hotair--2020-12-08--Arizona GOP: Are you willing to give your life in this fight?

The type of gutter trash that would post something like this will never grasp that the growing crankishness of the GOP under Trump is part of the reason he lost last month .
A politician as old and stale as Joe Biden wouldn ’ t come anywhere near 80 million votes under normal circumstances .
To get turnout like that for a figure as bland as him requires strong exogenous factors motivating people to vote .
And one of the strongest on November 3 was the fear that some parts of the Trumpified GOP have become a bit too , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a day has passed since Election Day that hasn ’ t affirmed that suspicion .
Some days it ’ s the president dialing up state legislators and asking them to void their elections .
Other days it ’ s state election officials being deluged with death threats or intimidated in their homes .
On one day it was the former National Security Advisor of the United States calling for martial law and an election do-over .
Today it happens to be the state party in Arizona casually inciting Republicans to violence with cutesy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone out there who ’ s taking all of this “ stop the steal ” nonsense very seriously will act on that incitement .
There ’ s no law of political gravity that says only leftists like James Hodgkinson can be driven to kill by their vilification of the other side .
The difference is that , after Hodgkinson shot several Republican congressmen , Bernie Sanders could honestly say that he ’ s never called for violence against his opponents .
What ’ ll the Arizona GOP say ?
Here ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in time : That ’ s Jeff Flake complaining about Trump trying to orchestrate a “ soft coup ” by pressuring Pennsylvania legislators into voiding the results of their election and the only counterpoint Trump has is “ ha ha , you ’ re unelectable.
” As I say : Fascism-curious .
And awkward too , as the Arizona GOP hasn ’ t been a model of electoral success since Flake retired .
Martha McSally lost to Kyrsten Sinema and then to Mark Kelly , leaving the home state of Barry Goldwater and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first time in decades .
Trump himself came up a few thousand votes short there against Sleepy Joe Biden last month .
Flake may be unelectable in Arizona but the Trumpified GOP isn ’ t doing so hot either .
I wonder if that was on Doug Ducey ’ s mind when he sent the president to voicemail while certifying his state ’ s results a few weeks ago .
Trump ’ s tweet is also ironic in that it implies that winning elections is something the GOP base cares deeply about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the populist right apart from Trump himself are Lin Wood and Sidney Powell , both of whom have called on Georgians to stay home in the January 5 Senate runoffs .
Trump lost the popular vote twice and the electoral college once and yet the cult of personality around him seems stronger than ever .
A state party that cared about winning elections wouldn ’ t be posting inflammatory garbage about dying for a cause on its Twitter feed for fear of scaring off moderates .
That ’ s the sort of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as part of a cultural grievance movement , not a political party aiming to win power in order to institute certain policies that ’ ll improve the country .
And that ’ s the divide the GOP will need to manage over the next few years , a split between people who subscribe to a right-wing policy agenda they ’ d like to advance and people who want to fight Trump ’ s enemies , be it the left , the RINOs , whoever .
All of which will suit Trump just fine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and afraid people fighting—over him—is the very top of his hierarchy of needs .
It ’ s his version of self-actualization .
And while he may be forced to give up the office of the presidency , he will not give up being at the center of this storm .
Republicans don ’ t seem capable of understanding where this eventually leads .
So let me spell it out for them : Donald Trump is going to destroy their party .
Not because he wants to or even because he ’ s trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the GOP will be required in order to fill his psychological needs… What Mitch McConnell and company don ’ t seem to understand is that this is the endgame : The MAGA cult no longer sees Democrats and the media as Enemy Number One .
The Republicans who aren ’ t legally permitted to deny reality are now the big threat .
And Trump is going to spend the next two—or four—years at war them .
Stoddard published that yesterday .
As if to prove her point , here ’ s the latest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this : “ Trump blows a hole in the GOP on his way out , ” Politico entitled a story today .
“ State party chairs are tearing into their governors .
Elected officials are knifing one another in the back .
Failed candidates are seizing on Trump ’ s rhetoric to claim they were also victims of voter fraud in at least a half dozen states.
” From day one , he ’ s been the chaos candidate .
The party embraced him , and now it has chaos .
Every bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former CISA chief Chris Krebs , who debunked Trump ’ s bogus theories of election fraud before he was fired and then had to go into hiding after the resulting demagoguery from some righties predictably led to death threats .
Krebs filed a defamation lawsuit against Joe diGenova today because of diGenova ’ s recent comments on Newsmax calling for Krebs to be “ drawn and quartered ” and “ taken out at dawn and shot.
” Krebs will probably lose that suit , but one sympathizes with him for wanting someone who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suffer some sort of legal or professional consequence for it .
That ’ s arguably the singular distinction of the Trumpified GOP : There ’ s really no price to be paid within it for being fascism-curious .
Being fascism-skeptical , as Krebs is , is when you need to watch out .

The type of gutter trash that would post something like this will never grasp that the growing crankishness of the GOP under Trump is part of the reason he lost last month.
A politician as old and stale as Joe Biden wouldn’t come anywhere near 80 million votes under normal circumstances. To get turnout like that for a figure as bland as him requires strong exogenous factors motivating people to vote. And one of the strongest on November 3 was the fear that some parts of the Trumpified GOP have become a bit too, shall we say, fascism-curious.
Not a day has passed since Election Day that hasn’t affirmed that suspicion. Some days it’s the president dialing up state legislators and asking them to void their elections. Other days it’s state election officials being deluged with death threats or intimidated in their homes. On one day it was the former National Security Advisor of the United States calling for martial law and an election do-over.
Today it happens to be the state party in Arizona casually inciting Republicans to violence with cutesy li’l Rambo memes.
Eventually someone out there who’s taking all of this “stop the steal” nonsense very seriously will act on that incitement. There’s no law of political gravity that says only leftists like James Hodgkinson can be driven to kill by their vilification of the other side. The difference is that, after Hodgkinson shot several Republican congressmen, Bernie Sanders could honestly say that he’s never called for violence against his opponents. What’ll the Arizona GOP say?
Here’s the party in microcosm at this specific moment in time:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1336320843484286977
That’s Jeff Flake complaining about Trump trying to orchestrate a “soft coup” by pressuring Pennsylvania legislators into voiding the results of their election and the only counterpoint Trump has is “ha ha, you’re unelectable.” As I say: Fascism-curious.
And awkward too, as the Arizona GOP hasn’t been a model of electoral success since Flake retired. Martha McSally lost to Kyrsten Sinema and then to Mark Kelly, leaving the home state of Barry Goldwater and John McCain with two Democratic senators for the first time in decades. Trump himself came up a few thousand votes short there against Sleepy Joe Biden last month. Flake may be unelectable in Arizona but the Trumpified GOP isn’t doing so hot either. I wonder if that was on Doug Ducey’s mind when he sent the president to voicemail while certifying his state’s results a few weeks ago.
Trump’s tweet is also ironic in that it implies that winning elections is something the GOP base cares deeply about. Right now the most popular people on the populist right apart from Trump himself are Lin Wood and Sidney Powell, both of whom have called on Georgians to stay home in the January 5 Senate runoffs. Trump lost the popular vote twice and the electoral college once and yet the cult of personality around him seems stronger than ever. A state party that cared about winning elections wouldn’t be posting inflammatory garbage about dying for a cause on its Twitter feed for fear of scaring off moderates. That’s the sort of thing you do when you view yourself as part of a cultural grievance movement, not a political party aiming to win power in order to institute certain policies that’ll improve the country. And that’s the divide the GOP will need to manage over the next few years, a split between people who subscribe to a right-wing policy agenda they’d like to advance and people who want to fight Trump’s enemies, be it the left, the RINOs, whoever. All of which will suit Trump just fine, notes A.B. Stoddard:
Angry and afraid people fighting—over him—is the very top of his hierarchy of needs. It’s his version of self-actualization. And while he may be forced to give up the office of the presidency, he will not give up being at the center of this storm. Republicans don’t seem capable of understanding where this eventually leads. So let me spell it out for them: Donald Trump is going to destroy their party. Not because he wants to or even because he’s trying to. But because the destruction of the GOP will be required in order to fill his psychological needs… What Mitch McConnell and company don’t seem to understand is that this is the endgame: The MAGA cult no longer sees Democrats and the media as Enemy Number One. The Republicans who aren’t legally permitted to deny reality are now the big threat. And Trump is going to spend the next two—or four—years at war them.
Stoddard published that yesterday. As if to prove her point, here’s the latest tweet from the president as I write this:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1336385153929793536
“Trump blows a hole in the GOP on his way out,” Politico entitled a story today. “State party chairs are tearing into their governors. Elected officials are knifing one another in the back. Failed candidates are seizing on Trump’s rhetoric to claim they were also victims of voter fraud in at least a half dozen states.” From day one, he’s been the chaos candidate. The party embraced him, and now it has chaos. Every bit is richly earned.
Here’s former CISA chief Chris Krebs, who debunked Trump’s bogus theories of election fraud before he was fired and then had to go into hiding after the resulting demagoguery from some righties predictably led to death threats. Krebs filed a defamation lawsuit against Joe diGenova today because of diGenova’s recent comments on Newsmax calling for Krebs to be “drawn and quartered” and “taken out at dawn and shot.” Krebs will probably lose that suit, but one sympathizes with him for wanting someone who’s incited violence against him to suffer some sort of legal or professional consequence for it. That’s arguably the singular distinction of the Trumpified GOP: There’s really no price to be paid within it for being fascism-curious. Being fascism-skeptical, as Krebs is, is when you need to watch out.


hotair--2020-12-08--Film review: The Gulf of Silence

Film review: The Gulf of Silence

This is a review of the recently released film The Gulf of Silence , directed by M.K .
Rhodes .
It ’ s the tale of a fictional ( ? )
professor who experiences something remarkable , suggesting the possibility of an alien intelligence visiting the Earth .
Her life then goes completely to pieces until she winds up being recruited to come work for a “ three-letter agency ” deep within the black-budget world of the United States government , investigating the UFO phenomenon .
Considering the limitations of both budget and restrictions caused by the pandemic , both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factors in how she was able to proceed , this is a truly remarkable film .
Nearly the entire film is shot in the form of an interview with the professor , Dr. Laura Gale , in a variety of backgrounds .
These segments are interspersed with wild and creative CGI imagery , historical footage and other imagery to flesh out the film .
It ’ s visually a beautiful piece telling a highly intriguing story and the score is hauntingly beautiful .
Upon its release , the movie became the subject of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some viewers seeing it as strictly a work of narrative fiction , while others claimed that it was a “ documentary in disguise ” revealing information about the United States government and UFOs .
We asked Ms. Rhodes to clear that up for us .
Here is her answer .
It is , in truth , both .
The framework of the film is fiction , but it contains more hard facts than virtually any UFO documentary bar James Fox ’ s excellent “ The Phenomenon ” .
This is less a reflection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is a reflection on the average UFO documentary .
In actuality , you can not make a proper “ documentary ” about the UFO phenomenon because ultimately you are either making a documentary founded on , at best , speculation or hedged bets , or you are simply interviewing witnesses , and that is not a documentary about UFOs , that is simply a documentary about people who claim they have seen UFOs .
A fictional framework allows me the luxury of speculating without the risk of being wrong and then having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allows me to say things that the more neutral tone of something like “ The Phenomenon ” can not .
Ms. Rhodes informed us that she ’ s long been a fan of the genre , describing herself as “ a child of the X-Files , ” and her love of the subject comes through clearly .
The December 2017 release of that blockbuster New York Times article on AATIP was what prompted her to begin work on the project .
I , for one , am very glad that she did .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Amazon along with other platforms .
Visit the film ’ s website for additional details .
Despite thoroughly enjoying this film from beginning to end , I vacillated a bit on a final rating because of the rather ambiguous nature of the presentation in terms of fact versus fantasy .
But in the end , on the Hot Air scale for subscription-service films , The Gulf of Silence gets a 3.5 : 4 – Subscribe to the service to watch this 3 – Make time to watch it if you already subscribe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ else appeals 1 – Avoid at all costs The Gulf of Silence is rated TV-MA ( 18+ ) though I ’ m not entirely sure why .
It ’ s not sexual in nature , nor does it contain much in the way of offensive language .
I would say this movie is fine at least for older teens , though it deals with some complicated subjects , potential conspiracy theories , and other matters that may require a bit of explanation for younger viewers .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa5kYfXhio4
This is a review of the recently released film The Gulf of Silence, directed by M.K. Rhodes. It’s the tale of a fictional (?) professor who experiences something remarkable, suggesting the possibility of an alien intelligence visiting the Earth. Her life then goes completely to pieces until she winds up being recruited to come work for a “three-letter agency” deep within the black-budget world of the United States government, investigating the UFO phenomenon.
Considering the limitations of both budget and restrictions caused by the pandemic, both of which Rhodes told Hot Air were factors in how she was able to proceed, this is a truly remarkable film. Nearly the entire film is shot in the form of an interview with the professor, Dr. Laura Gale, in a variety of backgrounds. These segments are interspersed with wild and creative CGI imagery, historical footage and other imagery to flesh out the film. It’s visually a beautiful piece telling a highly intriguing story and the score is hauntingly beautiful.
Upon its release, the movie became the subject of considerable speculation in online forums, with some viewers seeing it as strictly a work of narrative fiction, while others claimed that it was a “documentary in disguise” revealing information about the United States government and UFOs. We asked Ms. Rhodes to clear that up for us. Here is her answer.
It is, in truth, both. The framework of the film is fiction, but it contains more hard facts than virtually any UFO documentary bar James Fox’s excellent “The Phenomenon”. This is less a reflection of my film’s truthfulness than it is a reflection on the average UFO documentary. In actuality, you cannot make a proper “documentary” about the UFO phenomenon because ultimately you are either making a documentary founded on, at best, speculation or hedged bets, or you are simply interviewing witnesses, and that is not a documentary about UFOs, that is simply a documentary about people who claim they have seen UFOs. A fictional framework allows me the luxury of speculating without the risk of being wrong and then having the film become dated; it also allows me to say things that the more neutral tone of something like “The Phenomenon” cannot.
Ms. Rhodes informed us that she’s long been a fan of the genre, describing herself as “a child of the X-Files,” and her love of the subject comes through clearly. The December 2017 release of that blockbuster New York Times article on AATIP was what prompted her to begin work on the project. I, for one, am very glad that she did.
The Gulf of Silence is now streaming on Amazon along with other platforms. Visit the film’s website for additional details.
Despite thoroughly enjoying this film from beginning to end, I vacillated a bit on a final rating because of the rather ambiguous nature of the presentation in terms of fact versus fantasy. But in the end, on the Hot Air scale for subscription-service films, The Gulf of Silence gets a 3.5:
4 – Subscribe to the service to watch this
3 – Make time to watch it if you already subscribe
2 – Worth a watch if nothing else appeals
1 – Avoid at all costs
The Gulf of Silence is rated TV-MA (18+) though I’m not entirely sure why. It’s not sexual in nature, nor does it contain much in the way of offensive language. I would say this movie is fine at least for older teens, though it deals with some complicated subjects, potential conspiracy theories, and other matters that may require a bit of explanation for younger viewers.


hotair--2020-12-08--"Panic in the West Wing"? Ellis tests positive for COVID after White House Christmas party on Friday

Maybe Sidney Powell should be glad to have been “ distanced ” from Team Trump ’ s legal leaders .
According to ABC News , Jenna Ellis has informed people that she has now tested positive for COVID-19 , shortly after Donald Trump revealed the same diagnosis for Rudy Giuliani .
Ellis attended a White House Christmas party on Friday , though , which now has touched off a “ panic in the West Wing , ” according to ABC ’ s sources : Trump campaign legal adviser Jenna Ellis has informed associates she ’ s tested positive for coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the White House , igniting panic in the West Wing , multiple sources tell ABC News .
Ellis attended a senior staff Christmas party at the White House on Friday , where she was photographed not wearing a mask .
Panic there may or may not be , but anger ?
Most definitely .
Axios ’ Jonathan Swan reported that his sources are worried that a maskless Ellis has created another super-spreader event at the White House , and put their families at risk all over again : President Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tested positive for the coronavirus , multiple sources tell Axios , stirring West Wing fears after she attended a senior staff Christmas party on Friday .
Driving the news : There are concerns about the potential for another White House superspreader event , though it was unclear whether Ellis posed a risk when she attended .
Ellis declined to confirm the diagnosis to Axios .
“ People brought their families , ” said one senior White House official who attended the party and has since been informed of Ellis ’ diagnosis .
Er @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House knowing the lax attitude toward masks and social distancing in this administration ?
I get the anger , but caveat emptor , dude .
What did they think would happen when they played COVID-19 Russian roulette ?
They ’ re angry enough at this point , Swan reports , that they ’ re beginning to lash out at Ellis for her legal challenges to the election .
One “ senior administration official ” blamed her for pushing Trump into conspiracy theories about the election .
The skepticism over Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from within the ( White ) House , and it ’ s about to burst forth : Swan has been rather famously tied to well-informed sources in the administration , but he ’ s not the only reporter getting leaks about Ellis and the party .
Jake Tapper also heard from a “ former senior admin official ” about the danger of outbreaks from the holiday parties , which had already been controversial : Forbes also notes that Ellis has been a skeptic of COVID-19 ’ s status as a pandemic .
Just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arizona ’ s speaker of the house for closing the legislature for a week after Rudy Giuiani ’ s appearance last week .
“ EXCUSE !
!
” tweeted Ellis : Now it looks more like Giuliani and Ellis are putting even more obstacles into their own paths , and not just legal stumbles either .
I think people can cancel their calls to Bowers at this point .
Just a few minutes ago , Ellis tweeted out a criticism of the media for running with anonymous sourcing … but which also doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the judges aren ’ t buying the affidavits either in cases where they have commented on the merits of claims .
Affidavits aren ’ t automatically “ believed ” ( and neither are “ sources ” ) ; their claims are tested in court to see whether they are material , provable , and applicable to the complaint .
That ’ s why it makes sense to wait for hearings rather than just embrace “ affidavits ” as a standard of proof .
And besides , Ellis hasn ’ t claimed that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That might be why the West Wing is angry , if not “ panicked , ” as ABC puts it .
Anyway , let ’ s pray for a quick recovery for Ellis and Giuliani , and good fortune for everyone at the White House that might have been exposed to the virus .
Perhaps this will be a good lesson to everyone that this pandemic is no joke , and that maybe this isn ’ t the time to bring families to large Christmas parties .

Maybe Sidney Powell should be glad to have been “distanced” from Team Trump’s legal leaders. According to ABC News, Jenna Ellis has informed people that she has now tested positive for COVID-19, shortly after Donald Trump revealed the same diagnosis for Rudy Giuliani. Ellis attended a White House Christmas party on Friday, though, which now has touched off a “panic in the West Wing,” according to ABC’s sources:
Trump campaign legal adviser Jenna Ellis has informed associates she’s tested positive for coronavirus only days after attending a Christmas party at the White House, igniting panic in the West Wing, multiple sources tell ABC News. Ellis attended a senior staff Christmas party at the White House on Friday, where she was photographed not wearing a mask.
Panic there may or may not be, but anger? Most definitely. Axios’ Jonathan Swan reported that his sources are worried that a maskless Ellis has created another super-spreader event at the White House, and put their families at risk all over again:
President Trump’s lawyer Jenna Ellis has informed associates she tested positive for the coronavirus, multiple sources tell Axios, stirring West Wing fears after she attended a senior staff Christmas party on Friday. Driving the news: There are concerns about the potential for another White House superspreader event, though it was unclear whether Ellis posed a risk when she attended. Ellis declined to confirm the diagnosis to Axios. “People brought their families,” said one senior White House official who attended the party and has since been informed of Ellis’ diagnosis.
Er … what? People brought families to the White House knowing the lax attitude toward masks and social distancing in this administration? I get the anger, but caveat emptor, dude. What did they think would happen when they played COVID-19 Russian roulette?
They’re angry enough at this point, Swan reports, that they’re beginning to lash out at Ellis for her legal challenges to the election. One “senior administration official” blamed her for pushing Trump into conspiracy theories about the election. The skepticism over Trump’s claims about the election is coming from within the (White) House, and it’s about to burst forth:
“She had the nerve to show up at the senior staff Christmas party knowing everyone was furious with her for constantly stirring Trump up with nonsense,” said a senior administration official.
Swan has been rather famously tied to well-informed sources in the administration, but he’s not the only reporter getting leaks about Ellis and the party. Jake Tapper also heard from a “former senior admin official” about the danger of outbreaks from the holiday parties, which had already been controversial:
2/ “… It is almost certain there will end up being additional administration outbreaks as a result of these parties.” — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) December 8, 2020
Forbes also notes that Ellis has been a skeptic of COVID-19’s status as a pandemic. Just two days ago, she scoffed at Arizona’s speaker of the house for closing the legislature for a week after Rudy Giuiani’s appearance last week. “EXCUSE!!” tweeted Ellis:
Absolutely unnecessary. Call Rusty Bowers in AZ and tell him not to use COVID as an EXCUSE!! https://t.co/tWoXAVeWFa — Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) December 7, 2020
Now it looks more like Giuliani and Ellis are putting even more obstacles into their own paths, and not just legal stumbles either. I think people can cancel their calls to Bowers at this point.
Just a few minutes ago, Ellis tweeted out a criticism of the media for running with anonymous sourcing … but which also doesn’t include a denial:
Funny how MSM is quick to believe one or two unnamed “sources” every time, and yet refuses to acknowledge hundreds of eye witnesses across six states who signed affidavits under oath. — Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) December 8, 2020
Well, the judges aren’t buying the affidavits either in cases where they have commented on the merits of claims. Affidavits aren’t automatically “believed” (and neither are “sources”); their claims are tested in court to see whether they are material, provable, and applicable to the complaint. That’s why it makes sense to wait for hearings rather than just embrace “affidavits” as a standard of proof.
And besides, Ellis hasn’t claimed that the reporting in this case is erroneous. That might be why the West Wing is angry, if not “panicked,” as ABC puts it.
Anyway, let’s pray for a quick recovery for Ellis and Giuliani, and good fortune for everyone at the White House that might have been exposed to the virus. Perhaps this will be a good lesson to everyone that this pandemic is no joke, and that maybe this isn’t the time to bring families to large Christmas parties.


hotair--2020-12-08--Excellent: FDA says Pfizer's vaccine provides strong immunity after one dose as vaccinations begin i

Excellent: FDA says Pfizer's vaccine provides strong immunity after one dose as vaccinations begin in UK

It ’ s still a two-shot regimen , but you don ’ t need to wait for the second shot before you begin reaping the immunological benefits .
Ten days after your first dose , you ’ ll already have a solid defense against the virus .
Which means once vaccinations really start rolling across the U.S. we should start seeing case counts drop almost immediately .
*If* vaccinations really start rolling across the U.S. , I guess I should say .
Thanks to the White House ’ s baffling refusal to purchase more than 100 million doses of Pfizer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an open question when most of us will have access to this miracle of science .
Maybe we ’ ll get stuck with Oxford vaccine instead .
That one ’ s 70 percent effective on average according to the final data published today , not 90+ percent like Pfizer ’ s and Moderna ’ s products are .
Anyway , today ’ s news from the FDA is wonderful in two ways .
One , obviously , is that the Pfizer vaccine provides protection quickly after one dose .
The other is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclusion , they must be tantalizingly close to issuing an emergency use authorization for the vaccine .
It won ’ t be long now… New coronavirus cases quickly tapered off in the vaccinated group of volunteers about 10 days after the first dose , according to one graph in the briefing materials .
In the placebo group , cases kept steadily increasing… The efficacy of the vaccine after the first dose is about 52 percent , according to Dr. William C. Gruber , senior vice president of Pfizer Vaccine Clinical Research and Development @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rises to about 95 percent .
“ Two doses of vaccine provide maximum protection , ” he said .
Many experts have expressed concern that the coronavirus vaccines might protect some people better than others .
But the results in the briefing materials indicate no such problem .
The vaccine has a high efficacy rate in both men and women , as well as similar rates in white , Black and Latino people .
It also worked well in obese people , who carry a greater risk of getting sick with Covid-19 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a weak immune response in older adults .
But Pfizer and BioNTech found that people over 65 got about as much protection from the coronavirus vaccine as younger people did .
The second dose doesn ’ t just increase the Pfizer vaccine ’ s efficacy , it likely makes the immunity one enjoys from infection more durable .
Taking all the data under consideration , an immunologist at Yale called it an “ A+ report card.
” The one catch : Standard vaccine symptoms like fatigue and achiness were prevalent enough after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day off of work to recover after receiving it .
Bummer , but beats being on a ventilator .
Speaking of which , the UK ’ s vaccination drive has officially begun .
Among those to receive the shot today : 81-year-old William Shakespere .
No fooling .
The very first recipient was a 90-year-old grandmother , the very model of a stiff-upper-lip Briton : Keenan , who turns 91 next week , said she felt “ privileged ” to be the first to get the shot .
“ It ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for because it means I can finally look forward to spending time with my family and friends in the New Year after being on my own for most of the year , ” she said , according to a statement released by the UK ’ s National Health Service ( NHS ) … “ This is for a good cause so I ’ m so pleased I had it done .
This is a terrible , terrible disease so we do want rid of it , ” she added .
Keenan advised others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the offer : “ I would say go for it , ” she said .
“ If I can do it , well , so can you.
” If you lived through the Blitz and the very real prospect of a Nazi invasion , no vaccine ’ s going to faze you .
Meanwhile , we ’ re now a day removed from the news that the Trump administration declined Pfizer ’ s offer to purchase more than 100 million doses and it ’ s still unclear to me why .
Per the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal with the company gave it the option to buy another 500 million doses on top of the first 100 million ; it declined to exercise that option over the summer , which means now it may have to wait to place a second order .
What I didn ’ t know until I watched this Scott Gottlieb clip this morning , though , was that apparently Pfizer gave the feds another chance to exercise its option after the interim data came out showing how effective the vaccine seemed to be .
Why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a vaccine knowing that it got an A+ on its report card ?
Especially when other manufacturers , like Oxford and AstraZeneca , may only deliver a B+ ?
All I can think is that the feds are prioritizing speed over efficacy to some degree .
They can get shots into arms more quickly by contracting with five or six different manufacturers .
If you go all-in on Pfizer , you ’ re stuck waiting day after day as Pfizer produces more doses .
If you order from Pfizer *and* Moderna *and* @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that ’ s four outfits that are all cranking out doses simultaneously .
I can understand that logic .
But it ’ s going to create problems if , say , the Sanofi vaccine is only 50 percent effective .
Would you rather get that one or wait for a new batch of Pfizer ’ s vaccine to become available ?
If Americans end up being “ picky ” about which specific vaccine they ’ re willing to get , it ’ ll slow down the vaccination process .
When someone offers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A+ product that you desperately need , the answer is usually yes .
Trump is hosting a “ vaccine summit ” today — which Pfizer and Moderna won ’ t attend , as it would look bad for them to be gladhanding the president at a moment when their vaccines are pending before the FDA .
He ’ s going to sign an executive order too that will prioritize delivery of the vaccine to Americans before other countries receive it , which is a nice bit of nationalist PR but ultimately may have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. to jump the line for Pfizer ’ s and Moderna ’ s product ahead of their foreign purchasers , he could invoke the Defense Production Act , maybe .
But foreign governments will be irate at seeing the White House try to elbow its way in front of them after Trump ’ s administration declined to place a bigger order when it had the chance .
Vaccine disaster or diplomatic disaster ?
Those may be our choices .
I ’ ll leave you with this enjoyable interview from the UK today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the arm — so to speak .

It’s still a two-shot regimen, but you don’t need to wait for the second shot before you begin reaping the immunological benefits. Ten days after your first dose, you’ll already have a solid defense against the virus. Which means once vaccinations really start rolling across the U.S. we should start seeing case counts drop almost immediately.
*If* vaccinations really start rolling across the U.S., I guess I should say. Thanks to the White House’s baffling refusal to purchase more than 100 million doses of Pfizer’s product, it’s an open question when most of us will have access to this miracle of science.
Maybe we’ll get stuck with Oxford vaccine instead. That one’s 70 percent effective on average according to the final data published today, not 90+ percent like Pfizer’s and Moderna’s products are.
Anyway, today’s news from the FDA is wonderful in two ways. One, obviously, is that the Pfizer vaccine provides protection quickly after one dose. The other is that, if they’ve reached this conclusion, they must be tantalizingly close to issuing an emergency use authorization for the vaccine. It won’t be long now…
New coronavirus cases quickly tapered off in the vaccinated group of volunteers about 10 days after the first dose, according to one graph in the briefing materials. In the placebo group, cases kept steadily increasing… The efficacy of the vaccine after the first dose is about 52 percent, according to Dr. William C. Gruber, senior vice president of Pfizer Vaccine Clinical Research and Development. After the second dose, that rises to about 95 percent. “Two doses of vaccine provide maximum protection,” he said. Many experts have expressed concern that the coronavirus vaccines might protect some people better than others. But the results in the briefing materials indicate no such problem. The vaccine has a high efficacy rate in both men and women, as well as similar rates in white, Black and Latino people. It also worked well in obese people, who carry a greater risk of getting sick with Covid-19. Some vaccines for other diseases set off a weak immune response in older adults. But Pfizer and BioNTech found that people over 65 got about as much protection from the coronavirus vaccine as younger people did.
The second dose doesn’t just increase the Pfizer vaccine’s efficacy, it likely makes the immunity one enjoys from infection more durable. Taking all the data under consideration, an immunologist at Yale called it an “A+ report card.” The one catch: Standard vaccine symptoms like fatigue and achiness were prevalent enough after the second dose that you might need a day off of work to recover after receiving it. Bummer, but beats being on a ventilator.
Speaking of which, the UK’s vaccination drive has officially begun. Among those to receive the shot today: 81-year-old William Shakespere. No fooling. The very first recipient was a 90-year-old grandmother, the very model of a stiff-upper-lip Briton:
Keenan, who turns 91 next week, said she felt “privileged” to be the first to get the shot. “It’s the best early birthday present I could wish for because it means I can finally look forward to spending time with my family and friends in the New Year after being on my own for most of the year,” she said, according to a statement released by the UK’s National Health Service (NHS)… “This is for a good cause so I’m so pleased I had it done. This is a terrible, terrible disease so we do want rid of it,” she added. Keenan advised others eligible for the vaccine to take up the offer: “I would say go for it,” she said. “If I can do it, well, so can you.”
If you lived through the Blitz and the very real prospect of a Nazi invasion, no vaccine’s going to faze you.
Meanwhile, we’re now a day removed from the news that the Trump administration declined Pfizer’s offer to purchase more than 100 million doses and it’s still unclear to me why. Per the AP, the government’s initial deal with the company gave it the option to buy another 500 million doses on top of the first 100 million; it declined to exercise that option over the summer, which means now it may have to wait to place a second order. What I didn’t know until I watched this Scott Gottlieb clip this morning, though, was that apparently Pfizer gave the feds another chance to exercise its option after the interim data came out showing how effective the vaccine seemed to be.
Why would you decline to order more doses of a vaccine knowing that it got an A+ on its report card? Especially when other manufacturers, like Oxford and AstraZeneca, may only deliver a B+?
Pfizer board member @ScottGottliebMD on the report US declined to purchase additional doses: "$PFE did offer an additional allotment coming out of that plan … multiple times and as recently as after the interim data came out and we knew this vaccine looked to be effective." pic.twitter.com/VFC4evF8Ay — Squawk Box (@SquawkCNBC) December 8, 2020
All I can think is that the feds are prioritizing speed over efficacy to some degree. They can get shots into arms more quickly by contracting with five or six different manufacturers. If you go all-in on Pfizer, you’re stuck waiting day after day as Pfizer produces more doses. If you order from Pfizer *and* Moderna *and* Johnson & Johnson *and* Sanofi, etc, that’s four outfits that are all cranking out doses simultaneously.
I can understand that logic. But it’s going to create problems if, say, the Sanofi vaccine is only 50 percent effective. Would you rather get that one or wait for a new batch of Pfizer’s vaccine to become available? If Americans end up being “picky” about which specific vaccine they’re willing to get, it’ll slow down the vaccination process.
When someone offers to let you buy more of an A+ product that you desperately need, the answer is usually yes.
Trump is hosting a “vaccine summit” today — which Pfizer and Moderna won’t attend, as it would look bad for them to be gladhanding the president at a moment when their vaccines are pending before the FDA. He’s going to sign an executive order too that will prioritize delivery of the vaccine to Americans before other countries receive it, which is a nice bit of nationalist PR but ultimately may have no legal effect. If he wants the U.S. to jump the line for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s product ahead of their foreign purchasers, he could invoke the Defense Production Act, maybe. But foreign governments will be irate at seeing the White House try to elbow its way in front of them after Trump’s administration declined to place a bigger order when it had the chance. Vaccine disaster or diplomatic disaster? Those may be our choices.
I’ll leave you with this enjoyable interview from the UK today. It’s a shot in the arm — so to speak.


hotair--2020-12-08--NY-22 update: More uncounted ballots discovered and one county says election workers may have COVID

Given that it has been a full month since the election you might think a certified vote total and a winner could be determined in New York ’ s 22nd district by now .
After all , literally every other district has done it .
But in NY-22 the process drags on with no clear end in sight .
That ’ s not an exaggeration as you ’ ll see in a moment .
As I described last week , there are a couple of specific issues that have prevented this race from being resolved .
In Oneida county , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenged with sticky notes .
They sent those ballots to Chief Justice Scott DelConte who is trying to resolve this case/election .
But in the process some of the notes fell off the ballots , meaning the Judge can no longer tell why some of the ballots were challenged or even if they were counted .
This has become known as “ Stickygate.
” In Chenago County , election officials announced about a week ago that they had discovered 55 uncounted ballots , 44 of which were from registered voters .
Those votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tenney won , but her attorney has argued against counting them .
Instead she wants to certify the vote as it stands , preserving her 12 vote lead over Brindisi .
The expectation was that Chief Justice DelConte would reach a decision about how to proceed after a hearing with attorneys for both sides Monday .
The hearing was held yesterday and based on his criticism of attorneys for both sides it sounds as if the judge is leaning toward ordering a full recount .
DelConte heard arguments for about an hour on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He announced that he will soon issue his written ruling .
But his line of questioning during the hearing gave some insight into problems he sees with both candidates ’ arguments .
Though he has not ruled , DelConte suggested that Tenney ’ s lawyers were trying to get the judge to order results to stand that they know are inaccurate .
At the same time , he suggested that Brindisi ’ s attorneys are asking only for recounts in counties or precincts that they deemed to be a political advantage to Brindisi… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strategies , but they weren ’ t convincing him .
Also , he is obligated to maintain public confidence in the election , he said .
“ None of the lawyers here want to win a lawsuit , they want to win an election , ” he said .
“ But the role of the court here as I see is to make sure that everyone follows the law.
” If the vote can ’ t be certified as it is ( what Tenney ’ s camp wants ) and partial recounts wouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s camp wants ) that only leaves one option : a full recount of everything .
Even Brindisi ’ s lawyer thinks that would take too long but that ’ s where DelConte is headed .
A recount might at least solve the Stickygate mess except that Oneida County just announced that one of their election workers tested positive for COVID-19 after working a shift last Friday .
That means all of the County ’ s election workers have been exposed to COVID and will now need to be tested .
Depending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s ability to perform a recount could be severely limited .
Also during the Monday hearing , DelConte revealed that a dozen more uncounted ballots have been discovered in Chenago County : Tenney won the vote in Chenago County by more than 10 points so , statistically speaking , those extra votes should help her .
You would think the Brindisi camp would be very suspicious that votes keep turning up there but they seem convinced they will make up for those votes in other counties .
There ’ s only one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s to have the entire race turned into a TV movie .
Some of the twists , like election workers getting COVID , wouldn ’ t be believable if not for the fact they actually happened .
But the twists and turns in this race would make for great drama .
And given that we may be about to start a full recount , someone in Hollywood could probably have this written , cast and in production before we learn the outcome .

Given that it has been a full month since the election you might think a certified vote total and a winner could be determined in New York’s 22nd district by now. After all, literally every other district has done it. But in NY-22 the process drags on with no clear end in sight. That’s not an exaggeration as you’ll see in a moment.
As I described last week, there are a couple of specific issues that have prevented this race from being resolved. In Oneida county, elections officials marked ballots that had been challenged with sticky notes. They sent those ballots to Chief Justice Scott DelConte who is trying to resolve this case/election. But in the process some of the notes fell off the ballots, meaning the Judge can no longer tell why some of the ballots were challenged or even if they were counted. This has become known as “Stickygate.”
In Chenago County, election officials announced about a week ago that they had discovered 55 uncounted ballots, 44 of which were from registered voters. Those votes came mostly from Republicans in a County Tenney won, but her attorney has argued against counting them. Instead she wants to certify the vote as it stands, preserving her 12 vote lead over Brindisi.
The expectation was that Chief Justice DelConte would reach a decision about how to proceed after a hearing with attorneys for both sides Monday. The hearing was held yesterday and based on his criticism of attorneys for both sides it sounds as if the judge is leaning toward ordering a full recount.
DelConte heard arguments for about an hour on Monday from attorneys for both parties. He announced that he will soon issue his written ruling. But his line of questioning during the hearing gave some insight into problems he sees with both candidates’ arguments. Though he has not ruled, DelConte suggested that Tenney’s lawyers were trying to get the judge to order results to stand that they know are inaccurate. At the same time, he suggested that Brindisi’s attorneys are asking only for recounts in counties or precincts that they deemed to be a political advantage to Brindisi… DelConte said he understood both campaigns’ strategies, but they weren’t convincing him. Also, he is obligated to maintain public confidence in the election, he said. “None of the lawyers here want to win a lawsuit, they want to win an election,” he said. “But the role of the court here as I see is to make sure that everyone follows the law.”
If the vote can’t be certified as it is (what Tenney’s camp wants) and partial recounts wouldn’t be fair (what Brindisi’s camp wants) that only leaves one option: a full recount of everything. Even Brindisi’s lawyer thinks that would take too long but that’s where DelConte is headed.
A recount might at least solve the Stickygate mess except that Oneida County just announced that one of their election workers tested positive for COVID-19 after working a shift last Friday. That means all of the County’s election workers have been exposed to COVID and will now need to be tested. Depending how many get sick, the county’s ability to perform a recount could be severely limited.
Also during the Monday hearing, DelConte revealed that a dozen more uncounted ballots have been discovered in Chenago County:
During the proceedings, DelConte revealed at least 12 more ballots had been found in a drawer in Chenango County, prior to 55 uncounted early voting ballots discovered last week. While the Brindisi campaign wants to count those ballots, the Tenney campaign argued the votes should have already been canvassed and an evidentiary hearing would be required to figure out where the ballots were prior to being discovered.
Tenney won the vote in Chenago County by more than 10 points so, statistically speaking, those extra votes should help her. You would think the Brindisi camp would be very suspicious that votes keep turning up there but they seem convinced they will make up for those votes in other counties.
There’s only one way to salvage this situation and that’s to have the entire race turned into a TV movie. Some of the twists, like election workers getting COVID, wouldn’t be believable if not for the fact they actually happened. But the twists and turns in this race would make for great drama. And given that we may be about to start a full recount, someone in Hollywood could probably have this written, cast and in production before we learn the outcome.
Update 12/9: Tuesday afternoon, Justice Del Conte didn’t order a full recount but he did refuse to certify the vote and ordered each county to check thousands of absentee ballots:
Justice Scott J. DelConte…denied a motion by Tenney’s lawyers, who had asked the court to order the eight counties in the district to certify her as the winner in an election where more than 318,000 ballots were cast. But he ordered each county election board in the 22nd Congressional District to recheck counting errors that surfaced in recent weeks, and review about 2,200 absentee and affidavit ballots, including 809 disputed by the campaigns. All told, voters cast 60,000 absentee and affidavit ballots in the election. Where it’s not possible to correct the errors, the counties must go back and conduct a manual recount of any ballot in question, DelConte wrote in a 20-page order.
In short, this is the free-for-all that Brindisi’s team wanted. The uncounted ballots in Chenago County will now be counted (at least the valid ones from registered voters). In Oneida County some effort will be made to straighten out Stickygate, though it seems unlikely that can be done. There is no timeline in place for this work. Instead, Justice Del Conte asked for an update next Friday. Maybe we’ll have a result in this race by Christmas.


hotair--2020-12-08--"What is this garbage?": Woke Santa makes kid cry over Nerf guns

Broke : Dreaming of the Red Ryder Carbine Action air rifle .
Woke : Shaming a child in public to the point of tears over a request for a friggin ’ Nerf gun .
Count me with Meghan McCain — this person is a flat-out garbage choice for any interaction with children , let alone as Santa Claus : “ No , no guns , ” he said in a video posted Monday after the boy said he wanted a gun .
The boy ’ s mother then clarified the request , saying , “ A Nerf gun.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Santa replied in the video , which has been viewed more than 200,000 times .
“ Nope .
If your dad wants to get it for you , that ’ s fine , but I can ’ t bring it to you.
” He continued : “ What else would you like ?
There ’ s lots of other toys .
There ’ s Legos , there ’ s bicycles , there ’ s cars and trucks .
What do you think ?
” The boy then began to cry as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Imagine bringing your child all the way to a mall Santa in the middle of a pandemic just so he can capture a small part of the magic of Christmas , and then getting tangled up in someone ’ s Woke Lecture Series instead .
At least in A Christmas Story , the Santa had a real safety issue in mind — “ you ’ ll poke your eye out , kid !
” ( Also : Ralphie nearly did later in the film . )
There is no safety issue with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s earnest request for one .
There ’ s only an adult imposing his political agenda on kids just looking for a brief sense of wonder and joy with Santa Claus , and shaming them for violating his taste in Christmas gift requests .
Garbage might be too mild a word , come to think of it .
Thankfully , this does have a happy ending .
It even ends with a firing — although not in the firearms sense : That ’ s how you restore the magic … and maybe send @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the joy of children .
Someone ’ s getting a lump of coal in their stocking , that ’ s for sure .

Broke: Dreaming of the Red Ryder Carbine Action air rifle. Woke: Shaming a child in public to the point of tears over a request for a friggin’ Nerf gun.
Count me with Meghan McCain — this person is a flat-out garbage choice for any interaction with children, let alone as Santa Claus:
What is this garbage? This man is a woke Santa who hates nerf guns and so he makes kids cry?! If your liberal politics are too much of an issue to interact with children maybe you shouldn’t be a Santa! https://t.co/v9QKJ2JH6e — Meghan McCain (@MeghanMcCain) December 8, 2020
“No, no guns,” he said in a video posted Monday after the boy said he wanted a gun. The boy’s mother then clarified the request, saying, “A Nerf gun.” “Nope, not even a Nerf gun,” Santa replied in the video, which has been viewed more than 200,000 times. “Nope. If your dad wants to get it for you, that’s fine, but I can’t bring it to you.” He continued: “What else would you like? There’s lots of other toys. There’s Legos, there’s bicycles, there’s cars and trucks. What do you think?” The boy then began to cry as his mother walked over to console him.
Imagine bringing your child all the way to a mall Santa in the middle of a pandemic just so he can capture a small part of the magic of Christmas, and then getting tangled up in someone’s Woke Lecture Series instead. At least in A Christmas Story, the Santa had a real safety issue in mind — “you’ll poke your eye out, kid!” (Also: Ralphie nearly did later in the film.) There is no safety issue with Nerf guns or in this kid’s earnest request for one. There’s only an adult imposing his political agenda on kids just looking for a brief sense of wonder and joy with Santa Claus, and shaming them for violating his taste in Christmas gift requests.
Garbage might be too mild a word, come to think of it.
Thankfully, this does have a happy ending. It even ends with a firing — although not in the firearms sense:
That’s how you restore the magic … and maybe send a message to the wokesters who intrude on the joy of children. Someone’s getting a lump of coal in their stocking, that’s for sure.


hotair--2020-12-08--Sure looks like Biden's pick for defense secretary will have trouble getting confirmed; <span class=

Sure looks like Biden's pick for defense secretary will have trouble getting confirmed; Update: Blumenthal says no

Alleged pick , I should say .
It was widely reported last night that retired Gen. Lloyd Austin is his choice but Sleepy Joe hasn ’ t confirmed it yet .
And maybe there ’ s a reason for that .
Austin is a controversial selection , as we ’ re about to see .
Maybe this was a trial balloon from Team Biden , leaking Austin ’ s name to see how congressional Democrats would react .
If the feedback was bad — and it ’ s been fairly bad — Biden could always turn around and nominate one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Jeh Johnson , instead .
On the other hand , according to Politico , Biden himself offered Austin the job on Sunday and Austin accepted .
That sounds like more than a trial balloon .
Why Austin instead of Flournoy or Johnson ?
A few reasons .
First , African-American lawmakers have been lobbying Biden to appoint more black officials to his cabinet .
Biden ’ s been considering Deval Patrick for Attorney General but the expectation is that that job will go to Sally Yates , Doug Jones , or Lisa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Johnson , like Austin , is African-American but he ’ s “ been criticized for his record on expanding family detention [ as DHS chief ] and accelerating deportations , as well as approving hundreds of drone strikes against suspected terrorists that killed civilians.
” He ’ s too much of a hawk , and a border hawk , to make progressives happy .
As for Flournoy , she ’ d be the first woman defense secretary in U.S. history .
But she ’ s white , and she never built the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did when she worked for Obama ’ s defense department .
“ Biden … trusts Austin , as they worked together when Biden served as vice president and had a large foreign policy portfolio , ” Politico noted .
That ’ s in keeping with Biden ’ s general approach to appointments : He wants people generally whom he knows well and is comfortable with , like Tony Blinken .
Austin was the commanding general in Iraq during Obama ’ s first term and the head of CENTCOM in his second .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years .
So what ’ s the problem with the pick ?
As I say , Austin is a retired military officer — and under U.S. law , retired officers aren ’ t eligible to be defense secretary until they ’ ve been retired for seven years .
Austin ’ s been retired for four .
In order to serve , he ’ ll need the same sort of waiver that James Mattis received from Congress before he was appointed defense secretary by Trump in 2017 .
Mattis was only the second retired @ @ @ @ @ @ @ George Marshall was the first , nearly 70 years before .
Now here we are with Biden requesting the same sort of exemption for his guy even though he has two perfectly acceptable alternatives in Flournoy and Johnson .
In other words , after running an entire presidential campaign vowing to restore “ norms ” to Washington , Sleepy Joe is about to follow Trump ’ s lead by busting one before he ’ s sworn in .
Lots of people are unhappy about it this morning , and not all are Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to work for Obama ’ s defense department .
If you ’ re thinking “ Who cares what she thinks ?
” , try this on instead : Slotkin is a former CIA analyst turned Democratic congresswoman from Michigan .
She just won a second term in Congress representing a Republican-leaning district , which makes her a prominent centrist voice in Pelosi ’ s newly diminished caucus .
The fact that she ’ s uncomfortable with another retired general in charge of the Pentagon suggests Biden will have some trouble with this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re inclined to say “ Who cares what she thinks ?
” to Slotkin too , since after all it ’ s the Senate rather than the House that confirms nominations , remember that Austin will need both houses of Congress to act to grant him a waiver .
Also consider this : That ’ s at least two Dems , both of whom are still sitting senators , who voted against a waiver for Mattis three years ago because they thought having a recently retired general atop the Pentagon was a blow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Never underestimate a politician ’ s capacity for hypocrisy ( especially Kirsten Gillibrand ’ s ) , but if Reed and Gillibrand stick to their guns on that then Biden will need Republican votes to confirm Austin no matter what happens in the Georgia Senate runoffs .
Will those votes be available ?
Tom Cotton , whose opinion may carry a bit of extra weight in the Senate debate due to his own status as a veteran , told Fox News this morning that he suspects “ that many senators believe that while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distinction and he might be a suitable nomination for many other Cabinet positions , that it ’ s time to restore proper civil military balance to the Pentagon and granting another waiver might put that at risk.
” Reporters have already noticed that Biden has an unusually large number of former senior military officers on his transition “ landing ” teams for different agencies as well , with one former Bush official saying he “ winced ” at the trend .
The more retired officers have reason to believe they ’ re in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the service , the more tempted they ’ ll be to play politics while still on duty to try to position themselves for plum jobs after leaving .
One argument against Austin ’ s nomination that ’ s been made repeatedly in the past 24 hours is that Marshall and Mattis were both granted waivers to lead the Pentagon in unusual circumstances .
Marshall was appointed as the U.S. faced war in Korea ; Mattis was appointed in hopes that he ’ d stabilize a loose-cannon president .
There ’ s nothing similarly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justify a waiver for Austin .
If Congress grants it , they might as well repeal the law requiring a seven-year waiting period for retired officers to become defense secretary since they ’ ll have proved that they ’ re willing to issue waivers upon request .
As for why having a recently retired military man in charge is a bad idea , it ’ s more than just a simple matter of defending the principle of civilian rule .
( Ironically , one of the reasons Biden ’ s team reportedly likes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll loyally carry out Biden ’ s agenda without much pushback . )
Both Marshall and Mattis made errors in judgment that may have been due to their being too close to some of the officers serving under them .
Ideally , notes Shay Khatiri , the SecDef and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs complement each other , with one focused on political considerations and the other on strictly military concerns .
The Mattis/Dunford pairing undermined that dynamic .
Brooks makes a similar point , that the SecDef is a diplomat of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government and the military .
He should be a good politician , skilled at influencing other civilian officials to accomplish his aims .
A retired former general used to having others do what he wants without question can be an awkward match for that role : “ For secretary of defense , Americans should want someone of broad experience and perspective in civilian life , not the product of an all-absorbing institution as total in its way as the priesthood in the Catholic Church .
The military way is a noble way .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” writes Eliot Cohen .
“ There are practical issues as well : Would a soldier favor his own service in intramural budget battles , or bend over backwards not to ?
Would he concentrate on policy rather than the kind of tactical management generals feel most comfortable with ?
” The obvious wrinkle in all this for Republicans and especially Democrats is that no one will be keen to block the nomination of the would-be first black defense secretary in U.S. history .
If he ’ s denied a waiver by Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nomination , it seems a cinch that Biden will need to nominate Johnson over Flournoy as an alternative .
Lefties may dislike the idea of Johnson in charge but it ’ s hard to believe they ’ d block two African-American nominees before ultimately confirming a white woman , Flournoy , as Biden ’ s presumptive third pick .
If I had to bet on who the next SecDef would be , I ’ d bet on Johnson .
Update : Can I increase my bet on Johnson ?

Alleged pick, I should say. It was widely reported last night that retired Gen. Lloyd Austin is his choice but Sleepy Joe hasn’t confirmed it yet.
And maybe there’s a reason for that. Austin is a controversial selection, as we’re about to see. Maybe this was a trial balloon from Team Biden, leaking Austin’s name to see how congressional Democrats would react. If the feedback was bad — and it’s been fairly bad — Biden could always turn around and nominate one of the other shortlisters, Michele Flournoy or Jeh Johnson, instead.
On the other hand, according to Politico, Biden himself offered Austin the job on Sunday and Austin accepted. That sounds like more than a trial balloon.
Why Austin instead of Flournoy or Johnson? A few reasons. First, African-American lawmakers have been lobbying Biden to appoint more black officials to his cabinet. Biden’s been considering Deval Patrick for Attorney General but the expectation is that that job will go to Sally Yates, Doug Jones, or Lisa Monaco, all of whom are white. Johnson, like Austin, is African-American but he’s “been criticized for his record on expanding family detention [as DHS chief] and accelerating deportations, as well as approving hundreds of drone strikes against suspected terrorists that killed civilians.” He’s too much of a hawk, and a border hawk, to make progressives happy.
As for Flournoy, she’d be the first woman defense secretary in U.S. history. But she’s white, and she never built the sort of relationship with Biden that Austin did when she worked for Obama’s defense department. “Biden … trusts Austin, as they worked together when Biden served as vice president and had a large foreign policy portfolio,” Politico noted. That’s in keeping with Biden’s general approach to appointments: He wants people generally whom he knows well and is comfortable with, like Tony Blinken. Austin was the commanding general in Iraq during Obama’s first term and the head of CENTCOM in his second. He and Sleepy Joe have worked together for years.
So what’s the problem with the pick? As I say, Austin is a retired military officer — and under U.S. law, retired officers aren’t eligible to be defense secretary until they’ve been retired for seven years. Austin’s been retired for four. In order to serve, he’ll need the same sort of waiver that James Mattis received from Congress before he was appointed defense secretary by Trump in 2017. Mattis was only the second retired general to ever receive that waiver; George Marshall was the first, nearly 70 years before. Now here we are with Biden requesting the same sort of exemption for his guy even though he has two perfectly acceptable alternatives in Flournoy and Johnson.
In other words, after running an entire presidential campaign vowing to restore “norms” to Washington, Sleepy Joe is about to follow Trump’s lead by busting one before he’s sworn in. Lots of people are unhappy about it this morning, and not all are Republicans.
If Biden wants to deemphasize the military, nominating a 4 star so recently retired that he needs a congressional waiver to serve sends the opposite message. 2/ — Rosa Brooks (@brooks_rosa) December 8, 2020
Brooks is a law professor who used to work for Obama’s defense department. If you’re thinking “Who cares what she thinks?”, try this on instead:
I have deep respect for Gen. Lloyd Austin. We worked together when he commanded U.S. forces in Iraq, when he was vice chief of the Army, and when he was the CENTCOM commander. But choosing another recently retired general to serve in a role designed for a civilian just feels off. — Rep. Elissa Slotkin (@RepSlotkin) December 8, 2020
And after the last 4 years, civil-military relations at the Pentagon definitely need to be rebalanced. Gen. Austin has had an incredible career––but I’ll need to understand what he and the Biden Administration plan to do to address these concerns before I can vote for his waiver. — Rep. Elissa Slotkin (@RepSlotkin) December 8, 2020
Slotkin is a former CIA analyst turned Democratic congresswoman from Michigan. She just won a second term in Congress representing a Republican-leaning district, which makes her a prominent centrist voice in Pelosi’s newly diminished caucus. The fact that she’s uncomfortable with another retired general in charge of the Pentagon suggests Biden will have some trouble with this pick in Congress.
If you’re inclined to say “Who cares what she thinks?” to Slotkin too, since after all it’s the Senate rather than the House that confirms nominations, remember that Austin will need both houses of Congress to act to grant him a waiver. Also consider this:
“Waiving the law should happen no more than once in a generation,” Sen. Jack Reed, a West Point graduate and former Army Ranger, said when retired Gen. James Mattis was confirmed as Pentagon chief in 2017. “Therefore, I will not support a waiver for future nominees.”… Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who voted nay [on Mattis], was as clear as Reed: “Civilian control of our military is a fundamental principle of American democracy, and I will not vote for an exception to this rule.”
That’s at least two Dems, both of whom are still sitting senators, who voted against a waiver for Mattis three years ago because they thought having a recently retired general atop the Pentagon was a blow to civilian control of the military. Never underestimate a politician’s capacity for hypocrisy (especially Kirsten Gillibrand’s), but if Reed and Gillibrand stick to their guns on that then Biden will need Republican votes to confirm Austin no matter what happens in the Georgia Senate runoffs. Will those votes be available?
Tom Cotton, whose opinion may carry a bit of extra weight in the Senate debate due to his own status as a veteran, told Fox News this morning that he suspects “that many senators believe that while General Austin has served our country with distinction and he might be a suitable nomination for many other Cabinet positions, that it’s time to restore proper civil military balance to the Pentagon and granting another waiver might put that at risk.” Reporters have already noticed that Biden has an unusually large number of former senior military officers on his transition “landing” teams for different agencies as well, with one former Bush official saying he “winced” at the trend. The more retired officers have reason to believe they’re in line for prominent civilian jobs after exiting the service, the more tempted they’ll be to play politics while still on duty to try to position themselves for plum jobs after leaving.
One argument against Austin’s nomination that’s been made repeatedly in the past 24 hours is that Marshall and Mattis were both granted waivers to lead the Pentagon in unusual circumstances. Marshall was appointed as the U.S. faced war in Korea; Mattis was appointed in hopes that he’d stabilize a loose-cannon president. There’s nothing similarly unusual in American politics right now to justify a waiver for Austin. If Congress grants it, they might as well repeal the law requiring a seven-year waiting period for retired officers to become defense secretary since they’ll have proved that they’re willing to issue waivers upon request. As for why having a recently retired military man in charge is a bad idea, it’s more than just a simple matter of defending the principle of civilian rule. (Ironically, one of the reasons Biden’s team reportedly likes Austin is that they expect he’ll loyally carry out Biden’s agenda without much pushback.) Both Marshall and Mattis made errors in judgment that may have been due to their being too close to some of the officers serving under them.
Marshall stood by as a civil-military crisis slowly developed between Truman and Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Marshall’s former Army peer. Marshall even tried to avert MacArthur’s firing for insubordination, related to Truman’s Korean War policy, before reluctantly backing the president’s call. It is telling that today we remember Marshall more for his time as secretary of state than for his tenure as defense secretary… [L]ike Marshall, Mr. Mattis remained close to his former colleagues in uniform. When Trump administration infighting left key civilian jobs unfilled, Mr. Mattis leaned heavily on the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Joseph Dunford, and other military officers. Civilian political leaders in the Pentagon seemed to be sidelined. After Mr. Mattis departed, the musical chairs began. In two years, four men served as Mr. Trump’s defense secretary in a full-time or acting capacity.
Ideally, notes Shay Khatiri, the SecDef and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs complement each other, with one focused on political considerations and the other on strictly military concerns. The Mattis/Dunford pairing undermined that dynamic. Brooks makes a similar point, that the SecDef is a diplomat of sorts, a liaison between the civilian government and the military. He should be a good politician, skilled at influencing other civilian officials to accomplish his aims. A retired former general used to having others do what he wants without question can be an awkward match for that role:
5/ One of the roles of the Secretary of Defense is to serve as the top translator between the military and the civilian policy-makers and political leaders: — Rosa Brooks (@brooks_rosa) December 8, 2020
7/ When people go more or less straight from senior military roles to senior civilian roles, it can be very hard for them to do that effectively. — Rosa Brooks (@brooks_rosa) December 8, 2020
“For secretary of defense, Americans should want someone of broad experience and perspective in civilian life, not the product of an all-absorbing institution as total in its way as the priesthood in the Catholic Church. The military way is a noble way. It is also a narrow way,” writes Eliot Cohen. “There are practical issues as well: Would a soldier favor his own service in intramural budget battles, or bend over backwards not to? Would he concentrate on policy rather than the kind of tactical management generals feel most comfortable with?”
The obvious wrinkle in all this for Republicans and especially Democrats is that no one will be keen to block the nomination of the would-be first black defense secretary in U.S. history. If he’s denied a waiver by Congress, or if the Senate rejects his nomination, it seems a cinch that Biden will need to nominate Johnson over Flournoy as an alternative. Lefties may dislike the idea of Johnson in charge but it’s hard to believe they’d block two African-American nominees before ultimately confirming a white woman, Flournoy, as Biden’s presumptive third pick. If I had to bet on who the next SecDef would be, I’d bet on Johnson.
Update: Can I increase my bet on Johnson?


hotair--2020-12-08--Flynn flam: Sullivan valiantly hanging on in his fight to remain moot for some reason; <span class='

Flynn flam: Sullivan valiantly hanging on in his fight to remain moot for some reason; Breaking: Dismissed

Presidential pardons usually resolve all outstanding legal consequences — or at least they do everywhere except in Judge Emmet Sullivan ’ s courtroom .
Donald Trump ’ s pardon of Michael Flynn should have mooted the case currently dragging itself through Sullivan ’ s courtroom , especially because the pardon specifically applied to the case at hand .
For some reason , Jerry Dunleavy reported late last night , Sullivan has extended his review of the case to include Trump ’ s pardon — even though no one of standing in the case has challenged it : A federal judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outside groups who previously weighed in on the Justice Department ’ s motion to drop the case against retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn permission to submit briefs again after President Trump issued a pardon .
The schedule indicates the judge , Emmet Sullivan , may stall on dismissing the case even after President Trump granted his former national security adviser a full pardon late last month .
Appearing to ignore the Justice Department ’ s request for the case “ immediately ” to be dismissed , the judge , who has been involved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , instead seemed to move forward with further debate , with the district court docket on Monday showing more than a dozen groups who had previously filed amicus briefs related to the dismissal might now be able to weigh in in the wake of the pardon .
More than a dozen such friend-of-the-court judicial orders from Sullivan were dated for Monday .
Er … why ?
Dunleavy links to a report from National Law Journal questioning whether the pardon was “ too broad.
” That , however , still doesn ’ t apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friday , fellow U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton , who is handling a Freedom of Information Act case related to special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation , opined that Sullivan might choose to scrutinize Flynn ’ s pardon .
Walton said he didn ’ t believe Sullivan “ has a lot of options in reference to what he does … unless he takes the position that the wording of the pardon is too broad , ” according to the National Law Journal , adding , “ theoretically , the decision could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seems to be very , very broad .
It could be construed , I think , as extending protections against criminal prosecutions after the date the pardon was issued.
” If that ’ s the case , however , then that would be litigated at any point where Flynn faces new charges , not to chew over the charges for which Flynn got pardoned now .
This concern is overblown , however .
The pardon itself does give Flynn a pardon that might apply to future charges , but only if those relate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The language of the pardon clearly intends to give Flynn a clean slate from the Mueller probe , and by specifying that it applies to Flynn ’ s current indictment and the Mueller probe , excludes clemency for any future crimes not related to either .
Obviously and understandably , Trump didn ’ t want Flynn to get charged again by a succeeding Department of Justice in those investigations as a way to get around his pardon .
It ’ s very clear that Sullivan wants to drag this out as long as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to drop the case and now Flynn has received a full pardon .
There is no other reason for this than to exact some personal vendetta on Flynn , an animus which has been clear for a long time .
He ’ s forcing both Flynn and the DoJ to waste money and time on a case that is now entirely moot .
Maybe Sullivan just doesn ’ t want to be the only person to lose to Sidney Powell in 2020 , but his judgment has clearly become entirely warped , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the other justices on the DC Circuit .
The appellate court declined to deal with that issue when the DoJ appealed Sullivan ’ s decision to appoint a special master to debate their withdrawal of the complaint , but this is now crossing over into the Javertian absurd .
It ’ s long past time for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to remove Sullivan and issue the writ of mandamus directing dismissal in light of the pardon .
And perhaps it ’ s time to think about encouraging Sullivan to change careers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has clearly become his greatest interest .
Update , 2:05 pm ET : Just a day after entertaining the notion of getting extended briefings on the case , Sullivan dismissed it a few minutes ago as “ moot.
” But Sullivan made sure to let everyone know how unhappy he is about it : In formally ending Flynn ’ s three-year legal saga , U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said he probably would have denied the Justice Department ’ s controversial effort this year to drop the case , which Democrats and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an attempt by Attorney General William P. Barr to bend the rule of law to help a Trump ally .
Sullivan expressed deep skepticism about the Justice Department ’ s stated reasons for abandoning the case , criticizing it for applying a different set of rules to Flynn , who twice pleaded guilty to lying about his contacts with Russia ’ s ambassador during special counsel Robert S. Mueller III ’ s probe of 2016 election interference .
The judge also said he was troubled by the government ’ s “ dubious ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ ever-evolving justifications ” that ignored applicable law , appeared to be irrelevant or to contradict prosecutors ’ previous statements .
“ President Trump ’ s decision to pardon Mr. Flynn is a political decision , not a legal one .
Because the law recognizes the President ’ s political power to pardon , the appropriate course is to dismiss this case as moot , ” Sullivan wrote , adding : “ However , the pardon ‘ does not , standing alone , render [ Mr. Flynn ] innocent of the alleged violation.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it seems .
And one does have to wonder whether the DC Circuit ’ s leadership might have a few gripes of their own about Sullivan ’ s attitude toward this case .

Presidential pardons usually resolve all outstanding legal consequences — or at least they do everywhere except in Judge Emmet Sullivan’s courtroom. Donald Trump’s pardon of Michael Flynn should have mooted the case currently dragging itself through Sullivan’s courtroom, especially because the pardon specifically applied to the case at hand. For some reason, Jerry Dunleavy reported late last night, Sullivan has extended his review of the case to include Trump’s pardon — even though no one of standing in the case has challenged it:
A federal judge appeared to give a long list of outside groups who previously weighed in on the Justice Department’s motion to drop the case against retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn permission to submit briefs again after President Trump issued a pardon. The schedule indicates the judge, Emmet Sullivan, may stall on dismissing the case even after President Trump granted his former national security adviser a full pardon late last month. Appearing to ignore the Justice Department’s request for the case “immediately” to be dismissed, the judge, who has been involved in the Flynn case since December 2017, instead seemed to move forward with further debate, with the district court docket on Monday showing more than a dozen groups who had previously filed amicus briefs related to the dismissal might now be able to weigh in in the wake of the pardon. More than a dozen such friend-of-the-court judicial orders from Sullivan were dated for Monday.
Er … why? Dunleavy links to a report from National Law Journal questioning whether the pardon was “too broad.” That, however, still doesn’t apply to the question at hand:
On Friday, fellow U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, who is handling a Freedom of Information Act case related to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, opined that Sullivan might choose to scrutinize Flynn’s pardon. Walton said he didn’t believe Sullivan “has a lot of options in reference to what he does … unless he takes the position that the wording of the pardon is too broad,” according to the National Law Journal, adding, “theoretically, the decision could be reached because the wording in the pardon seems to be very, very broad. It could be construed, I think, as extending protections against criminal prosecutions after the date the pardon was issued.”
If that’s the case, however, then that would be litigated at any point where Flynn faces new charges, not to chew over the charges for which Flynn got pardoned now. This concern is overblown, however. The pardon itself does give Flynn a pardon that might apply to future charges, but only if those relate to the special-counsel probe and Russiagate. The language of the pardon clearly intends to give Flynn a clean slate from the Mueller probe, and by specifying that it applies to Flynn’s current indictment and the Mueller probe, excludes clemency for any future crimes not related to either. Obviously and understandably, Trump didn’t want Flynn to get charged again by a succeeding Department of Justice in those investigations as a way to get around his pardon.
It’s very clear that Sullivan wants to drag this out as long as possible, even though prosecutors have petitioned to drop the case and now Flynn has received a full pardon. There is no other reason for this than to exact some personal vendetta on Flynn, an animus which has been clear for a long time. He’s forcing both Flynn and the DoJ to waste money and time on a case that is now entirely moot. Maybe Sullivan just doesn’t want to be the only person to lose to Sidney Powell in 2020, but his judgment has clearly become entirely warped, and the abuse of his authority should embarrass the other justices on the DC Circuit.
The appellate court declined to deal with that issue when the DoJ appealed Sullivan’s decision to appoint a special master to debate their withdrawal of the complaint, but this is now crossing over into the Javertian absurd. It’s long past time for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to remove Sullivan and issue the writ of mandamus directing dismissal in light of the pardon. And perhaps it’s time to think about encouraging Sullivan to change careers from the judiciary to advocacy, which has clearly become his greatest interest.
Update, 2:05 pm ET: Just a day after entertaining the notion of getting extended briefings on the case, Sullivan dismissed it a few minutes ago as “moot.” But Sullivan made sure to let everyone know how unhappy he is about it:
In formally ending Flynn’s three-year legal saga, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said he probably would have denied the Justice Department’s controversial effort this year to drop the case, which Democrats and many legal experts said appeared to be an attempt by Attorney General William P. Barr to bend the rule of law to help a Trump ally. Sullivan expressed deep skepticism about the Justice Department’s stated reasons for abandoning the case, criticizing it for applying a different set of rules to Flynn, who twice pleaded guilty to lying about his contacts with Russia’s ambassador during special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe of 2016 election interference. The judge also said he was troubled by the government’s “dubious” rationales as well as aspects of its “ever-evolving justifications” that ignored applicable law, appeared to be irrelevant or to contradict prosecutors’ previous statements. “President Trump’s decision to pardon Mr. Flynn is a political decision, not a legal one. Because the law recognizes the President’s political power to pardon, the appropriate course is to dismiss this case as moot,” Sullivan wrote, adding: “However, the pardon ‘does not, standing alone, render [Mr. Flynn] innocent of the alleged violation.’ ”
Sour grapes to the end, it seems. And one does have to wonder whether the DC Circuit’s leadership might have a few gripes of their own about Sullivan’s attitude toward this case.


hotair--2020-12-08--Goya Foods CEO named AOC Employee of the Month after calling for boycott

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez called for a boycott of Goya Foods last July after the company ’ s CEO Robert Unanue met with President Trump at the White House .
Unanue attended an event for Hispanic business owners , politicians , and Trump supporters .
After the event , the guests participated in a press conference in the Rose Garden with the president .
Unanue praised Trump ’ s performance in the White House and that triggered AOC and other leftists .
AOC tweeted out her support for boycotting Goya Foods , the largest Hispanic-owned food company in the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Derangement Syndrome caused her to essentially betray her own people to own the conservatives or something .
Monday Unanue told a talk radio show host that the company named AOC as the Employee of the Month because after she and others called for a boycott , sales increased 1000 % .
Sandy from the Bronx unwittingly spiked the company ’ s sales when conservatives and Trump supporters found out about the boycott .
Some grocery stores had to put purchase limits into place until they could catch up with the newfound demands of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us , our sales actually increased 1,000 % , ” Unanue said on the show which is syndicated on some 20 stations across the country , “ So we gave her an honorary , we never were able to hand it to her , but she got employee of the month for bringing attention to Goya and our adobo.
” He noted that the boycott allowed Goya to reach “ so many new people ” while maintaining its base .
Unanue also criticized AOC ’ s “ naive ” support of policies like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doubled its production with an $ 80 million facility in Texas to meet increasing demand .
Last week in an interview with FOX Business ’ Maria Bartiromo , he voiced concern over America ’ s loss of freedom and the effects of social media .
“ We ’ re controlled by social media .
Anything that doesn ’ t go along with their agenda and narrative is not permissible , ” he said on “ Mornings with Maria ” .
“ We ’ ve lost our courage .
We are the greatest country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the freedom and we have to get back to work.
” He lamented that politicians have blamed the coronavirus on Trump and “ weaponized ” it against the American worker .
He also argued that politicians should be fired instead of the millions in the restaurant industry who are now unemployed due to COVID-19 restrictions .
“ They turned their weapons , in a political year , on the masses , ” he said .
“ This is discrimination against the working class .
We ’ re not teaching our children .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he has been censored on social media , specifically on Twitter .
He laments the perpetually angry mob found on Twitter .
“ We ’ re the land of the free and the home of the brave , although we ’ re losing our freedom and we ’ re losing our courage , ” Unanue told FOX Business ’ Maria Bartiromo on “ Mornings with Maria ” Wednesday .
“ Here we are , sitting , the greatest economy on the Earth led by President Trump and that ’ s why we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bay , but the problem is we ’ re in an election year , ” he added noting that he ’ s been censored on Twitter , Unanue believes Americans no longer have free expression .
Unanue lives and votes in Texas .
Talking about the presidential election , he said he used a mail-in ballot to vote this election .
He said that social media had a tremendous effect on the election by silencing one side and allowing the other side to speak .
He ’ s looking at you , Jack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a double standard with their censorship , though Facebook is in close competition for that distinction .

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez called for a boycott of Goya Foods last July after the company’s CEO Robert Unanue met with President Trump at the White House. Unanue attended an event for Hispanic business owners, politicians, and Trump supporters. After the event, the guests participated in a press conference in the Rose Garden with the president. Unanue praised Trump’s performance in the White House and that triggered AOC and other leftists.
AOC tweeted out her support for boycotting Goya Foods, the largest Hispanic-owned food company in the United States. Her terminal case of Trump Derangement Syndrome caused her to essentially betray her own people to own the conservatives or something. Monday Unanue told a talk radio show host that the company named AOC as the Employee of the Month because after she and others called for a boycott, sales increased 1000%. Sandy from the Bronx unwittingly spiked the company’s sales when conservatives and Trump supporters found out about the boycott. Some grocery stores had to put purchase limits into place until they could catch up with the newfound demands of Goya products.
Oh look, it’s the sound of me Googling “how to make your own Adobo” https://t.co/YOScAcyAnC — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 10, 2020
“When she boycotted us, our sales actually increased 1,000%,” Unanue said on the show which is syndicated on some 20 stations across the country, “So we gave her an honorary, we never were able to hand it to her, but she got employee of the month for bringing attention to Goya and our adobo.” He noted that the boycott allowed Goya to reach “so many new people” while maintaining its base.
Unanue also criticized AOC’s “naive” support of policies like the Green New Deal. Goya has doubled its production with an $80 million facility in Texas to meet increasing demand. Last week in an interview with FOX Business’ Maria Bartiromo, he voiced concern over America’s loss of freedom and the effects of social media.
“We’re controlled by social media. Anything that doesn’t go along with their agenda and narrative is not permissible,” he said on “Mornings with Maria”. “We’ve lost our courage. We are the greatest country on earth but we’ve lost the freedom and we have to get back to work.” He lamented that politicians have blamed the coronavirus on Trump and “weaponized” it against the American worker. He also argued that politicians should be fired instead of the millions in the restaurant industry who are now unemployed due to COVID-19 restrictions. “They turned their weapons, in a political year, on the masses,” he said. “This is discrimination against the working class. We’re not teaching our children. We’re not working.”
He noted that he has been censored on social media, specifically on Twitter. He laments the perpetually angry mob found on Twitter.
“We’re the land of the free and the home of the brave, although we’re losing our freedom and we’re losing our courage,” Unanue told FOX Business’ Maria Bartiromo on “Mornings with Maria” Wednesday. “Here we are, sitting, the greatest economy on the Earth led by President Trump and that’s why we’re blessed, with regulations at bay, but the problem is we’re in an election year,” he added noting that he’s been censored on Twitter, Unanue believes Americans no longer have free expression.
Unanue lives and votes in Texas. Talking about the presidential election, he said he used a mail-in ballot to vote this election. He said that social media had a tremendous effect on the election by silencing one side and allowing the other side to speak. He’s looking at you, Jack. Twitter is the worst offender of a double standard with their censorship, though Facebook is in close competition for that distinction.