hotair--2020-09-17--Former top Pence aide on COVID flips to Biden: I can't support Trump given his disregard for human l

Former top Pence aide on COVID flips to Biden: I can't support Trump given his disregard for human life

Probably the closest we ’ re going to get to a “ Lonesome ” Rhodes moment from Trump is her claiming in the clip at the end of this post that he once said the pandemic might at least spare him from having to shake the hands of “ disgusting ” people .
Olivia Troye worked for Pence for two years on counterterrorism , then shifted over to the coronavirus task force when he took charge and helped him plan and prepare for the daily meetings , including writing and editing his comments , according to an interview she gave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she claims she co-wrote his now infamous op-ed in the Wall Street Journal insisting there was no COVID “ second wave , ” which was published in June right around the time that a second wave started breaking across the Sun Belt and California .
The piece was “ ludicrous , ” she now admits .
Asked about her turning on Trump , White House staff resorted to the same playbook they ’ ve used for the many , many , many other Trump alumni , senior and otherwise , who ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the president is unfit for office .
She ’ s “ disgruntled.
” White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere said , “ Outside of generally watching the White House Coronavirus Taskforce from the overflow staff room , this disgruntled former detailee was never in private meetings with the President and her assertions have no basis in reality and are flat out inaccurate.
” Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg , Pence ’ s national security adviser , said in a statement Troye was “ disgruntled that her detail was cut short.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and never once during her detail did she every express any concern regarding the Administration ’ s response to the Coronavirus to anyone in her chain of command , ” Kellogg said .
Pence joined the refrain even though Troye told WaPo , “ I still have a lot of respect for the vice president .
I worked very loyally for him to do everything I could for him .
I don ’ t want this to become a speaking-out-against-him thing.
” He has his eye on 2024 ; if preserving his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , oh well .
It ’ s weird that her supposed disgruntlement doesn ’ t extend to her own former boss , the VP .
Anyway , in every White House there are big egos , they collide frequently , and most of their pet ideas end up being rejected by the president , but only one administration recently has seen so many staffers leave “ disgruntled ” that they now have the numbers to staff an entire organization designed to move the party away from him .
That would be REPAIR , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Trump ex-staffers , including Troye , among its advisors .
Also among them is Betsy DeVos ’ s former chief of staff , the newest member of the “ disgruntled ” club .
Maybe they ’ re disgruntled because they ’ ve concluded from first-hand observation that Trump and the people around him are unfit for office ?
Senior aides to Pence held a contemptuous view of the administration ’ s scientists and tried to project a far too rosy outlook about the virus with cherry-picked data — and key public health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her tenure , Troye said .
Advisers were afraid to express positions contrary to the president ’ s views because they feared a public denunciation or “ that they would be cut out , ” she said… Trump rarely attended task force meetings and was briefed only on top-level discussions by Pence or the government ’ s public health officials .
When Trump attended one meeting , Troye said , he spoke for 45 minutes about how poorly he was being treated by certain personalities on Fox News .
“ He spent more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox and yell at them to set them straight than he did on the virus , ” she said .
The most interesting part of the WaPo piece comes not from Troye but from independent reporting claiming that James Mattis , John Kelly , Rex Tillerson , Gary Cohn , and Kirstjen Nielsen have all been critical of Trump privately , with Kelly reportedly describing Trump as “ a narcissist who does not understand the military , cares only about his political fortunes and is unqualified to be president , ” per sources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the woodwork publicly ?
Another former senior official who ’ s in the mix is Dan Coats , who supposedly once said that Trump “ doesn ’ t know the difference between the truth and a lie , ” according to Bob Woodward .
Coats has an op-ed out today about protecting the integrity of the election that includes this passage , which features no names but whose subject is clear enough : Normally a “ disgruntled ” staffer might accuse a president of being a fool who should have taken that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choir of “ disgruntled ” Trump staffers all sing from a different hymnal : He ’ s an egomaniac , freakishly callous , a pathological liar , has his priorities out of whack , and doesn ’ t know what he ’ s doing .
They must be colluding to have all arrived at the same impression .
I mean , what other explanation could there be ?
I actually hope Mattis et al .
don ’ t speak out against him before the election , as it ’ s increasingly depressing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hand one after the other even though what they ’ re saying is frightening and unprecedented .
They ’ re not claiming that Trump ’ s policies are bad for America , they ’ re claiming that the country is in danger if he ’ s reelected .
These are people who have served inside the Trump White House and are burning the many professional bridges they ’ ve made during their careers working for Republicans in order to sound this alarm , and yet they ’ re waved off with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe conceivably justify that if the face Trump presented to the public was different from the private character described by Troye and others like Coats , but it isn ’ t .
Just the opposite .
His public persona is *precisely* that of a guy who ’ d walk into a meeting about a deadly pandemic and rant for an hour about how mean Chris Wallace was to him on the air that day or whatever .
This is who he is .
Half the country doesn ’ t care at all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Seriously , he ’ s even worse behind closed doors.
” The *best*-case scenario for anti-Trumpers in having a barrage of Trump ’ s own former employees warning people not to vote for him under any circumstances is that it might verrrrrrry slightly move the margins in some key states , which could be relevant if the election ’ s ultra-tight .
But that ’ s just a fancy way of saying that this country is so broken by partisanship that a harsh consensus judgment on the president rendered by multiple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely scarcely matter at all .
I think that reality comes through in Troye ’ s clip here .
She ’ s under no illusions that anyone will heed her warning .
She ’ s doing it for herself , purely as a matter of conscience .

Probably the closest we’re going to get to a “Lonesome” Rhodes moment from Trump is her claiming in the clip at the end of this post that he once said the pandemic might at least spare him from having to shake the hands of “disgusting” people.
Olivia Troye worked for Pence for two years on counterterrorism, then shifted over to the coronavirus task force when he took charge and helped him plan and prepare for the daily meetings, including writing and editing his comments, according to an interview she gave to WaPo. In keeping with that, she claims she co-wrote his now infamous op-ed in the Wall Street Journal insisting there was no COVID “second wave,” which was published in June right around the time that a second wave started breaking across the Sun Belt and California. The piece was “ludicrous,” she now admits.
Asked about her turning on Trump, White House staff resorted to the same playbook they’ve used for the many, many, many other Trump alumni, senior and otherwise, who’ve walked away from their experiences believing that the president is unfit for office. She’s “disgruntled.”
White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere said, “Outside of generally watching the White House Coronavirus Taskforce from the overflow staff room, this disgruntled former detailee was never in private meetings with the President and her assertions have no basis in reality and are flat out inaccurate.” Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, Pence’s national security adviser, said in a statement Troye was “disgruntled that her detail was cut short.” “Ms. Troye directly reported to me, and never once during her detail did she every express any concern regarding the Administration’s response to the Coronavirus to anyone in her chain of command,” Kellogg said.
Pence joined the refrain even though Troye told WaPo, “I still have a lot of respect for the vice president. I worked very loyally for him to do everything I could for him. I don’t want this to become a speaking-out-against-him thing.” He has his eye on 2024; if preserving his chances in that primary means knifing Troye, oh well.
The Vice President just responded about his former homeland security adviser. Olivia Troye, who is now supporting Biden. Pence describes her as “one more disgruntled employee who's left the WH decided to play politics during an election year…” — Kelly O'Donnell (@KellyO) September 17, 2020
It’s weird that her supposed disgruntlement doesn’t extend to her own former boss, the VP. Anyway, in every White House there are big egos, they collide frequently, and most of their pet ideas end up being rejected by the president, but only one administration recently has seen so many staffers leave “disgruntled” that they now have the numbers to staff an entire organization designed to move the party away from him. That would be REPAIR, which launched today and counts a bunch of Trump ex-staffers, including Troye, among its advisors. Also among them is Betsy DeVos’s former chief of staff, the newest member of the “disgruntled” club.
Maybe they’re disgruntled because they’ve concluded from first-hand observation that Trump and the people around him are unfit for office?
Senior aides to Pence held a contemptuous view of the administration’s scientists and tried to project a far too rosy outlook about the virus with cherry-picked data — and key public health agencies including the CDC were marginalized throughout her tenure, Troye said. Advisers were afraid to express positions contrary to the president’s views because they feared a public denunciation or “that they would be cut out,” she said… Trump rarely attended task force meetings and was briefed only on top-level discussions by Pence or the government’s public health officials. When Trump attended one meeting, Troye said, he spoke for 45 minutes about how poorly he was being treated by certain personalities on Fox News. “He spent more time about who was going to call Fox and yell at them to set them straight than he did on the virus,” she said.
The most interesting part of the WaPo piece comes not from Troye but from independent reporting claiming that James Mattis, John Kelly, Rex Tillerson, Gary Cohn, and Kirstjen Nielsen have all been critical of Trump privately, with Kelly reportedly describing Trump as “a narcissist who does not understand the military, cares only about his political fortunes and is unqualified to be president,” per sources. Are they about to come out of the woodwork publicly? Another former senior official who’s in the mix is Dan Coats, who supposedly once said that Trump “doesn’t know the difference between the truth and a lie,” according to Bob Woodward. Coats has an op-ed out today about protecting the integrity of the election that includes this passage, which features no names but whose subject is clear enough:
Our democracy’s enemies, foreign and domestic, want us to concede in advance that our voting systems are faulty or fraudulent; that sinister conspiracies have distorted the political will of the people; that our public discourse has been perverted by the news media and social networks riddled with prejudice, lies and ill will; that judicial institutions, law enforcement and even national security have been twisted, misused and misdirected to create anxiety and conflict, not justice and social peace.
Normally a “disgruntled” staffer might accuse a president of being a fool who should have taken that staffer’s precious advice. The choir of “disgruntled” Trump staffers all sing from a different hymnal: He’s an egomaniac, freakishly callous, a pathological liar, has his priorities out of whack, and doesn’t know what he’s doing.
They must be colluding to have all arrived at the same impression. I mean, what other explanation could there be?
I actually hope Mattis et al. don’t speak out against him before the election, as it’s increasingly depressing to watch people like Troye be dismissed out of hand one after the other even though what they’re saying is frightening and unprecedented. They’re not claiming that Trump’s policies are bad for America, they’re claiming that the country is in danger if he’s reelected. These are people who have served inside the Trump White House and are burning the many professional bridges they’ve made during their careers working for Republicans in order to sound this alarm, and yet they’re waved off with a sniff: “Disgruntled.” One could maybe conceivably justify that if the face Trump presented to the public was different from the private character described by Troye and others like Coats, but it isn’t. Just the opposite. His public persona is *precisely* that of a guy who’d walk into a meeting about a deadly pandemic and rant for an hour about how mean Chris Wallace was to him on the air that day or whatever.
This is who he is. Half the country doesn’t care at all, no matter how many people tell them, “Seriously, he’s even worse behind closed doors.”
The *best*-case scenario for anti-Trumpers in having a barrage of Trump’s own former employees warning people not to vote for him under any circumstances is that it might verrrrrrry slightly move the margins in some key states, which could be relevant if the election’s ultra-tight. But that’s just a fancy way of saying that this country is so broken by partisanship that a harsh consensus judgment on the president rendered by multiple former officials from his own cabinet would likely scarcely matter at all. I think that reality comes through in Troye’s clip here. She’s under no illusions that anyone will heed her warning. She’s doing it for herself, purely as a matter of conscience.


hotair--2020-09-18--<span color='red'>Breaking: RIP, Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Update: No vote before the election, Murkowski

Breaking: RIP, Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Update: No vote before the election, Murkowski declares; Update: Collins a no, too; Update: Grassley a no? Update: McConnells says vote will take place

The political shocks will come soon enough .
For now , though , it ’ s the time to mark an end of an era .
Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away today after 27 years on the court , and after a long and tough fight with pancreatic cancer : Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , the demure firebrand who in her 80s became a legal , cultural and feminist icon , died Friday .
The Supreme Court announced her death , saying the cause was complications from metastatic cancer of the pancreas .
The court , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at her home in Washington surrounded by family .
She was 87 .
“ Our nation has lost a justice of historic stature , ” Chief Justice John Roberts said .
“ We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague .
Today we mourn but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her , a tired and resolute champion of justice.
” Regardless of her ideology and approach , Ginsburg devoted her life to public service .
That kind of dedication to the law and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be , recalled with respect and gratitude .
We have had lots of reasons and occasions to disagree with her , but Ginsburg is now beyond those issues , and so should we be , too .
Our condolences , prayers , and best wishes go out to her family , friends , and admirers for their loss .
There will be plenty of retrospectives on her life and career , of course .
Some are already being published now , as media outlets had plenty of time to prepare for this moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; as Jazz wrote on Twitter , it almost seemed like she would live forever : However , her death creates a unique political issue at a critical time .
It ’ s not too soon to discuss that , as even Ginsburg herself recognized shortly before her death : Just days before her death , as her strength waned , Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera : “ My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.
” She knew what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ death will have profound consequences for the court and the country .
Inside the court , not only is the leader of the liberal wing gone , but with the Court about to open a new term , Chief Justice John Roberts no longer holds the controlling vote in closely contested cases .
That would depend greatly on who wins the election .
This seat won ’ t sit open for four years , after all , nor would Ginsburg have expected that .
Interestingly enough , Hugh Hewitt asked Donald Trump about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a vacancy just a month ago : It ’ s possible that Trump could just pick a name off of his list in the next few days , but that ’ s as far as it will go .
Amy Coney Barrett seems to be the most likely candidate , under the circumstances , and she has been relatively recently vetted for the appellate court .
However , there ’ s almost no time left for a candidate to come up for a vote before the election .
There ’ s only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and few of those days will have senators around to conduct business .
Lindsey Graham probably can ’ t even arrange a confirmation hearing in the Judiciary Committee that fast , let alone pass a nominee to the full floor .
What ’ s more likely to happen will be that Trump ’ s selection will end up being a major issue in the election — perhaps the major issue now .
It will remind voters in both parties of the stakes involved in presidential elections , but will it change the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Republicans are already pretty motivated , and Democrats for whom this is critical probably would be , too .
This probably isn ’ t that much of a game-changer in that sense , but it might convince some previous Trump voters who have been disillusioned to come back to the fold for this issue .
The big question will be whether the Senate will confirm a Trump appointee after the election if he loses to Biden .
Would Mitch McConnell escalate the judiciary wars with that kind of maneuver ?
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but don ’ t expect all 53 Republican senators to go along .
Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski would absolutely balk , which means McConnell would have only one more vote to lose .
The meltdown that would follow would likely cow more than one other Republican to quail at the prospect , especially in the class that has to defend their seats in 2022 .
The most likely outcome is that either Trump wins or Biden gets to choose .
Update : Murkowski ’ s already out in front of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really not enough time on the legislative calendar for that .
The big question really is whether Republicans would confirm a SCOTUS appointment from a president who lost an election in a lame-duck session .
All the talk about precedents will get a big test over the next few weeks — unless voters moot it in the election .
Update : It didn ’ t take long for Collins to stake out the same position , and also add that she ’ s opposed to a lame-duck confirmation too : I ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gardner and Martha McSally sometime soon , too .
They ’ re going to get asked — repeatedly .
Update : That ’ s probably an end to the before-the-election question : Again , none of this stops Trump from nominating a replacement .
But whoever it is should be prepared for a s***storm of personal attacks over the next few weeks .
That ’ s something Trump and his team should keep in mind while calculating their next moves .
Update ; More of an aside , actually , from friends on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go for a pre-election vote ?
Naah .
McConnell doesn ’ t have a prayer of moving forward before Election Day .
Update : Let ’ s chalk this up to sunny optimism : We ’ ll see , but I wouldn ’ t count on it before Election Day .
However , this could be taken to apply to a lame-duck appointment , too .
Maybe she figures that the MAGA vote in Arizona is more important than the centrist-crossover vote .
She may be right , too .
Not sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bluer Colorado for Gardner , though ,

Breaking: RIP, Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Update: No vote before the election, Murkowski declares; Update: Collins a no, too; Update: Grassley a no? Update: McConnell says vote will take place; Update: An election-case argument?
The political shocks will come soon enough. For now, though, it’s the time to mark an end of an era. Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away today after 27 years on the court, and after a long and tough fight with pancreatic cancer:
BREAKING: Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died. @CBSNews pic.twitter.com/AXmbyQwaxl — Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) September 18, 2020
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the demure firebrand who in her 80s became a legal, cultural and feminist icon, died Friday. The Supreme Court announced her death, saying the cause was complications from metastatic cancer of the pancreas. The court, in a statement, said Ginsburg died at her home in Washington surrounded by family. She was 87. “Our nation has lost a justice of historic stature,” Chief Justice John Roberts said. “We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her, a tired and resolute champion of justice.”
Regardless of her ideology and approach, Ginsburg devoted her life to public service. That kind of dedication to the law and its application should be, and will be, recalled with respect and gratitude. We have had lots of reasons and occasions to disagree with her, but Ginsburg is now beyond those issues, and so should we be, too. Our condolences, prayers, and best wishes go out to her family, friends, and admirers for their loss.
There will be plenty of retrospectives on her life and career, of course. Some are already being published now, as media outlets had plenty of time to prepare for this moment. Ginsburg seemed rather indestructible, though; as Jazz wrote on Twitter, it almost seemed like she would live forever:
RIP Notorious RBG. Honestly shocked. Thought she would be going like the Energizer Bunny. Long career of service. — Jazz Shaw (@JazzShaw) September 18, 2020
However, her death creates a unique political issue at a critical time. It’s not too soon to discuss that, as even Ginsburg herself recognized shortly before her death:
Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” She knew what was to come. Ginsburg’s death will have profound consequences for the court and the country. Inside the court, not only is the leader of the liberal wing gone, but with the Court about to open a new term, Chief Justice John Roberts no longer holds the controlling vote in closely contested cases.
That would depend greatly on who wins the election. This seat won’t sit open for four years, after all, nor would Ginsburg have expected that. Interestingly enough, Hugh Hewitt asked Donald Trump about what he planned to do in case of a vacancy just a month ago:
It’s possible that Trump could just pick a name off of his list in the next few days, but that’s as far as it will go. Amy Coney Barrett seems to be the most likely candidate, under the circumstances, and she has been relatively recently vetted for the appellate court. However, there’s almost no time left for a candidate to come up for a vote before the election. There’s only six weeks to go before Election Day, and few of those days will have senators around to conduct business. Lindsey Graham probably can’t even arrange a confirmation hearing in the Judiciary Committee that fast, let alone pass a nominee to the full floor.
What’s more likely to happen will be that Trump’s selection will end up being a major issue in the election — perhaps the major issue now. It will remind voters in both parties of the stakes involved in presidential elections, but will it change the turnout models? I’d guess that Republicans are already pretty motivated, and Democrats for whom this is critical probably would be, too. This probably isn’t that much of a game-changer in that sense, but it might convince some previous Trump voters who have been disillusioned to come back to the fold for this issue.
The big question will be whether the Senate will confirm a Trump appointee after the election if he loses to Biden. Would Mitch McConnell escalate the judiciary wars with that kind of maneuver? I’d guess that he’d try, but don’t expect all 53 Republican senators to go along. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski would absolutely balk, which means McConnell would have only one more vote to lose. The meltdown that would follow would likely cow more than one other Republican to quail at the prospect, especially in the class that has to defend their seats in 2022. The most likely outcome is that either Trump wins or Biden gets to choose.
Update: Murkowski’s already out in front of this
https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1307106318839435270
As I wrote, there’s really not enough time on the legislative calendar for that. The big question really is whether Republicans would confirm a SCOTUS appointment from a president who lost an election in a lame-duck session. All the talk about precedents will get a big test over the next few weeks — unless voters moot it in the election.
Update: It didn’t take long for Collins to stake out the same position, and also add that she’s opposed to a lame-duck confirmation too:
News: @SenatorCollins told me earlier this month in Maine that she would not seat a Supreme Court justice in October. “I think that’s too close, I really do,” she said. She said she’d also oppose seating a justice in the lame duck if there’s a change in presidents. — Jonathan Martin (@jmartNYT) September 19, 2020
I’d guess we’ll hear from Cory Gardner and Martha McSally sometime soon, too. They’re going to get asked — repeatedly.
Update: That’s probably an end to the before-the-election question:
So far the following GOP Senators have pledged that they will not consider a Supreme Court appointment until after the next inauguration. Susan Collins
Chuck Grassley
Lisa Murkowski — Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) September 19, 2020
Again, none of this stops Trump from nominating a replacement. But whoever it is should be prepared for a s***storm of personal attacks over the next few weeks. That’s something Trump and his team should keep in mind while calculating their next moves.
Update; More of an aside, actually, from friends on Twitter. Does anyone expect Mitt Romney to go for a pre-election vote? Naah. McConnell doesn’t have a prayer of moving forward before Election Day.
Update: Let’s chalk this up to sunny optimism:
We’ll see, but I wouldn’t count on it before Election Day. However, this could be taken to apply to a lame-duck appointment, too.
Update: This one’s a bit of a surprise:
McSally indicates that the Senate should vote on Trump's SCOTUS nominee — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) September 19, 2020
Maybe she figures that the MAGA vote in Arizona is more important than the centrist-crossover vote. She may be right, too. Not sure the calculus will be the same in bluer Colorado for Gardner, though.
Update: Can Republicans sell the idea that the election will require a full bench in place?
From my notebook/calls over the past hour: there are discussions within the Senate GOP about voting *before* the election, making the argument that 9 justices are needed in case of an election crisis. But Rs who want that aren't sure if Collins/Murkowski would fight it. — Robert Costa (@costareports) September 19, 2020
Eh, I’m not sure this makes sense. Right now conservatives have a 5-3 majority with Ginsburg’s passing, at least nominally. Adding another conservative would not improve matters for the liberal wing, so they won’t have any reason to buy into this argument. And Roberts would probably try hard to avoid 4-4 splits now, so Republicans don’t really need it anyway.
Update: The election argument has another defect, too:
Prepare to hear much concern voiced about the risks of an 8-justice Supreme Court existing during the 2020 presidential election that was not voiced during the 8-justice Supreme Court that existed during the 2016 presidential election. https://t.co/KJbq8L0dok — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) September 19, 2020
In that case, the nomination of Merrick Garland threatened to create a 5-4 liberal tilt. Republicans blocked that for obvious reasons, but it did leave a 4-4 ideological split that was more likely to deadlock if the court had to deal with any election challenges. It didn’t bother Republicans at that time, or at least not publicly.


hotair--2020-09-18--The Hill: Democrats dreading the debates -- and Biden's fact-checking abilities

Gee , I wonder why Democrats might not have faith in Joe Biden ’ s ability to correct the record .
Could it be because Biden has a long history of fogging it up — and then forgetting when he ’ s been caught ?
In last night ’ s town hall on CNN , Anderson Cooper asked Biden whether he ’ s benefited from “ white privilege , ” and he responded by telling Cooper that he was the first in his family to attend college while taking a swing at Donald Trump for the silver spoon in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bob Woodward asked President Trump about white privilege and whether or not he benefited from it .
And the President said , no , I don ’ t feel that way at all and sort of mock Bob Woodward .
Do you see ways that you ’ ve benefited from white privilege ?
BIDEN : Sure , I ’ ve benefited just because I don ’ t have to go through what my black brothers and sisters have had to go through , number one .
But number two , you know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ re used to guys to look down their nose at us .
We ’ re looked at people who look at us and think that we ’ re suckers , look at us and they think that we don ’ t , we ’ re not equivalent to them .
If you didn ’ t have a college degree , you must be stupid .
If in fact , you didn ’ t get to go to an Ivy school .
Well , I tell you , it bothered me to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s my Scranton roots .
I don ’ t know .
But when you guys started talking on television about Biden , if he wins , we ’ ll be the first person without a Ivy League degree to be elected president .
I think , who the hell makes you think I have to have an Ivy League degree to be president and I really mean it .
I found my backup .
No , I ’ m not joking .
I ’ m not joking .
Like , guys like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ family to go to college .
Up here , my dad busted his neck .
My dad came up here , worked here , lost his job , like a lot of people did here used to be a bad joke in the ’ 60s in Scranton , everybody ’ s not — no one in Scranton , everybody ’ s from Scranton , because so many people lost their jobs .
We are as good as anybody else .
And guys like Trump , who inherited everything and squandered what they inherited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always had a problem with , not the people who are busting their neck .
Not only is that claim untrue , Biden had previously acknowledged it to be untrue .
He first trotted out that claim in 1987 during his first run for the presidency , a claim that came from Biden ’ s plagiarism of speeches by British Labour politician Neil Kinnock .
Mollie Hemingway jumps into the Wayback Machine to recall the episode : Back in 1987 , The New York Times published Biden ’ s quote admitting that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden said … he had miscast some of his own forebears , painting them as having rather more humble origins than they in fact did .
For example , borrowing Mr. Kinnock ’ s sentiments , Mr. Biden had said he was ‘ the first in his family ever to go to university.
’ In fact , Mr. Biden said today , ‘ there are Finnegans , my mother ’ s family , that went to college.
’ Among others , his great-grandfather attended college at a time in which fewer than 2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States did so .
Now it ’ s around 60 percent .
Biden got caught by E.J .
Dionne practically lifting this claim word for word from Kinnock , and more : In the commercial , the Briton began , ” Why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to be able to get to university ?
” Then pointing to his wife in the audience , he continued : ” Why is Glenys the first woman in her family in a thousand generations to be able to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our predecessors were thick ?
” Senator Biden began his remarks by saying the ideas had come to him spontaneously on the way to the debate .
” I started thinking as I was coming over here , why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university ?
” he said .
Then , pointing to his wife , he continued : ” Why is it that my wife who is sitting out there in the audience is the first in her family to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because our fathers and mothers were not bright ?
Is it because I ’ m the first Biden in a thousand generations to get a college and a graduate degree that I was smarter than the rest ?
” In his speech , Mr. Kinnock , an orator of great eloquence , rhetorically asked why his ancestors , Welsh coal miners , did not get ahead as fast as he .
” Did they lack talent ?
” he asked , in his lilting rhythm .
” Those people who could sing and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Those people who could make wonderful beautiful things with their hands ?
Those people who could dream dreams , see visions ?
Why didn ’ t they get it ?
Was it because they were weak ?
Those people who could work eight hours underground and then come up and play football ?
Weak ?
” Senator Biden ’ s Irish relations , it would seem , were similar , though they seemed to stay underground longer .
” Those same people who read poetry and wrote poetry and taught me how to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , whose father was a Chevrolet dealer in Wilmington .
” Is it because they didn ’ t work hard ?
My ancestors , who worked in the coal mines of Northeast Pennsylvania and would come up after 12 hours and play football for four hours ?
” Nor was that Biden ’ s only bout with plagiarism .
As Hemingway notes , today is the 33rd anniversary of Biden ’ s admission of plagiarizing in law school , although he told Dionne at the time that it wasn ’ t malevolent plagiarism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R. Biden Jr. , fighting to salvage his Presidential campaign , today acknowledged ” a mistake ” in his youth , when he plagiarized a law review article for a paper he wrote in his first year at law school .
Mr. Biden insisted , however , that he had done nothing ” malevolent , ” that he had simply misunderstood the need to cite sources carefully .
And he asserted that another controversy , concerning recent reports of his using material from others ’ speeches without attribution , was ” much ado @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Senator included a law school faculty report , dated Dec. 1 , 1965 , that concluded that Mr. Biden had ” used five pages from a published law review article without quotation or attribution ” and that he ought to be failed in the legal methods course for which he had submitted the 15-page paper .
The plagiarized article , ” Tortious Acts as a Basis for Jurisdiction in Products Liability Cases , ” was published in the Fordham Law Review of May 1965 .
Mr. Biden drew large chunks of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including such sentences as : ” The trend of judicial opinion in various jurisdictions has been that the breach of an implied warranty of fitness is actionable without privity , because it is a tortious wrong upon which suit may be brought by a non-contracting party.
” In his paper , Mr. Biden included a single footnote to the Fordham Law Review article .
That ’ s a nonsense argument ; any undergrad then and even now would have understood the rules of citing one ’ s sources properly , and anyone who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law school would have been experienced with those rules .
Needless to say , though , Biden ’ s later plagiarism rendered the not malevolent argument moot .
And his sudden regurgitation of a claim Biden first drew by plagiarizing Kinnock either means that Biden didn ’ t actually regret plagiarizing Kinnock as much as he regretted getting caught at it , or he ’ s forgotten that he got caught at all .
That ’ s what has Democrats worried , Amie Parnes writes at The Hill .
They see his only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be in acting like a fact-checker against Trump , but he ’ s hardly one with any standing on which to call shenanigans .
Plus , they ’ re worried that Biden is no longer up to the task , mentally speaking : “ The only way he ‘ wins ’ is if he stays on offense , ” another ally added .
“ The second it goes the other way , things could go sideways.
” Fact-checking Trump live is a challenge for anyone , even when you ’ re not on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidency .
There is a palpable fear among some Democrats about whether Biden is up for the challenge and whether being too aggressive could backfire .
They ’ ve cringed when Biden has given long-winded answers or trailed off without returning to his initial thought and when he ’ s gone off message or said the wrong name or city .
… Even those closest to Biden acknowledge that it takes him awhile to get warmed up and the early statements are never his best .
“ He has a tendency to wrap @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s one of those people who takes some time to get there , ” said one close Biden ally .
“ He ’ s just not a guy who performs well in those initial moments .
I think that ’ s something that makes us all a little nervous.
” Indeed .
Given all of this , and Biden ’ s tendency to get lost in his own answers , one has to seriously question the wisdom of a strategy that makes Biden completely reactive to Trump .
The campaign can fact-check Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and should do the same with Biden , but almost certainly won ’ t ) .
Biden would do best in these debates by taking the high road and focusing on his own agenda and platform while taking shots at Trump ’ s record in office .
If Biden starts getting into a shouting match with Trump , Biden ’ s going to get steamrolled .
And he might not even realize it when it happens .

Gee, I wonder why Democrats might not have faith in Joe Biden’s ability to correct the record. Could it be because Biden has a long history of fogging it up — and then forgetting when he’s been caught? In last night’s town hall on CNN, Anderson Cooper asked Biden whether he’s benefited from “white privilege,” and he responded by telling Cooper that he was the first in his family to attend college while taking a swing at Donald Trump for the silver spoon in his mouth:
COOPER: Mr. Vice President, Bob Woodward asked President Trump about white privilege and whether or not he benefited from it. And the President said, no, I don’t feel that way at all and sort of mock Bob Woodward. Do you see ways that you’ve benefited from white privilege? BIDEN: Sure, I’ve benefited just because I don’t have to go through what my black brothers and sisters have had to go through, number one. But number two, you know, grow up parents, Scranton. We’re used to guys to look down their nose at us. We’re looked at people who look at us and think that we’re suckers, look at us and they think that we don’t, we’re not equivalent to them. If you didn’t have a college degree, you must be stupid. If in fact, you didn’t get to go to an Ivy school. Well, I tell you, it bothered me to tell you the truth. Maybe it’s my Scranton roots. I don’t know. But when you guys started talking on television about Biden, if he wins, we’ll be the first person without a Ivy League degree to be elected president. I think, who the hell makes you think I have to have an Ivy League degree to be president and I really mean it. I found my backup. No, I’m not joking. I’m not joking. Like, guys like me, were the first in my family to go to college. Up here, my dad busted his neck. My dad came up here, worked here, lost his job, like a lot of people did here used to be a bad joke in the ’60s in Scranton, everybody’s not — no one in Scranton, everybody’s from Scranton, because so many people lost their jobs. We are as good as anybody else. And guys like Trump, who inherited everything and squandered what they inherited are the people that I’ve always had a problem with, not the people who are busting their neck.
Not only is that claim untrue, Biden had previously acknowledged it to be untrue. He first trotted out that claim in 1987 during his first run for the presidency, a claim that came from Biden’s plagiarism of speeches by British Labour politician Neil Kinnock. Mollie Hemingway jumps into the Wayback Machine to recall the episode:
Back in 1987, The New York Times published Biden’s quote admitting that was not true: In addition, Mr. Biden said … he had miscast some of his own forebears, painting them as having rather more humble origins than they in fact did. For example, borrowing Mr. Kinnock’s sentiments, Mr. Biden had said he was ‘the first in his family ever to go to university.’ In fact, Mr. Biden said today, ‘there are Finnegans, my mother’s family, that went to college.’ Among others, his great-grandfather attended college at a time in which fewer than 2 percent of college-aged men and women in the United States did so. Now it’s around 60 percent.
Biden got caught by E.J. Dionne practically lifting this claim word for word from Kinnock, and more:
In the commercial, the Briton began, ”Why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to be able to get to university?” Then pointing to his wife in the audience, he continued: ”Why is Glenys the first woman in her family in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? Was it because all our predecessors were thick?” Senator Biden began his remarks by saying the ideas had come to him spontaneously on the way to the debate. ”I started thinking as I was coming over here, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university?” he said. Then, pointing to his wife, he continued: ”Why is it that my wife who is sitting out there in the audience is the first in her family to ever go to college? Is it because our fathers and mothers were not bright? Is it because I’m the first Biden in a thousand generations to get a college and a graduate degree that I was smarter than the rest?” In his speech, Mr. Kinnock, an orator of great eloquence, rhetorically asked why his ancestors, Welsh coal miners, did not get ahead as fast as he. ”Did they lack talent?” he asked, in his lilting rhythm. ”Those people who could sing and play and recite and write poetry? Those people who could make wonderful beautiful things with their hands? Those people who could dream dreams, see visions? Why didn’t they get it? Was it because they were weak? Those people who could work eight hours underground and then come up and play football? Weak?” Senator Biden’s Irish relations, it would seem, were similar, though they seemed to stay underground longer. ”Those same people who read poetry and wrote poetry and taught me how to sing verse?” continued Mr. Biden, whose father was a Chevrolet dealer in Wilmington. ”Is it because they didn’t work hard? My ancestors, who worked in the coal mines of Northeast Pennsylvania and would come up after 12 hours and play football for four hours?”
Nor was that Biden’s only bout with plagiarism. As Hemingway notes, today is the 33rd anniversary of Biden’s admission of plagiarizing in law school, although he told Dionne at the time that it wasn’t malevolent plagiarism … whatever that means:
Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., fighting to salvage his Presidential campaign, today acknowledged ”a mistake” in his youth, when he plagiarized a law review article for a paper he wrote in his first year at law school. Mr. Biden insisted, however, that he had done nothing ”malevolent,” that he had simply misunderstood the need to cite sources carefully. And he asserted that another controversy, concerning recent reports of his using material from others’ speeches without attribution, was ”much ado about nothing.” … The file distributed by the Senator included a law school faculty report, dated Dec. 1, 1965, that concluded that Mr. Biden had ”used five pages from a published law review article without quotation or attribution” and that he ought to be failed in the legal methods course for which he had submitted the 15-page paper. The plagiarized article, ”Tortious Acts as a Basis for Jurisdiction in Products Liability Cases,” was published in the Fordham Law Review of May 1965. Mr. Biden drew large chunks of heavy legal prose directly from it, including such sentences as: ”The trend of judicial opinion in various jurisdictions has been that the breach of an implied warranty of fitness is actionable without privity, because it is a tortious wrong upon which suit may be brought by a non-contracting party.” In his paper, Mr. Biden included a single footnote to the Fordham Law Review article.
That’s a nonsense argument; any undergrad then and even now would have understood the rules of citing one’s sources properly, and anyone who made it all the way through to law school would have been experienced with those rules. Needless to say, though, Biden’s later plagiarism rendered the not malevolent argument moot. And his sudden regurgitation of a claim Biden first drew by plagiarizing Kinnock either means that Biden didn’t actually regret plagiarizing Kinnock as much as he regretted getting caught at it, or he’s forgotten that he got caught at all.
That’s what has Democrats worried, Amie Parnes writes at The Hill. They see his only chance of success in the debates will be in acting like a fact-checker against Trump, but he’s hardly one with any standing on which to call shenanigans. Plus, they’re worried that Biden is no longer up to the task, mentally speaking:
“The only way he ‘wins’ is if he stays on offense,” another ally added. “The second it goes the other way, things could go sideways.” Fact-checking Trump live is a challenge for anyone, even when you’re not on stage in a make-or-break debate for the presidency. There is a palpable fear among some Democrats about whether Biden is up for the challenge and whether being too aggressive could backfire. They’ve cringed when Biden has given long-winded answers or trailed off without returning to his initial thought and when he’s gone off message or said the wrong name or city. … Even those closest to Biden acknowledge that it takes him awhile to get warmed up and the early statements are never his best. “He has a tendency to wrap up very well, but he’s one of those people who takes some time to get there,” said one close Biden ally. “He’s just not a guy who performs well in those initial moments. I think that’s something that makes us all a little nervous.”
Indeed. Given all of this, and Biden’s tendency to get lost in his own answers, one has to seriously question the wisdom of a strategy that makes Biden completely reactive to Trump. The campaign can fact-check Trump in real time on social media (and should do the same with Biden, but almost certainly won’t). Biden would do best in these debates by taking the high road and focusing on his own agenda and platform while taking shots at Trump’s record in office. If Biden starts getting into a shouting match with Trump, Biden’s going to get steamrolled. And he might not even realize it when it happens.


hotair--2020-09-18--Lockdown fatigue: Van Morrison set to release 3 protest songs for freedom

Irish singer-songwriter Van Morrison has had enough of government-mandated lockdowns .
He ’ s announced that he will release three songs written in favor of freedom over restrictions .
Morrison is accusing the U.K. government of “ taking our freedom ” and is criticizing worldwide lockdowns , in general , as a method of mitigating the coronavirus pandemic .
He goes as far as to accuse scientists of “ making up crooked facts ” to “ enslave ” the population .
One particular lyric in a song is criticized as supporting a conspiracy theory .
Morrison refers to a UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 21 , 2020 , “ Covid-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease ( HCID ) in the UK ” .
While it is true that the statement appeared , it does not diminish the fact that the coronavirus is highly contagious .
The HCID designation in the U.K. is given to very fatal diseases , like Ebola , which kills more than 50 % of those infected .
As of the latest update on the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center website , the fatality rate in the U.K. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100,000 population .
In the U.S. , for comparison , the fatality rate is 3.0 % , with 60.41 per 100,000 population .
The coronavirus was classified as HCID in January when little was known about it but that classification was revised in March .
As you might expect , Morrison is being criticized by scientists and public officials .
Health Minister Robin Swann says if Sir Van has scientific facts to present , he should do so .
Mr Swann said : “ I don ’ t know where he gets his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are on this , but I will say that sort of messaging is dangerous .
“ If Van wanted to sing a song about saving lives , then that would be more in keeping with where we are at the minute.
” He added : “ If Van Morrison has counter-scientific facts that he ’ s prepared to stand over , and have that debate with the chief scientific adviser , then I think that ’ s how he should do it.
” Mr Swann has warned that Northern Ireland could again face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to rise .
On the flip side , DUP MP Sammy Wilson spoke up for Morrison saying he raises an important point .
The East Antrim MP said : “ While I might not agree with all of the sentiments , nevertheless he is raising an important point – what direction are we taking the country in ?
“ And it ’ s a debate which has been going on for a long , long time , that we do ask the kind of questions that he has asked in these songs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we give to the government and how much should the government rely on us to use our common sense ?
” I think that is what a lot of us are pondering these days – as we work through this pandemic , how much freedom are we losing and what happens with the lockdowns end ?
What will normal look like then ?
Morrison recorded the songs in Belfast and England .
This is all a part of his campaign to save live music .
He is campaigning for venues to be open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out that shutdowns are killing live music and many venues will have to close if they don ’ t soon re-open .
The songs will be released in two-week intervals .
In the statement he released , Morrison states that he isn ’ t telling anyone what to do , he ’ s just speaking up for freedom .
“ I ’ m not telling people what to do or think , the government is doing a great job of that already , ” he said in a statement .
“ It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe people should have the right to think for themselves.
” As expected , followers on social media had thoughts .
Some offered their own lyrics and others shared GIFs .
Most poked fun at his age ( 75 years young ) and conspiracy theories .
This week Prime Minister Boris Johnson is busy batting down calls for another lockdown due to a new increase in coronavirus cases .
He told a committee of MPs that the government is doing all it can to prevent another nationwide lockdown .
He admits there isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ colossal spike ” in demand .
On Wednesday it was reported that coronavirus cases in the UK increased by 3,991 .
Also reported is that 20 people died within 28 days of testing positive for COVID-19 .
But , the financial costs of another large scale shutdown are likely too great .
New rules came into effect Monday restricting indoor and outdoor gatherings in England and Scotland , and indoor groups in Wales .
“ And can we afford it ?
I very much doubt that the financial consequences would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make sure that we defeat the disease by the means that we have set out .
“ So when I see people arguing against the rule of six or saying that the government is coming in too hard on individual liberties and so on – I totally understand that and I sympathise with that , but we must , must defeat this disease.
” The medical community has a better grasp of the coronavirus now than earlier in the year .
That is the best argument for a halt to additional shutdowns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we enter flu season , hospitals and doctors should be able to handle the situation .

Irish singer-songwriter Van Morrison has had enough of government-mandated lockdowns. He’s announced that he will release three songs written in favor of freedom over restrictions.
Morrison is accusing the U.K. government of “taking our freedom” and is criticizing worldwide lockdowns, in general, as a method of mitigating the coronavirus pandemic. He goes as far as to accuse scientists of “making up crooked facts” to “enslave” the population. One particular lyric in a song is criticized as supporting a conspiracy theory. Morrison refers to a UK government page that stated as of March 21, 2020, “Covid-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK”. While it is true that the statement appeared, it does not diminish the fact that the coronavirus is highly contagious. The HCID designation in the U.K. is given to very fatal diseases, like Ebola, which kills more than 50% of those infected. As of the latest update on the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center website, the fatality rate in the U.K. is 10.9%, with 62.86 per 100,000 population. In the U.S., for comparison, the fatality rate is 3.0%, with 60.41 per 100,000 population. The coronavirus was classified as HCID in January when little was known about it but that classification was revised in March.
As you might expect, Morrison is being criticized by scientists and public officials. Health Minister Robin Swann says if Sir Van has scientific facts to present, he should do so.
Mr Swann said: “I don’t know where he gets his facts. I know where the emotions are on this, but I will say that sort of messaging is dangerous. “Our messaging is about saving lives. “If Van wanted to sing a song about saving lives, then that would be more in keeping with where we are at the minute.” He added: “If Van Morrison has counter-scientific facts that he’s prepared to stand over, and have that debate with the chief scientific adviser, then I think that’s how he should do it.” Mr Swann has warned that Northern Ireland could again face tighter restrictions if new cases of Covid-19 continue to rise.
On the flip side, DUP MP Sammy Wilson spoke up for Morrison saying he raises an important point.
The East Antrim MP said: “While I might not agree with all of the sentiments, nevertheless he is raising an important point – what direction are we taking the country in? “And it’s a debate which has been going on for a long, long time, that we do ask the kind of questions that he has asked in these songs – how much of our freedom do we give to the government and how much should the government rely on us to use our common sense?”
I think that is what a lot of us are pondering these days – as we work through this pandemic, how much freedom are we losing and what happens with the lockdowns end? What will normal look like then?
Morrison recorded the songs in Belfast and England. This is all a part of his campaign to save live music. He is campaigning for venues to be open at full capacity again. He points out that shutdowns are killing live music and many venues will have to close if they don’t soon re-open. The songs will be released in two-week intervals.
“Born to Be Free” is out on Friday, September 25th, “As I Walked Out” will drop on Friday, October 9th, and “No More Lockdown” will come on Friday, October 23rd. He will play the songs live at the London Palladium this fall.
In the statement he released, Morrison states that he isn’t telling anyone what to do, he’s just speaking up for freedom. “I’m not telling people what to do or think, the government is doing a great job of that already,” he said in a statement. “It’s about freedom of choice, I believe people should have the right to think for themselves.”
As expected, followers on social media had thoughts. Some offered their own lyrics and others shared GIFs. Most poked fun at his age (75 years young) and conspiracy theories.
Morrison’s conspiracy-riddled lyrics and vocal-opposition to COVID lockdowns have led to fans re-writing some of his biggest hits into coronavirus parodies on Twitter. Comedian Sarah O’Connell put her own spin on “Brown Eyed Girl,” with the lines, “Spreading and infecting/On a hospital ventilator with/Our hearts a stoppin’ and you, my 5G girl.” Another Twitter user shared a GIF from American Werewolf in London, where the singer’s best song “Moondance” plays, saying that his protest song should be a spoof of a Creedence Clearwater Revival classic called “Bad Mood Rising.”
Possible Van Morrison lyrics…
“Hey, where did masks go?
Days when the plagues came
No social distancing
Playin' a daft game
Coughin and a wheezin hey, hey
Spreading and infecting
On a hospital ventilator with
Our hearts a stoppin' and you, my… 5G girl” https://t.co/DGhrAOuaPZ — Sarah O'Connell (@SarahO_Connell) September 18, 2020
Van Morrison is releasing a lockdown protest song, it's called 'Bad Mood Rising'.
Good morning everyone 😀 pic.twitter.com/33ivSB0or0 — The Sting (@TheSting17) September 18, 2020
It's a marvellous night for a Moon landings didn't really happen https://t.co/MQuTcqUszz — David Baddiel (@Baddiel) September 18, 2020
I’m so mad at Van Morrison for his stupid anti-lockdown song that I took off work, flew to my parents house, went in their attic, found his latest record, and broke it in half. — Tony Posnanski (@tonyposnanski) September 18, 2020
This week Prime Minister Boris Johnson is busy batting down calls for another lockdown due to a new increase in coronavirus cases. He told a committee of MPs that the government is doing all it can to prevent another nationwide lockdown. He admits there isn’t enough testing capacity due to a “colossal spike” in demand. On Wednesday it was reported that coronavirus cases in the UK increased by 3,991. Also reported is that 20 people died within 28 days of testing positive for COVID-19. But, the financial costs of another large scale shutdown are likely too great. New rules came into effect Monday restricting indoor and outdoor gatherings in England and Scotland, and indoor groups in Wales.
“And can we afford it? I very much doubt that the financial consequences would be anything but disastrous, but we have to make sure that we defeat the disease by the means that we have set out. “So when I see people arguing against the rule of six or saying that the government is coming in too hard on individual liberties and so on – I totally understand that and I sympathise with that, but we must, must defeat this disease.”
The medical community has a better grasp of the coronavirus now than earlier in the year. That is the best argument for a halt to additional shutdowns. Even if things get worse as we enter flu season, hospitals and doctors should be able to handle the situation.


hotair--2020-09-18--Report: HHS forced new coronavirus guidance on CDC to make testing asymptomatic people a lower prior

Report: HHS forced new coronavirus guidance on CDC to make testing asymptomatic people a lower priority

This is a perfect topic to follow the post about Biden blaming the entire pandemic on Trump , where I argued that many of the worst chapters of the U.S. response really aren ’ t the president ’ s fault .
If we had President Ted Cruz instead of President Donald Trump , we might very well still have had a CDC testing disaster in February , foolishness and mendacity from experts about masks early on , and Andrew Cuomo culling New York ’ s elderly by the thousands with terrible policies as the virus spread throughout NYC .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s leadership , like the heavy pressure on states to reopen before it was safe to do so .
This new NYT expose belongs in that category too .
No other candidate in the 2016 field would have tried to politicize the science produced by the federal government ’ s medical authorities the way Trump has .
Read this if you need a reminder about some of the most noteworthy instances ; there have been new examples even in the few days since I wrote that .
His political cronies at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FDA and CDC enough times now that it ’ s no longer outlandish to believe that the feds would try to rush an untested vaccine through before Election Day simply because it would help Trump at the polls .
Which is not to say that they *can* successfully rush an untested vaccine through ; they ’ re at the mercy of manufacturers in terms of a timeline , and the manufacturers are behaving more responsibly in not cutting corners than the feds have been with , say , hydroxychloroquine and convalescent plasma .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but he ’ s not so much of an amoral narcissist that he ’ d prioritize his own reelection over scientific rigor in a matter that ’ ll directly affect 300+ million people .
Which brings us to the Times story .
Last month doctors woke up to find new guidance on the CDC website declaring that people who ’ ve been in close contact for 15 minutes with someone who has COVID *don ’ t* necessarily need to be tested .
They were stunned .
By now , we all understand ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may not only have the virus themselves but are able to spread it to others .
Asymptomatic carriers are probably the biggest variable in why the virus is so hard to contain , in fact .
Untold numbers of Americans are out and about , infecting others without any clue that they ’ re sick themselves — unless they ’ re tested .
Having the CDC suddenly back off on testing for close contacts of infected people thus seemed inexplicable — scientifically .
Politically , though , it made more sense .
Maybe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing possible asymptomatic carriers due to political pressure from Trump ’ s aides .
The president has complained endlessly that the reason the U.S. has so many confirmed cases is only because we do so many tests .
Logically he might reason that if fewer tests are performed on asymptomatics in the final weeks before the election , there ’ ll be fewer confirmed cases — and he ’ ll be able to claim , however dishonestly , that the pandemic is finally “ going away ” just in time for Election Day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a few weeks ago that indeed the pressure to change the guidance was “ coming from the top down.
” Today ’ s Times story confirms that .
It was HHS , where Trump had installed campaign crony Michael Caputo as communications director , that allegedly imposed the guidance downplaying the importance of testing asymptomatics on the CDC .
And not just that guidance .
Guidance on reopening schools , another Trump political priority , too .
“ That was a doc that came from the top down , from the H.H.S .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a federal official with knowledge of the matter , referring to the White House task force on the coronavirus .
“ That policy does not reflect what many people at the C.D.C .
feel should be the policy.
” … Similarly , a document , arguing for “ the importance of reopening schools , ” was also dropped into the C.D.C .
website by the Department of Health and Human Services in July and is sharply out of step with the C.D.C.
’ s usual neutral and scientific tone , the officials said… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
would write guidelines and have it posted under the C.D.C .
banner is absolutely chilling , ” said Dr. Richard Besser , who served as acting director at the Centers for Disease Control in 2009… At least eight versions of the current testing guidance were circulated within the agency in early August , according to officials .
But staff scientists ’ objections to the document went unheard .
A senior C.D.C .
official told the scientists , “ We do not have the ability to make substantial edits , ” according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The testing guidance was then quietly published on the agency ’ s website on Aug. 24 .
The White House ’ s defense to this is that drafts of the guidance downplaying testing for asymptomatics went through the task force and received comments from CDC chief Robert Redfield , Fauci , Birx , and Trump-friendly radiologist Scott Atlas , who ’ s advising the president on a killer infectious disease like COVID for some reason .
That makes it sound like all of the most trusted people signed off on this dubious idea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , certain phrases that ended up in the final version on the CDC website suggest that it was written by people who don ’ t really know what they ’ re talking about .
For instance , the guidance referred to “ testing for Covid-19 , ” which is something a layman like you or I might say but represents a basic error that a scientist who works on this wouldn ’ t make .
COVID-19 is the disease caused by the virus ; the virus itself is SARS-CoV-2 .
( Same difference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
The guidance also referred to testing for “ vulnerable ” groups , a term the CDC tends to stay away from .
And it was posted in a section of the website designed for health-care providers even though the advice it gives is aimed at the general public .
“ We just looked so sloppy , ” said one source to the Times .
It ’ s hard to believe that Fauci or Birx or even Redfield would be that sloppy , less hard to believe that political actors would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Atlas ?
Caputo ?
Caputo ’ s “ science advisor , ” Paul Alexander , who ’ s now left the government ?
Not coincidentally , the Times has a new story out just within the last hour or two with concrete examples of how Caputo and Alexander tried to browbeat the CDC to get them to sound Trumpier about the state of the pandemic : Schuchat made those comments on June 30 , right before her predictions were fulfilled with a summer wave of COVID in California and across the Sun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen mumbling on Facebook about “ sedition ” at the CDC and a possible plot to assassinate him .
Bad enough that political cronies would be trying to muscle scientists in the middle of a pandemic not to embarrass the president by telling the public the truth , but these aren ’ t even impressive cronies .
Trump might as well have Redditors edit the weekly CDC mortality reports .
Thanks to all of the reporting on this and Caputo ’ s very public meltdown a few days ago , today the CDC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asymptomatics to get tested if they ’ ve had prolonged contact with someone who ’ s tested positive .
If this is the sort of madness the CDC is dealing with now about something as anodyne as testing guidance , I can ’ t imagine the kind of apocalyptic politicized chaos the FDA will be coping with internally circa October 20th if Trump ’ s still down eight in the polls and there hasn ’ t been any news on a vaccine .
Unquestionably , the president is going to demand that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announce , even if it ’ s just a very limited emergency-use authorization for whatever the leading vaccine is at the time .
And the punchline will be that , by then , public confidence in the integrity of the government ’ s scientific arms will have eroded so much due to these persistent attempts to politicize them that the news won ’ t even do much for Trump electorally .
People will just assume that he gamed the system to get the vaccine announcement , shrug , and resolve not to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot more evidence that it wasn ’ t rushed through to suit his election message .

This is a perfect topic to follow the post about Biden blaming the entire pandemic on Trump, where I argued that many of the worst chapters of the U.S. response really aren’t the president’s fault. If we had President Ted Cruz instead of President Donald Trump, we might very well still have had a CDC testing disaster in February, foolishness and mendacity from experts about masks early on, and Andrew Cuomo culling New York’s elderly by the thousands with terrible policies as the virus spread throughout NYC.
But some problems really are unique to Trump’s leadership, like the heavy pressure on states to reopen before it was safe to do so. This new NYT expose belongs in that category too. No other candidate in the 2016 field would have tried to politicize the science produced by the federal government’s medical authorities the way Trump has. Read this if you need a reminder about some of the most noteworthy instances; there have been new examples even in the few days since I wrote that. His political cronies at the White House and HHS have strong-armed the FDA and CDC enough times now that it’s no longer outlandish to believe that the feds would try to rush an untested vaccine through before Election Day simply because it would help Trump at the polls. Which is not to say that they *can* successfully rush an untested vaccine through; they’re at the mercy of manufacturers in terms of a timeline, and the manufacturers are behaving more responsibly in not cutting corners than the feds have been with, say, hydroxychloroquine and convalescent plasma.
Think what you want about Ted Cruz but he’s not so much of an amoral narcissist that he’d prioritize his own reelection over scientific rigor in a matter that’ll directly affect 300+ million people.
Which brings us to the Times story. Last month doctors woke up to find new guidance on the CDC website declaring that people who’ve been in close contact for 15 minutes with someone who has COVID *don’t* necessarily need to be tested. They were stunned. By now, we all understand (hopefully) that people with no symptoms may not only have the virus themselves but are able to spread it to others. Asymptomatic carriers are probably the biggest variable in why the virus is so hard to contain, in fact. Untold numbers of Americans are out and about, infecting others without any clue that they’re sick themselves — unless they’re tested. Having the CDC suddenly back off on testing for close contacts of infected people thus seemed inexplicable — scientifically.
Politically, though, it made more sense. Maybe the CDC had changed the guidance on testing possible asymptomatic carriers due to political pressure from Trump’s aides. The president has complained endlessly that the reason the U.S. has so many confirmed cases is only because we do so many tests. Logically he might reason that if fewer tests are performed on asymptomatics in the final weeks before the election, there’ll be fewer confirmed cases — and he’ll be able to claim, however dishonestly, that the pandemic is finally “going away” just in time for Election Day. Sources at the CDC told CNN a few weeks ago that indeed the pressure to change the guidance was “coming from the top down.” Today’s Times story confirms that. It was HHS, where Trump had installed campaign crony Michael Caputo as communications director, that allegedly imposed the guidance downplaying the importance of testing asymptomatics on the CDC. And not just that guidance. Guidance on reopening schools, another Trump political priority, too.
“That was a doc that came from the top down, from the H.H.S. and the task force,” said a federal official with knowledge of the matter, referring to the White House task force on the coronavirus. “That policy does not reflect what many people at the C.D.C. feel should be the policy.”… Similarly, a document, arguing for “the importance of reopening schools,” was also dropped into the C.D.C. website by the Department of Health and Human Services in July and is sharply out of step with the C.D.C.’s usual neutral and scientific tone, the officials said… “The idea that someone at H.H.S. would write guidelines and have it posted under the C.D.C. banner is absolutely chilling,” said Dr. Richard Besser, who served as acting director at the Centers for Disease Control in 2009… At least eight versions of the current testing guidance were circulated within the agency in early August, according to officials. But staff scientists’ objections to the document went unheard. A senior C.D.C. official told the scientists, “We do not have the ability to make substantial edits,” according to an email obtained by The Times. The testing guidance was then quietly published on the agency’s website on Aug. 24.
The White House’s defense to this is that drafts of the guidance downplaying testing for asymptomatics went through the task force and received comments from CDC chief Robert Redfield, Fauci, Birx, and Trump-friendly radiologist Scott Atlas, who’s advising the president on a killer infectious disease like COVID for some reason. That makes it sound like all of the most trusted people signed off on this dubious idea. In fact, notes the Times, certain phrases that ended up in the final version on the CDC website suggest that it was written by people who don’t really know what they’re talking about. For instance, the guidance referred to “testing for Covid-19,” which is something a layman like you or I might say but represents a basic error that a scientist who works on this wouldn’t make. COVID-19 is the disease caused by the virus; the virus itself is SARS-CoV-2. (Same difference as between AIDS and HIV, basically.) The guidance also referred to testing for “vulnerable” groups, a term the CDC tends to stay away from. And it was posted in a section of the website designed for health-care providers even though the advice it gives is aimed at the general public. “We just looked so sloppy,” said one source to the Times.
It’s hard to believe that Fauci or Birx or even Redfield would be that sloppy, less hard to believe that political actors would be. So who really wrote the guidance? Atlas? Caputo? Caputo’s “science advisor,” Paul Alexander, who’s now left the government?
Not coincidentally, the Times has a new story out just within the last hour or two with concrete examples of how Caputo and Alexander tried to browbeat the CDC to get them to sound Trumpier about the state of the pandemic:
Dr. Anne Schuchat, a 32-year veteran of the C.D.C. and its principal deputy director, had appealed to Americans to wear masks and warned, “We have way too much virus across the country.” But Dr. Alexander, a part-time assistant professor of health research methods, appeared sure he understood the coronavirus better. “Her aim is to embarrass the president,” he wrote, commenting on Dr. Schuchat’s appeal for face masks in an interview with the Journal of the American Medical Association. “She is duplicitous,” he also wrote in an email to his boss, Michael R. Caputo, the Health and Human Services Department’s top spokesman who went on medical leave this week. He asked Mr. Caputo to “remind” Dr. Schuchat that during the H1N1 swine flu outbreak in 2009, thousands of Americans had died “under her work.”
Schuchat made those comments on June 30, right before her predictions were fulfilled with a summer wave of COVID in California and across the Sun Belt. Meanwhile, Caputo was last seen mumbling on Facebook about “sedition” at the CDC and a possible plot to assassinate him. Bad enough that political cronies would be trying to muscle scientists in the middle of a pandemic not to embarrass the president by telling the public the truth, but these aren’t even impressive cronies. Trump might as well have Redditors edit the weekly CDC mortality reports.
Thanks to all of the reporting on this and Caputo’s very public meltdown a few days ago, today the CDC quietly restored the original guidance calling for asymptomatics to get tested if they’ve had prolonged contact with someone who’s tested positive. If this is the sort of madness the CDC is dealing with now about something as anodyne as testing guidance, I can’t imagine the kind of apocalyptic politicized chaos the FDA will be coping with internally circa October 20th if Trump’s still down eight in the polls and there hasn’t been any news on a vaccine. Unquestionably, the president is going to demand that they give him some sort of breakthrough to announce, even if it’s just a very limited emergency-use authorization for whatever the leading vaccine is at the time. And the punchline will be that, by then, public confidence in the integrity of the government’s scientific arms will have eroded so much due to these persistent attempts to politicize them that the news won’t even do much for Trump electorally. People will just assume that he gamed the system to get the vaccine announcement, shrug, and resolve not to get the shot until they’ve seen a lot more evidence that it wasn’t rushed through to suit his election message.


hotair--2020-09-18--Whitlock: Let's face it, the "Criminal$ Justice Movement" is nothing more than a "cash grab" for ric

Whitlock: Let's face it, the "Criminal$ Justice Movement" is nothing more than a "cash grab" for rich athletes and the media

Jason Whitlock may or may not be a conservative , but the black sports journalist certainly doesn ’ t follow along with the crowd .
Writing at Outkick , his platform with Clay Travis , the former Pardon the Interruption co-host rips into the narratives being launched by Black Lives Matter and celebrity athletes and attorneys about law enforcement .
The so-called Criminal Justice Movement being adopted by the sports and celebrity industry is nothing but a “ cash grab ” by the already-wealthy , and puts more lives in danger than bad policing does : Given the hyperfocus regarding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history , ” let me take the first crack at defining the history being forged by Black Lives Matter , Colin Kaepernick , Lebron James , Nike and their media sycophants .
They ’ ve created the Criminals Justice Movement .
Or better yet , the Criminal $ Justice Movement .
The intense fight for the rights of criminal suspects resisting arrest is really just a cash grab by Democratic politicians , Nike and athletes , celebrities and journalists seeking social media influence .
It ’ s not just the celebrities cashing in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ben Crump , the attorney representing Breonna Taylor ’ s family as well as Jacob Blake , a “ hearse ” chaser .
Whitlock especially objects to this tweet from Crump featuring a particular message from Blake , who got shot by police who were called out by Blake ’ s ex-girlfriend for violating a protective order : The “ cash grab ” is one thing , but Whitlock argues that BLM and its allies in the media are putting people ’ s lives at risk .
Whitlock , who lost a cousin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the consequences of the impunity toward law enforcement these false narratives and exploitation create : In fact , the “ awareness raising ” actually promotes a more dangerous climate .
Criminal suspects are being told by athletes , celebrities and the mainstream media that they have the right to ignore police instruction .
Resistance is good .
The Criminal $ Justice Movement and its primary policy push — defund the police — have predictably emboldened criminals .
Violent crime is elevating in high-crime neighborhoods and police are reluctant to aggressively police those areas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in and financial donations pour down on Democratic voter drives .
Everybody is using George Floyd ’ s death to make it rain .
His memory is used to hype NFL and NBA games , power ad campaigns for podcasts and YouTube shows , leverage media members for promotions and , most importantly , fuel left-wing political funding .
Justice is not being sought .
Cash and power are .
At least a couple of athletes have begun to dissent from the narrative .
The Pittsburgh Steelers chose to put the name of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their helmets this season as their contribution to social justice .
After lineman Alejandro Villanueva chose to honor a deceased Iraq War soldier instead , fellow lineman Maurkice Pouncey took a second look at Antwon Rose ’ s case .
Pouncey concluded that the team hadn ’ t been told the full truth about Rose : Writing separately , Outkick reporter Joe Kinsey explained how activists had all but erased the fact that Rose had been shot after conducting a drive-by shooting of his own : “ On the night of June 19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jr. , who is black , was a passenger in was pulled over by the East Pittsburgh Police .
While the driver was being handcuffed on suspicion of being involved in an incident that happened earlier that evening , a frightened Rose fled from the car , Teresa Varley wrote on Steelers.com .
“ The cell phone video a bystander captured showed Rose running , and then you could hear gunshots and see as he was fatally shot in the back three times by a white East Pittsburgh Police Officer.
” The Steelers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case such as the victim in the drive-by “ incident ” told investigators it was Rose who shot at him .
“ The beef was between me and him , that car came by , he shot me , I ran to the store , ” William Ross told investigators referencing Rose .
Police also found a 9-millimeter handgun magazine in Rose ’ s pocket .
A loaded 9-millimeter Glock was found under the seat with 16-rounds in a 17-round magazine .
Police also stated gunshot residue was found on Rose ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the driver — later determined to be a jitney ( unlicensed cabbie ) — when Rose and Zaijuan Hester , who was in the backseat and used a .40-caliber Glock 22 pistol during the drive-by , took off running from the East Pittsburgh officer .
Rosfeld shot Rose .
The police officer testified that he thought one of the teens had turned and pointed a gun at him .
Whitlock recounts this in today ’ s column , and adds that “ Black men in Pittsburgh were far more likely to be hunted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pittsburgh cop.
” Furthermore , Whitlock writes , any media outlet could easily have fact-checked the Steelers ’ victimhood narrative at any time .
Why don ’ t they choose to report the facts rather than allow activists ’ false or at least incomplete narratives to stand ?
Because they ’ re in on the hustle themselves , Whitlock concludes , specifically calling out his former employer ESPN for “ paying and promoting the employees willing to stir racial animosity , demonize the police and support the Criminal $ Justice Movement.
” Be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe follow Whitlock ’ s Twitter feed , too .
He ’ s been getting predictable flak over his argument , but Whitlock ’ s not in the mood to retreat — although apparently at least one of his critics , ESPN contributor Rikki Soumpholphakdy , felt retreat was necessary .

Jason Whitlock may or may not be a conservative, but the black sports journalist certainly doesn’t follow along with the crowd. Writing at Outkick, his platform with Clay Travis, the former Pardon the Interruption co-host rips into the narratives being launched by Black Lives Matter and celebrity athletes and attorneys about law enforcement. The so-called Criminal Justice Movement being adopted by the sports and celebrity industry is nothing but a “cash grab” by the already-wealthy, and puts more lives in danger than bad policing does:
Given the hyperfocus regarding landing “on the right side of history,” let me take the first crack at defining the history being forged by Black Lives Matter, Colin Kaepernick, Lebron James, Nike and their media sycophants. They’ve created the Criminals Justice Movement. Or better yet, the Criminal$ Justice Movement. The intense fight for the rights of criminal suspects resisting arrest is really just a cash grab by Democratic politicians, Nike and athletes, celebrities and journalists seeking social media influence.
It’s not just the celebrities cashing in either, Whitlock argues. He calls Ben Crump, the attorney representing Breonna Taylor’s family as well as Jacob Blake, a “hearse” chaser. Whitlock especially objects to this tweet from Crump featuring a particular message from Blake, who got shot by police who were called out by Blake’s ex-girlfriend for violating a protective order:
#JacobBlake released this powerful video message from his hospital bed today, reminding everyone just how precious life is. #JusticeForJacobBlake pic.twitter.com/87CYlgPDBj — Ben Crump (@AttorneyCrump) September 6, 2020
On September 8th, Crump tweeted out a “powerful” message from Jacob Blake that summarizes the Criminal$ Justice Movement. “Change y’all’s lives out there,” Blake said from his hospital bed, “stick together, make some money, make things easier for our people out here.” “Make some money” best explains the Criminal$ Justice Movement.
The “cash grab” is one thing, but Whitlock argues that BLM and its allies in the media are putting people’s lives at risk. Whitlock, who lost a cousin in a police-tasering incident, warns about the consequences of the impunity toward law enforcement these false narratives and exploitation create:
In fact, the “awareness raising” actually promotes a more dangerous climate. Criminal suspects are being told by athletes, celebrities and the mainstream media that they have the right to ignore police instruction. Resistance is good. The Criminal$ Justice Movement and its primary policy push — defund the police — have predictably emboldened criminals. Violent crime is elevating in high-crime neighborhoods and police are reluctant to aggressively police those areas. All while Kaepernick and Nike cash in and financial donations pour down on Democratic voter drives. Everybody is using George Floyd’s death to make it rain. His memory is used to hype NFL and NBA games, power ad campaigns for podcasts and YouTube shows, leverage media members for promotions and, most importantly, fuel left-wing political funding. Justice is not being sought. Cash and power are.
At least a couple of athletes have begun to dissent from the narrative. The Pittsburgh Steelers chose to put the name of a police shooting “victim” on their helmets this season as their contribution to social justice. After lineman Alejandro Villanueva chose to honor a deceased Iraq War soldier instead, fellow lineman Maurkice Pouncey took a second look at Antwon Rose’s case. Pouncey concluded that the team hadn’t been told the full truth about Rose:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CFPUiBSAONJ/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Writing separately, Outkick reporter Joe Kinsey explained how activists had all but erased the fact that Rose had been shot after conducting a drive-by shooting of his own:
“On the night of June 19, 2018, the car Antwon Rose Jr., who is black, was a passenger in was pulled over by the East Pittsburgh Police. While the driver was being handcuffed on suspicion of being involved in an incident that happened earlier that evening, a frightened Rose fled from the car, Teresa Varley wrote on Steelers.com. “The cell phone video a bystander captured showed Rose running, and then you could hear gunshots and see as he was fatally shot in the back three times by a white East Pittsburgh Police Officer.” The Steelers failed to mention deeper details surrounding the case such as the victim in the drive-by “incident” told investigators it was Rose who shot at him. “The beef was between me and him, that car came by, he shot me, I ran to the store,” William Ross told investigators referencing Rose. Police also found a 9-millimeter handgun magazine in Rose’s pocket. A loaded 9-millimeter Glock was found under the seat with 16-rounds in a 17-round magazine. Police also stated gunshot residue was found on Rose’s hands. Officer Michael Rosfeld was handcuffing the driver — later determined to be a jitney (unlicensed cabbie) — when Rose and Zaijuan Hester, who was in the backseat and used a .40-caliber Glock 22 pistol during the drive-by, took off running from the East Pittsburgh officer. Rosfeld shot Rose. The police officer testified that he thought one of the teens had turned and pointed a gun at him.
Whitlock recounts this in today’s column, and adds that “Black men in Pittsburgh were far more likely to be hunted and shot by Antwon Rose than any Pittsburgh cop.” Furthermore, Whitlock writes, any media outlet could easily have fact-checked the Steelers’ victimhood narrative at any time. Why don’t they choose to report the facts rather than allow activists’ false or at least incomplete narratives to stand? Because they’re in on the hustle themselves, Whitlock concludes, specifically calling out his former employer ESPN for “paying and promoting the employees willing to stir racial animosity, demonize the police and support the Criminal$ Justice Movement.”
Be sure to read it all, and maybe follow Whitlock’s Twitter feed, too. He’s been getting predictable flak over his argument, but Whitlock’s not in the mood to retreat — although apparently at least one of his critics, ESPN contributor Rikki Soumpholphakdy, felt retreat was necessary.
https://twitter.com/WhitlockJason/status/1306977659604303877


hotair--2020-09-18--Dem congresswoman says she's not leaving D.C. without a stimulus deal -- and then leaves?

Something fun that ’ s circulating on political Twitter this afternoon .
It ’ s too amusing not to post but a little checking suggests that it ’ s misleading .
A nice try by the Congressional Leadership Fund , though .
Watch , then read on .
“ I just knew that I was not going to go back to my district and walk around and go to the grocery store and have people ask me again about the state of the latest COVID emergency bill and tell them that because of politics we couldn ’ t get in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Slotkin tells Jake Tapper .
Who ’ s the “ we , ” though ?
Is it Congress , in which case the CLF has her dead to rights on skipping town early ?
Or is it the Problem Solvers Caucus in the House , of which she ’ s a member ?
The PSC , a bipartisan group composed mainly of pols from purple districts , just produced a $ 1.5 trillion bipartisan stimulus plan for coronavirus relief , which is bigger than the Senate GOP ’ s “ skinny ” stimulus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2 trillion Pelosi and Senate Dems are willing to consider as a rock-bottom offer .
Various Democratic House committee chairs rejected the PSC proposal immediately after it was introduced this week , not wanting to give Republicans an opportunity to lowball Pelosi with an offer that has the patina of bipartisanship .
But the members of the Problem Solvers Caucus knew their offer would be rejected .
The caucus exists so that vulnerable members can give each other political cover ahead of tough reelection bids .
Slotkin represents Michigan ’ s Eighth District @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s afraid of being blamed by her red-leaning constituents this fall if no COVID relief package passes before November and the public ’ s suddenly in a “ throw the bums out ” kind of mood .
She and her colleagues in the PSC wanted something tangible they could point at as proof for voters that they ’ re doing everything they can to deliver stimulus funds to the public .
The result : The PSC ’ s middle-ground stimulus plan .
Now Slotkin can tell Republican voters in MI-8 that she refused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nancy Pelosi and joined with 25 Republican friends to produce a plan that would satisfy people on both sides .
Skip to 4:50 of the clip below and watch her full interview with Tapper .
Right after she talks about how “ we ” need to get in a room together to hash this out , she says , “ So , the Problem Solvers , we got together , we started talking… ” All she means , I think , is that she couldn ’ t in good conscience go back home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something to work with the other side to produce a plan .
She did that with the PSC .
So now off she goes to the airport .

Something fun that’s circulating on political Twitter this afternoon. It’s too amusing not to post but a little checking suggests that it’s misleading. A nice try by the Congressional Leadership Fund, though. Watch, then read on.
.@RepSlotkin told CNN she wasn’t going home from DC without a deal on COVID relief. Less than 40 minutes later, @ElissaSlotkin was at the DCA airport where she refused to answer why she was headed home without a deal.https://t.co/EhjELMpMBl WATCH ⬇ pic.twitter.com/Sq6zZjAnZi — Congressional Leadership Fund (@CLFSuperPAC) September 18, 2020
“I just knew that I was not going to go back to my district and walk around and go to the grocery store and have people ask me again about the state of the latest COVID emergency bill and tell them that because of politics we couldn’t get in a room together,” Democrat Elissa Slotkin tells Jake Tapper. Who’s the “we,” though? Is it Congress, in which case the CLF has her dead to rights on skipping town early?
Or is it the Problem Solvers Caucus in the House, of which she’s a member? The PSC, a bipartisan group composed mainly of pols from purple districts, just produced a $1.5 trillion bipartisan stimulus plan for coronavirus relief, which is bigger than the Senate GOP’s “skinny” stimulus and a bit shy of the $2 trillion Pelosi and Senate Dems are willing to consider as a rock-bottom offer. Various Democratic House committee chairs rejected the PSC proposal immediately after it was introduced this week, not wanting to give Republicans an opportunity to lowball Pelosi with an offer that has the patina of bipartisanship.
But the members of the Problem Solvers Caucus knew their offer would be rejected. The caucus exists so that vulnerable members can give each other political cover ahead of tough reelection bids. Slotkin represents Michigan’s Eighth District, which leans R+4. She’s afraid of being blamed by her red-leaning constituents this fall if no COVID relief package passes before November and the public’s suddenly in a “throw the bums out” kind of mood. She and her colleagues in the PSC wanted something tangible they could point at as proof for voters that they’re doing everything they can to deliver stimulus funds to the public. The result: The PSC’s middle-ground stimulus plan. Now Slotkin can tell Republican voters in MI-8 that she refused to be taken prisoner by the evil Nancy Pelosi and joined with 25 Republican friends to produce a plan that would satisfy people on both sides.
Skip to 4:50 of the clip below and watch her full interview with Tapper. Right after she talks about how “we” need to get in a room together to hash this out, she says, “So, the Problem Solvers, we got together, we started talking…” All she means, I think, is that she couldn’t in good conscience go back home to her district until she had done something to work with the other side to produce a plan. She did that with the PSC. So now off she goes to the airport.