hotair--2020-07-13--Mulvaney: COVID-19 testing levels, delays "inexcusable at this point in the pandemic"

How shall Congress spend the next round of imaginary money in the Phase 4 COVID-19 relief bill ?
Former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney has an idea — and a sharp contradiction to his boss ’ narrative on testing .
Despite Donald Trump ’ s claims about robust testing , Mulvaney tells CNBC , the truth is that testing is in greater demand and is falling behind as cases spike upward .
In both this interview and in an op-ed for the channel , Mulvaney offers his personal testimony that response times for COVID-19 tests make them useless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of engagement that leads to economic rebounds .
Congress has spent a lot of money on the “ symptoms , ” Mulvaney says , but it ’ s now time to “ treat the cause ” : It may be too soon , then , to reasonably conclude that another massive stimulus is necessary .
But if lawmakers still see the need to run the presses , they need to realize that the current economic crisis is public-health driven .
As such , using ordinary fiscal tools might not be particularly efficacious .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ people aren ’ t going on vacation probably has more to do with fear of getting sick than it does with their economic condition .
Giving people a check , or some financial incentive to travel , won ’ t solve their problem .
Make people feel safe to go back on an airplane or cruise ship , and they will of their own accord .
Any stimulus should be directed at the root cause of our recession : dealing with Covid .
I know it isn ’ t popular to talk about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still have a testing problem in this country .
My son was tested recently ; we had to wait 5 to 7 days for results .
My daughter wanted to get tested before visiting her grandparents , but was told she didn ’ t qualify .
That is simply inexcusable at this point in the pandemic .
We could also direct more money for research .
Or more temporary hospital beds or therapeutics .
If we are going to borrow hundreds of billions of dollars , let ’ s do it to treat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not just the symptoms .
This won ’ t be received well at the White House , but Mulvaney ’ s not the only one making this argument .
The Washington Post reported yesterday that delays of several days for test results have basically made their functional value worthless , except for those exhibiting symptoms : Test results for the novel coronavirus are taking so long to come back that experts say the results across the United States are often proving useless in the campaign to control the deadly disease .
Some testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ five to seven days .
Others are taking even longer .
Outbreaks across the Sun Belt have strained labs beyond capacity .
That rising demand , in turn , has caused shortages of swabs , chemical reagents and equipment as far away as New York .
The long testing turnaround times are making it impossible for the United States to replicate the central strategy used by other countries to effectively contain the virus — test , trace and isolate .
Like catching any killer , speed is of the essence when it comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going from one step to the next , it ’ s like you ’ re already stumbling right out of the gate , ” said Crystal R. Watson , a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University .
“ It makes contact tracing almost useless .
By the time a person is getting results , they already have symptoms , their contacts may already have symptoms and have gone on to infect others.
” This also calls into question plans for the Republican convention in Jacksonville .
The RNC announced that they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day , with 15 minutes for results .
The capacity for those tests must be very limited , however , and this will call into question why that limited capacity is being used for what is nothing more than an extended political rally .
Shouldn ’ t that capacity get reserved for essential services , such as contact tracing ?
The same issue got plenty of play in the media over the weekend , and is likely to accelerate after Mulvaney ’ s remarks .
Is that what motivated him to speak out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hoped to reach some of Trump ’ s base by taking on the argument himself and pointing out the deficiencies in the current effort .
Mulvaney ’ s right that we can ’ t sustain an economic recovery without curtailing the spread of the disease , and absent a vaccine , the only way to accomplish that is through rapid testing and contact tracing .
Will it work ?
Thus far , the White House has been uncharacteristically silent about Mulvaney ’ s remarks .
Trump hasn ’ t tweeted about them , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so far either .
Maybe Mulvaney ’ s testimony still carries some weight in the West Wing .

How shall Congress spend the next round of imaginary money in the Phase 4 COVID-19 relief bill? Former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney has an idea — and a sharp contradiction to his boss’ narrative on testing. Despite Donald Trump’s claims about robust testing, Mulvaney tells CNBC, the truth is that testing is in greater demand and is falling behind as cases spike upward. In both this interview and in an op-ed for the channel, Mulvaney offers his personal testimony that response times for COVID-19 tests make them useless for the decisions necessary for the kind of engagement that leads to economic rebounds.
Congress has spent a lot of money on the “symptoms,” Mulvaney says, but it’s now time to “treat the cause”:
It may be too soon, then, to reasonably conclude that another massive stimulus is necessary. But if lawmakers still see the need to run the presses, they need to realize that the current economic crisis is public-health driven. As such, using ordinary fiscal tools might not be particularly efficacious. Put another way, the fact that people aren’t going on vacation probably has more to do with fear of getting sick than it does with their economic condition. Giving people a check, or some financial incentive to travel, won’t solve their problem. Make people feel safe to go back on an airplane or cruise ship, and they will of their own accord. Any stimulus should be directed at the root cause of our recession: dealing with Covid. I know it isn’t popular to talk about in some Republican circles, but we still have a testing problem in this country. My son was tested recently; we had to wait 5 to 7 days for results. My daughter wanted to get tested before visiting her grandparents, but was told she didn’t qualify. That is simply inexcusable at this point in the pandemic. We could also direct more money for research. Or more temporary hospital beds or therapeutics. If we are going to borrow hundreds of billions of dollars, let’s do it to treat the cause of our economic illness, not just the symptoms.
This won’t be received well at the White House, but Mulvaney’s not the only one making this argument. The Washington Post reported yesterday that delays of several days for test results have basically made their functional value worthless, except for those exhibiting symptoms:
Test results for the novel coronavirus are taking so long to come back that experts say the results across the United States are often proving useless in the campaign to control the deadly disease. Some testing sites are struggling to provide results in five to seven days. Others are taking even longer. Outbreaks across the Sun Belt have strained labs beyond capacity. That rising demand, in turn, has caused shortages of swabs, chemical reagents and equipment as far away as New York. The long testing turnaround times are making it impossible for the United States to replicate the central strategy used by other countries to effectively contain the virus — test, trace and isolate. Like catching any killer, speed is of the essence when it comes to the coronavirus. “Instead of going from one step to the next, it’s like you’re already stumbling right out of the gate,” said Crystal R. Watson, a public health expert at Johns Hopkins University. “It makes contact tracing almost useless. By the time a person is getting results, they already have symptoms, their contacts may already have symptoms and have gone on to infect others.”
This also calls into question plans for the Republican convention in Jacksonville. The RNC announced that they would do rapid screening for all attendees every day, with 15 minutes for results. The capacity for those tests must be very limited, however, and this will call into question why that limited capacity is being used for what is nothing more than an extended political rally. Shouldn’t that capacity get reserved for essential services, such as contact tracing?
The same issue got plenty of play in the media over the weekend, and is likely to accelerate after Mulvaney’s remarks. Is that what motivated him to speak out? It seems more likely that Mulvaney hoped to reach some of Trump’s base by taking on the argument himself and pointing out the deficiencies in the current effort. Mulvaney’s right that we can’t sustain an economic recovery without curtailing the spread of the disease, and absent a vaccine, the only way to accomplish that is through rapid testing and contact tracing.
Will it work? Thus far, the White House has been uncharacteristically silent about Mulvaney’s remarks. Trump hasn’t tweeted about them, nor has he bragged about testing metrics so far either. Maybe Mulvaney’s testimony still carries some weight in the West Wing.


hotair--2020-07-13--L.A. Teachers Union's demands before reopening schools are really... something. UPDATE: It doesn't m

L.A. Teachers Union's demands before reopening schools are really... something. UPDATE: It doesn't matter

When it comes to California ’ s plans as to when and how to reopen the schools , it ’ s only natural that the teachers unions would weigh in on the subject .
After all , those decisions affect the teachers every bit as much as the students .
Casting the net a bit further , a failure to reopen the schools will negatively impact many families if they can ’ t afford childcare costs , allowing them to return to work and their pre-pandemic “ normal ” schedules .
So what do the unions want to see before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natural to assume they want to see more distance between students , mask requirements and better sanitation protocols .
And they certainly do want some of those things .
But according to a statement put out this week by United Teachers Los Angeles , there are several other things on their list of demands .
Let ’ s take a look , shall we ?
There ’ s a massive list of demands in the document , of which those are only a few .
Everything revolves around budget increases adding up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scratch the surface .
And that ’ s only for the greater Los Angeles area , not the entire state of California .
So how do they propose to come up with the money ?
Easy as pie , my friends .
The Union points out that there are more than 150 billionaires living in California .
I ’ m sure you can guess where this is going .
That ’ s right .
They want a wealth tax and a millionaire tax imposed at the state level , to the tune of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if you have “ too much money , ” with the cash being funded directly into the school systems .
At the federal level , they not only want “ immediate , full funding ” for a number of programs , but also the implementation of Medicare for All .
( Huh ? )
Oh , and how could I forget ?
They want to defund the police .
From there , we move on to a demand to shut down all the charter schools and mandatory , direct financial assistance to illegal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not making any of this up . )
This is the list of what they want to see done before they will offer their blessing for reopening the schools .
In other words… they don ’ t want to reopen the schools .
At least not until after the election in November .
And are we really surprised by this ?
It was all fairly predictable if you ask me .
Perhaps the citizens of California should ask for something in return if they ’ re going to be this “ generous ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like a promise to cut down on the number of instances of teachers sexually abusing their students ?
UPDATE : ( Jazz ) As it turns out , the teachers unions won ’ t need to worry about it .
No sooner had their list of hostage demands been released than the school district announced that normal classroom activity would not be taking place until further notice due to the surge in novel coronavirus cases .

When it comes to California’s plans as to when and how to reopen the schools, it’s only natural that the teachers unions would weigh in on the subject. After all, those decisions affect the teachers every bit as much as the students. Casting the net a bit further, a failure to reopen the schools will negatively impact many families if they can’t afford childcare costs, allowing them to return to work and their pre-pandemic “normal” schedules.
So what do the unions want to see before the schools reopen? It would be natural to assume they want to see more distance between students, mask requirements and better sanitation protocols. And they certainly do want some of those things. But according to a statement put out this week by United Teachers Los Angeles, there are several other things on their list of demands. Let’s take a look, shall we?
Paid sick leave for parents to be able to keep symptomatic children home
Clear framework to protect against personal liability, in acknowledgment of the fact that there is no way to eliminate all risk during an active pandemic
Greatly increased federal and state funding to support physical distancing and hygiene practices
Drastically reduced class sizes to no more than 12 per classroom
There’s a massive list of demands in the document, of which those are only a few. Everything revolves around budget increases adding up to tens of billions of dollars to even scratch the surface. And that’s only for the greater Los Angeles area, not the entire state of California. So how do they propose to come up with the money?
Easy as pie, my friends. The Union points out that there are more than 150 billionaires living in California. I’m sure you can guess where this is going. That’s right. They want a wealth tax and a millionaire tax imposed at the state level, to the tune of 1% of your wealth each year if you have “too much money,” with the cash being funded directly into the school systems. At the federal level, they not only want “immediate, full funding” for a number of programs, but also the implementation of Medicare for All. (Huh?)
Oh, and how could I forget? They want to defund the police.
Defund Police: Police violence is a leading cause of death and trauma for Black people, and is a serious public health and moral issue. We must shift the astronomical amount of money devoted to policing, to education and other essential needs such as housing and public health.
From there, we move on to a demand to shut down all the charter schools and mandatory, direct financial assistance to illegal aliens. (I’m seriously not making any of this up.) This is the list of what they want to see done before they will offer their blessing for reopening the schools. In other words… they don’t want to reopen the schools. At least not until after the election in November. And are we really surprised by this? It was all fairly predictable if you ask me.
Perhaps the citizens of California should ask for something in return if they’re going to be this “generous” to the teachers unions. Maybe something like a promise to cut down on the number of instances of teachers sexually abusing their students?
UPDATE: (Jazz) As it turns out, the teachers unions won’t need to worry about it. No sooner had their list of hostage demands been released than the school district announced that normal classroom activity would not be taking place until further notice due to the surge in novel coronavirus cases.


hotair--2020-07-13--Study suggests coronavirus immunity only lasts a few months (and a 2nd infection could be worse)

Last month I wrote about a Chinese study of the coronavirus which found antibodies to the virus only last a few months in the body .
That seemed to indicated that people who ’ d survived the virus would not have a long term immunity to it .
Over the weekend a pre-print ( meaning it hasn ’ t been peer-reviewed yet ) study from King ’ s College in the UK found something similar .
People who have recovered from Covid-19 may lose their immunity to the disease within months , according to research suggesting the virus could reinfect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colds .
In the first longitudinal study of its kind , scientists analysed the immune response of more than 90 patients and healthcare workers at Guy ’ s and St Thomas ’ NHS foundation trust and found levels of antibodies that can destroy the virus peaked about three weeks after the onset of symptoms then swiftly declined .
Blood tests revealed that while 60 % of people marshalled a “ potent ” antibody response at the height of their battle with the virus , only 17 % retained the same potency three months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as 23-fold over the period .
In some cases , they became undetectable .
“ People are producing a reasonable antibody response to the virus , but it ’ s waning over a short period of time and depending on how high your peak is , that determines how long the antibodies are staying around , ” said Dr Katie Doores , lead author on the study at King ’ s College London .
There are several caveats here , starting with the fact that this hasn ’ t been peer reviewed yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two distinct kinds of immunity in the body .
Antibody immunity is also known as humoral immunity .
But there is a separate type of immunity called cellular immunity which involved white blood cells called T-cells which target virus-infected cells .
This study only looks at the former kind of immunity but there is some evidence that even people with low levels of antibodies have some T-cell immunity to the virus .
However , there is also some early concern that people are actually getting the virus more than once .
Yesterday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ named D. Clay Ackerly who believes one of his patients has had the virus twice in three months and the second time was worse : “ Wait .
I can catch Covid twice ?
” my 50-year-old patient asked in disbelief .
It was the beginning of July , and he had just tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 , the virus that causes Covid-19 , for a second time — three months after a previous infection .
While there ’ s still much we don ’ t understand about immunity to this new illness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases like his suggest the answer is yes .
Covid-19 may also be much worse the second time around .
During his first infection , my patient experienced a mild cough and sore throat .
His second infection , in contrast , was marked by a high fever , shortness of breath , and hypoxia , resulting in multiple trips to the hospital .
Recent reports and conversations with physician colleagues suggest my patient is not alone .
Two patients in New Jersey , for instance , appear to have contracted Covid-19 a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recovering from their first infection .
Daniel Griffin , a physician and researcher at Columbia in New York , recently described a case of presumed reinfection on the This Week in Virology podcast .
Why would a second infection be worse than the first ?
Dr. Ackerly points out that that is sometimes the case with dengue fever .
Research has shown it can become more severe upon a second infection because antibody levels have dipped to a specific level .
He links to this Stat News piece from 2017 explaining how that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bite of mosquitoes that carry the viruses .
It is an unpleasant disease that can cause high fever , severe headache , and joint and muscle pain .
But in some people , it can also cause small blood vessels to leak , which can lead to failure of the circulatory system , shock , and death .
Severe disease can happen with any dengue infection but is more common on the second .
Harris and her colleagues found that when antibody levels fell to a certain point in children who had been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk of having severe dengue disease if they were again infected .
In fact , for children whose antibodies fell to within this low range — a sort of anti-sweet spot — the risk was nearly eight times higher than for other children .
The belief is that low levels of antibodies can not neutralize or kill the invading viruses .
But they do bind to them and effectively usher them into susceptible cells , where the viruses then replicate .
This is still speculation at this point .
Dr. Ackerly can ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patient was infected a 2nd time ( as opposed to one lingering infection ) .
Still , the overall picture is pretty grim .
If it turns out that immunity to the disease only lasts a few months then this is likely to become an annual disease similar to the common cold ( which is also a coronavirus ) .
We could be fighting new outbreaks of this every winter , unable to reach herd immunity naturally .
If this latest study proves to be accurate then a vaccine may be our only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normal .
The first half of this report covers the new immunity study .
The second half discusses another study which found that people who had survived the coronavirus often developed heart abnormalities they didn ’ t have previously .
So the lasting effects of this disease may be very serious even for those who survive a first infection .

Last month I wrote about a Chinese study of the coronavirus which found antibodies to the virus only last a few months in the body. That seemed to indicated that people who’d survived the virus would not have a long term immunity to it. Over the weekend a pre-print (meaning it hasn’t been peer-reviewed yet) study from King’s College in the UK found something similar.
People who have recovered from Covid-19 may lose their immunity to the disease within months, according to research suggesting the virus could reinfect people year after year, like common colds. In the first longitudinal study of its kind, scientists analysed the immune response of more than 90 patients and healthcare workers at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS foundation trust and found levels of antibodies that can destroy the virus peaked about three weeks after the onset of symptoms then swiftly declined. Blood tests revealed that while 60% of people marshalled a “potent” antibody response at the height of their battle with the virus, only 17% retained the same potency three months later. Antibody levels fell as much as 23-fold over the period. In some cases, they became undetectable. “People are producing a reasonable antibody response to the virus, but it’s waning over a short period of time and depending on how high your peak is, that determines how long the antibodies are staying around,” said Dr Katie Doores, lead author on the study at King’s College London.
There are several caveats here, starting with the fact that this hasn’t been peer reviewed yet. In addition, there are actually two distinct kinds of immunity in the body. Antibody immunity is also known as humoral immunity. But there is a separate type of immunity called cellular immunity which involved white blood cells called T-cells which target virus-infected cells. This study only looks at the former kind of immunity but there is some evidence that even people with low levels of antibodies have some T-cell immunity to the virus.
However, there is also some early concern that people are actually getting the virus more than once. Yesterday, Vox published a piece by a doctor named D. Clay Ackerly who believes one of his patients has had the virus twice in three months and the second time was worse:
“Wait. I can catch Covid twice?” my 50-year-old patient asked in disbelief. It was the beginning of July, and he had just tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, for a second time — three months after a previous infection. While there’s still much we don’t understand about immunity to this new illness, a small but growing number of cases like his suggest the answer is yes. Covid-19 may also be much worse the second time around. During his first infection, my patient experienced a mild cough and sore throat. His second infection, in contrast, was marked by a high fever, shortness of breath, and hypoxia, resulting in multiple trips to the hospital. Recent reports and conversations with physician colleagues suggest my patient is not alone. Two patients in New Jersey, for instance, appear to have contracted Covid-19 a second time almost two months after fully recovering from their first infection. Daniel Griffin, a physician and researcher at Columbia in New York, recently described a case of presumed reinfection on the This Week in Virology podcast.
Why would a second infection be worse than the first? Dr. Ackerly points out that that is sometimes the case with dengue fever. Research has shown it can become more severe upon a second infection because antibody levels have dipped to a specific level. He links to this Stat News piece from 2017 explaining how that works:
Dengue is transmitted via the bite of mosquitoes that carry the viruses. It is an unpleasant disease that can cause high fever, severe headache, and joint and muscle pain. But in some people, it can also cause small blood vessels to leak, which can lead to failure of the circulatory system, shock, and death. Severe disease can happen with any dengue infection but is more common on the second. Harris and her colleagues found that when antibody levels fell to a certain point in children who had been previously infected, they were at greater risk of having severe dengue disease if they were again infected. In fact, for children whose antibodies fell to within this low range — a sort of anti-sweet spot — the risk was nearly eight times higher than for other children. The belief is that low levels of antibodies cannot neutralize or kill the invading viruses. But they do bind to them and effectively usher them into susceptible cells, where the viruses then replicate.
This is still speculation at this point. Dr. Ackerly can’t even say for certain that his patient was infected a 2nd time (as opposed to one lingering infection). Still, the overall picture is pretty grim. If it turns out that immunity to the disease only lasts a few months then this is likely to become an annual disease similar to the common cold (which is also a coronavirus). We could be fighting new outbreaks of this every winter, unable to reach herd immunity naturally. If this latest study proves to be accurate then a vaccine may be our only real hope of returning the world to normal.
The first half of this report covers the new immunity study. The second half discusses another study which found that people who had survived the coronavirus often developed heart abnormalities they didn’t have previously. So the lasting effects of this disease may be very serious even for those who survive a first infection.


hotair--2020-07-13--Stone judge: I need to review Trump's commutation

Eeeeenteresting , even if it might just relate to a technical question of application .
When Donald Trump issued his clemency action for Roger Stone , he chose to commute the sentence rather than issue a full pardon .
Does that commutation also apply to Stone ’ s probation and the conditions set for it ?
Judge Amy Berman Jackson , the presiding jurist in the trial , has ordered the Department of Justice to explain the commutation language — raising at least the theoretical possibility of judicial review on an executive clemency action : A federal judge on Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scope ” of President Trump ’ s commutation of longtime GOP operative Roger Stone , including whether the move only involved the sentence of incarceration , or also the period of supervised release .
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered the government to provide the court by Tuesday , July 14 , “ a copy of the Executive Order commuting the defendant ’ s sentence and to address the question of the scope of the commutation , in particular , whether it involves the sentence of incarceration alone or also the period @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , signed by Jackson , comes after the White House announced Friday that the president signed an Executive Grant of Clemency commuting what they called the “ unjust sentence ” of Stone , just days before the longtime political operative was slated to report to prison to serve more than three years for charges stemming from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation .
This isn ’ t going to be another case of La Résistance as in Judge Emmet Sullivan ’ s fight with the DoJ .
The authority to dismiss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they should almost always comply with a motion to dismiss from prosecutors .
Berman Jackson would have no basis in law to nullify a presidential clemency action , as that exists extrajudicially , for better or worse .
It ’ s very likely that Berman Jackson just wants to clarify whether Stone still has to serve his probation or not — but it remains to be seen whether she will take that opportunity to read into the record some of her thoughts on Trump ’ s commutation .
Of course , some want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the Atlantic , Cory Brettschneider argues that it ’ s illegal for a president to issue a clemency action for people associated with any potential issues of impeachment : The power to grant “ pardons and reprieves ” includes the power to commute , or reduce , sentences after convictions .
But this power is constrained by a limit : “ except in cases of impeachment.
” Traditionally , this exception has been read to mean only that a president can not use the pardon and reprieve power to prevent or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an impeachment conviction by the Senate .
By this interpretation , only impeachment charges themselves are precluded from presidential pardons .
( According to the Constitution , the vice president and “ all civil Officers of the United States ” are subject to impeachment , which means , for example , that a president can not pardon a federal judge ’ s impeachment . )
But there is a strong argument , rooted in the Constitution ’ s text , history , values , and structure , that in addition to banning the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this phrase also bans a president from using the pardon and reprieve power to commute the sentences of people directly associated with any impeachment charges against him .
This argument is not a partisan one .
Whatever rule is applied today would necessarily apply to future presidents , Democrats as well as Republicans .
What about past presidents ?
Jonathan Turley shoots down this argument before it even takes flight .
Not only does history suggest just the opposite , this isn ’ t even the best example of what Brettschneider argues is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for violations of the Alien and Sedition Act in the hope that he would testify against rival Aaron Burr for treason .
After the intervention of powerful friends , Andrew Jackson stopped the execution of George Wilson in favor of a prison sentence despite Wilson ’ s guilt in a serious violent crimes ( for which his co-defendant was executed ) .
Wilson surprised everyone by opting to be hanged anyway .
However , Wilson could not hold a candle to Ignazio Lupo , one of the most lethal mob hitmen who was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mafia war .
Warren Harding , who along with his attorney general , Harry Daugherty , was repeatedly accused of selling pardons .
With the bootlegging business hanging in the balance , they decided to pardon “ Lupo the Wolf ” on the condition that he be a “ law abiding ” free citizen .
… Richard Nixon was both giver and receiver of controversial pardons .
He pardoned Jimmy Hoffa after the Teamsters Union leader had pledged to support his reelection bid .
Nixon himself was later pardoned by Gerald Ford , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a mistake .
To his credit , Ronald Reagan declined to pardon the Iran Contra affair figures , but his vice president , George Bush , did so after becoming president .
Despite his own alleged involvement in that scandal , Bush still pardoned those other Iran Contra figures , such as Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger .
Bill Clinton committed some of the worst abuses of this power , including pardons for his brother Roger Clinton and his friend and business partner Susan McDougal .
He also pardoned the fugitive financier Marc Rich @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Entirely unrepentant , Rich was a major Democratic donor , and Clinton had wiped away his convictions for fraud , tax evasion , racketeering , and illegal dealings with Iran .
Needless to say , it ’ s not exactly a compliment to have a clemency action compared to this list of notorious executive interventions .
The Stone commutation was both premature and unwise , especially because of these connotations .
Stone got convicted for lying to Congress , not the hated Mueller probe , as well as witness tampering .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ righteous , ” and the sentence relatively lenient .
Stone could have taken the Fifth rather than give false testimony ; he chose to try to brazen his way out of it instead and got caught .
Why Trump chose to associate himself with this decision is beyond me , even in a commutation .
Even so , there is no real doubt that this commutation falls entirely within Trump ’ s authority .
Berman Jackson can ’ t stop it , nor even delay it , but she can make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days .

Eeeeenteresting, even if it might just relate to a technical question of application. When Donald Trump issued his clemency action for Roger Stone, he chose to commute the sentence rather than issue a full pardon. Does that commutation also apply to Stone’s probation and the conditions set for it? Judge Amy Berman Jackson, the presiding jurist in the trial, has ordered the Department of Justice to explain the commutation language — raising at least the theoretical possibility of judicial review on an executive clemency action:
!!! Judge Amy Berman Jackson wants to see Roger Stone's commutation paperwork, after questions have arisen about whether President Trump's clemency covers only Stone's prison time or also his probation. US Probation Office has raised questions about the commutation @kpolantz — Shimon Prokupecz (@ShimonPro) July 13, 2020
A federal judge on Monday ordered the government to explain the “scope” of President Trump’s commutation of longtime GOP operative Roger Stone, including whether the move only involved the sentence of incarceration, or also the period of supervised release. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered the government to provide the court by Tuesday, July 14, “a copy of the Executive Order commuting the defendant’s sentence and to address the question of the scope of the commutation, in particular, whether it involves the sentence of incarceration alone or also the period of supervised release.” … The filing, signed by Jackson, comes after the White House announced Friday that the president signed an Executive Grant of Clemency commuting what they called the “unjust sentence” of Stone, just days before the longtime political operative was slated to report to prison to serve more than three years for charges stemming from former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
This isn’t going to be another case of La Résistance as in Judge Emmet Sullivan’s fight with the DoJ. The authority to dismiss a case rests with judges, although they should almost always comply with a motion to dismiss from prosecutors. Berman Jackson would have no basis in law to nullify a presidential clemency action, as that exists extrajudicially, for better or worse. It’s very likely that Berman Jackson just wants to clarify whether Stone still has to serve his probation or not — but it remains to be seen whether she will take that opportunity to read into the record some of her thoughts on Trump’s commutation.
Of course, some want a more direct intervention from Berman Jackson. In the Atlantic, Cory Brettschneider argues that it’s illegal for a president to issue a clemency action for people associated with any potential issues of impeachment:
The power to grant “pardons and reprieves” includes the power to commute, or reduce, sentences after convictions. But this power is constrained by a limit: “except in cases of impeachment.” Traditionally, this exception has been read to mean only that a president cannot use the pardon and reprieve power to prevent or undo an impeachment by the House or an impeachment conviction by the Senate. By this interpretation, only impeachment charges themselves are precluded from presidential pardons. (According to the Constitution, the vice president and “all civil Officers of the United States” are subject to impeachment, which means, for example, that a president cannot pardon a federal judge’s impeachment.) But there is a strong argument, rooted in the Constitution’s text, history, values, and structure, that in addition to banning the prevention or undoing of an impeachment, this phrase also bans a president from using the pardon and reprieve power to commute the sentences of people directly associated with any impeachment charges against him. This argument is not a partisan one. Whatever rule is applied today would necessarily apply to future presidents, Democrats as well as Republicans.
What about past presidents? Jonathan Turley shoots down this argument before it even takes flight. Not only does history suggest just the opposite, this isn’t even the best example of what Brettschneider argues is illegal:
Thomas Jefferson pardoned Erick Bollman for violations of the Alien and Sedition Act in the hope that he would testify against rival Aaron Burr for treason. After the intervention of powerful friends, Andrew Jackson stopped the execution of George Wilson in favor of a prison sentence despite Wilson’s guilt in a serious violent crimes (for which his co-defendant was executed). Wilson surprised everyone by opting to be hanged anyway. However, Wilson could not hold a candle to Ignazio Lupo, one of the most lethal mob hitmen who was needed back in New York during a mafia war. Warren Harding, who along with his attorney general, Harry Daugherty, was repeatedly accused of selling pardons. With the bootlegging business hanging in the balance, they decided to pardon “Lupo the Wolf” on the condition that he be a “law abiding” free citizen. … Richard Nixon was both giver and receiver of controversial pardons. He pardoned Jimmy Hoffa after the Teamsters Union leader had pledged to support his reelection bid. Nixon himself was later pardoned by Gerald Ford, an act many of us view as a mistake. To his credit, Ronald Reagan declined to pardon the Iran Contra affair figures, but his vice president, George Bush, did so after becoming president. Despite his own alleged involvement in that scandal, Bush still pardoned those other Iran Contra figures, such as Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger. Bill Clinton committed some of the worst abuses of this power, including pardons for his brother Roger Clinton and his friend and business partner Susan McDougal. He also pardoned the fugitive financier Marc Rich, who evaded justice by fleeing abroad. Entirely unrepentant, Rich was a major Democratic donor, and Clinton had wiped away his convictions for fraud, tax evasion, racketeering, and illegal dealings with Iran.
Needless to say, it’s not exactly a compliment to have a clemency action compared to this list of notorious executive interventions. The Stone commutation was both premature and unwise, especially because of these connotations. Stone got convicted for lying to Congress, not the hated Mueller probe, as well as witness tampering. As William Barr himself noted, the prosecution was “righteous,” and the sentence relatively lenient. Stone could have taken the Fifth rather than give false testimony; he chose to try to brazen his way out of it instead and got caught. Why Trump chose to associate himself with this decision is beyond me, even in a commutation.
Even so, there is no real doubt that this commutation falls entirely within Trump’s authority. Berman Jackson can’t stop it, nor even delay it, but she can make everyone a little uncomfortable for a few days.


hotair--2020-07-13--Another Chicago weekend of violence: 64 shot and 13 killed

Another weekend of violence in Chicago with 64 people shot and 13 of them killed .
As has become usual in Chicago , several of the casualties were children .
Incredibly , these numbers constitutes a dip in violence compared to other recent weekends : Sixty-four people were shot , 13 of them fatally , across Chicago over the weekend .
Fifteen-year-old Terrance Malden , who was gunned down about 4:50 p.m. Friday in Jeffery Manor on the South Side , was the weekend ’ s first victim .
Five other teenagers were wounded in separate shootings between then and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a dip from the gun violence that befell the city over the Fourth of July weekend , when 79 people were shot , 15 fatally .
Eleven of those victims were minors , and two of the children died from their injuries .
In the same weekend last year , nine people were killed and 32 more were wounded .
At least two fourteen year olds were shot over the weekend but both survived .
Saturday night someone targeted a group of three women who were standing in the street around 9:40 pm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other two women survived .
The victims were holding a vigil with candles in the street for someone who was killed near the same spot two years ago .
There was a mass shooting in which five men were shot in Humboldt Park early Sunday morning .
One 53-year-year-old was shot in the neck and killed and the other victims are expected to survive .
CBS 2 Chicago has a rundown of other victims : A 21-year-old man was approached by a vehicle in the 3000 block of South Paulina Street in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and someone in the car fired shots .
The victim was struck in the face and was pronounced dead at Stroger Hospital of Cook County .
He was identified as Sergio Cervantes .
At 1:04 a.m. Saturday , a 41-year-old man was found in the alley after police responded to a ShotSpotter call in the 7000 block of South Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in the Greater Grand Crossing community .
The man was pronounced dead at the scene with gunshot wounds to the back and chest .
A 41-year-old man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 300 block of North Ashland Avenue on the Near West Side with a gunshot wound to the chest at 1:32 a.m. Saturday .
He was pronounced dead at the scene .
Two men , ages 31 and 35 , were on the sidewalk in the 5400 block of West Congress Parkway in the South Austin neighborhood when someone fired shots at 1:48 a.m. Saturday .
The younger man was pronounced dead at Mount Sinai Hospital with a gunshot wound to the chest , while the older man was grazed in the left hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a portion of the list of those who died .
As far as I can tell , no one has even tried to publish a complete list of the dozens more who were shot but survived .
There were two marches over the weekend to protest the violence , one by a communist group called Revolution Club and another by a group called Good Kids Mad City .
Combined those marches probably had 100 people .
These a pretty small efforts compared to some of the black lives matter marches in the city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a report published this morning by WGN 9 on the weekend ’ s violence .

Another weekend of violence in Chicago with 64 people shot and 13 of them killed. As has become usual in Chicago, several of the casualties were children. Incredibly, these numbers constitutes a dip in violence compared to other recent weekends:
Sixty-four people were shot, 13 of them fatally, across Chicago over the weekend. Fifteen-year-old Terrance Malden, who was gunned down about 4:50 p.m. Friday in Jeffery Manor on the South Side, was the weekend’s first victim. Five other teenagers were wounded in separate shootings between then and Monday morning. The alarming numbers marked a dip from the gun violence that befell the city over the Fourth of July weekend, when 79 people were shot, 15 fatally. Eleven of those victims were minors, and two of the children died from their injuries. In the same weekend last year, nine people were killed and 32 more were wounded.
At least two fourteen year olds were shot over the weekend but both survived. Saturday night someone targeted a group of three women who were standing in the street around 9:40 pm. A 33-year-old woman died and the other two women survived. The victims were holding a vigil with candles in the street for someone who was killed near the same spot two years ago.
There was a mass shooting in which five men were shot in Humboldt Park early Sunday morning. One 53-year-year-old was shot in the neck and killed and the other victims are expected to survive.
CBS 2 Chicago has a rundown of other victims:
A 21-year-old man was approached by a vehicle in the 3000 block of South Paulina Street in the McKinley Park neighborhood at 6:50 p.m. Friday, and someone in the car fired shots. The victim was struck in the face and was pronounced dead at Stroger Hospital of Cook County. He was identified as Sergio Cervantes. At 1:04 a.m. Saturday, a 41-year-old man was found in the alley after police responded to a ShotSpotter call in the 7000 block of South Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in the Greater Grand Crossing community. The man was pronounced dead at the scene with gunshot wounds to the back and chest. A 41-year-old man was found on the street in the 300 block of North Ashland Avenue on the Near West Side with a gunshot wound to the chest at 1:32 a.m. Saturday. He was pronounced dead at the scene. Two men, ages 31 and 35, were on the sidewalk in the 5400 block of West Congress Parkway in the South Austin neighborhood when someone fired shots at 1:48 a.m. Saturday. The younger man was pronounced dead at Mount Sinai Hospital with a gunshot wound to the chest, while the older man was grazed in the left hand and refused treatment.
This is just a portion of the list of those who died. As far as I can tell, no one has even tried to publish a complete list of the dozens more who were shot but survived. There were two marches over the weekend to protest the violence, one by a communist group called Revolution Club and another by a group called Good Kids Mad City. Combined those marches probably had 100 people. These a pretty small efforts compared to some of the black lives matter marches in the city a month ago.
Finally, here’s a report published this morning by WGN 9 on the weekend’s violence.


hotair--2020-07-13--Here we go again: Houston mayor wants a two-week shut down

As Yogi Berra said , “ It ’ s like déjà vu all over again.
” While speaking with reporters over the weekend , Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner said it ’ s time to shut down the city again to get a handle on the coronavirus outbreak .
Sounds familiar , right ?
This time the mayor has a new term for his heavy-handed response – it ’ s a ‘ step back ’ .
It ’ s another shutdown but maybe he thinks a step back sounds kinder and gentler .
Turner ’ s partner , Harris County Judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember , if she had her way , Harris County would never have begun re-opening in the first place .
Hidalgo has argued for a continuous shutdown to be in place since the coronavirus first hit Harris County .
Turner and Hidalgo justify the extreme reaction due to the current spike in COVID-19 cases the Houston area finds itself in .
This time , if the coronavirus spread doesn ’ t get under control , the governor may be on the side of the mayor and county judge .
Last week Governor Abbott @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t adhere to wearing face masks in public .
Now , with a new school year just around the corner , the idea is to shut down for two weeks and not only flatten the curve but see the number of new cases go down so that schools can get back on track and re-open .
Turner was also concerned about getting the virus under “ some semblance of control in time to send children , teachers and staff back to school in August , ” according to his director of communications , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the mayor would prefer the economy remain open but the virus is currently spreading out of control in our community and hospitalizations are rising , ” she said in an email .
“ We must join together as a community to stop the spread now.
” So , here we are .
What caught my eye was the part in Hidalgo ’ s remarks that says we need to remain locked down not just to flatten the curve but to see the number of cases go down .
Remember , when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told a lockdown was needed to help flatten the curve and head off the medical community and first responders from being overwhelmed with sick patients .
Now that goal post has moved .
That ’ s what happens , though .
Give elected officials a little bit of control and they want more , right ?
We can ’ t stay locked down until a vaccine is on the market , this is the real world .
People need to be able to keep their businesses open and support themselves , their families @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payroll .
The mayor shut down the Republican Party of Texas ’ state convention in Houston .
The governor still has the authority to shut down the city or county , though , not the mayor or county judge .
The power struggle has been at the forefront of mitigating the coronavirus outbreak from the start .
Local elected officials embraced their inner authoritarian tendencies early on and it has only gotten worse with time .
Now we are back to pleas for shutdowns in two-week intervals .
That sort of threat hanging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unbearably stressful and likely to lead to many having to close for good .
The mayor may want a couple of weeks to ‘ re-calibrate ’ but many businesses hanging on by a thread throughout the pandemic don ’ t have that option .
Turner and Hidalgo are finding an ally in a doctor you may have seen on cable television news channels .
I know Dr. Peter Hotez is frequently interviewed on FNC for his expertise on viruses .
He doesn ’ t like that decisions are being left to governors .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Peter Hotez agreed with the shut down proposal .
Hotez said other states need to do the same He said hard choices need to be made now so schools and colleges can reopen safely in the coming months .
“ I ’ m very frustrated by the fact that everything ’ s being sort of left up to the governors and the governors and the states just don ’ t have the epidemiological models and the horsepower to make those kinds of evidence-based decisions , ” said Hotez .
Summer gatherings ( including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holiday celebrations over the 4th of July weekend are likely to blame for the increase of local COVID-19 cases , along with the trend of younger adults getting out more due to fewer restrictions on re-opening .
Bars have already been shut down again in response to the spike in cases and some businesses like restaurants have been put back under Stage Two restrictions on occupancy .
It seems the horse is out of the barn at this point .
Are younger , healthy people going to accept another lockdown ?
Older people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health concerns are far more likely to accept a longer time of stay-at-home orders .
All we can do now is just keep an eye on the numbers coming from the Texas Medical Center and hope more extreme measures don ’ t have to be in place again .

As Yogi Berra said, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.” While speaking with reporters over the weekend, Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner said it’s time to shut down the city again to get a handle on the coronavirus outbreak. Sounds familiar, right?
This time the mayor has a new term for his heavy-handed response – it’s a ‘step back’. It’s another shutdown but maybe he thinks a step back sounds kinder and gentler. Turner’s partner, Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo, agrees.
If we want schools to open safely for the long haul, if we want some semblance of normalcy, & if we want a sustainable economy, then we have to buckle down–now. We need a stay home order.The longer we wait, the longer it’ll take to bring down the curve & the more people will die — Lina Hidalgo (@LinaHidalgoTX) July 11, 2020
Not only do we need a stay home order now, but we need to stick with it this time until the hospitalization curve comes down, not just flattens. Many communities that persevered in that way are reopening for the long haul. Let’s learn from that & not make the same mistake twice. https://t.co/Y5SITeamFP — Lina Hidalgo (@LinaHidalgoTX) July 12, 2020
If you remember, if she had her way, Harris County would never have begun re-opening in the first place. Hidalgo has argued for a continuous shutdown to be in place since the coronavirus first hit Harris County. Turner and Hidalgo justify the extreme reaction due to the current spike in COVID-19 cases the Houston area finds itself in.
“Let’s look at the numbers, look at the data, see where things are,” Turner said in remarks to the media Saturday. “And then gradually, move forward again.”
This time, if the coronavirus spread doesn’t get under control, the governor may be on the side of the mayor and county judge. Last week Governor Abbott threatened another shutdown if Texans don’t adhere to wearing face masks in public. Now, with a new school year just around the corner, the idea is to shut down for two weeks and not only flatten the curve but see the number of new cases go down so that schools can get back on track and re-open.
Turner was also concerned about getting the virus under “some semblance of control in time to send children, teachers and staff back to school in August,” according to his director of communications, Mary Benton. “To be clear, the mayor would prefer the economy remain open but the virus is currently spreading out of control in our community and hospitalizations are rising,” she said in an email. “We must join together as a community to stop the spread now.”
So, here we are. What caught my eye was the part in Hidalgo’s remarks that says we need to remain locked down not just to flatten the curve but to see the number of cases go down. Remember, when the coronavirus outbreak first began, we were told a lockdown was needed to help flatten the curve and head off the medical community and first responders from being overwhelmed with sick patients. Now that goal post has moved. That’s what happens, though. Give elected officials a little bit of control and they want more, right? We can’t stay locked down until a vaccine is on the market, this is the real world. People need to be able to keep their businesses open and support themselves, their families, and keep their employees on the payroll.
The mayor shut down the Republican Party of Texas’ state convention in Houston. The governor still has the authority to shut down the city or county, though, not the mayor or county judge. The power struggle has been at the forefront of mitigating the coronavirus outbreak from the start. Local elected officials embraced their inner authoritarian tendencies early on and it has only gotten worse with time. Now we are back to pleas for shutdowns in two-week intervals. That sort of threat hanging over small business owners has to be unbearably stressful and likely to lead to many having to close for good. The mayor may want a couple of weeks to ‘re-calibrate’ but many businesses hanging on by a thread throughout the pandemic don’t have that option.
Turner and Hidalgo are finding an ally in a doctor you may have seen on cable television news channels. I know Dr. Peter Hotez is frequently interviewed on FNC for his expertise on viruses. He doesn’t like that decisions are being left to governors.
National School of Tropical Medicine Dean Dr. Peter Hotez agreed with the shut down proposal. Hotez said other states need to do the same He said hard choices need to be made now so schools and colleges can reopen safely in the coming months. “I’m very frustrated by the fact that everything’s being sort of left up to the governors and the governors and the states just don’t have the epidemiological models and the horsepower to make those kinds of evidence-based decisions,” said Hotez.
Summer gatherings (including protests and large memorial ceremonies) and holiday celebrations over the 4th of July weekend are likely to blame for the increase of local COVID-19 cases, along with the trend of younger adults getting out more due to fewer restrictions on re-opening. Bars have already been shut down again in response to the spike in cases and some businesses like restaurants have been put back under Stage Two restrictions on occupancy. It seems the horse is out of the barn at this point. Are younger, healthy people going to accept another lockdown? Older people and those at risk due to underlying health concerns are far more likely to accept a longer time of stay-at-home orders. All we can do now is just keep an eye on the numbers coming from the Texas Medical Center and hope more extreme measures don’t have to be in place again.


hotair--2020-07-13--Unthinkable: Could Ghislaine Maxwell get bail?

No one doubts that her attorneys will ask for bail , but is there any chance Ghislaine Maxwell will get it ?
Maybe , the New York Post reports , and not just for the COVID-19 reason Maxwell ’ s attorney will use in court tomorrow .
That may make for an understandable public reason , but the death of Jeffrey Epstein might be subtext : The Associated Press lays out the case for bail presented by Maxwell ’ s attorneys : After Epstein was found dead in his jail cell , “ the media focus quickly shifted to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Epstein – even though she ’ d had no contact with Epstein for more than a decade , had never been charged with a crime or been found liable in any civil litigation and has always denied any allegations of claimed misconduct , ” the lawyers wrote in a preview of their defense .
In the court papers , lawyers cited reports of coronavirus infections spreading through federal jails as one of the reasons to free Maxwell , arguing that if “ she continues to be detained , her health will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to receive a fair trial.
” The case for bail is also strengthened by the fact that the government ’ s case “ is based primarily on the testimony of three individuals about events that allegedly occurred roughly 25 years ago , ” the defense papers say .
“ It is inherently more difficult to prosecute cases relating to decades-old conduct.
” The issue of the pandemic and the push to release even convicted felons from prisons might be the most effective argument , one former federal prosecutor told the NY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal prison system — and the fact Maxwell didn ’ t flee the country after Epstein ’ s suicide — may save her from languishing in a federal jail cell , former federal prosecutor Jaimie Nawaday told The Post .
“ I think this one is a close case .
Epstein had no chance at all at bail .
She ’ s in a very different position , ” Nawaday said .
In a detention memo filed after Maxwell ’ s arrest , prosecutors argued for remand , saying she ’ s an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vast sums of money , three passports and ties to European countries such as England and France .
In normal circumstances , that may have been enough to keep her in jail — but the coronavirus outbreak has upended typical bail agreements , Nawaday added .
“ All bail arguments look a little bit different now given COVID .
That ’ s definitely in her favor , ” Nawaday said .
“ More and more there is a push toward home confinement , especially holding people pretrial , when you still have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a good face-saving explanation .
However , the death of Jeffrey Epstein while in custody will loom large over this request , too .
Recall that Epstein promised to fund his own home detention and put up a $ 77 million bond at his arraignment , an offer which drew hoots of derision over Epstein ’ s attempts to leverage his wealth for even more privilege .
That too seemed to be a closer decision than people liked , with the judge taking extra time to mull it over before declining to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Bureau of Prisons .
And how did that work out ?
Epstein could have committed suicide at home too , ( assuming that ’ s what happened ) , but the BoP failed spectacularly in its mission to get Epstein to trial .
That denied Epstein ’ s victims the full measure of justice they had waited decades to get .
Do you think Judge Alison Nathan might be worried about the BoP ’ s incompetence ( or worse ) when it comes time to consider the same question about Maxwell ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Furthermore , the Post reports separately , it looks like the BoP is in the middle of a full freak-out over its newest star inmate : Ghislaine Maxwell is being moved from “ cell to cell ” in her Brooklyn lockup — over fears someone will try to kill the accused Jeffrey Epstein madam before she stands trial , according to a report .
The Post already revealed how the 58-year-old British socialite was forced to wear paper clothes and sleep on a bare mattress so she couldn ’ t hang herself with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now insiders have told the Mail on Sunday that prison officials are so “ terrified someone will try to kill her ” that they are constantly moving her around inside the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn .
“ She is being moved from cell to cell and sometimes has a cellmate , sometimes not , ” an insider told the UK paper .
“ Jeffrey Epstein died behind bars and they are terrified someone will try to kill Ghislaine , ” the source said .
How sad is this ?
The Bureau of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ facilities well enough to keep their inmates from getting killed — even those in protective isolation .
If they have to go through this much trouble to keep other prisoners from murdering Maxwell , Judge Nathan might well decide to let Maxwell stew at home in isolation instead , with enough of her liquidity tied up in court so that she can ’ t escape .
The Epstein deal offer might start looking pretty good to a judge under these conditions .
Of course , that would require lots of surveillance and security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Epstein offered as a condition of home confinement .
She didn ’ t run before , despite her resources and contacts , which is curious on its own .
Perhaps she didn ’ t actually have the means to do so , or maybe Maxwell never thought she ’ d get arrested — although she would have had to have stopped watching all media to believe that .
Does she still have aces up her sleeve that have nothing to do with fleeing the jurisdiction ?

No one doubts that her attorneys will ask for bail, but is there any chance Ghislaine Maxwell will get it? Maybe, the New York Post reports, and not just for the COVID-19 reason Maxwell’s attorney will use in court tomorrow. That may make for an understandable public reason, but the death of Jeffrey Epstein might be subtext:
The Associated Press lays out the case for bail presented by Maxwell’s attorneys:
After Epstein was found dead in his jail cell, “the media focus quickly shifted to our client – wrongly trying to substitute her for Epstein – even though she’d had no contact with Epstein for more than a decade, had never been charged with a crime or been found liable in any civil litigation and has always denied any allegations of claimed misconduct,” the lawyers wrote in a preview of their defense. “Ghislaine Maxwell,” they added, “is not Jeffrey Epstein.” … In the court papers, lawyers cited reports of coronavirus infections spreading through federal jails as one of the reasons to free Maxwell, arguing that if “she continues to be detained, her health will be at serious risk and she will not be able to receive a fair trial.” The case for bail is also strengthened by the fact that the government’s case “is based primarily on the testimony of three individuals about events that allegedly occurred roughly 25 years ago,” the defense papers say. “It is inherently more difficult to prosecute cases relating to decades-old conduct.”
The issue of the pandemic and the push to release even convicted felons from prisons might be the most effective argument, one former federal prosecutor told the NY Post:
The coronavirus outbreak in the federal prison system — and the fact Maxwell didn’t flee the country after Epstein’s suicide — may save her from languishing in a federal jail cell, former federal prosecutor Jaimie Nawaday told The Post. “I think this one is a close case. Epstein had no chance at all at bail. She’s in a very different position,” Nawaday said. In a detention memo filed after Maxwell’s arrest, prosecutors argued for remand, saying she’s an “extreme” flight risk given her vast sums of money, three passports and ties to European countries such as England and France. In normal circumstances, that may have been enough to keep her in jail — but the coronavirus outbreak has upended typical bail agreements, Nawaday added. “All bail arguments look a little bit different now given COVID. That’s definitely in her favor,” Nawaday said. “More and more there is a push toward home confinement, especially holding people pretrial, when you still have the presumption of innocence.”
COVID-19 might make for a good face-saving explanation. However, the death of Jeffrey Epstein while in custody will loom large over this request, too. Recall that Epstein promised to fund his own home detention and put up a $77 million bond at his arraignment, an offer which drew hoots of derision over Epstein’s attempts to leverage his wealth for even more privilege. That too seemed to be a closer decision than people liked, with the judge taking extra time to mull it over before declining to set any bail and remanding Epstein to the Bureau of Prisons.
And how did that work out? Epstein could have committed suicide at home too, (assuming that’s what happened), but the BoP failed spectacularly in its mission to get Epstein to trial. That denied Epstein’s victims the full measure of justice they had waited decades to get. Do you think Judge Alison Nathan might be worried about the BoP’s incompetence (or worse) when it comes time to consider the same question about Maxwell? I’d bet on it.
Furthermore, the Post reports separately, it looks like the BoP is in the middle of a full freak-out over its newest star inmate:
Ghislaine Maxwell is being moved from “cell to cell” in her Brooklyn lockup — over fears someone will try to kill the accused Jeffrey Epstein madam before she stands trial, according to a report. The Post already revealed how the 58-year-old British socialite was forced to wear paper clothes and sleep on a bare mattress so she couldn’t hang herself with clothes or bed sheets like Epstein. Now insiders have told the Mail on Sunday that prison officials are so “terrified someone will try to kill her” that they are constantly moving her around inside the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. “She is being moved from cell to cell and sometimes has a cellmate, sometimes not,” an insider told the UK paper. “Jeffrey Epstein died behind bars and they are terrified someone will try to kill Ghislaine,” the source said.
How sad is this? The Bureau of Prisons can’t secure their own facilities well enough to keep their inmates from getting killed — even those in protective isolation. If they have to go through this much trouble to keep other prisoners from murdering Maxwell, Judge Nathan might well decide to let Maxwell stew at home in isolation instead, with enough of her liquidity tied up in court so that she can’t escape. The Epstein deal offer might start looking pretty good to a judge under these conditions.
Of course, that would require lots of surveillance and security, but Maxwell could fund those costs as Epstein offered as a condition of home confinement. She didn’t run before, despite her resources and contacts, which is curious on its own. Perhaps she didn’t actually have the means to do so, or maybe Maxwell never thought she’d get arrested — although she would have had to have stopped watching all media to believe that. Does she still have aces up her sleeve that have nothing to do with fleeing the jurisdiction?


hotair--2020-07-13--Ford woke workers: We should stop making police cars

We ’ ve grown used to the dangerous trend of the nation ’ s police coming under verbal ( and sometimes physical ) attacks from everyone from mobs in the streets to liberal politicians .
But now they ’ re facing a new opponent in the form of some of the workers at Ford Motor Company .
A group of “ at least 100 ” employees have sent a letter to the company ’ s CEO saying that they should stop manufacturing their line of Interceptor police vehicles , used by law enforcement agencies around the country .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ systemic racism or something .
Your guess is as good as mine .
But I suppose we should check in and see what the heck they ’ re going on about .
( NY Post ) Ford employees are prodding the company to stop making cop cars amid a nationwide uprising against police brutality .
Ford staffers made the demand in a letter to Chief Executive Jim Hackett and Executive Chairman Bill Ford that was recently circulated at the company ’ s Dearborn , Mich. , headquarters , according to news reports .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Ford employees design and build have been used as accessories to police brutality and oppression , ” the letter reads , according to an excerpt published by the automotive news website Jalopnik .
“ As an undeniable part of that history and system , we are long overdue to ‘ think and act differently ’ on our role in racism.
” Fortunately for the police ( and Ford ’ s bottom line ) , their CEO was having none of this nonsense .
Jim Hackett responded to the letter by simply saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting out of the market any time soon.
” Hackett condemned racism in all its forms , but noted that issues impacting police credibility have nothing to do with the vehicles they ’ re driving .
Ya think ?
The obstinate employees attempted to counter that issue by saying that George Floyd was killed “ next to a Ford Police Interceptor.
” Seriously ?
Are we to assume that if the officers in question had arrived in a Chevy Mr. Floyd might still be alive today ?
I suppose we shouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably in line with the “ logic ” we see on display from everyone demanding we either defund or abolish the police .
Even if Ford isn ’ t going to take this request seriously , it ’ s still a valid reminder of just what our law enforcement officers are facing these days .
A call to stop providing the police with vehicles and the other equipment they need to safely perform their jobs is a call for an indirect attack on police officers .
After all , an officer on foot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with full access to all of the offensive and defensive equipment available in their patrol vehicle .
Further , the entire concept of police vehicles has nothing to do with racism .
The vast majority of cops ( who are not racists and don ’ t wind up facing excessive use of force complaints ) also drive the same cars .
It ’ s a pointless charade and an obvious attempt at virtue signaling .
Fortunately , the CEO of Ford clearly isn ’ t ready to slash his bottom line over this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is how the police are going to be treated going forward , is it any wonder that so many of them are choosing to leave the profession in droves ?
And that ’ s only a victory for the anarchists .

We’ve grown used to the dangerous trend of the nation’s police coming under verbal (and sometimes physical) attacks from everyone from mobs in the streets to liberal politicians. But now they’re facing a new opponent in the form of some of the workers at Ford Motor Company. A group of “at least 100” employees have sent a letter to the company’s CEO saying that they should stop manufacturing their line of Interceptor police vehicles, used by law enforcement agencies around the country. This is apparently supposed to strike a blow against systemic racism or something. Your guess is as good as mine. But I suppose we should check in and see what the heck they’re going on about. (NY Post)
Ford employees are prodding the company to stop making cop cars amid a nationwide uprising against police brutality. Ford staffers made the demand in a letter to Chief Executive Jim Hackett and Executive Chairman Bill Ford that was recently circulated at the company’s Dearborn, Mich., headquarters, according to news reports. “Throughout our history, the vehicles that Ford employees design and build have been used as accessories to police brutality and oppression,” the letter reads, according to an excerpt published by the automotive news website Jalopnik. “As an undeniable part of that history and system, we are long overdue to ‘think and act differently’ on our role in racism.”
Fortunately for the police (and Ford’s bottom line), their CEO was having none of this nonsense. Jim Hackett responded to the letter by simply saying that Ford “won’t be getting out of the market any time soon.” Hackett condemned racism in all its forms, but noted that issues impacting police credibility have nothing to do with the vehicles they’re driving. Ya think?
The obstinate employees attempted to counter that issue by saying that George Floyd was killed “next to a Ford Police Interceptor.” Seriously? Are we to assume that if the officers in question had arrived in a Chevy Mr. Floyd might still be alive today? I suppose we shouldn’t be too surprised. This argument is probably in line with the “logic” we see on display from everyone demanding we either defund or abolish the police.
Even if Ford isn’t going to take this request seriously, it’s still a valid reminder of just what our law enforcement officers are facing these days. A call to stop providing the police with vehicles and the other equipment they need to safely perform their jobs is a call for an indirect attack on police officers. After all, an officer on foot is easier to take out than one with full access to all of the offensive and defensive equipment available in their patrol vehicle.
Further, the entire concept of police vehicles has nothing to do with racism. The vast majority of cops (who are not racists and don’t wind up facing excessive use of force complaints) also drive the same cars. It’s a pointless charade and an obvious attempt at virtue signaling. Fortunately, the CEO of Ford clearly isn’t ready to slash his bottom line over this nonsense. But still, if this is how the police are going to be treated going forward, is it any wonder that so many of them are choosing to leave the profession in droves? And that’s only a victory for the anarchists.


hotair--2020-07-13--Alabama Five Guys workers refuse to serve cops. Now they don't have to serve anyone

A strange and infuriating story , but one with a relatively happy ending , comes to us from The Right Scoop this week .
The tale unfolded last Tuesday night at a Five Guys restaurant in Daphne , Alabama .
Three officers from the Daphne Police Department showed up at the eatery , but upon entering , five employees turned their backs on them and refused to serve them .
That was pretty much the end of the actual encounter because the officers simply left and went out to get something to eat elsewhere .
But the incident wound up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned out that the franchise isn ’ t down with the woke crowd nearly as much as the workers may have guessed .
A law enforcement source told FOX10 News that Daphne officers were refused service late Tuesday night by several employees at the Five Guys restaurant at the Jubilee Square shopping center .
The officers said the employees turned their backs on them when they entered the restaurant .
The officers said one of the employees was overheard saying , “ I ’ m not serving them.
” The officers left and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim six or seven employees acted together .
Here ’ s the coverage from the local NBC outlet .
Keep in mind that this report was filed before the initial investigation was complete , so they ’ re taking the “ we don ’ t know what happened yet ” approach .
It didn ’ t take long after that for things to get sorted out .
Apparently , the officers ’ story checked out and Five Guys responded with an apology and an update on the “ status ” of the employees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Daphne , AL franchise want to thank the Daphne Police Department for their support in working together toward a resolution .
The actions the Daphne , AL franchise have taken include termination and suspension of the employees involved .
The store has temporarily closed for further education and customer service training with a representative from the Daphne Police Department and will reopen at 4PM today , July 10th .
As we uphold our commitment to fair , respectful , and equal treatment for all customers , please know that the actions and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , AL do not represent Five Guys or the local franchisee.
” There was apparently some confusion being sown on social media after someone – possibly one of the employees – tried to claim that the refusal of service was based on the fact that face masks are required in the store and there is no dine-in option available .
But the cops made it clear that they saw the sign about masks and went back to their patrol cars to get them before entering .
So that ’ s been ruled out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this was an argument over observing mask policy , that would be one thing .
But that ’ s not what happened .
And even if the cops hadn ’ t been wearing masks , the employee would have only needed to politely remind them of the policy .
Instead , they turned their backs on them and refused to even address them .
That ’ s not an act of health and safety precautions .
That ’ s just a straight-up “ Eff The Police ” move .
The police department was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers left without creating a scene .
And the PD accepted the apology gracefully , thanking both the local franchise and the entire chain for their cooperation .
So there ’ s no need for a police boycott of Five Guys locally or nationally .
It looks like this was nothing more than the personal , bad decision-making of a few woke individuals .
And as for those workers… hey , look on the bright side , guys .
Now you ’ ve got all sorts of free time on your hands to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for new jobs .
I ’ m sure there are plenty of Woke Brigade employers out there who would love to have you .
Then again , this is Alabama we ’ re talking about .
Perhaps not so much after all .

A strange and infuriating story, but one with a relatively happy ending, comes to us from The Right Scoop this week. The tale unfolded last Tuesday night at a Five Guys restaurant in Daphne, Alabama. Three officers from the Daphne Police Department showed up at the eatery, but upon entering, five employees turned their backs on them and refused to serve them. That was pretty much the end of the actual encounter because the officers simply left and went out to get something to eat elsewhere. But the incident wound up blowing up on social media and it turned out that the franchise isn’t down with the woke crowd nearly as much as the workers may have guessed.
A law enforcement source told FOX10 News that Daphne officers were refused service late Tuesday night by several employees at the Five Guys restaurant at the Jubilee Square shopping center. The officers said the employees turned their backs on them when they entered the restaurant. The officers said one of the employees was overheard saying, “I’m not serving them.” The officers left and went to another restaurant. The officers claim six or seven employees acted together.
Here’s the coverage from the local NBC outlet. Keep in mind that this report was filed before the initial investigation was complete, so they’re taking the “we don’t know what happened yet” approach.
It didn’t take long after that for things to get sorted out. Apparently, the officers’ story checked out and Five Guys responded with an apology and an update on the “status” of the employees in question.
“Five Guys and the Daphne, AL franchise want to thank the Daphne Police Department for their support in working together toward a resolution. The actions the Daphne, AL franchise have taken include termination and suspension of the employees involved. The store has temporarily closed for further education and customer service training with a representative from the Daphne Police Department and will reopen at 4PM today, July 10th. As we uphold our commitment to fair, respectful, and equal treatment for all customers, please know that the actions and sentiments of a few employees in Daphne, AL do not represent Five Guys or the local franchisee.”
There was apparently some confusion being sown on social media after someone – possibly one of the employees – tried to claim that the refusal of service was based on the fact that face masks are required in the store and there is no dine-in option available. But the cops made it clear that they saw the sign about masks and went back to their patrol cars to get them before entering. So that’s been ruled out, or so it seems.
If this was an argument over observing mask policy, that would be one thing. But that’s not what happened. And even if the cops hadn’t been wearing masks, the employee would have only needed to politely remind them of the policy. Instead, they turned their backs on them and refused to even address them. That’s not an act of health and safety precautions. That’s just a straight-up “Eff The Police” move.
The police department was more than respectful in return. The officers left without creating a scene. And the PD accepted the apology gracefully, thanking both the local franchise and the entire chain for their cooperation. So there’s no need for a police boycott of Five Guys locally or nationally. It looks like this was nothing more than the personal, bad decision-making of a few woke individuals.
And as for those workers… hey, look on the bright side, guys. Now you’ve got all sorts of free time on your hands to catch up on the news and look for new jobs. I’m sure there are plenty of Woke Brigade employers out there who would love to have you. Then again, this is Alabama we’re talking about. Perhaps not so much after all.


hotair--2020-07-13--Today's guessing game: What will the new Washington Redskins name be?

To quote an old joke , the NFL ’ s team in the nation ’ s capital has suddenly discovered that their name is offensive .
The new name will be … the DC Redskins .
The announcement on July 3rd that team owner Dan Snyder had begun a “ thorough review ” of the team ’ s name only meant one thing , and today Snyder will make it official — the Redskins name is history .
What will replace it ?
Your guess is as good as anyone ’ s .
They have apparently stumbled into a Lady @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to announce Monday morning that they will change their team name , three people with knowledge of the situation confirmed Sunday night .
The team is not expected to reveal a new name until a later date .
Monday ’ s anticipated announcement comes after the organization released a statement July 3 saying it would be undertaking what it called a “ thorough review ” of the team ’ s name ; multiple people familiar with the process have said that it would result in the name being changed .
In an interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who is working with owner Daniel Snyder to choose a name — said he hoped the new name would be in place by the start of the 2020 NFL season .
Others have said it will be revealed as soon as within two weeks .
Two people with knowledge of the team ’ s plans said Sunday that the preferred replacement name is tied up in a trademark fight , which is why the team can ’ t announce the new name Monday .
At least Snyder didn ’ t wait until after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research .
He managed to avoid that kind of faceplant , anyway , but this is still pretty strange .
Snyder wants to get credit for changing the name now , even though he still doesn ’ t have a replacement .
He ’ s trading the Redskins brand for a team name to be named later , or something .
I tell you , the lawsuit to strip the Globetrotters name from the people using it now will be lit .
Unlike the Lady A**holes , Snyder didn ’ t really have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” was undeniable used in a derogatory fashion , even if — as Snyder claims — it was also used in a non-derogatory fashion , too .
His sponsors and his merchandising partners all refused to work with the name any longer .
Snyder has enough money to where he could sustain massive losses without those revenue streams for a while , but who wants to sustain massive losses ?
The problem is that Snyder needs a new name for the merchandise , and he needs one fast .
So what ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington Warriors , a name that would allow them to continue the Native American motif .
Another idea was to call the team the Redtails , the nickname of the famed WWII Tuskegee Airmen : That seems to be one of the choices , if you read between the WaPo ’ s lines : That could apply to the name Warriors , but perhaps not the Redtails , which has no Native American reference .
However , Native American groups that objected to Redskins also objected to any other reference , so that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have a trademark issue with that name either , so if he can ’ t reveal it now , Warriors is probably not the first choice .
Perhaps Snyder should consider something more reflective of the culture of his home rather than appropriating symbology from others .
The Washington Swamp Rats has a ring to it , no ?
How about the Washington Graft ?
True , they ’ d have to petition the league for a color change to green , but at least no one would object to any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too , as a play off gridiron , and also as a great description of their offense .
What ’ s the best way to launch the new brand , whatever they choose ?
Maybe they could have the Lady A**holes sing the national anthem .
That ’ s a move that could only make both more popular than they are at the moment .

To quote an old joke, the NFL’s team in the nation’s capital has suddenly discovered that their name is offensive. The new name will be … the DC Redskins. The announcement on July 3rd that team owner Dan Snyder had begun a “thorough review” of the team’s name only meant one thing, and today Snyder will make it official — the Redskins name is history.
What will replace it? Your guess is as good as anyone’s. They have apparently stumbled into a Lady Antebellum conundrum:
The Washington Redskins plan to announce Monday morning that they will change their team name, three people with knowledge of the situation confirmed Sunday night. The team is not expected to reveal a new name until a later date. Monday’s anticipated announcement comes after the organization released a statement July 3 saying it would be undertaking what it called a “thorough review” of the team’s name; multiple people familiar with the process have said that it would result in the name being changed. In an interview July 4, Coach Ron Rivera — who is working with owner Daniel Snyder to choose a name — said he hoped the new name would be in place by the start of the 2020 NFL season. Others have said it will be revealed as soon as within two weeks. Two people with knowledge of the team’s plans said Sunday that the preferred replacement name is tied up in a trademark fight, which is why the team can’t announce the new name Monday.
At least Snyder didn’t wait until after announcing the change to do a little research. He managed to avoid that kind of faceplant, anyway, but this is still pretty strange. Snyder wants to get credit for changing the name now, even though he still doesn’t have a replacement. He’s trading the Redskins brand for a team name to be named later, or something.
I tell you, the lawsuit to strip the Globetrotters name from the people using it now will be lit.
Unlike the Lady A**holes, Snyder didn’t really have any choice. The term “redskin” was undeniable used in a derogatory fashion, even if — as Snyder claims — it was also used in a non-derogatory fashion, too. His sponsors and his merchandising partners all refused to work with the name any longer. Snyder has enough money to where he could sustain massive losses without those revenue streams for a while, but who wants to sustain massive losses? The problem is that Snyder needs a new name for the merchandise, and he needs one fast.
So what’s the hold-up? Snyder had already trademarked Washington Warriors, a name that would allow them to continue the Native American motif. Another idea was to call the team the Redtails, the nickname of the famed WWII Tuskegee Airmen:
If Washington is to change its franchise name (it should), then team should follow @petemrogers’ design pic.twitter.com/GPsWFgy6DB — Ollie Connolly (@OllieConnolly) July 2, 2020
That seems to be one of the choices, if you read between the WaPo’s lines:
In the July 4 interview, Rivera said he and Snyder had come up with two names that Rivera really liked. He did not reveal the names but said he wanted to confer with Native American and military organizations to make sure that the new name properly honored both.
That could apply to the name Warriors, but perhaps not the Redtails, which has no Native American reference. However, Native American groups that objected to Redskins also objected to any other reference, so that seems unlikely to fly. Snyder wouldn’t have a trademark issue with that name either, so if he can’t reveal it now, Warriors is probably not the first choice.
Perhaps Snyder should consider something more reflective of the culture of his home rather than appropriating symbology from others. The Washington Swamp Rats has a ring to it, no? How about the Washington Graft? True, they’d have to petition the league for a color change to green, but at least no one would object to any cultural appropriation. The Washington Gridlock works too, as a play off gridiron, and also as a great description of their offense.
What’s the best way to launch the new brand, whatever they choose? Maybe they could have the Lady A**holes sing the national anthem. That’s a move that could only make both more popular than they are at the moment.


hotair--2020-07-14--SCOTUS rules federal executions are back on

The last inmate to be executed by the federal government was Louis Jones Jr , in 2003 for the rape and murder of Private Tracie McBride .
Two years earlier , both Timothy McVeigh and Juan Raul Garza shuffled off this mortal coil via lethal injection for obvious reasons .
Since then , federal implementation of capital punishment has gone dormant , though a number of convicts have been assigned the death penalty and run out of appeals in the meantime .
President Trump promised last year that the death penalty would resume at the federal level , but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prisoners have been held up on one technicality or another since then .
But as of last night , that appears to be about to change .
The Supreme Court issued a late-night 5-4 ruling , saying that the plaintiffs had failed to make their case and the execution of triple-murderer Daniel Lewis Lee can proceed .
Several others are in the queue on Death Row and are scheduled for execution in the coming couple of weeks .
( BBC ) Several executions were delayed after a judge ruled on Monday that there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justice department .
Among those facing the death penalty is triple murderer Daniel Lewis Lee , who was due to be executed on Monday .
The condemned prisoners have argued that lethal injections constitute “ cruel and unusual punishments ” .
The Supreme Court voted 5-4 that “ executions may proceed as planned ” .
Assuming nothing else happens at the 11th hour , Lee ’ s execution should move forward , though a new date and time hasn ’ t been set yet .
But as mentioned above , Lee isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ date with mortality .
Wesley Ira Purkey has been on death row in Missouri since 2003 .
He was convicted of the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl .
Following the killing , he dismembered and burned the body before dumping her in a septic pond .
He is scheduled to be executed tomorrow .
Dustin Lee Honken was convicted in 2004 for shooting and killing five people .
The victims included two young girls , aged six and ten .
Assuming no more appeals are allowed , he ’ s set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Following Honken , we have Keith Dwayne Nelson .
He was given the death penalty in Missouri in 2001 for raping and murdering a 10-year-old girl .
Adding to that horror show was the fact that the atrocity was committed behind a church .
Nelson ’ s date with destiny is scheduled for some time in August .
This is always a difficult subject for many people and understandably so .
I completely understand and sympathize with those who feel that there is never a justifiable cause for the government to end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of conception until they reach their natural end of life .
While I find the prospect unsettling myself , however , there just seem to be certain crimes that cry out for a terminal solution such as this .
The rogue ’ s gallery I mentioned above fall into that general category .
Some will argue that the death penalty doesn ’ t act as a sufficient deterrent for other prospective killers , though I would counter by saying that self-preservation is a powerful inherited trait in humans .
The knowledge that you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surely must deter at least some would-be killers .
And , as always , it ’ s worth noting that the recidivism rate for those who are successfully executed remains fixed at zero .
None of this is to say that we don ’ t need to be as careful as possible when making these decisions .
Cases built against those accused of such heinous deeds have to be absolutely airtight because you don ’ t get a do-over once the sentence is carried out .
Hopefully , advances in both law enforcement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeals processes can eliminate cases where the wrongly accused are put to death .
As far as I ’ m concerned , if we haven ’ t reached 100 % certainty of guilt ( which is certainly possible when video and/or an abundance of physical evidence and reliable testimony is available ) then life in prison without parole is the preferable option .
At least in that case , exoneration is still a possibility down the line if new , compelling evidence of innocence comes to light .

UPDATE: (Jazz) The remaining question earlier this morning that I referenced below was when the government would get around to executing Daniel Lewis Lee once the Supreme Court cleared the way. It turns out that we didn’t have to wait long to find out. Lee was executed and pronounced dead at 8:07 eastern time this morning. He continued to proclaim his innocence until the end.
Original article continues below.
The last inmate to be executed by the federal government was Louis Jones Jr, in 2003 for the rape and murder of Private Tracie McBride. Two years earlier, both Timothy McVeigh and Juan Raul Garza shuffled off this mortal coil via lethal injection for obvious reasons. Since then, federal implementation of capital punishment has gone dormant, though a number of convicts have been assigned the death penalty and run out of appeals in the meantime.
President Trump promised last year that the death penalty would resume at the federal level, but the court cases involved for most of these prisoners have been held up on one technicality or another since then. But as of last night, that appears to be about to change. The Supreme Court issued a late-night 5-4 ruling, saying that the plaintiffs had failed to make their case and the execution of triple-murderer Daniel Lewis Lee can proceed. Several others are in the queue on Death Row and are scheduled for execution in the coming couple of weeks. (BBC)
Several executions were delayed after a judge ruled on Monday that there were still unresolved legal challenges against the justice department. Among those facing the death penalty is triple murderer Daniel Lewis Lee, who was due to be executed on Monday. The condemned prisoners have argued that lethal injections constitute “cruel and unusual punishments”. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 that “executions may proceed as planned”.
Assuming nothing else happens at the 11th hour, Lee’s execution should move forward, though a new date and time hasn’t been set yet. But as mentioned above, Lee isn’t the only one up for their date with mortality.
Wesley Ira Purkey has been on death row in Missouri since 2003. He was convicted of the rape and murder of a 16-year-old girl. Following the killing, he dismembered and burned the body before dumping her in a septic pond. He is scheduled to be executed tomorrow.
Dustin Lee Honken was convicted in 2004 for shooting and killing five people. The victims included two young girls, aged six and ten. Assuming no more appeals are allowed, he’s set to go under the needle on Friday. Following Honken, we have Keith Dwayne Nelson. He was given the death penalty in Missouri in 2001 for raping and murdering a 10-year-old girl. Adding to that horror show was the fact that the atrocity was committed behind a church. Nelson’s date with destiny is scheduled for some time in August.
This is always a difficult subject for many people and understandably so. I completely understand and sympathize with those who feel that there is never a justifiable cause for the government to end someone’s life from the moment of conception until they reach their natural end of life. While I find the prospect unsettling myself, however, there just seem to be certain crimes that cry out for a terminal solution such as this. The rogue’s gallery I mentioned above fall into that general category.
Some will argue that the death penalty doesn’t act as a sufficient deterrent for other prospective killers, though I would counter by saying that self-preservation is a powerful inherited trait in humans. The knowledge that you may wind up in the execution chamber surely must deter at least some would-be killers. And, as always, it’s worth noting that the recidivism rate for those who are successfully executed remains fixed at zero.
None of this is to say that we don’t need to be as careful as possible when making these decisions. Cases built against those accused of such heinous deeds have to be absolutely airtight because you don’t get a do-over once the sentence is carried out. Hopefully, advances in both law enforcement and security technology along with appropriately robust appeals processes can eliminate cases where the wrongly accused are put to death. As far as I’m concerned, if we haven’t reached 100% certainty of guilt (which is certainly possible when video and/or an abundance of physical evidence and reliable testimony is available) then life in prison without parole is the preferable option. At least in that case, exoneration is still a possibility down the line if new, compelling evidence of innocence comes to light.