his last breaths. “When you’re a mom you have this primal urge to protect kids, and not just your kids, all kids,” said Wall of Moms organizer Jennie Vinson, 43. “To see a grown man reaching out and calling for his mother — I think that was a transformational moment for so many of us. It’s like: What choice do we have but to do this?” Angie Noriega, 43, attended her first protest on Monday with a group of seven other mothers who piled into two minivans and drove downtown. Noriega, a health-care worker who has two black children, ages 3 and 7, said after weeks of avoiding attending protests in person due to the coronavirus pandemic, seeing the moms of Portland mobilize inspired her to get more involved. “It’s been such a struggle to balance being afraid, but wanting to do the right thing for my kids,” she said, her voice cracking with emotion. “I want to be a role model for them, someone they can be proud of. But I also want to make it home safely.” Before she left home, Noriega’s 7-year-old daughter begged her not to leave. She’s old enough to understand the risks of facing off with heavily armed police officers, Noriega said. “But we talked about that and I said, ‘Sometimes we have to be brave and do the right thing even when it feels scary,’ ” Noriega said. As Rachel Weishaar, 34, was preparing to leave her home on Tuesday, she said, her 3-year-old offered this wish for her mother’s safety: “Tell the police officers to be more gentle,” the girl said.
So, Ms. Weishaar made a sign with the child’s quote and held it outside of Portland’s federal courthouse. Feel all warm and fuzzy yet? Well, don’t. While some of these women may have good intentions, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt, many do not. Wait. No, I won’t. They know they are taking the side of the agitators. They are Antifa. Don’t let the bike helmet-wearing women fool you. They are Momtifa, if you will.
Courage is not the absence of fear but the overcoming of it. “Feds stay clear! Moms are here!” They are calling themselves Momtifa.https://t.co/epI6VqFOPM — Ben Phillips (@benphillips76) July 19, 2020
Many of them wear yellow t-shirts and the Twitter account of Andy Ngo points out that they are recognizable members of Antifa with less than peaceful intentions.
I recognize a lot of the so-called “moms” as the same antifa women who dressed in black as recent as a couple days ago. They just put on a yellow shirt now for optics. Most of these people aren’t mothers & many don’t even identify as female. #PortlandRiots pic.twitter.com/UPffcao0fv — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) July 22, 2020
Some of the “moms” lauded in the media joined in on trying to break into the Portland federal courthouse. #PortlandRiots #PortlandMoms #antifa https://t.co/GdaIj0NzB7 — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) July 21, 2020
You get the picture. The Trump-hating, leftist-loving media is being used as a useful idiot for violent anarchists hell-bent on destroying America by any means necessary. Women in other cities under violent attack by the left have formed Wall of Moms groups, too. This is an orchestrated effort. It is not as it is painted – just some concerned moms out to protect their children from racism.
WaPo reports that the night before this protest, the moms gathered to sing a “lullaby” outside the Multnomah County Justice Center, the site of the county jail and police headquarters. “Hands up, please don’t shoot me.” Yes, the words long-ago debunked from the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri yet still used by protesters. By the newspaper describing the action as singing a lullaby, it plays to emotions, not reality.
This rube fell for it:
Courage is not the absence of fear but the overcoming of it. “Feds stay clear! Moms are here!” They are calling themselves Momtifa.https://t.co/epI6VqFOPM — Ben Phillips (@benphillips76) July 19, 2020
A group of men came together to come to the aid of the women, carrying leaf blowers. No, really. The leaf blowers were meant to be used “to help stop tear gas from police from affecting other protesters, specifically the Wall of Moms organization.” You can’t make this stuff up, y’all.
Portland dads wear orange shirts. They call for safety. I’ll let that bit of irony go, as images of law enforcement being battered and bloodied by violent thugs springs to mind.
Prior to the start of the protests, the PDX Dad Pod Twitter account posted a tweet that read, “come stand up for your town, your neighbors, your kids. Look for the other orange shirts, use the buddy system. And remember, safety first.” The tweet also includes a photo which shows the leaf blowers the dads were carrying and different details about the protest on Tuesday night.
Come stand up for your town, your neighbors, your kids. Look for the other orange shirts, use the buddy system. And remember, safety first. pic.twitter.com/FJY8JM4ccI — @PDXDadPod (@pdxdadpod) July 22, 2020
This is why Portland and other cities are devolving into uninhabitable places. The lunatics are running the asylum. The next generation was raised by people who think law enforcement is the problem, not the criminals. Anarchists infiltrate demonstrations and these “moms” normalize the civil disruption by softening their violent tendencies with images of children and parenthood. It’s disgusting. Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) have thrown in with Antifa and other anarchists for political reasons. They hate President Trump and his attempts to promote law and order more than they care about their communities and the taxpayers there. This is the worst kind of politics. And, none of this has anything to do with George Floyd.


hotair--2020-07-22--California now has most coronavirus cases in the country

Not surprising when you consider that California has about double the population of New York .
Still , it ’ s a record the state would rather not hold .
A record one-day total of newly confirmed coronavirus cases gave California more than 409,000 since the pandemic began , sending it past New York for the most in the country , data from Wednesday showed .
California ’ s cases have climbed rapidly in the last month , punctuated by the 12,807 recorded Tuesday , while New York″s have fallen to less than 1,000 per day .
California ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York ’ s , according to a tally Johns Hopkins University… Gov .
Gavin Newsom and health officials have blamed the increase on people — many of them younger adults — gathering with friends and family and not wearing masks or maintaining social distancing… New York still has by far the most coronavirus-related deaths in the country with more than 32,500 — four times more than California ’ s tally of about 7,900 .
The state began reopening gradually in May after the first wave of the virus .
Last Monday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that reopening when he announced gyms , bars and other businesses would need to shut down again .
That announcement was broken into two parts , some closures which applied to everyone in the state and some which only applied to counties on the state ’ s Monitoring List for more than three days .
At the time Newsom made the announcement last week , about 80 % of California ’ s population lived in counties on the Monitoring List .
Last Friday , Gov .
Newsom rolled out additional guidelines regarding the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gavin Newsom laid out strict criteria Friday for school reopenings that makes it unlikely the vast majority of districts will have classroom instruction in the fall as the coronavirus pandemic surges .
The rules include a mandate that students above second grade and all staff wear masks in school .
As many have said before , you can ’ t reopen the economy until you reopen the schools .
There are too many parents who can ’ t go to work if their young children are at home .
One group in California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ injunction to prevent Newsom ’ s school reopening guidelines from taking effect : The Center for American Liberty is suing the governor over his new guidelines to determine which school districts would be allowed to reopen classrooms this fall .
“ Indeed , California is the only state in the United States where there is a ban on the majority of children from being educated , ” attorney Harmeet Dhillon told FOX40 .
“ We intend to pursue an injunction in court to prevent the governor from destroying the academic year and beyond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ … “ Even parents with the most motivated and academically successful children reported depression , anxiety , withdrawal , behavioral issues , a lack of motivation , ” explained Dhillon .
We ’ ll have to wait and see how this goes .
Meanwhile , some families are starting to form “ micro-schools ” in anticipation that distance learning will be the only option this fall .
But with California now becoming the state with the most cases in the country the Gov .
can make the case that the state is trending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to play it safe .
There ’ s a pretty good argument to be made that opening schools don ’ t present much of a threat to kids or to teachers but for obvious reasons , Newsom doesn ’ t want to take a risk that could wind up making his state look worse .

Not surprising when you consider that California has about double the population of New York. Still, it’s a record the state would rather not hold.
A record one-day total of newly confirmed coronavirus cases gave California more than 409,000 since the pandemic began, sending it past New York for the most in the country, data from Wednesday showed. California’s cases have climbed rapidly in the last month, punctuated by the 12,807 recorded Tuesday, while New York″s have fallen to less than 1,000 per day. California’s overall total is about 700 more than New York’s, according to a tally Johns Hopkins University… Gov. Gavin Newsom and health officials have blamed the increase on people — many of them younger adults — gathering with friends and family and not wearing masks or maintaining social distancing… New York still has by far the most coronavirus-related deaths in the country with more than 32,500 — four times more than California’s tally of about 7,900.
The state began reopening gradually in May after the first wave of the virus. Last Monday, Gov. Newsom rolled back some of that reopening when he announced gyms, bars and other businesses would need to shut down again. That announcement was broken into two parts, some closures which applied to everyone in the state and some which only applied to counties on the state’s Monitoring List for more than three days. At the time Newsom made the announcement last week, about 80% of California’s population lived in counties on the Monitoring List.
Effective immediately, CA is closing some indoor business operations statewide and additional indoor business operations in counties on @CAPublicHealth Monitoring List for 3 consecutive days. 📍Find the updated list of counties here: https://t.co/snYe5v55Rw pic.twitter.com/W3wBJp2ap5 — Office of the Governor of California (@CAgovernor) July 13, 2020
Last Friday, Gov. Newsom rolled out additional guidelines regarding the reopening of schools:
California Gov. Gavin Newsom laid out strict criteria Friday for school reopenings that makes it unlikely the vast majority of districts will have classroom instruction in the fall as the coronavirus pandemic surges. The rules include a mandate that students above second grade and all staff wear masks in school.
As many have said before, you can’t reopen the economy until you reopen the schools. There are too many parents who can’t go to work if their young children are at home. One group in California has already filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction to prevent Newsom’s school reopening guidelines from taking effect:
The Center for American Liberty is suing the governor over his new guidelines to determine which school districts would be allowed to reopen classrooms this fall. “Indeed, California is the only state in the United States where there is a ban on the majority of children from being educated,” attorney Harmeet Dhillon told FOX40. “We intend to pursue an injunction in court to prevent the governor from destroying the academic year and beyond for these families and their kids.”… “Even parents with the most motivated and academically successful children reported depression, anxiety, withdrawal, behavioral issues, a lack of motivation,” explained Dhillon.
We’ll have to wait and see how this goes. Meanwhile, some families are starting to form “micro-schools” in anticipation that distance learning will be the only option this fall. But with California now becoming the state with the most cases in the country the Gov. can make the case that the state is trending in the wrong direction right now and needs to play it safe. There’s a pretty good argument to be made that opening schools don’t present much of a threat to kids or to teachers but for obvious reasons, Newsom doesn’t want to take a risk that could wind up making his state look worse.