hotair--2020-12-10--Rudy: I got special treatment for COVID because I'm a "celebrity"

A perfect populist moment , inasmuch as populism has never been about leveling the playing field for the little guy so much as making sure that populist heroes get to break the rules with the same impunity as the old guard did .
In fact , reading the quote here from Giuliani , I had the same thought Greg Sargent did .
It really is a pandemic-era version of “ When you ’ re a star , they let you do it.
” I don ’ t begrudge Trump for having received special medication ( i.e .
Regeneron ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suite of doctors when he came down with COVID .
He ’ s the duly elected president , head of state , and commander-in-chief .
The country has an interest in protecting his health .
I don ’ t know what the excuse is for Giuliani getting priority over some random person ’ s grandpa , though .
If you ’ ve ranted and raved about A-holes like Gavin Newsom cutting themselves special breaks from the pandemic misery the rest of us are forced to cope with every day , make sure you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ben Carson , Chris Christie and Donald J. Trump are not the sturdiest candidates to conquer the coronavirus : older , in some cases overweight , male and not particularly fit .
Yet all seem to have gotten through Covid-19 , and all have gotten an antibody treatment in such short supply that some hospitals and states are doling it out by lottery .
Now Rudolph W. Giuliani , the latest member of President Trump ’ s inner circle to contract Covid-19 , has acknowledged that he received at least two of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even conceded that his “ celebrity ” status had given him access to care that others did not have .
“ If it wasn ’ t me , I wouldn ’ t have been put in a hospital frankly , ” Mr. Giuliani , the president ’ s personal lawyer , told WABC radio in New York .
“ Sometimes when you ’ re a celebrity , they ’ re worried if something happens to you they ’ re going to examine it more carefully , and do everything right.
” It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ granting pardons to cronies .
In one case powerful strings are being pulled to spare people from prison , in the other those strings are being pulled to spare them from death .
Rudy may end up with the dubious distinction of being the only person to receive both kinds of special treatment .
If it had turned out that some Pelosi flunky got a scarce , possibly lifesaving COVID treatment while the hoi polloi had to take their chances with a lottery , we ’ d treat it as a major scandal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will pass largely without mention in populist media , though .
Again , it ’ s not about equal treatment for elites and average people , it ’ s about making sure populist elites enjoy the same corrupt perks that establishment elites do .
It ’ s a pure coincidence , but I was struck by the fact that the news of Giuliani getting to cut the line was circulating on the same day as this arresting graphic putting the recent COVID death tolls in perspective relative to Rudy ’ s finest hour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than in the attacks 19 years ago .
And it ’ ll be just as bad or worse today , and tomorrow , and potentially every day for the next few months .
We haven ’ t even seen the death surge from infections incurred on Thanksgiving yet .
The holiday was two weeks ago ; new infections typically take three to four weeks to progress all the way to death .
The CDC projected yesterday that between 332,000 and 362,000 Americans will have died from COVID by January 2 , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been just under 290,000 deaths in the U.S. from COVID thus far , as I write this .
In a worst-case scenario , in other words , the CDC expects 72,000 deaths — in the next three weeks alone .
That ’ s more than 9/11 every single day for the rest of 2020 .
Bill Kristol makes a fair point .
Why would Rudy openly admit the indefensible fact that he got a rare antibody treatment unavailable to most others ?
Why not evince a sense of shame and humility by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can think is that he moves through life nowadays with a sense of such ludicrous impunity that he has nothing to fear from flaunting his privilege , not even social sanction .
Anti-Trumpers already despise him and want nothing to do with him .
Pro-Trumpers will forgive him anything thanks to his willingness to tell them what they want to hear at any given moment , including but not limited to insane , unprovable conspiracy theories about election-rigging .
God knows they ’ re not going to punish loyal Trumpists like him or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the president .
That ’ s their treat for being good dogs .
I don ’ t know about Christie , though .
He ’ s made the mistake of criticizing Trump lately , which jeopardizes his immunity from Republican criticism .
He ’ s lucky Giuliani and Carson cut the same line he did , as that makes singling him out for phony-populist umbrage over his antibody treatment harder to pull off .
One last point to bear in mind .
While it ’ s nice for all three that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each benefited ( or seemingly benefited ) from the scarce antibody treatments has probably convinced some Americans that the virus is less dangerous than it ’ s cracked up to be and therefore they needn ’ t take precautions .
If someone like Christie who ’ s obese or Rudy who ’ s in his mid-70s can be back on their feet quickly , one might naturally wonder how severe the coronavirus can possibly be .
Answer : *Maybe* not very severe if you ’ re a “ celebrity ” with access to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ joes who watched them recover were aware of that very important detail ?
Or are operating under the mistaken belief that if they get sick and end up in the hospital , those drugs will be available to them too ?

A perfect populist moment, inasmuch as populism has never been about leveling the playing field for the little guy so much as making sure that populist heroes get to break the rules with the same impunity as the old guard did.
In fact, reading the quote here from Giuliani, I had the same thought Greg Sargent did. It really is a pandemic-era version of “When you’re a star, they let you do it.”
I don’t begrudge Trump for having received special medication (i.e. Regeneron’s experimental antibody treatment) and his own suite of doctors when he came down with COVID. He’s the duly elected president, head of state, and commander-in-chief. The country has an interest in protecting his health. I don’t know what the excuse is for Giuliani getting priority over some random person’s grandpa, though. If you’ve ranted and raved about A-holes like Gavin Newsom cutting themselves special breaks from the pandemic misery the rest of us are forced to cope with every day, make sure you save some bile for Rudy too.
Ben Carson, Chris Christie and Donald J. Trump are not the sturdiest candidates to conquer the coronavirus: older, in some cases overweight, male and not particularly fit. Yet all seem to have gotten through Covid-19, and all have gotten an antibody treatment in such short supply that some hospitals and states are doling it out by lottery. Now Rudolph W. Giuliani, the latest member of President Trump’s inner circle to contract Covid-19, has acknowledged that he received at least two of the same drugs the president received. He even conceded that his “celebrity” status had given him access to care that others did not have. “If it wasn’t me, I wouldn’t have been put in a hospital frankly,” Mr. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, told WABC radio in New York. “Sometimes when you’re a celebrity, they’re worried if something happens to you they’re going to examine it more carefully, and do everything right.”
It’s not all that different from Trump granting pardons to cronies. In one case powerful strings are being pulled to spare people from prison, in the other those strings are being pulled to spare them from death. Rudy may end up with the dubious distinction of being the only person to receive both kinds of special treatment. If it had turned out that some Pelosi flunky got a scarce, possibly lifesaving COVID treatment while the hoi polloi had to take their chances with a lottery, we’d treat it as a major scandal — appropriately. Giuliani’s privilege will pass largely without mention in populist media, though. Again, it’s not about equal treatment for elites and average people, it’s about making sure populist elites enjoy the same corrupt perks that establishment elites do.
It’s a pure coincidence, but I was struck by the fact that the news of Giuliani getting to cut the line was circulating on the same day as this arresting graphic putting the recent COVID death tolls in perspective relative to Rudy’s finest hour, 9/11:
5 of the deadliest days (from a specific event or cause) in recorded U.S. history have now occurred this month. #WearAMask pic.twitter.com/Vj3XWGY4jt — Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II (@RevDrBarber) December 10, 2020
3,054 deaths yesterday, more than in the attacks 19 years ago. And it’ll be just as bad or worse today, and tomorrow, and potentially every day for the next few months. We haven’t even seen the death surge from infections incurred on Thanksgiving yet. The holiday was two weeks ago; new infections typically take three to four weeks to progress all the way to death.
The CDC projected yesterday that between 332,000 and 362,000 Americans will have died from COVID by January 2, which is 22 days from now. There have been just under 290,000 deaths in the U.S. from COVID thus far, as I write this. In a worst-case scenario, in other words, the CDC expects 72,000 deaths — in the next three weeks alone. That’s more than 9/11 every single day for the rest of 2020.
Bill Kristol makes a fair point. Why would Rudy openly admit the indefensible fact that he got a rare antibody treatment unavailable to most others? Why not evince a sense of shame and humility by simply declining to comment?
It's one thing for the rich & powerful to get better treatment. That may just be one of the realities of the world. But for the rich & powerful to boast about their treatment, and act as if others lacking access to it need not take care, is reprehensible.https://t.co/KQbrhJCr85 — Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) December 10, 2020
All I can think is that he moves through life nowadays with a sense of such ludicrous impunity that he has nothing to fear from flaunting his privilege, not even social sanction. Anti-Trumpers already despise him and want nothing to do with him. Pro-Trumpers will forgive him anything thanks to his willingness to tell them what they want to hear at any given moment, including but not limited to insane, unprovable conspiracy theories about election-rigging. God knows they’re not going to punish loyal Trumpists like him or Ben Carson for benefiting from their connections to the president. That’s their treat for being good dogs.
I don’t know about Christie, though. He’s made the mistake of criticizing Trump lately, which jeopardizes his immunity from Republican criticism. He’s lucky Giuliani and Carson cut the same line he did, as that makes singling him out for phony-populist umbrage over his antibody treatment harder to pull off.
One last point to bear in mind. While it’s nice for all three that they managed to recover, the fact that each benefited (or seemingly benefited) from the scarce antibody treatments has probably convinced some Americans that the virus is less dangerous than it’s cracked up to be and therefore they needn’t take precautions. If someone like Christie who’s obese or Rudy who’s in his mid-70s can be back on their feet quickly, one might naturally wonder how severe the coronavirus can possibly be. Answer: *Maybe* not very severe if you’re a “celebrity” with access to special drugs. But how many average joes who watched them recover were aware of that very important detail? Or are operating under the mistaken belief that if they get sick and end up in the hospital, those drugs will be available to them too?


hotair--2020-12-10--Warnock: Fidel Castro was "complex," but Netanyahu is George Wallace all over again

It ’ s always good to see candidates for federal office give their thoughts on foreign policy .
In the case of Raphael Warnock , it ’ s especially good — for Republicans .
In the latest drop of oppo research , it seems Rev .
Warnock gave lots of room for nuance on the records of foreign leaders — at least those in communist dictatorships : Hmmmm .
I suppose one could make the case for Castro ’ s complexity , if one wanted to overlook things like concentration camps for dissidents , denial of basic human rights , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They murdered thousands after taking power , and continued murdering and oppressing opponents right up to the moment at which Warnock called Castro ’ s legacy “ complex.
” Just to give an idea of how outside the mainstream this was , Barack Obama ’ s adviser on Cuba — not exactly a hardliner — had this to say about Castro at the same time : Some tributes to Castro misjudged the balance , said Christopher Sabatini , a Columbia University expert on Cuba who advised Barack Obama ’ s administration and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Unfortunately , his human rights record will not get the weight it deserves .
You see that in many of the declarations of presidents calling him a revolutionary icon .
Let ’ s be honest : this was a regime which when it came to power lined up its opponents and shot them.
” In fairness , perhaps Warnock spoke these words out of Christian charity .
Maybe he wants to always see the best in people , holding out hope for their redemption , and — oh , wait , never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Rev .
Raphael Warnock , a Democrat , criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ’ s opposition to a two-state solution for peace in the region .
He called Netanyahu ’ s stance “ tantamount to saying occupation today , occupation tomorrow , occupation forever , ” a line similar to former Alabama Gov .
George Wallace ’ s call for , “ segregation now , segregation tomorrow and segregation forever.
” He went on to argue that there could be no democracy in Israel without a two-state solution because of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you don ’ t have a Palestinian state , you can not have a Jewish democracy , ” he said .
“ That state will either be Jewish , or it will be a democracy .
It can not be both.
” The problem with the two-state solution is that the Palestinians won ’ t commit to it either , and neither will their supporters .
“ Palestine free from the river to the sea ” is their slogan , which is a demand for the annihilation of Israel .
As Prince Bandar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago , Israel repeatedly agreed to two-state solutions brokered by Saudi Arabia , only to renege on those later .
Warnock ’ s campaign did some damage control , but … In 2019 , Warnock signed a statement with a number of fellow Christian faith leaders comparing the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories with apartheid in South Africa .
“ We saw the patterns that seem to have been borrowed and perfected from other previous oppressive regimes , ” the statement read .
It went on to criticize the “ heavy militarization of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ military occupation of Namibia by apartheid South Africa.
” During a virtual campaign event on Tuesday , Warnock walked back that criticism , saying “ I do not believe Israel is an apartheid state as some have suggested.
” That only leaves two options .
Either Warnock is a hard-Left radical who supports Castroism , or he ’ s an intellectual lightweight who doesn ’ t comprehend what he ’ s saying when he says it .
There aren ’ t any other options with this set of facts , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are going to notice it .
Especially with the GOP spending $ 240 million on advertising to hammer that point home .

It’s always good to see candidates for federal office give their thoughts on foreign policy. In the case of Raphael Warnock, it’s especially good — for Republicans. In the latest drop of oppo research, it seems Rev. Warnock gave lots of room for nuance on the records of foreign leaders — at least those in communist dictatorships:
WOW. Two days after FIDEL CASTRO's death in 2016, Democrat Raphael Warnock called his legacy "complex," adding "kind of like America’s legacy is complex.” REMINDER: Warnock's church hosted Fidel Castro in 1995 for a "lovefest." https://t.co/1Ym41zB954 #GApol #GAsen pic.twitter.com/5gKyuvd5vK — Nathan Brand (@NathanBrandWA) December 9, 2020
“We pray for the people of Cuba in this moment,” Warnock said. “We remember Fidel Castro, whose legacy is complex. Don’t let anyone tell you a simple story; life usually isn’t very simple. His legacy is complex, kind of like America’s legacy is complex.”
Hmmmm. I suppose one could make the case for Castro’s complexity, if one wanted to overlook things like concentration camps for dissidents, denial of basic human rights, and pretty much any rights at all. They murdered thousands after taking power, and continued murdering and oppressing opponents right up to the moment at which Warnock called Castro’s legacy “complex.”
Just to give an idea of how outside the mainstream this was, Barack Obama’s adviser on Cuba — not exactly a hardliner — had this to say about Castro at the same time:
Some tributes to Castro misjudged the balance, said Christopher Sabatini, a Columbia University expert on Cuba who advised Barack Obama’s administration and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. “Unfortunately, his human rights record will not get the weight it deserves. You see that in many of the declarations of presidents calling him a revolutionary icon. Let’s be honest: this was a regime which when it came to power lined up its opponents and shot them.”
In fairness, perhaps Warnock spoke these words out of Christian charity. Maybe he wants to always see the best in people, holding out hope for their redemption, and — oh, wait, never mind:
In a 2016 sermon, the Rev. Raphael Warnock, a Democrat, criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s opposition to a two-state solution for peace in the region. He called Netanyahu’s stance “tantamount to saying occupation today, occupation tomorrow, occupation forever,” a line similar to former Alabama Gov. George Wallace’s call for, “segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever.” He went on to argue that there could be no democracy in Israel without a two-state solution because of the disenfranchisement of Arab voters. “If you don’t have a Palestinian state, you cannot have a Jewish democracy,” he said. “That state will either be Jewish, or it will be a democracy. It cannot be both.”
The problem with the two-state solution is that the Palestinians won’t commit to it either, and neither will their supporters. “Palestine free from the river to the sea” is their slogan, which is a demand for the annihilation of Israel. As Prince Bandar bin Sultan finally revealed a few months ago, Israel repeatedly agreed to two-state solutions brokered by Saudi Arabia, only to renege on those later.
Warnock’s campaign did some damage control, but …
A campaign spokesman on Wednesday restated Warnock’s backtracking from the apartheid remarks. “As Reverend Warnock has said and said again yesterday, he does not believe Israel is an apartheid state,” he told Fox News.
But …
In 2019, Warnock signed a statement with a number of fellow Christian faith leaders comparing the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories with apartheid in South Africa. “We saw the patterns that seem to have been borrowed and perfected from other previous oppressive regimes,” the statement read. It went on to criticize the “heavy militarization of the West Bank” and likened it to “military occupation of Namibia by apartheid South Africa.” During a virtual campaign event on Tuesday, Warnock walked back that criticism, saying “I do not believe Israel is an apartheid state as some have suggested.”
That only leaves two options. Either Warnock is a hard-Left radical who supports Castroism, or he’s an intellectual lightweight who doesn’t comprehend what he’s saying when he says it. There aren’t any other options with this set of facts, and it’s likely that Georgia voters are going to notice it. Especially with the GOP spending $240 million on advertising to hammer that point home.


hotair--2020-12-10--New head of Biden's Domestic Policy Council is ... Susan Rice?

“ Sometimes it kind of feels like the Biden team has a list of people they like and a list of jobs they need to fill and they ’ re just kind of matching them up at random ?
” writes Josh Barro .
It does seem a little random , come to think of it .
Susan Rice ’ s background is in foreign policy , first as Obama ’ s ambassador to the UN and later as his National Security Advisor , so naturally Sleepy Joe would think of her to lead a council focused on [ checks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Xavier Becerra at HHS .
He ’ s the Attorney General of California and a former congressman , and for some reason Biden wants him atop the federal health-care bureaucracy .
Same goes for Biden ’ s other nomination this morning , former Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough to lead the VA. McDonough ’ s background is in national security ; he ’ s a logical choice to head Veterans ’ Affairs because … why , exactly ?
Even Lloyd Austin is a bit of a headscratcher at the Pentagon .
Obviously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he has more expertise in the agency he ’ ll be leading than Rice , Becerra , or McDonough does .
But as I pointed out yesterday , his most distinguished service came in the Middle East .
The chief threats Biden will be facing will come from the Far East , namely , China and North Korea .
So what ’ s Austin doing as SecDef ?
It really does seem like Biden is choosing people whom he knows and likes from his time as VP without much regard for their particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of musical chairs among Obama administration alumni with each person getting to lead whichever agency they happen to sit on when the music stops .
For all of the criticism of Trump ’ s cronyist habits , Biden ’ s cabinet choices feel a little cronyist too , don ’ t they ?
President-elect Biden will name former National Security Adviser Susan Rice to head the Domestic Policy Council , two people familiar with his plans tell Axios — a significant change from her previous roles that would put her in charge of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Better ” plan… The big picture : Rice , 56 , a Black woman and former UN ambassador , is a heavy-hitter and trusted friend whom Biden considered for his running mate as well as Cabinet posts .
She ’ s being brought in to elevate the DPC ’ s stature along with an expansion of staff and resources to guide the U.S. through the pandemic and recovery… While Rice ’ s resume is heavy on foreign policy , diplomacy and national security , her biography is steeped in consideration of domestic issues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and racial equality… In this role , Rice will meet regularly with Biden , sit on the administration ’ s COVID-19 task force , convene sessions with Cabinet secretaries and formulate and coordinate policies .
Two considerations make Biden ’ s cabinet choices less random than musical chairs — diversity and confirmability .
If Democrats had performed in Senate races as well as the polls expected them to , Rice wouldn ’ t be shunted off into some low-key position like DPC chief .
She ’ d probably be Biden ’ s nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate will be 50/50 even in a best-case scenario for Dems , she probably can ’ t be confirmed .
He had no choice but to offer her a position that doesn ’ t require Senate advice and consent .
On top of that , he ’ s trying to satisfy critics who complain that there aren ’ t enough African-American or Latino members of his administration .
And on top of that , he ’ s trying to reward longtime friends and allies who helped him out in the presidential primaries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s how he ended up with Rice in charge of domestic policy , Becerra in charge of health-care policy , and Buttigieg potentially as ambassador to China .
They ’ re all “ huh ?
” picks , but each checks a particular box Biden is eager to check .
Clearly he cares less about making sure his nominees are amply qualified for the particular role they ’ ll play than making sure that everyone who “ needs ” a job in his administration for a political reason gets one .
Not everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Several veterans groups were hoping Biden would choose a veteran of the Iraq or Afghanistan wars , ” reports CNN of McDonough ’ s nomination to lead the VA , which is being defended by Team Joe on grounds of managerial expertise .
The one group that isn ’ t being given much consideration in Biden ’ s diversity push is progressives , and they ’ re starting to get restless about it : “ The progressive movement deserves a number of seats — important seats — in the Biden administration .
Have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have not , ” [ Bernie ] Sanders told me .
“ I ’ ve told the Biden people : The progressive movement is 35-40 % of the Democratic coalition .
Without a lot of other enormously hard work on the part of grassroots activists and progressives , Joe would not have won the election , ” Sanders added .
Driving the news : There ’ s a lot of surprise among outside groups , strategists , Hill members and staffers at Tom Vilsack ’ s return as Agriculture secretary .
Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like America ” but picked a white guy who ’ s already held the job for eight years over two qualified women , including one who ’ s Black , Rep. Marcia Fudge ( D-Ohio ) .
AOC has also been grumbling lately about the dearth of leftists in Biden ’ s cabinet , telling reporters yesterday , “ [ W ] hen I see all of these picks put together is : What is the agenda ?
What is this overall vision going to be ?
And to me , I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Remember that Bernie has his eye on becoming labor secretary but , again , confirmability might make that impossible .
Are there any Republicans willing to vote to put the furthest-left member of the Senate in charge of America ’ s labor bureaucracy , even if only as a matter of collegiality towards a fellow member ?
Collins and Murkowski , maybe ?
Biden may have no choice but to nominate Sanders at this point in order to appease the left and then huddle with Collins and Murky to see if he can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nomination through .
If he can ’ t get any Republican votes and Bernie ends up being borked , oh well .
At least he tried .
By the way , the musical-chairs gambit that seems to have most rankled rank-and-filed Dems this week is Fudge getting passed over for secretary of agriculture .
That ’ s the job she wanted and she has experience as a member of the House Agriculture Committee .
Biden buddy James Clyburn lobbied hard for her too , yet somehow Fudge , who ’ s black , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urban ” agency while white Iowan Obama retread Vilsack got brought back for the agriculture job .
Very strange .
Exit quotation from Fudge , speaking last month to Politico : “ As this country becomes more and more diverse , we ’ re going to have to stop looking at only certain agencies as those that people like me fit in .
You know , it ’ s always ‘ we want to put the Black person in Labor or HUD.
’ ” That ’ s exactly what ended up happening .

“Sometimes it kind of feels like the Biden team has a list of people they like and a list of jobs they need to fill and they’re just kind of matching them up at random?” writes Josh Barro. It does seem a little random, come to think of it. Susan Rice’s background is in foreign policy, first as Obama’s ambassador to the UN and later as his National Security Advisor, so naturally Sleepy Joe would think of her to lead a council focused on [checks notes] domestic policy?
Likewise for Xavier Becerra at HHS. He’s the Attorney General of California and a former congressman, and for some reason Biden wants him atop the federal health-care bureaucracy. Same goes for Biden’s other nomination this morning, former Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough to lead the VA. McDonough’s background is in national security; he’s a logical choice to head Veterans’ Affairs because … why, exactly?
Even Lloyd Austin is a bit of a headscratcher at the Pentagon. Obviously, as a career military officer, he has more expertise in the agency he’ll be leading than Rice, Becerra, or McDonough does. But as I pointed out yesterday, his most distinguished service came in the Middle East. The chief threats Biden will be facing will come from the Far East, namely, China and North Korea. So what’s Austin doing as SecDef?
It really does seem like Biden is choosing people whom he knows and likes from his time as VP without much regard for their particular knowledge base. One imagines a game of musical chairs among Obama administration alumni with each person getting to lead whichever agency they happen to sit on when the music stops. For all of the criticism of Trump’s cronyist habits, Biden’s cabinet choices feel a little cronyist too, don’t they?
President-elect Biden will name former National Security Adviser Susan Rice to head the Domestic Policy Council, two people familiar with his plans tell Axios — a significant change from her previous roles that would put her in charge of major portions of his “Build Back Better” plan… The big picture: Rice, 56, a Black woman and former UN ambassador, is a heavy-hitter and trusted friend whom Biden considered for his running mate as well as Cabinet posts. She’s being brought in to elevate the DPC’s stature along with an expansion of staff and resources to guide the U.S. through the pandemic and recovery… While Rice’s resume is heavy on foreign policy, diplomacy and national security, her biography is steeped in consideration of domestic issues including civil rights, education and economic and racial equality… In this role, Rice will meet regularly with Biden, sit on the administration’s COVID-19 task force, convene sessions with Cabinet secretaries and formulate and coordinate policies.
Two considerations make Biden’s cabinet choices less random than musical chairs — diversity and confirmability. If Democrats had performed in Senate races as well as the polls expected them to, Rice wouldn’t be shunted off into some low-key position like DPC chief. She’d probably be Biden’s nominee for Secretary of State. But because the Senate will be 50/50 even in a best-case scenario for Dems, she probably can’t be confirmed. He had no choice but to offer her a position that doesn’t require Senate advice and consent. On top of that, he’s trying to satisfy critics who complain that there aren’t enough African-American or Latino members of his administration. And on top of that, he’s trying to reward longtime friends and allies who helped him out in the presidential primaries, like Pete Buttigieg.
That’s how he ended up with Rice in charge of domestic policy, Becerra in charge of health-care policy, and Buttigieg potentially as ambassador to China. They’re all “huh?” picks, but each checks a particular box Biden is eager to check. Clearly he cares less about making sure his nominees are amply qualified for the particular role they’ll play than making sure that everyone who “needs” a job in his administration for a political reason gets one.
Not everyone’s happy about it:
https://twitter.com/djrothkopf/status/1337055252688883716
https://twitter.com/djrothkopf/status/1337055255494848515
“Several veterans groups were hoping Biden would choose a veteran of the Iraq or Afghanistan wars,” reports CNN of McDonough’s nomination to lead the VA, which is being defended by Team Joe on grounds of managerial expertise. The one group that isn’t being given much consideration in Biden’s diversity push is progressives, and they’re starting to get restless about it:
“The progressive movement deserves a number of seats — important seats — in the Biden administration. Have I seen that at this point? I have not,” [Bernie] Sanders told me. “I’ve told the Biden people: The progressive movement is 35-40% of the Democratic coalition. Without a lot of other enormously hard work on the part of grassroots activists and progressives, Joe would not have won the election,” Sanders added. Driving the news: There’s a lot of surprise among outside groups, strategists, Hill members and staffers at Tom Vilsack’s return as Agriculture secretary. Biden vowed to make his Cabinet “look like America” but picked a white guy who’s already held the job for eight years over two qualified women, including one who’s Black, Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio).
AOC has also been grumbling lately about the dearth of leftists in Biden’s cabinet, telling reporters yesterday, “[W]hen I see all of these picks put together is: What is the agenda? What is this overall vision going to be? And to me, I think that’s a little hazy.” Remember that Bernie has his eye on becoming labor secretary but, again, confirmability might make that impossible. Are there any Republicans willing to vote to put the furthest-left member of the Senate in charge of America’s labor bureaucracy, even if only as a matter of collegiality towards a fellow member? Collins and Murkowski, maybe?
Biden may have no choice but to nominate Sanders at this point in order to appease the left and then huddle with Collins and Murky to see if he can bribe them with anything to get the nomination through. If he can’t get any Republican votes and Bernie ends up being borked, oh well. At least he tried.
By the way, the musical-chairs gambit that seems to have most rankled rank-and-filed Dems this week is Fudge getting passed over for secretary of agriculture. That’s the job she wanted and she has experience as a member of the House Agriculture Committee. Biden buddy James Clyburn lobbied hard for her too, yet somehow Fudge, who’s black, ended up in charge of an “urban” agency while white Iowan Obama retread Vilsack got brought back for the agriculture job. Very strange. Exit quotation from Fudge, speaking last month to Politico: “As this country becomes more and more diverse, we’re going to have to stop looking at only certain agencies as those that people like me fit in. You know, it’s always ‘we want to put the Black person in Labor or HUD.’” That’s exactly what ended up happening.


hotair--2020-12-10--Daily Beast: Isn't it odd that the Hunter Biden money-laundering probe went "largely unnoticed" unti

Daily Beast: Isn't it odd that the Hunter Biden money-laundering probe went "largely unnoticed" until now?

“ Largely unnoticed , ” purposely ignored , or actively suppressed ?
The Daily Beast ’ s reporting team on Hunter Biden ’ s legal woes sound somewhat surprised that the FBI ’ s money-laundering probe didn ’ t get noticed before the election : The Justice Department ’ s announcement on Wednesday that it was investigating Hunter Biden , for what he deemed to be “ tax affairs , ” took root several years ago with a much broader inquiry that included possible money laundering , according to a report by CNN .
That inquiry reportedly fizzled , leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is now being led by the U.S. attorney ’ s office in Delaware .
But evidence of the larger probe was apparent in the markings on a series of documents that were made public—but went largely unnoticed—in the days leading up to the November election , according to two individuals familiar with the matter .
The word “ unnoticed ” is doing an awful lot of heavy lifting in this sentence .
Not only did it get noticed , it got reported by Sinclair TV ’ s James Rosen a few days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of online outlets — mostly conservative — picked up on Rosen ’ s report about the FBI ’ s criminal probe of Hunter Biden , including us .
Rosen reported that Tony Bobulinski had cooperated in the probe , and that its focus was money laundering : A U.S. Justice Department official has confirmed to Sinclair Broadcast Group that a 2019 FBI investigation into Hunter Biden , son of Democratic nominee Joe Biden , is still active .
The 2019 criminal investigation looks into Hunter and his associates on allegations of money-laundering .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a central witness in these allegations , who suggested that former vice president Joe Biden knew more than he has acknowledged about his son ’ s overseas dealings .
That witness was Bobulinski , who went public about Hunter ’ s business dealings after the Biden campaign tried sloughing him off as a malcontent business partner .
Rosen himself addressed this last night : This didn ’ t go “ largely unnoticed.
” It was widely noticed , everywhere except in the mainstream media .
Why ?
It started with the New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which Biden ’ s team claimed was Russian disinformation and social media platforms actively suppressed : MacIsaac also said he copied the contents of one of the laptops for Giuliani .
And , sure enough , those contents quickly made their way to conservative media personalities and outlets .
Giuliani and others , including Steve Bannon , appeared on network television , stirring conspiracy theories and pushing unsubstantiated claims about Hunter ’ s overseas business dealings .
One of the main outlets pushing emails and pictures from the hard drive was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of its stories , the paper published what appeared to be federal law enforcement documents given to MacIsaac in return for his handing over the Biden laptops .
One of those documents—from the FBI— included a case number that had the code associated with an ongoing federal money laundering investigation in Delaware , according to several law enforcement officials who reviewed the document .
Another document—one with a grand jury subpoena number—appeared to show the initials of two assistant U.S. attorneys linked to the Wilmington , Delaware , office .
Gee — you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the details , they might have found a real story about corruption around Joe Biden ?
As in , acting like real journalistic organizations and speaking truth to power ?
The deuce you say .
The excuse in this article for failing to report on this — even with Rosen ’ s report already made public — was that law enforcement wouldn ’ t comment and the Biden team stonewalled the Daily Beast .
But the documents themselves apparently left that very big clue two months ago that they ’ re reporting … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s too harsh in regard to the Daily Beast , actually .
They did try to follow up .
That puts them head and shoulders above other media outlets … like , for instance … ] It ’ s not just media outlets that should get the heat , either .
Twitter and Facebook actively suppressed the New York Post article — and the New York Post itself — for days .
Democrats called it Russian disinformation , and both Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey nearly twisted their ankles in a rush @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only after Hunter Biden issued a press release acknowledging the accuracy of Rosen ’ s reporting , have all of these “ institutions ” suddenly cured their myopia .
The clear conclusion is that the national media didn ’ t want to report anything detrimental to Joe Biden , no matter how accurate it might have been .
Now that the election is over , they ’ ll tell their readers and viewers that the story went “ largely unnoticed ” [ see update above as to TDB , which did at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to avoid responsibility for their active decision to ignore and in some cases suppress it .
It ’ s an utter disgrace .

“Largely unnoticed,” purposely ignored, or actively suppressed? The Daily Beast’s reporting team on Hunter Biden’s legal woes sound somewhat surprised that the FBI’s money-laundering probe didn’t get noticed before the election:
The Justice Department’s announcement on Wednesday that it was investigating Hunter Biden, for what he deemed to be “tax affairs,” took root several years ago with a much broader inquiry that included possible money laundering, according to a report by CNN. That inquiry reportedly fizzled, leading instead to a probe on tax matters that is now being led by the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware. But evidence of the larger probe was apparent in the markings on a series of documents that were made public—but went largely unnoticed—in the days leading up to the November election, according to two individuals familiar with the matter.
The word “unnoticed” is doing an awful lot of heavy lifting in this sentence. Not only did it get noticed, it got reported by Sinclair TV’s James Rosen a few days before the election. A large number of online outlets — mostly conservative — picked up on Rosen’s report about the FBI’s criminal probe of Hunter Biden, including us. Rosen reported that Tony Bobulinski had cooperated in the probe, and that its focus was money laundering:
A U.S. Justice Department official has confirmed to Sinclair Broadcast Group that a 2019 FBI investigation into Hunter Biden, son of Democratic nominee Joe Biden, is still active. The 2019 criminal investigation looks into Hunter and his associates on allegations of money-laundering. Sinclair investigative reporter James Rosen spoke with a central witness in these allegations, who suggested that former vice president Joe Biden knew more than he has acknowledged about his son’s overseas dealings.
That witness was Bobulinski, who went public about Hunter’s business dealings after the Biden campaign tried sloughing him off as a malcontent business partner. Rosen himself addressed this last night:
Many today are referencing my reporting of October 29, wherein a DOJ official confirmed the FBI had opened a criminal investigation into Hunter Biden and his associates back in 2019. At no time since then has @TheJusticeDept, @FBI, or @JoeBiden disputed that reporting. https://t.co/U41SNUdaZf — James Rosen (@JamesRosenTV) December 9, 2020
This didn’t go “largely unnoticed.” It was widely noticed, everywhere except in the mainstream media. Why? It started with the New York Post exposé of Hunter’s laptop, which Biden’s team claimed was Russian disinformation and social media platforms actively suppressed:
MacIsaac also said he copied the contents of one of the laptops for Giuliani. And, sure enough, those contents quickly made their way to conservative media personalities and outlets. Giuliani and others, including Steve Bannon, appeared on network television, stirring conspiracy theories and pushing unsubstantiated claims about Hunter’s overseas business dealings. One of the main outlets pushing emails and pictures from the hard drive was the New York Post. And for one of its stories, the paper published what appeared to be federal law enforcement documents given to MacIsaac in return for his handing over the Biden laptops. One of those documents—from the FBI— included a case number that had the code associated with an ongoing federal money laundering investigation in Delaware, according to several law enforcement officials who reviewed the document. Another document—one with a grand jury subpoena number—appeared to show the initials of two assistant U.S. attorneys linked to the Wilmington, Delaware, office.
Gee — you mean if media outlets had actually checked the details, they might have found a real story about corruption around Joe Biden? As in, acting like real journalistic organizations and speaking truth to power? The deuce you say. The excuse in this article for failing to report on this — even with Rosen’s report already made public — was that law enforcement wouldn’t comment and the Biden team stonewalled the Daily Beast. But the documents themselves apparently left that very big clue two months ago that they’re reporting …. now.
[Update: That’s too harsh in regard to the Daily Beast, actually. They did try to follow up. That puts them head and shoulders above other media outlets … like, for instance …]
As Glenn Greenwald says — memories …
It’s not just media outlets that should get the heat, either. Twitter and Facebook actively suppressed the New York Post article — and the New York Post itself — for days. Democrats called it Russian disinformation, and both Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey nearly twisted their ankles in a rush to suppress it. Now, and only after Hunter Biden issued a press release acknowledging the accuracy of Rosen’s reporting, have all of these “institutions” suddenly cured their myopia.
The clear conclusion is that the national media didn’t want to report anything detrimental to Joe Biden, no matter how accurate it might have been. Now that the election is over, they’ll tell their readers and viewers that the story went “largely unnoticed” [see update above as to TDB, which did at least notice it] as a passive-voice dodge to avoid responsibility for their active decision to ignore and in some cases suppress it. It’s an utter disgrace.


hotair--2020-12-10--Michigan lawmaker threatens Trump supporters on Facebook, stripped of committee seats

Republican leaders of the Michigan House of Representatives have removed Rep. Cynthia Johnson , ( D-Detroit ) , from her committee assignments in response to videos she posted on Facebook .
Johnson posted not one but two videos in which she sounds as though she is inciting violence as she threatens Trump supporters .
The Michigan House of Representatives leadership wants to make one point perfectly clear – death threats and threats of violence against anyone on either side of the political aisle is unacceptable .
The House ’ s Republican leaders issued a joint news release Wednesday .
House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t specify which statements were the cause of Johnson ’ s removal from her committee assignments .
“ Threats to either Democrats or Republicans are unacceptable and un-American .
They ’ re even more unbecoming of an elected official .
Rep. Johnson has been removed from her committee assignments , and we are looking into further disciplinary action as the proper authorities conduct their own investigations , ” Chatfield and Wentworth said in the joint statement .
“ We have been consistent in our position on this — violence and intimidation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have said that about threats against Gov .
Whitmer , Secretary ( of State Jocelyn ) Benson , Rep. Johnson herself , and others .
That applies to threats made toward public officials , and it must also apply when the threats come from public officials .
Behavior like this will not be tolerated this term or next.
” Rep. Johnson , who is black , says she has received threats of violence , including death threats after she tried to question Rudy Guiliani during a recent legislative committee hearing .
She posted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lynching .
The video she posted on Tuesday night seems to have been the final straw for the Michigan House leadership .
At the end of a roughly three-minute video posted Tuesday evening to Facebook , Johnson referenced law enforcement tracking down someone who made a threat against her before issuing what she called a warning .
“ So , this is just a warning to you Trumpers .
Be careful .
Walk lightly .
We ain ’ t playing with you .
Enough of the shenanigans .
Enough is enough , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And for those of you who are soldiers , you know how to do it .
Do it right .
Be in order .
Make them pay .
I love y ’ all.
” And , the video has been reported to law enforcement .
As a side note , reporter Dave Boucher ’ s Twitter feed includes pushback over his story for the Detroit Free Press .
Johnson does call for her supporters to “ hit ’ em in their pocketbooks ” and thanks people for “ doing things right and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Her message on the videoes is mixed , at best , but sounds like the messages she is speaking out about .
The first video is more passive , calling for supporters to speak with civility .
It was the second video she posted that was tinged with what sounds like a call for violence .
At the start of the Tuesday Facebook video , Johnson thanks “ everybody who is supporting our efforts , and when I say our efforts , I ’ m talking about doing things right and in order.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with folks , and start cussing them out and all that .
Don ’ t .
It never works , ” she states .
“ Be smart .
You don ’ t have to yell .
You don ’ t have to curse anybody out .
You don ’ t have to call people names .
Hit their asses in the pocketbook .
Hit ‘ em in the pocketbook.
” Michigan House Democrat leadership blames the highly-charged political atmosphere during an election year .
Michigan has been a focal point during the Electoral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They say that the statement released by the Republican leadership will not help the tensions .
House Democratic Leader Christine Greig and Democratic Leader-elect Donna Lasinski also issued a joint statement : “ There is no doubt that this election cycle has been rife with hyper-partisan political rhetoric , theatrics , and dangerous threats of violence toward elected and public officials and their loved ones , which continue to escalate amid the most significant public health crisis in our state and country.
” “ The overheated language of the statement issued by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chatfield and Speaker-elect [ Jason ] Wentworth , illustrates that the Republicans prioritize partisan politics and political theater over healing the wounds of division , preserving the well-being of the Legislature as an institution , protecting the safety of members , and acting on the needs of the people of Michigan.
” All of this is almost like when Democrats like Maxine Waters told anti-Trump audiences to run off Trump administration staffers from public places like gas stations and retail stores , as though they have no right to lead a normal life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inciting her audiences without using threats as an excuse .
Rep. Johnson has two later posts that came after the videos on her Facebook page .
One post states that she doesn ’ t feel she is getting the support from other Democrats that she should be getting .
The other offers the message that there will be “ a big reveal ” today .
We ’ ll see if anything comes of this .
Even mixed messages about violence shouldn ’ t be the message to her supporters against “ Trumpers ” @

Republican leaders of the Michigan House of Representatives have removed Rep. Cynthia Johnson,(D-Detroit), from her committee assignments in response to videos she posted on Facebook. Johnson posted not one but two videos in which she sounds as though she is inciting violence as she threatens Trump supporters.
The Michigan House of Representatives leadership wants to make one point perfectly clear – death threats and threats of violence against anyone on either side of the political aisle is unacceptable. The House’s Republican leaders issued a joint news release Wednesday. House Speaker Lee Chatfield and Speaker-elect Jason Wentworth didn’t specify which statements were the cause of Johnson’s removal from her committee assignments.
“Threats to either Democrats or Republicans are unacceptable and un-American. They’re even more unbecoming of an elected official. Rep. Johnson has been removed from her committee assignments, and we are looking into further disciplinary action as the proper authorities conduct their own investigations,” Chatfield and Wentworth said in the joint statement. “We have been consistent in our position on this — violence and intimidation is never appropriate in politics. We have said that about threats against Gov. Whitmer, Secretary (of State Jocelyn) Benson, Rep. Johnson herself, and others. That applies to threats made toward public officials, and it must also apply when the threats come from public officials. Behavior like this will not be tolerated this term or next.”
Rep. Johnson, who is black, says she has received threats of violence, including death threats after she tried to question Rudy Guiliani during a recent legislative committee hearing. She posted voicemails on Facebook which include calls for lynching. The video she posted on Tuesday night seems to have been the final straw for the Michigan House leadership.
At the end of a roughly three-minute video posted Tuesday evening to Facebook, Johnson referenced law enforcement tracking down someone who made a threat against her before issuing what she called a warning. “So, this is just a warning to you Trumpers. Be careful. Walk lightly. We ain’t playing with you. Enough of the shenanigans. Enough is enough,” Johnson states in the video. “And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it. Do it right. Be in order. Make them pay. I love y’all.”
Michigan State Rep. Cynthia Johnson is stripped of her assignments and is under investigation for her threats against Trump supporters posted on social media on Tuesday night. pic.twitter.com/3MpMlul2wZ — Alex Salvi (@alexsalvinews) December 9, 2020
And, the video has been reported to law enforcement.
Update: A spokesman for House GOP leadership says video was referred to law enforcement. Doesn't say which agency. Again, I've called and emailed Rep. Johnson for comment. Requested comment from House Dems as well https://t.co/s28DLWS30D — Dave Boucher (@Dave_Boucher1) December 9, 2020
As a side note, reporter Dave Boucher’s Twitter feed includes pushback over his story for the Detroit Free Press.
Johnson does call for her supporters to “hit ’em in their pocketbooks” and thanks people for “doing things right and in order” in the first video. Her message on the videoes is mixed, at best, but sounds like the messages she is speaking out about. The first video is more passive, calling for supporters to speak with civility. It was the second video she posted that was tinged with what sounds like a call for violence.
At the start of the Tuesday Facebook video, Johnson thanks “everybody who is supporting our efforts, and when I say our efforts, I’m talking about doing things right and in order.” “Don’t get upset with folks, and start cussing them out and all that. Don’t. It never works,” she states. “Be smart. You don’t have to yell. You don’t have to curse anybody out. You don’t have to call people names. Hit their asses in the pocketbook. Hit ‘em in the pocketbook.”
On Wednesday, Michigan Republican Party Chairman Laura Cox called the videos “deranged rants”.
“It was distressing to know that Representative Johnson received threats after last week’s hearing, however by issuing threats of violence of her own against the supporters of President Trump she has sunk to the same level as the unhinged individuals who threatened her,” Johnson said, calling on Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Michigan Democrats to denounce Johnson’s comments.
Michigan House Democrat leadership blames the highly-charged political atmosphere during an election year. Michigan has been a focal point during the Electoral College battle for vote counting and re-counts. They say that the statement released by the Republican leadership will not help the tensions.
House Democratic Leader Christine Greig and Democratic Leader-elect Donna Lasinski also issued a joint statement: “There is no doubt that this election cycle has been rife with hyper-partisan political rhetoric, theatrics, and dangerous threats of violence toward elected and public officials and their loved ones, which continue to escalate amid the most significant public health crisis in our state and country.” “The overheated language of the statement issued by [House] Speaker [Lee] Chatfield and Speaker-elect [Jason] Wentworth, illustrates that the Republicans prioritize partisan politics and political theater over healing the wounds of division, preserving the well-being of the Legislature as an institution, protecting the safety of members, and acting on the needs of the people of Michigan.”
All of this is almost like when Democrats like Maxine Waters told anti-Trump audiences to run off Trump administration staffers from public places like gas stations and retail stores, as though they have no right to lead a normal life. The difference is that Waters was inciting her audiences without using threats as an excuse. Rep. Johnson has two later posts that came after the videos on her Facebook page. One post states that she doesn’t feel she is getting the support from other Democrats that she should be getting. The other offers the message that there will be “a big reveal” today.
PEACE be still. There is a big reveal later on today. Look out for it. All I can say is, shame on Michigan’s House leadership on both sides! Get yourselves ready to apologize to me publicly!!
We’ll see if anything comes of this. Even mixed messages about violence shouldn’t be the message to her supporters against “Trumpers”.


hotair--2020-12-10--FDA commish: We have to wait for our panel [wink] before we can approve Pfizer's vaccine [wink wink]

Never has reading between the lines been made so easy , suggests Business Insider .
The Food and Drug Administration meets with its panel of independent experts today to conduct a final review of data from Pfizer ’ s COVID-19 trials .
The FDA could issue an emergency-use authorization that would roll out millions of doses for the first US vaccinations in the pandemic .
That ’ s if the FDA gets support from its experts and considers it safe , commissioner Stephen Hahn told NBC ’ s Savannah Guthrie on Today : Come on , man , writes Anna @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FDA has little choice but to roll out the vaccine , especially since the same vaccinations have already begun in the UK and will start in Canada shortly : FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn said the outcome is already predictable , and that the agency intends to act on the advisory panel ’ s advice immediately .
“ We ’ ll have to see what the scientific and medical discussion is today .
But our plan is to take their recommendations into account for our decision making and make a decision shortly thereafter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he told Savannah Guthrie live on NBC News ’ TODAY before the advisory committee convened .
The head of the FDA assured , “ our initial assessment is that this is a vaccine that does meet our criteria … But we do want to hear from the vaccine advisory committee.
” It ’ s not as if there aren ’ t some open questions .
The UK discovered that people with “ significant ” histories of allergic reactions might have to wait for a different vaccine .
There are also questions about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be answered at this time , but as one epidemiologist told me on Monday , the long term impact of no vaccine is pretty much continued isolation and its health impacts .
Besides , the FDA can ’ t back down now that the UK and Canada have launched the Pfizer vaccine .
The US hit a new record for daily deaths yesterday at over 3,000 , and thanks to the holiday season that might not yet be the peak .
They need to start dragging the transmission rate down pronto @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will do that .
Especially at the efficacy level promised by Pfizer and Moderna — 95 % in a two-stage dosing regimen .
In other words , this is almost certainly a mere formality .
That prompts the question , though , why the FDA didn ’ t just call its panel last week and skip the formalities .
A week ’ s head start would have been helpful if this was a done deal all along .
The FDA hearing is being streamed on YouTube .
It ’ s all pretty technical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real suspense in the ending .
It ’ s sometimes amusing to watch the smartest minds in the world not knowing how to unmute themselves , but let every person who never did their own Zoom version of Silent Movie cast the first stone .

Never has reading between the lines been made so easy, suggests Business Insider. The Food and Drug Administration meets with its panel of independent experts today to conduct a final review of data from Pfizer’s COVID-19 trials. The FDA could issue an emergency-use authorization that would roll out millions of doses for the first US vaccinations in the pandemic.
That’s if the FDA gets support from its experts and considers it safe, commissioner Stephen Hahn told NBC’s Savannah Guthrie on Today:
“Our plan is to take their recommendations into account… and make a decision shortly thereafter. We intend to act quickly.” – FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn on today’s meeting with an outside panel to discuss the approval of Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine pic.twitter.com/1CqJWu9GxH — TODAY (@TODAYshow) December 10, 2020
Come on, man, writes Anna Medaris Miller. Everyone knows that the FDA has little choice but to roll out the vaccine, especially since the same vaccinations have already begun in the UK and will start in Canada shortly:
FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn said the outcome is already predictable, and that the agency intends to act on the advisory panel’s advice immediately. “We’ll have to see what the scientific and medical discussion is today. But our plan is to take their recommendations into account for our decision making and make a decision shortly thereafter … We intend to act quickly,” he told Savannah Guthrie live on NBC News’ TODAY before the advisory committee convened. The head of the FDA assured, “our initial assessment is that this is a vaccine that does meet our criteria … But we do want to hear from the vaccine advisory committee.”
It’s not as if there aren’t some open questions. The UK discovered that people with “significant” histories of allergic reactions might have to wait for a different vaccine. There are also questions about long-term impacts of the vaccine that can’t be answered at this time, but as one epidemiologist told me on Monday, the long term impact of no vaccine is pretty much continued isolation and its health impacts.
Besides, the FDA can’t back down now that the UK and Canada have launched the Pfizer vaccine. The US hit a new record for daily deaths yesterday at over 3,000, and thanks to the holiday season that might not yet be the peak. They need to start dragging the transmission rate down pronto, and emergency deployments of effective vaccines will do that. Especially at the efficacy level promised by Pfizer and Moderna — 95% in a two-stage dosing regimen.
In other words, this is almost certainly a mere formality. That prompts the question, though, why the FDA didn’t just call its panel last week and skip the formalities. A week’s head start would have been helpful if this was a done deal all along.
The FDA hearing is being streamed on YouTube. It’s all pretty technical, and there seems to be no real suspense in the ending. It’s sometimes amusing to watch the smartest minds in the world not knowing how to unmute themselves, but let every person who never did their own Zoom version of Silent Movie cast the first stone.


hotair--2020-12-10--Defund: Minneapolis cuts police budget by $8M -- but not staffing levels -- as murders skyrocket by

Defund: Minneapolis cuts police budget by $8M -- but not staffing levels -- as murders skyrocket by 50%

What do cities do when murders suddenly rocket up by over 50 % and carjackings by 537 % ?
Here in Minneapolis , the city council cuts police spending by $ 8 million .
Believe it or not , this deal is actually the good news , as the council initially wanted to cap the force at 750 employees — far below its currently authorized 888 , a move stymied by Mayor Jacob Frey ’ s veto threat.. Police can come back and request funds for two new recruitment classes starting next year … assuming they can find anyone who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here : The Minneapolis City Council passed a budget early Thursday that moves about $ 8 million from the Police Department to other services — but preserves its plan to hire more officers in future years .
The late change to the department ’ s staffing projections , passed along a narrow 7-6 vote , does not change the number of officers who will work in 2021 .
The move , instead , avoided a political showdown with Mayor Jacob Frey .
The city expects a monthly average of 770 police officers will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to release funding for some recruit classes .
The City Council had initially planned to drop the force ’ s authorized size to 750 officers starting in 2022 , but reversed course late Wednesday .
Frey , who sought to keep the current target level of 888 , had said he was considering vetoing the budget because he was concerned about “ the massive permanent cut to officer capacity ” in future years .
The cash will get redirected into social programs , notably “ de-escalation efforts.
” That will certainly be useful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faces while having their cars stolen in broad daylight .
Part of the money cut from the budget covered overtime costs , which have risen substantially this year .
That is because the department has suffered a 20 % loss of manpower over the last six months , police chief Medaria Arradondo explained , forcing police officers to stretch their schedules to cover the gaps : About $ 5 million of that money came from cuts to a budget for police overtime — a move that Police Chief Medaria Arradondo had strongly discouraged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the department as it copes with staffing shortages and prepares for the trial of the four former police officers charged in Floyd ’ s death .
The department had been funded for about 880 officers in 2020 .
But Arradondo told council members Monday that , as of Dec. 1 , the agency was down 166 officers — some of whom have permanently left the force and others who have been out on long-term medical leave , many citing post-traumatic stress disorder from the civil unrest that erupted after Floyd ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city plans to cut overtime in the middle of … [ checks notes ] … a huge staffing crisis and a massive crime wave .
Just to remind everyone of the latter : Homicides in Minneapolis are up more than 50 percent , with nearly 80 people killed across the city so far this year .
Nearly 530 people have been shot , the highest number in more than a decade and twice as many as in 2019 .
And there have been more than 4,600 violent crimes — including hundreds of carjackings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yeah , this is a great time to cut the law-enforcement budget .
And once again , the city council talked about alternatives to policing but without any real plan in place , let alone evidence that their innovations would do anything to curtail the crime wave city residents are now experiencing .
That was too much for one participant in the council meeting : Doug Tanner , a resident of South Minneapolis , told council members his wife had been carjacked , robbed and assaulted .
“ The fact that this council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem is irresponsible , ” he said .
“ The crime rate is at an all-time high , and you want less cops on the street .
Where does common sense come into the equation ?
” Perhaps the answer to that is with the voters who elected these clowns to office in the first place .
Minneapolis got the governance they chose — politically correct , hard-Left progressive , and utterly devoid of any sense of accountability for not managing their own public safety responsibilities .
Perhaps in the next election , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more seriously .

What do cities do when murders suddenly rocket up by over 50% and carjackings by 537%? Here in Minneapolis, the city council cuts police spending by $8 million. Believe it or not, this deal is actually the good news, as the council initially wanted to cap the force at 750 employees — far below its currently authorized 888, a move stymied by Mayor Jacob Frey’s veto threat..
Police can come back and request funds for two new recruitment classes starting next year … assuming they can find anyone who’d want to join law enforcement here:
The Minneapolis City Council passed a budget early Thursday that moves about $8 million from the Police Department to other services — but preserves its plan to hire more officers in future years. The late change to the department’s staffing projections, passed along a narrow 7-6 vote, does not change the number of officers who will work in 2021. The move, instead, avoided a political showdown with Mayor Jacob Frey. The city expects a monthly average of 770 police officers will work in 2021, if council agrees to release funding for some recruit classes. The City Council had initially planned to drop the force’s authorized size to 750 officers starting in 2022, but reversed course late Wednesday. Frey, who sought to keep the current target level of 888, had said he was considering vetoing the budget because he was concerned about “the massive permanent cut to officer capacity” in future years.
The cash will get redirected into social programs, notably “de-escalation efforts.” That will certainly be useful when residents get guns pointed in their faces while having their cars stolen in broad daylight.
Part of the money cut from the budget covered overtime costs, which have risen substantially this year. That is because the department has suffered a 20% loss of manpower over the last six months, police chief Medaria Arradondo explained, forcing police officers to stretch their schedules to cover the gaps:
About $5 million of that money came from cuts to a budget for police overtime — a move that Police Chief Medaria Arradondo had strongly discouraged, calling overtime a “necessity” for the department as it copes with staffing shortages and prepares for the trial of the four former police officers charged in Floyd’s death. The department had been funded for about 880 officers in 2020. But Arradondo told council members Monday that, as of Dec. 1, the agency was down 166 officers — some of whom have permanently left the force and others who have been out on long-term medical leave, many citing post-traumatic stress disorder from the civil unrest that erupted after Floyd’s death.
In other words, the city plans to cut overtime in the middle of … [checks notes] … a huge staffing crisis and a massive crime wave. Just to remind everyone of the latter:
Homicides in Minneapolis are up more than 50 percent, with nearly 80 people killed across the city so far this year. Nearly 530 people have been shot, the highest number in more than a decade and twice as many as in 2019. And there have been more than 4,600 violent crimes — including hundreds of carjackings and robberies — a five-year high.
Yeah, this is a great time to cut the law-enforcement budget. And once again, the city council talked about alternatives to policing but without any real plan in place, let alone evidence that their innovations would do anything to curtail the crime wave city residents are now experiencing. That was too much for one participant in the council meeting:
Doug Tanner, a resident of South Minneapolis, told council members his wife had been carjacked, robbed and assaulted. “The fact that this council does not even acknowledge there is a problem is irresponsible,” he said. “The crime rate is at an all-time high, and you want less cops on the street. Where does common sense come into the equation?”
Perhaps the answer to that is with the voters who elected these clowns to office in the first place. Minneapolis got the governance they chose — politically correct, hard-Left progressive, and utterly devoid of any sense of accountability for not managing their own public safety responsibilities. Perhaps in the next election, residents will take these choices a bit more seriously.
Update: Edited headline for more context.


hotair--2020-12-10--Nevada's highest-paid prostitute sues over lockdown orders

Times are tough all over , I suppose .
There has been a flood of lawsuits winding through the courts from business owners and workers who have been crippled by their states ’ various lockdown orders and closures .
The majority of these have come from bars and restaurants , but now another “ industry ” has jumped on the dogpile .
The legal brothels in Nevada were ordered shut down in March and they remain closed to this day , despite other businesses ( including casinos ! )
being allowed to at least partially reopen .
This week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sex worker in America has brought a suit against Nevada ’ s governor demanding that the brothel where she works be allowed to reopen .
( NY Post ) Alice Little , the woman who infamously hypes herself as the “ highest-earning sex worker in the US , ” is suing the state of Nevada to reopen its brothels mid-pandemic .
The lawsuit comes after the state ’ s governor Steve Sisolak excluded prostitutes from the “ close contact ” businesses he permitted to open as part of the phase 2 reopening efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The governor ’ s decision to keep brothels closed is just blatant discrimination against Nevada ’ s legal sex workers , ” said Little , 30 , in a press release .
The woman ’ s name is Alice Little , but before we get to the substance of the lawsuit , there ’ s another question I ’ d like to put forward .
Can this woman really be making a million dollars per year as a hooker ?
I ’ ve never heard of her and I suppose it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clients can she actually “ service ” in the average year ?
Since she works out of a licensed brothel , I assume the owners of the Moonlite Bunny Ranch ( Little ’ s place of employment ) must keep a cut of the fees that customers pay , right ?
I tried doing a Google search to see how much that place charges but immediately regretted it .
( That ’ s just what I needed in my search history .
Yeesh . )
As far as the lawsuit goes , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from two different angles .
First of all , would prostitution be considered an “ essential service ” in terms of pandemic shutdown orders ?
You might be laughing about that , but consider that liquor stores qualified as essential services in nearly every state .
But churches aren ’ t uniformly put in that category , so there ’ s really not much rhyme or reason to it .
Personally , I would say that prostitution wouldn ’ t qualify , but given Nevada ’ s history , they might go either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably more important question is whether or not the Moonlite Bunny Ranch can operate while remaining in compliance with social distancing guidelines .
Sure , you could only allow customers by appointment to prevent crowds from gathering and conduct all payments digitally .
But at some point , the actual “ services ” being offered would have to take place .
And let ’ s face it… six feet of distancing and a face mask aren ’ t going to cut it when this particular “ service ” is being provided .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a case for tossing this lawsuit out .
And I ’ ll admit , that was my first inclination .
But since the voters of Nevada have determined that prostitution should be legal in specific locations in their state , we really have to treat the question the same as we would for any other legal business .
Is there some way that the prostitutes could operate safely in terms of the pandemic ?
The only thing that comes to mind is the possibility that both customers and “ employees ” could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taken in the last 24 to 48 hours .
I mean , if you ’ re already willing to risk your health by either working as a prostitute or engaging the services of one , who is to say that you can ’ t toss the risk of COVID on top of the pile ?
I ’ m honestly not sure what a judge would do with this case .
Of course , by the time it makes its way through the courts , we ’ ll probably have widely available vaccines and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the question may be moot by the time we ’ re given a final ruling .

Times are tough all over, I suppose. There has been a flood of lawsuits winding through the courts from business owners and workers who have been crippled by their states’ various lockdown orders and closures. The majority of these have come from bars and restaurants, but now another “industry” has jumped on the dogpile. The legal brothels in Nevada were ordered shut down in March and they remain closed to this day, despite other businesses (including casinos!) being allowed to at least partially reopen. This week, a woman claiming to be the highest-paid sex worker in America has brought a suit against Nevada’s governor demanding that the brothel where she works be allowed to reopen. (NY Post)
Alice Little, the woman who infamously hypes herself as the “highest-earning sex worker in the US,” is suing the state of Nevada to reopen its brothels mid-pandemic. The lawsuit comes after the state’s governor Steve Sisolak excluded prostitutes from the “close contact” businesses he permitted to open as part of the phase 2 reopening efforts in May, Insider reported. “The governor’s decision to keep brothels closed is just blatant discrimination against Nevada’s legal sex workers,” said Little, 30, in a press release.
The woman’s name is Alice Little, but before we get to the substance of the lawsuit, there’s another question I’d like to put forward. Can this woman really be making a million dollars per year as a hooker? I’ve never heard of her and I suppose it’s not impossible, but seriously… how many clients can she actually “service” in the average year? Since she works out of a licensed brothel, I assume the owners of the Moonlite Bunny Ranch (Little’s place of employment) must keep a cut of the fees that customers pay, right? I tried doing a Google search to see how much that place charges but immediately regretted it. (That’s just what I needed in my search history. Yeesh.)
As far as the lawsuit goes, I suppose we have to address the complaint from two different angles. First of all, would prostitution be considered an “essential service” in terms of pandemic shutdown orders? You might be laughing about that, but consider that liquor stores qualified as essential services in nearly every state. But churches aren’t uniformly put in that category, so there’s really not much rhyme or reason to it. Personally, I would say that prostitution wouldn’t qualify, but given Nevada’s history, they might go either way on this.
The second and probably more important question is whether or not the Moonlite Bunny Ranch can operate while remaining in compliance with social distancing guidelines. Sure, you could only allow customers by appointment to prevent crowds from gathering and conduct all payments digitally. But at some point, the actual “services” being offered would have to take place. And let’s face it… six feet of distancing and a face mask aren’t going to cut it when this particular “service” is being provided.
This probably sounds like I’m building a case for tossing this lawsuit out. And I’ll admit, that was my first inclination. But since the voters of Nevada have determined that prostitution should be legal in specific locations in their state, we really have to treat the question the same as we would for any other legal business. Is there some way that the prostitutes could operate safely in terms of the pandemic? The only thing that comes to mind is the possibility that both customers and “employees” could be required to provide a negative COVID test taken in the last 24 to 48 hours. I mean, if you’re already willing to risk your health by either working as a prostitute or engaging the services of one, who is to say that you can’t toss the risk of COVID on top of the pile?
I’m honestly not sure what a judge would do with this case. Of course, by the time it makes its way through the courts, we’ll probably have widely available vaccines and some level of herd immunity, so the question may be moot by the time we’re given a final ruling.


hotair--2020-12-10--Poll: Will Trump run in 2024?

Poll: Will Trump run in 2024?

Assuming the Hail Mary court case in Texas goes down in flames ( as it almost certainly will ) , we ’ re quickly reaching the point where all but the most die-hard fans of President Trump will have to concede that there won ’ t be a second Trump term beginning in January .
But does that mean that Donald Trump will never again settle into the big chair in the Oval Office ?
There is no constitutional barrier to a one-term president running again for another term at a later date and the President has already teased that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Consult put the question of such a prospect to a cross-section of voters this week and it turns out that a lot of people believe Donald Trump will once again attempt to win the Republican nomination four years from now .
And at least among Republicans and independents , very solid majorities fall into that camp .
( Politico ) A large majority of Republicans and independents have faith President Donald Trump will follow through on his musings about running for president again in 2024 , according to a POLITICO/Morning Consult poll released @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believed a 2024 run to be likely , along with 60 percent of independents .
Democrats were less certain , with only 47 percent believing a run to be likely .
Trump has flirted with running again in four years as his unfounded claims of a stolen victory this year increasingly fall apart in court .
Still , a majority of Republicans in Congress refuse to recognize President-elect Joe Biden as the electoral victor and Trump continues to enjoy wide support within his party .
So more than three-quarters of Republicans and well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will make another run in 2024 .
Democrats are more evenly split with 47 % believing he will .
Keep in mind that these numbers don ’ t represent those who would actually favor the move or vote for him .
These are just the people who believe he ’ s going to try .
Could he pull it off ?
Grover Cleveland did , but he was the only one .
He ’ s also the guy who perpetually messes people up in political trivia contests because while Donald Trump is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever held the office .
As we all know , however , if any given thing can happen once it can happen twice .
While we ’ ve batted this idea around before , it still seems to me that Donald Trump ’ s age could be the deciding factor .
Assuming he ’ s out of office for four years , he ’ ll be 78 when the next election rolls around .
Granted , it ’ s obviously not impossible for a person of that age to take the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prove that . )
Trump has always struck me as being physically robust , no matter how many joke the mainstream media likes to make about his weight .
He kept up a grueling campaign schedule over the past couple of years and he ’ s shown that he can still get up before dawn and work late into the night .
But will that still be true four years from now ?
The other side to this question is whether or not Republican and conservative voters will really want to give him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s approval rating among members of his own party remains through the roof , even after the debacle that 2020 has been .
His fundraising ability is legendary .
Trump was elected on a promise to be an agent of disruption in the swamp of Washington , D.C. and he ’ s certainly delivered on that promise .
But after four years of disruption , will the voters look back on Trump ’ s first term with fond memories or an overall feeling of exhaustion ?
If a pollster were to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approve of the job Trump has done during his time in office I would answer in the affirmative without hesitation .
His record of judicial appointments alone should be enough for the majority of conservatives to say the same .
But even I have to admit that there eventually comes a point where you can grow exhausted at the prospect of waking up each morning , turning on your phone and wondering , okay… what ’ s he tweeted this time ?
This is all entirely premature , of course .
Only Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ ll need to make that call sooner than we might think .
It takes time to establish ( or reestablish in this case ) a full , national campaign team .
And other primary hopefuls are already making early moves in that direction .

Assuming the Hail Mary court case in Texas goes down in flames (as it almost certainly will), we’re quickly reaching the point where all but the most die-hard fans of President Trump will have to concede that there won’t be a second Trump term beginning in January. But does that mean that Donald Trump will never again settle into the big chair in the Oval Office? There is no constitutional barrier to a one-term president running again for another term at a later date and the President has already teased that possibility in his Twitter feed. Morning Consult put the question of such a prospect to a cross-section of voters this week and it turns out that a lot of people believe Donald Trump will once again attempt to win the Republican nomination four years from now. And at least among Republicans and independents, very solid majorities fall into that camp. (Politico)
A large majority of Republicans and independents have faith President Donald Trump will follow through on his musings about running for president again in 2024, according to a POLITICO/Morning Consult poll released Wednesday. Among Republicans, 76 percent believed a 2024 run to be likely, along with 60 percent of independents. Democrats were less certain, with only 47 percent believing a run to be likely. Trump has flirted with running again in four years as his unfounded claims of a stolen victory this year increasingly fall apart in court. Still, a majority of Republicans in Congress refuse to recognize President-elect Joe Biden as the electoral victor and Trump continues to enjoy wide support within his party.
So more than three-quarters of Republicans and well over half of independents think that Trump will make another run in 2024. Democrats are more evenly split with 47% believing he will. Keep in mind that these numbers don’t represent those who would actually favor the move or vote for him. These are just the people who believe he’s going to try.
Could he pull it off? Grover Cleveland did, but he was the only one. He’s also the guy who perpetually messes people up in political trivia contests because while Donald Trump is the 45th president, only 44 people have ever held the office. As we all know, however, if any given thing can happen once it can happen twice.
While we’ve batted this idea around before, it still seems to me that Donald Trump’s age could be the deciding factor. Assuming he’s out of office for four years, he’ll be 78 when the next election rolls around. Granted, it’s obviously not impossible for a person of that age to take the White House. (Joe Biden is about to prove that.) Trump has always struck me as being physically robust, no matter how many joke the mainstream media likes to make about his weight. He kept up a grueling campaign schedule over the past couple of years and he’s shown that he can still get up before dawn and work late into the night. But will that still be true four years from now?
The other side to this question is whether or not Republican and conservative voters will really want to give him the nomination for a third time. Trump’s approval rating among members of his own party remains through the roof, even after the debacle that 2020 has been. His fundraising ability is legendary. Trump was elected on a promise to be an agent of disruption in the swamp of Washington, D.C. and he’s certainly delivered on that promise. But after four years of disruption, will the voters look back on Trump’s first term with fond memories or an overall feeling of exhaustion?
If a pollster were to call me today and ask if I approve of the job Trump has done during his time in office I would answer in the affirmative without hesitation. His record of judicial appointments alone should be enough for the majority of conservatives to say the same. But even I have to admit that there eventually comes a point where you can grow exhausted at the prospect of waking up each morning, turning on your phone and wondering, okay… what’s he tweeted this time?
This is all entirely premature, of course. Only Donald Trump can make this decision. But he’ll need to make that call sooner than we might think. It takes time to establish (or reestablish in this case) a full, national campaign team. And other primary hopefuls are already making early moves in that direction.


hotair--2020-12-11--Breaking: FDA told Pfizer to expect immediate emergency-use authorization f

Breaking: FDA told Pfizer to expect immediate emergency-use authorization for vaccine, says Azar

“ Good news ” ?
It ’ s great news , even if it is anything but unexpected .
Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar announced on Good Morning America that the FDA has informed Pfizer of its intent to issue an emergency-use authorization ( EUA ) for its COVID-19 vaccine .
That means that vaccinations in the US could start as soon as Monday .
Plus , the FDA will come back and do this all over again on December 17th with the Moderna vaccine : The New York Times wondered whether the FDA would get bogged down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advisory panel ’ s vote yesterday to recommend the EUA .
Azar ’ s announcement removes the remaining doubt : Since the panel ’ s vote on Thursday was only advisory , the vaccine must now secure the authorization of the federal Food and Drug Administration .
That ’ s ordinarily a long and laborious process .
But that is highly unlikely to be the case this time .
Barring last-minute snags , the F.D.A .
is expected to issue an emergency authorization on Saturday .
And that means the first Covid-19 vaccinations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the confines of an experiment are likely to begin early next week .
First in line to get it are health care workers and nursing home residents .
“ We could see people getting vaccinated Monday , Tuesday of next week , ” Alex Azar , the secretary of health and human services , said on ABC ’ s “ Good Morning America ” on Friday .
Azar explicitly told George Stephanopoulos that the FDA had told Pfizer of its intent to act immediately .
They would need to inform Pfizer of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of distribution turning as fast as possible .
Regulations prevented Pfizer from moving the vaccines to providers until the FDA issued its EUA .
To get vaccines started by Monday , Pfizer needs to start moving its inventory to its end users ASAP .
But are they approving it because it ’ s safe and effective , or because they ’ re desperate ?
Or for *ahem* some other reason ?
Definitely the former , previous CDC director Rich Besser told Savannah Guthrie on NBC ’ s Today .
Besser watched the advisory-panel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The FDA will want more studies on subdemos that might not have gotten enough participation in the Phase 3 trials , but overall the data was comprehensive and impressive .
Americans should have high confidence in the Pfizer vaccine , Besser says : Next up : Moderna on the 17th .
Based on the time frame of this approval process , we might end up with two EUAs for COVID-19 vaccines by Christmas .
Congratulations to everyone who made this happen .
Update : Azar says that a setback for Sanofi will have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re still looking at 50 million vaccinations by the end of January .

“Good news”? It’s great news, even if it is anything but unexpected. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar announced on Good Morning America that the FDA has informed Pfizer of its intent to issue an emergency-use authorization (EUA) for its COVID-19 vaccine. That means that vaccinations in the US could start as soon as Monday.
Plus, the FDA will come back and do this all over again on December 17th with the Moderna vaccine:
NEW: HHS Azar says FDA will proceed with emergency use authorization for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 coronavirus vaccine and vaccinations could come as soon as Monday or Tuesday of next week. https://t.co/v1dsjMAvCK pic.twitter.com/48CGRJRTVs — Good Morning America (@GMA) December 11, 2020
The New York Times wondered whether the FDA would get bogged down any further in its bureaucracy after the advisory panel’s vote yesterday to recommend the EUA. Azar’s announcement removes the remaining doubt:
Since the panel’s vote on Thursday was only advisory, the vaccine must now secure the authorization of the federal Food and Drug Administration. That’s ordinarily a long and laborious process. But that is highly unlikely to be the case this time. Barring last-minute snags, the F.D.A. is expected to issue an emergency authorization on Saturday. And that means the first Covid-19 vaccinations to be administered in the U.S. outside the confines of an experiment are likely to begin early next week. First in line to get it are health care workers and nursing home residents. “We could see people getting vaccinated Monday, Tuesday of next week,” Alex Azar, the secretary of health and human services, said on ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Friday.
Azar explicitly told George Stephanopoulos that the FDA had told Pfizer of its intent to act immediately. They would need to inform Pfizer of that intent in order to get the wheels of distribution turning as fast as possible. Regulations prevented Pfizer from moving the vaccines to providers until the FDA issued its EUA. To get vaccines started by Monday, Pfizer needs to start moving its inventory to its end users ASAP.
But are they approving it because it’s safe and effective, or because they’re desperate? Or for *ahem* some other reason?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1337369403638362114
Definitely the former, previous CDC director Rich Besser told Savannah Guthrie on NBC’s Today. Besser watched the advisory-panel meeting yesterday and came away impressed. The FDA will want more studies on subdemos that might not have gotten enough participation in the Phase 3 trials, but overall the data was comprehensive and impressive. Americans should have high confidence in the Pfizer vaccine, Besser says:
“There was an overwhelming feeling that this is a very safe and effective vaccine, and that the FDA should approve it.” -Former acting CDC Director @DrRichBesser pic.twitter.com/6vmW1xzG63 — TODAY (@TODAYshow) December 11, 2020
Next up: Moderna on the 17th. Based on the time frame of this approval process, we might end up with two EUAs for COVID-19 vaccines by Christmas. Congratulations to everyone who made this happen.
Update: Azar says that a setback for Sanofi will have no impact on projected vaccinations. They’re still looking at 50 million vaccinations by the end of January.