hotair--2020-07-15--John McWhorter: White fragility is a 'racist tract'

Recently I wrote about John McWhorter ’ s contention that the far-left ideology now running rampant on college campuses and in newsrooms is a religion .
Today the Atlantic published a new piece by McWhorter in which he goes to the heart of this new faith by reading Robin DiAngelo ’ s White Fragility .
While he says he believes DiAngelo is well meaning , he finds the book itself to be a “ racist tract.
” I have learned that one of America ’ s favorite advice books of the moment is actually a racist tract .
Despite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book diminishes Black people in the name of dignifying us .
This is unintentional , of course , like the racism DiAngelo sees in all whites .
Still , the book is pernicious because of the authority that its author has been granted over the way innocent readers think .
First , McWhorter walks through some of the odd things in the book that others have noted .
For instance , DiAngelo ’ s understanding of the lesson of Jackie Robinson ’ s story is one that will leave baseball fans scratching their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t the obvious errors in the book but its dubious goal .
Remember also that you are not to express yourself except to say Amen .
Namely , thou shalt not utter : This is an abridgment of a list DiAngelo offers in Chapter 9 ; its result is to silence people .
Whites aren ’ t even allowed to say , “ I don ’ t feel safe.
” Only Black people can say that .
If you are white , you are solely to listen as DiAngelo tars you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this self-mortification serve ?
Impatient with such questions , DiAngelo insists that “ wanting to jump over the hard , personal work and get to ‘ solutions ’ ” is a “ foundation of white fragility.
” In other words , for DiAngelo , the whole point is the suffering .
And note the scare quotes around solutions , as if wanting such a thing were somehow ridiculous .
Ultimately , McWhorter says White Fragility is a condescending book that infantilizes black people as a group , something he describes as racist : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ depiction of Black people as endlessly delicate poster children within this self-gratifying fantasy about how white America needs to think—or , better , stop thinking .
Her answer to white fragility , in other words , entails an elaborate and pitilessly dehumanizing condescension toward Black people .
The sad truth is that anyone falling under the sway of this blinkered , self-satisfied , punitive stunt of a primer has been taught , by a well-intentioned but tragically misguided pastor , how to be racist in a whole new way .
I wonder how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to last .
Another author recently described it as a new kind of self-help book for white women after noticing that it was hard to tell the Amazon reviews for White Fragility from those for other self-help books .
I ’ m sure most of the people buying and reading the book are sincere , but I think that ’ s true of the people who buy Suzanne Somers diet books too .
A lot of the readers of White Fragility are going to get a social justice buzz from reading it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a few months .
What worries me is that the renewed popularity of this book is sure to create copycats looking to cash in .
By next year there will be books competing to be the next White Fragility , not to mention that DiAngelo herself will surely write a sequel .
And because people get tired of hearing the same thing , the books that come next will need to amp up the rhetoric even more .
There ’ s going to be a kind of arms race in social justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m already exhausted just imagining it .
Ultimately I think this book is going to do more harm than good .
Focusing people on the centrality of racial identity in every situation seems like a really bad way to combat the tendency of some people to focus on racial identity in every situation .
It ’ s the opposite of Dr. King ’ s dream and it ’ s odd that doesn ’ t seem to matter to a lot of people all of a sudden .

Recently I wrote about John McWhorter’s contention that the far-left ideology now running rampant on college campuses and in newsrooms is a religion. Today the Atlantic published a new piece by McWhorter in which he goes to the heart of this new faith by reading Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility. While he says he believes DiAngelo is well meaning, he finds the book itself to be a “racist tract.”
I have learned that one of America’s favorite advice books of the moment is actually a racist tract. Despite the sincere intentions of its author, the book diminishes Black people in the name of dignifying us. This is unintentional, of course, like the racism DiAngelo sees in all whites. Still, the book is pernicious because of the authority that its author has been granted over the way innocent readers think.
First, McWhorter walks through some of the odd things in the book that others have noted. For instance, DiAngelo’s understanding of the lesson of Jackie Robinson’s story is one that will leave baseball fans scratching their heads. But what really concerns McWhorter isn’t the obvious errors in the book but its dubious goal.
Remember also that you are not to express yourself except to say Amen. Namely, thou shalt not utter: I know people of color. I marched in the sixties. You are judging me. You don’t know me. You are generalizing. I disagree… This is an abridgment of a list DiAngelo offers in Chapter 9; its result is to silence people. Whites aren’t even allowed to say, “I don’t feel safe.” Only Black people can say that. If you are white, you are solely to listen as DiAngelo tars you as morally stained… What end does all this self-mortification serve? Impatient with such questions, DiAngelo insists that “wanting to jump over the hard, personal work and get to ‘solutions’” is a “foundation of white fragility.” In other words, for DiAngelo, the whole point is the suffering. And note the scare quotes around solutions, as if wanting such a thing were somehow ridiculous.
Ultimately, McWhorter says White Fragility is a condescending book that infantilizes black people as a group, something he describes as racist:
DiAngelo’s outlook rests upon a depiction of Black people as endlessly delicate poster children within this self-gratifying fantasy about how white America needs to think—or, better, stop thinking. Her answer to white fragility, in other words, entails an elaborate and pitilessly dehumanizing condescension toward Black people. The sad truth is that anyone falling under the sway of this blinkered, self-satisfied, punitive stunt of a primer has been taught, by a well-intentioned but tragically misguided pastor, how to be racist in a whole new way.
I wonder how long the popularity of this book is going to last. Another author recently described it as a new kind of self-help book for white women after noticing that it was hard to tell the Amazon reviews for White Fragility from those for other self-help books.
I’m sure most of the people buying and reading the book are sincere, but I think that’s true of the people who buy Suzanne Somers diet books too. A lot of the readers of White Fragility are going to get a social justice buzz from reading it and then move on to other interests in a few months. What worries me is that the renewed popularity of this book is sure to create copycats looking to cash in. By next year there will be books competing to be the next White Fragility, not to mention that DiAngelo herself will surely write a sequel. And because people get tired of hearing the same thing, the books that come next will need to amp up the rhetoric even more. There’s going to be a kind of arms race in social justice self help books coming soon and I’m already exhausted just imagining it.
Ultimately I think this book is going to do more harm than good. Focusing people on the centrality of racial identity in every situation seems like a really bad way to combat the tendency of some people to focus on racial identity in every situation. It’s the opposite of Dr. King’s dream and it’s odd that doesn’t seem to matter to a lot of people all of a sudden.


hotair--2020-07-15--NASA doesn't want any alien plagues contaminating our planet

The title seems like a no-brainer to most of you , or so I ’ d assume .
We ’ ve already got more than our fair share of plagues currently wreaking havoc around the Earth , with potentially some other golden oldies waiting for their turn to get the band back together .
We certainly don ’ t need any infectious contagions from the Moon , Mars , the upper atmosphere of Venus or anywhere else dropping in on us .
But as we Earthlings prepare a new fleet of missions heading to all of those locations and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back home for study , how do we prevent some sort of Martian COVID-666 from breaking loose here ?
To solve this riddle , NASA is sending in the United States Office of Planetary Protection ( OPP , and yes , that ’ s a real thing ) to keep everyone safe .
They ’ re being tasked with the chore of keeping any alien microbes , spores or other tiny lifeforms that might be looking to hitch a ride back to Florida from surviving the trip or getting loose if they manage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ curious move , they ’ re outsourcing this seemingly vital job to somebody else .
That would be SETI , the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence .
Why ?
Let ’ s did out .
( NY Post ) Aliens take note : Only humans can trash this planet .
NASA is taking measures to prevent extraterrestrial-borne contaminants from invading Earth .
Last week , the agency ’ s Office of Planetary Protection ( OPP ) said they ’ d hired the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence ( SETI ) Institute to support all current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standards .
Researchers at SETI will oversee nearly all aspects of hygiene on future flight projects , and are charged with carrying out new guidelines for “ biological cleanliness.
” Founded in 1984 by NASA officials , the SETI Institute is a nonprofit research organization dedicated to answering the question , “ Are we alone in the universe ?
” At first glance , this doesn ’ t exactly look like a very good fit , does it ?
I mean , SETI is an obvious starting point if you ’ re looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aliens .
That ’ s pretty much been their raison d ’ etre since the beginning .
And they ’ ve done plenty of work on the subject over the years .
Back in the early 2000s I took part for several years in the “ SETI at Home ” project where users installed some SETI software on their internet-connected computers and allowed the group to use your computer ’ s “ idle ” time to process their data , looking for patterns in signals they detected from space .
But what do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and wiping out microbes before they morph into something out of a Sigourney Weaver movie and start eating all of the tourists at Disney World ?
It seems to me like this would be more of a job for the CDC .
( Wait… check that .
After looking at the novel coronavirus situation , maybe that ’ s not a great plan either . )
All jokes aside , I assume that SETI must have some people who have been working on such things for a while now , otherwise NASA wouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The problem is , we have almost no real-world ( or really off of this world ) experience to draw on .
Aside from the moon dust that the Apollo missions brought back and a couple of probes that intercepted comets or asteroids , we haven ’ t really been bringing much stuff back to our planet that ’ s gone much further than low Earth orbit .
Hopefully , NASA is devoting at least an equal amount of attention to the reverse problem .
Based on the opinions of some fairly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m pretty confident that we ’ re eventually going to find at least some residual , microbial life on Mars .
Anywhere that there ’ s water lying under more than a few feet of soil and rock to protect it from the ambient radiation , I ’ ll be shocked if there aren ’ t some extremophiles .
But with all of these missions we have scheduled , we ’ re probably far more likely to contaminate all of the places we ’ re visiting with Earth germs than vice versa .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Mars , assuming we eventually find life there , how will we know if it ’ s really “ Martians ” and not just our own germs settling in on a new home ?

The title seems like a no-brainer to most of you, or so I’d assume. We’ve already got more than our fair share of plagues currently wreaking havoc around the Earth, with potentially some other golden oldies waiting for their turn to get the band back together. We certainly don’t need any infectious contagions from the Moon, Mars, the upper atmosphere of Venus or anywhere else dropping in on us. But as we Earthlings prepare a new fleet of missions heading to all of those locations and more, with some scheduled to bring samples back home for study, how do we prevent some sort of Martian COVID-666 from breaking loose here?
To solve this riddle, NASA is sending in the United States Office of Planetary Protection (OPP, and yes, that’s a real thing) to keep everyone safe. They’re being tasked with the chore of keeping any alien microbes, spores or other tiny lifeforms that might be looking to hitch a ride back to Florida from surviving the trip or getting loose if they manage to do so. But in a curious move, they’re outsourcing this seemingly vital job to somebody else. That would be SETI, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. Why? Let’s did out. (NY Post)
Aliens take note: Only humans can trash this planet. NASA is taking measures to prevent extraterrestrial-borne contaminants from invading Earth. Last week, the agency’s Office of Planetary Protection (OPP) said they’d hired the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) Institute to support all current and future missions per OPP’s standards. Researchers at SETI will oversee nearly all aspects of hygiene on future flight projects, and are charged with carrying out new guidelines for “biological cleanliness.” Founded in 1984 by NASA officials, the SETI Institute is a nonprofit research organization dedicated to answering the question, “Are we alone in the universe?”
At first glance, this doesn’t exactly look like a very good fit, does it? I mean, SETI is an obvious starting point if you’re looking for information about advanced, intelligent extraterrestrial aliens. That’s pretty much been their raison d’etre since the beginning. And they’ve done plenty of work on the subject over the years. Back in the early 2000s I took part for several years in the “SETI at Home” project where users installed some SETI software on their internet-connected computers and allowed the group to use your computer’s “idle” time to process their data, looking for patterns in signals they detected from space.
But what do they really know about decontaminating space hardware and wiping out microbes before they morph into something out of a Sigourney Weaver movie and start eating all of the tourists at Disney World? It seems to me like this would be more of a job for the CDC. (Wait… check that. After looking at the novel coronavirus situation, maybe that’s not a great plan either.)
All jokes aside, I assume that SETI must have some people who have been working on such things for a while now, otherwise NASA wouldn’t have given them the nod. The problem is, we have almost no real-world (or really off of this world) experience to draw on. Aside from the moon dust that the Apollo missions brought back and a couple of probes that intercepted comets or asteroids, we haven’t really been bringing much stuff back to our planet that’s gone much further than low Earth orbit.
Hopefully, NASA is devoting at least an equal amount of attention to the reverse problem. Based on the opinions of some fairly smart people I follow, I’m pretty confident that we’re eventually going to find at least some residual, microbial life on Mars. Anywhere that there’s water lying under more than a few feet of soil and rock to protect it from the ambient radiation, I’ll be shocked if there aren’t some extremophiles. But with all of these missions we have scheduled, we’re probably far more likely to contaminate all of the places we’re visiting with Earth germs than vice versa. And if they’re taking root on Mars, assuming we eventually find life there, how will we know if it’s really “Martians” and not just our own germs settling in on a new home?


hotair--2020-07-15--Sweet revenge: Former White House physician wins GOP primary race

Dr. Ronny Jackson won a Republican primary run-off race Tuesday night .
If that name sounds familiar it is because he is a former White House physician who served at the White House from 2006 to 2018 .
He served as the president ’ s physician from 2013 to 2018 .
He is a retired United States Navy rear admiral .
Now he lives in Texas ’ 13th District and very likely headed to serving as a member of the House of Representatives in the seat now occupied by retiring Rep. Mac Thornberry .
Rep. Thornberry didn ’ t endorse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Josh Winegarner in the primary run-off .
President Trump endorsed Jackson just days before the March primary .
That endorsement likely took Jackson into the run-off race .
Thornberry has been in office for 25 years .
It set up a Trump versus GOP Establishment scenario .
Jackson won that battle and Trump is pleased .
Trump nominated Jackson for Veterans Affairs secretary but that didn ’ t go anywhere because of the smear campaign launched by Democrats , led by Montana Democrat Senator Jon Tester .
Jackson was accused of alcohol abuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the allegations , resigned from his position , withdrew from the nomination , and moved back to Texas .
It would be entirely understandable if he sees his near future in a seat in the House of Representatives as sweet revenge .
The endorsement from President Trump was a clear boost to his victory in the run-off .
He received help from Trump ’ s re-election team , too .
Trump ’ s endorsement record isn ’ t perfect but it still has juice .
In the runoff campaign , Jackson was aided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which dramatically boosted his once meager fundraising efforts .
And they helped Jackson hire a professional Republican operative to run the doctor ’ s campaign .
Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh called the victory “ a clear testament to the power and value of President Trump ’ s endorsement and support.
” And , just like that , the long knives come out .
The media , hellbent to get Joe Biden elected president in November thanks to their absolute hatred of President Trump , is ready to take Jackson down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a piece on Jackson ’ s appearance on Fox and Friends earlier in the morning .
Jackson isn ’ t on board with the government telling everyone to wear a face mask so the piece highlighted the veer away from Governor Abbott ’ s plea for Texans to wear one , due to the recent spike in cases in some parts of the state .
“ I think that wearing a mask is a personal choice , and I don ’ t particularly want my government telling me that I have to wear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s a choice that I can make , ” Jackson told “ Fox & Friends.
” The remarks from Jackson , a retired Navy rear admiral who served as the personal doctor for Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump , not only contradict the universal guidance of public health experts , but also undermine Texas Gov .
Greg Abbott — who has mandated that most of his state ’ s residents wear a mask .
But Jackson argued Wednesday Americans should “ look at your personal circumstances ” and “ look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mask-wearing is “ right for you.
” “ I ’ m a firm believer that that ’ s , at this point , a personal choice , ” he said .
“ And I encourage people , if they want to wear a mask , to wear a mask .
But I don ’ t wear a mask all that often , to be honest with you.
” The rest of the piece in Politico then went on to trash Trump for his slowness to publicly wear a face mask because let ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real reason for the piece .
It ’ s 2020 and this is what will continue until the presidential election in November .
Trump will be blamed for everything , even a coronavirus pandemic from China .
This election will revolve around voters ’ perception of how Trump handles the coronavirus and the economic collapse the virus ushered in .
Joe Biden has no new ideas coming from his basement but he ’ s not the bad Orange Man so he must be propped up by the media .
Talk about an impending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a good look at Biden ’ s embrace of the Green New Deal to destroy the American energy sector .
Solyndra , anyone ?
The choice remains clear in November .
Stay the course with Trump to bring back the American economy and opportunities for American workers or go back to the bad old days of the Obama-Biden administration with a heavy dose of Marxism .
If job loss due to excessive regulations , employment stagnation due to an exodus of manufacturing jobs to overseas locations , and government mandates to micromanage everyday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Quo Joe is your guy .
Biden is desperate for the support of the far left , which is why he is embracing AOC ’ s Green New Deal now after rejecting it in the primary race .
The media is playing wingman for him by continuing to stress the false narrative that good old Joe is a moderate Democrat who can clean up after the chaos produced by President Trump .

Dr. Ronny Jackson won a Republican primary run-off race Tuesday night. If that name sounds familiar it is because he is a former White House physician who served at the White House from 2006 to 2018. He served as the president’s physician from 2013 to 2018. He is a retired United States Navy rear admiral. Now he lives in Texas’ 13th District and very likely headed to serving as a member of the House of Representatives in the seat now occupied by retiring Rep. Mac Thornberry.
Rep. Thornberry didn’t endorse Dr. Jackson. He endorsed agricultural lobbyist Josh Winegarner in the primary run-off. President Trump endorsed Jackson just days before the March primary. That endorsement likely took Jackson into the run-off race. Thornberry has been in office for 25 years. It set up a Trump versus GOP Establishment scenario. Jackson won that battle and Trump is pleased.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1283240204522921984
Jane and I just got off the phone with @realDonaldTrump! It’s official! I am honored to be the Republican nominee for #TX13! I promise I will make you proud! pic.twitter.com/Hr7ZJPfwqu — Ronny Jackson (@RonnyJacksonTX) July 15, 2020
Trump nominated Jackson for Veterans Affairs secretary but that didn’t go anywhere because of the smear campaign launched by Democrats, led by Montana Democrat Senator Jon Tester. Jackson was accused of alcohol abuse and mishandling prescription drugs. He denied the allegations, resigned from his position, withdrew from the nomination, and moved back to Texas. It would be entirely understandable if he sees his near future in a seat in the House of Representatives as sweet revenge.
The endorsement from President Trump was a clear boost to his victory in the run-off. He received help from Trump’s re-election team, too. Trump’s endorsement record isn’t perfect but it still has juice.
In the runoff campaign, Jackson was aided by officials from the Trump re-election campaign, which dramatically boosted his once meager fundraising efforts. And they helped Jackson hire a professional Republican operative to run the doctor’s campaign. Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh called the victory “a clear testament to the power and value of President Trump’s endorsement and support.”
And, just like that, the long knives come out. The media, hellbent to get Joe Biden elected president in November thanks to their absolute hatred of President Trump, is ready to take Jackson down again. This morning, Politico published a piece on Jackson’s appearance on Fox and Friends earlier in the morning. Jackson isn’t on board with the government telling everyone to wear a face mask so the piece highlighted the veer away from Governor Abbott’s plea for Texans to wear one, due to the recent spike in cases in some parts of the state.
“I think that wearing a mask is a personal choice, and I don’t particularly want my government telling me that I have to wear a mask. And so I think that’s a choice that I can make,” Jackson told “Fox & Friends.” The remarks from Jackson, a retired Navy rear admiral who served as the personal doctor for Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump, not only contradict the universal guidance of public health experts, but also undermine Texas Gov. Greg Abbott — who has mandated that most of his state’s residents wear a mask. But Jackson argued Wednesday Americans should “look at your personal circumstances” and “look at your surroundings” to determine whether mask-wearing is “right for you.” “I’m a firm believer that that’s, at this point, a personal choice,” he said. “And I encourage people, if they want to wear a mask, to wear a mask. But I don’t wear a mask all that often, to be honest with you.”
The rest of the piece in Politico then went on to trash Trump for his slowness to publicly wear a face mask because let’s face it, that was the real reason for the piece. It’s 2020 and this is what will continue until the presidential election in November. Trump will be blamed for everything, even a coronavirus pandemic from China. This election will revolve around voters’ perception of how Trump handles the coronavirus and the economic collapse the virus ushered in. Joe Biden has no new ideas coming from his basement but he’s not the bad Orange Man so he must be propped up by the media. Talk about an impending economic collapse – wait until voters get a good look at Biden’s embrace of the Green New Deal to destroy the American energy sector. Solyndra, anyone?
The choice remains clear in November. Stay the course with Trump to bring back the American economy and opportunities for American workers or go back to the bad old days of the Obama-Biden administration with a heavy dose of Marxism. If job loss due to excessive regulations, employment stagnation due to an exodus of manufacturing jobs to overseas locations, and government mandates to micromanage everyday life sounds good to you, Status Quo Joe is your guy. Biden is desperate for the support of the far left, which is why he is embracing AOC’s Green New Deal now after rejecting it in the primary race. The media is playing wingman for him by continuing to stress the false narrative that good old Joe is a moderate Democrat who can clean up after the chaos produced by President Trump.


hotair--2020-07-15--National African-American history museum: May we interest you in some demeaning racial stereotypes a

National African-American history museum: May we interest you in some demeaning racial stereotypes about blacks and whites?

Reading this reminded me of the op-ed that appeared in the NYT last year by a progressive Latino writer who ’ d been convinced by his friends that wokeness required him to dump his girlfriend — because she was white .
That is , there ’ s a certain point on the far end of the woke spectrum at which adherents begin to sound a little , shall we say , Jim-Crow-ish in their beliefs .
Our country ’ s official museum of African-American culture and history has arrived at that point , you ’ ll be pleased to hear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insulting in its assumptions about whites and blacks — mainly blacks — that I ’ m left to wonder if they didn ’ t pull it off of some alt-right message board online .
It ’ s bad .
Not quite “ Nation of Islam inviting George Lincoln Rockwell to speak ” bad , but in the same area code .
You can see the full-sized version here .
I ’ m willing to be charitable and let them slide on some things , like claiming that the nuclear family is an artifact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they mean to suggest by “ othering ” the two-parent household that way is that multi-generational households are at least as beneficial , which is a defensible position .
But then you come to this artifact of “ white culture ” and think : Did they get this from a flier handed out at the Charlottesville rally ?
I speak for Caucasians everywhere when I say that if you want to cede full credit for the scientific method to Whitey , we ’ ll take it .
But have you looked around at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of white idiots who can ’ t be convinced to put on a mask in the middle of the worst pandemic in a hundred years .
Our loyalty to the scientific method is complicated at best .
Here ’ s another one for the “ You sure you ’ re making the point you want to make ?
” file : What they mean , I take it , is that a good work ethic isn ’ t sufficient to get ahead in a country that ’ s prejudiced against African-Americans , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be .
Systemic racism could still hold you back no matter how hard you try .
Okay , but … that ’ s not a reason to disparage the value of hard work , which remains a necessary ingredient to success .
Why would they want to disclaim that belief as something particular to the benighted white oppressor ?
I don ’ t know what to do with the idea that “ work before play ” is a distinctly “ white ” concept .
If Tucker Carlson made that point in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Matters react ?
Here ’ s where things get really weird , though : The idea that black people are betraying their own culture somehow when they “ delay gratification ” or stick to “ rigid time schedules ” is riiiight on the cusp of claiming that they ’ re primitive .
It ’ s like Al Campanis babbling about how blacks may lack the “ necessities ” to manage in the big leagues .
How are they going to compete with whites if keeping schedules and resisting their basic urges in certain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ C ’ mon .
Tell me Richard Spencer didn ’ t write this : Speaking good English and being polite and “ avoiding conflict ” ?
That ’ s white-people sh*t , man .
Like the “ written tradition.
” Congrats to the museum , I guess , on resisting the urge to include bathing and chewing with your mouth closed as further evidence of the white devil ’ s cultural imperialism .
There are a few parts of the poster that really are insulting to whites .
You ’ re looking at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with “ avoiding intimacy.
” There ’ s another elsewhere that attributes to white culture the view that “ wealth = worth ” and “ your job is who you are.
” ( Ironically , to the extent that stereotype is true , it ’ s surely truer of the white woke professional classes than it is of more downscale whites . )
But on balance it ’ s vastly more denigrating to blacks .
And it ’ s not just righties like me who noticed : “ White supremacist ideologies and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white racial superiority , ” says the museum ’ s webpage .
Exit question : Do the museum ’ s curators genuinely believe it ’ s a myth ?
How can we tell ?

Reading this reminded me of the op-ed that appeared in the NYT last year by a progressive Latino writer who’d been convinced by his friends that wokeness required him to dump his girlfriend — because she was white.
That is, there’s a certain point on the far end of the woke spectrum at which adherents begin to sound a little, shall we say, Jim-Crow-ish in their beliefs.
Our country’s official museum of African-American culture and history has arrived at that point, you’ll be pleased to hear. The dreck captured below is so insulting in its assumptions about whites and blacks — mainly blacks — that I’m left to wonder if they didn’t pull it off of some alt-right message board online. It’s bad. Not quite “Nation of Islam inviting George Lincoln Rockwell to speak” bad, but in the same area code.
The National Museum of African American History & Culture wants to make you aware of certain signs of whiteness: Individualism, hard work, objectivity, the nuclear family, progress, respect for authority, delayed gratification, more. (via @RpwWilliams)https://t.co/k9X3u4Suas pic.twitter.com/gWYOeEh4vu — Byron York (@ByronYork) July 15, 2020
You can see the full-sized version here. I’m willing to be charitable and let them slide on some things, like claiming that the nuclear family is an artifact of “white culture.” Presumably all they mean to suggest by “othering” the two-parent household that way is that multi-generational households are at least as beneficial, which is a defensible position.
But then you come to this artifact of “white culture” and think: Did they get this from a flier handed out at the Charlottesville rally?
I speak for Caucasians everywhere when I say that if you want to cede full credit for the scientific method to Whitey, we’ll take it.
But have you looked around at this country lately? There are millions of white idiots who can’t be convinced to put on a mask in the middle of the worst pandemic in a hundred years. Our loyalty to the scientific method is complicated at best.
Here’s another one for the “You sure you’re making the point you want to make?” file:
What they mean, I take it, is that a good work ethic isn’t sufficient to get ahead in a country that’s prejudiced against African-Americans, if not nearly as prejudiced as it used to be. Systemic racism could still hold you back no matter how hard you try. Okay, but … that’s not a reason to disparage the value of hard work, which remains a necessary ingredient to success. Why would they want to disclaim that belief as something particular to the benighted white oppressor?
I don’t know what to do with the idea that “work before play” is a distinctly “white” concept. If Tucker Carlson made that point in a Fox News monologue, how would Media Matters react?
Here’s where things get really weird, though:
The idea that black people are betraying their own culture somehow when they “delay gratification” or stick to “rigid time schedules” is riiiight on the cusp of claiming that they’re primitive. It’s like Al Campanis babbling about how blacks may lack the “necessities” to manage in the big leagues.
How are they going to compete with whites if keeping schedules and resisting their basic urges in certain circumstances is naturally foreign to them?
C’mon. Tell me Richard Spencer didn’t write this:
Speaking good English and being polite and “avoiding conflict”? That’s white-people sh*t, man. Like the “written tradition.”
Congrats to the museum, I guess, on resisting the urge to include bathing and chewing with your mouth closed as further evidence of the white devil’s cultural imperialism.
There are a few parts of the poster that really are insulting to whites. You’re looking at one of them in that last image with “avoiding intimacy.” There’s another elsewhere that attributes to white culture the view that “wealth = worth” and “your job is who you are.” (Ironically, to the extent that stereotype is true, it’s surely truer of the white woke professional classes than it is of more downscale whites.) But on balance it’s vastly more denigrating to blacks. And it’s not just righties like me who noticed:
The far left and the far right have lots of points of agreement. For instance, identifying hard work, the scientific method and a yearning for family structure with whiteness https://t.co/j7N2LY9zg2 pic.twitter.com/A3OPmmGcCA — Jonathan Chait (@jonathanchait) July 15, 2020
“White supremacist ideologies and their followers continue to perpetuate the myth of white racial superiority,” says the museum’s webpage. Exit question: Do the museum’s curators genuinely believe it’s a myth? How can we tell?


hotair--2020-07-16--Upset brewing in MN-05 primary? Omar opponent raised million$$ in Q2

Has Ilhan Omar grown too radical even for the heart of Minneapolis ?
New FEC filings in the DFL primary for her seat in Congress show Omar in serious trouble .
The Star Tribune reported yesterday that challenger Antone Melton-Meaux raised seven times as much money as Omar , scoring $ 3.2 million against Omar ’ s $ 471K .
Melton-Meaux now has twice as much cash on hand ahead of the August 11 primary : Melton-Meaux , a mediation lawyer who emerged on the DFL scene late last year to challenge Omar , told the Star Tribune he raised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the end of June , with $ 2 million cash left in the bank before the Aug. 11 primary .
He dramatically outraised Omar , who took in $ 471,624 during the same time period .
Omar ’ s campaign said she has $ 1,111,861 left on hand ahead of the primary election .
The fundraising gap would be striking for any newcomer challenging an incumbent , but it ’ s especially notable in a race against Omar , a freshman Democrat and member of “ The Squad ” who has risen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Muslim women elected to Congress .
Omar herself is a prolific fundraiser , fueled in part by her national profile and her unabashed criticism of President Donald Trump .
The difference is staggering , especially when dealing with a congressional incumbent in a primary .
Challengers simply don ’ t get that kind of attention from in-party voters under normal circumstances .
Unless the incumbent has proven embarrassing or unreliable , the risk in changing horses for a general-election fight is usually too much of a disincentive .
Is Omar that embarrassing ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ against her as well .
As I have noted before , that calculation matters a lot less in stronghold districts like MN-05 , where a Democrat is practically guaranteed a general-election win .
That means Democrats can feel safer in conducting a competitive primary , although those still rarely produce substantial challengers — and almost never a challenger who can outraise an incumbent to this degree .
Where has the money come from ?
A lot of it is coming from outside the district , but not all of it , the Strib @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surge for Melton-Meaux , who reported raising nearly $ 400,000 between December and the end of March .
The influx of money came , in part , from some conservative donors and pro-Israel groups like nonpartisan NORPAC , which held a virtual fundraiser for Melton-Meaux in May .
According to data from ActBlue , an online fundraising tool , a number of individual donors outside of the district contributed the maximum amount allowed in May .
He ’ s also received donations from prominent Minnesota Democratic fundraisers such as Sam and Sylvia Kaplan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residents who live there , but they ’ ve certainly invited in enough outside money that now it ’ s become more of a regional or national battle , ” said Todd Rapp , a longtime veteran of DFL campaigns .
He said he ’ s never seen so much money flood a single intraparty contest .
“ It ’ s kind of moved beyond our borders.
” Omar ’ s anti-Semitic comments over the past two years are playing a big part in this , too .
Much has been made about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community in Minneapolis , but there is a large Jewish vote in MN-05 , too .
Plus , the Somali community generally feels closer to the Jewish community than Omar ’ s rhetoric would indicate , thanks to Jewish support for their migration and integration into Twin Cities life .
Did Omar see this coming ?
Perhaps her pals did .
A couple of weeks ago , the “ Squad ” announced that it would partner on fundraising to keep themselves in Congress : U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar and the other three members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Squad ” launched a joint fundraising committee to support their re-elections .
Omar , along with U.S. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York , Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan , recently announced they are creating the Squad Victory Fund .
They ’ ll use it to back their re-election campaigns and political action committees , which can provide support to other candidates .
Ocasio-Cortez had already won her primary in New York when they launched this joint effort .
Pressley doesn ’ t appear to have a primary challenger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ significant challengers , with the latter trying her best ( via a proxy ) to disqualify Detroit City Council president Brenda Jones from the August 4 primary .
That now looks more like a rescue mission for Omar and Tlaib .
Money isn ’ t everything in politics , but it ’ s not nothing either .
The huge influx of cash into MN-05 makes it very clear that some Democrats would be happy to see the anti-Semitic Omar disappear from the national stage — and maybe take her campaign-skimming husband with her @ @ @

Has Ilhan Omar grown too radical even for the heart of Minneapolis? New FEC filings in the DFL primary for her seat in Congress show Omar in serious trouble. The Star Tribune reported yesterday that challenger Antone Melton-Meaux raised seven times as much money as Omar, scoring $3.2 million against Omar’s $471K. Melton-Meaux now has twice as much cash on hand ahead of the August 11 primary:
Melton-Meaux, a mediation lawyer who emerged on the DFL scene late last year to challenge Omar, told the Star Tribune he raised a staggering $3.2 million between April and the end of June, with $2 million cash left in the bank before the Aug. 11 primary. He dramatically outraised Omar, who took in $471,624 during the same time period. Omar’s campaign said she has $1,111,861 left on hand ahead of the primary election. The fundraising gap would be striking for any newcomer challenging an incumbent, but it’s especially notable in a race against Omar, a freshman Democrat and member of “The Squad” who has risen to prominence as one of the first Muslim women elected to Congress. Omar herself is a prolific fundraiser, fueled in part by her national profile and her unabashed criticism of President Donald Trump.
The difference is staggering, especially when dealing with a congressional incumbent in a primary. Challengers simply don’t get that kind of attention from in-party voters under normal circumstances. Unless the incumbent has proven embarrassing or unreliable, the risk in changing horses for a general-election fight is usually too much of a disincentive.
Is Omar that embarrassing? Yes, and she has another strike against her as well. As I have noted before, that calculation matters a lot less in stronghold districts like MN-05, where a Democrat is practically guaranteed a general-election win. That means Democrats can feel safer in conducting a competitive primary, although those still rarely produce substantial challengers — and almost never a challenger who can outraise an incumbent to this degree.
Where has the money come from? A lot of it is coming from outside the district, but not all of it, the Strib notes:
It’s a dramatic surge for Melton-Meaux, who reported raising nearly $400,000 between December and the end of March. The influx of money came, in part, from some conservative donors and pro-Israel groups like nonpartisan NORPAC, which held a virtual fundraiser for Melton-Meaux in May. According to data from ActBlue, an online fundraising tool, a number of individual donors outside of the district contributed the maximum amount allowed in May. He’s also received donations from prominent Minnesota Democratic fundraisers such as Sam and Sylvia Kaplan. “It’s about the residents who live there, but they’ve certainly invited in enough outside money that now it’s become more of a regional or national battle,” said Todd Rapp, a longtime veteran of DFL campaigns. He said he’s never seen so much money flood a single intraparty contest. “It’s kind of moved beyond our borders.”
Omar’s anti-Semitic comments over the past two years are playing a big part in this, too. Much has been made about the voting power of the Somali immigrant community in Minneapolis, but there is a large Jewish vote in MN-05, too. Plus, the Somali community generally feels closer to the Jewish community than Omar’s rhetoric would indicate, thanks to Jewish support for their migration and integration into Twin Cities life.
Did Omar see this coming? Perhaps her pals did. A couple of weeks ago, the “Squad” announced that it would partner on fundraising to keep themselves in Congress:
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar and the other three members of the group known as “the Squad” launched a joint fundraising committee to support their re-elections. Omar, along with U.S. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, recently announced they are creating the Squad Victory Fund. They’ll use it to back their re-election campaigns and political action committees, which can provide support to other candidates.
Ocasio-Cortez had already won her primary in New York when they launched this joint effort. Pressley doesn’t appear to have a primary challenger. Only Omar and Rashida Tlaib face significant challengers, with the latter trying her best (via a proxy) to disqualify Detroit City Council president Brenda Jones from the August 4 primary. That now looks more like a rescue mission for Omar and Tlaib.
Money isn’t everything in politics, but it’s not nothing either. The huge influx of cash into MN-05 makes it very clear that some Democrats would be happy to see the anti-Semitic Omar disappear from the national stage — and maybe take her campaign-skimming husband with her, too.


hotair--2020-07-16--Two randomized trials: No benefit from hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 patients

Wasn ’ t there a blockbuster study published two weeks ago that showed hydroxychloroquine *did* have a significant benefit for coronavirus patients ?
A study that grabbed the president ’ s attention and renewed calls from HCQ boosters like Peter Navarro , Laura Ingraham , and Rudy Giuliani for the FDA to once again authorize the drug for use in treating COVID ?
There was .
But that was an observational study .
I ’ ve posted other observational studies that indicated no benefit from HCQ against the virus .
The problem with observational studies is that the patients who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chosen at random , which means firm conclusions about what did and didn ’ t contribute to their recovery can ’ t be drawn as easily .
Last week Stat published this critique of the “ blockbuster ” from the Henry Ford Health System that was touted by Trump : Decisions [ by the FDA ] are based almost entirely on what is known as a randomized controlled trial , in which patients are randomly assigned to receive a treatment or not .
Other types of studies have , again and again , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ benefits and risks , and are used sparingly in making medical decisions .
Three randomized studies have now shown no benefit for hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients .
The study that sparked the latest controversy was anything but randomized .
Not only was it not randomized , outside experts noted , but patients who received hydroxychloroquine were also more likely to get steroids , which appear to help very sick patients with Covid-19 .
That is likely to have influenced the central finding of the Henry Ford study : that death rates were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treated with hydroxychloroquine… Nissen and Borio say observational studies simply can not be used to determine whether a medicine is effective .
Again and again they have been wrong .
The steroid dexamethasone *has* been shown in a randomized controlled trial to benefit severely ill coronavirus patients .
If the patients in the Henry Ford study were getting HCQ and steroids , it may be that the steroids are what helped bring them back from the brink , not hydroxychloroquine .
What we need are randomized trials .
Conveniently , results from two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day or so .
One came from the UK ’ s RECOVERY project and focused on patients who ’ d reached the point of needing hospital treatment for COVID-19 : Patients who received hydroxychloroquine randomly were less likely to have been discharged from the hospital by the end of the study than patients who didn ’ t get it .
The other study came from the University of Minnesota and focused on patients who didn ’ t ( yet ) require hospitalization : Yes , they tried giving the drug with zinc too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t help .
But can we trust these studies ?
Some doctors are skeptical : To conduct these studies , the researchers made significant compromises .
They could not obtain diagnostic testing for all patients , so included people who had symptoms but couldn ’ t get a test result .
In the end , only 58 % of the people in this study had diagnostic test results .
The researchers mailed study drug or placebo to patients without examining them after they enrolled over the internet , meaning they used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the study randomized 491 patients , 432 of whom contributed data to the final analysis… “ The study was of such low quality that it was fundamentally uninterpretable , ” said Steven Nissen , a veteran clinical trialist at the Cleveland Clinic .
Still , he said , the evidence against hydroxychloroquine is mounting .
“ In this study there is no evidence of a benefit for hydroxychloroquine , and it is probably time to move on and start testing other therapies , ” he said .
Hard to believe the FDA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any randomized data supporting the drug ’ s efficacy .
Maybe a future study will alter the balance of opinion , but it ’ s an open question at this point how many scientists will want to continue devoting resources to testing hydroxychloroquine when there are other , potentially more beneficial drugs coming online .
The Times has a webpage set up to track the status of various COVID treatments : As of today , five drugs show strong evidence of working against COVID-19 and another three are “ promising ” but require @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as “ not promising.
” Why spend money on running that experiment when you might get more bang for your buck elsewhere ?
In lieu of an exit question , go read this Gizmodo post about the French study that ignited a global frenzy over hydroxychloroquine in March after it purported to show tremendous results in treating coronavirus patients with the drug .
Various scientists have since shredded it for its methodological errors .
Anthony Fauci ’ s skepticism about HCQ was the crowning indictment of his scientific expertise in the dopey op-ed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago .

Wasn’t there a blockbuster study published two weeks ago that showed hydroxychloroquine *did* have a significant benefit for coronavirus patients? A study that grabbed the president’s attention and renewed calls from HCQ boosters like Peter Navarro, Laura Ingraham, and Rudy Giuliani for the FDA to once again authorize the drug for use in treating COVID?
There was. But that was an observational study. I’ve posted other observational studies that indicated no benefit from HCQ against the virus. The problem with observational studies is that the patients who receive the drug aren’t necessarily chosen at random, which means firm conclusions about what did and didn’t contribute to their recovery can’t be drawn as easily. Last week Stat published this critique of the “blockbuster” from the Henry Ford Health System that was touted by Trump:
Decisions [by the FDA] are based almost entirely on what is known as a randomized controlled trial, in which patients are randomly assigned to receive a treatment or not. Other types of studies have, again and again, failed to deliver accurate information about medicines’ benefits and risks, and are used sparingly in making medical decisions. Three randomized studies have now shown no benefit for hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients. The study that sparked the latest controversy was anything but randomized. Not only was it not randomized, outside experts noted, but patients who received hydroxychloroquine were also more likely to get steroids, which appear to help very sick patients with Covid-19. That is likely to have influenced the central finding of the Henry Ford study: that death rates were 50% lower among patients in hospitals treated with hydroxychloroquine… Nissen and Borio say observational studies simply cannot be used to determine whether a medicine is effective. Again and again they have been wrong.
The steroid dexamethasone *has* been shown in a randomized controlled trial to benefit severely ill coronavirus patients. If the patients in the Henry Ford study were getting HCQ and steroids, it may be that the steroids are what helped bring them back from the brink, not hydroxychloroquine.
What we need are randomized trials. Conveniently, results from two of them were published in the last day or so. One came from the UK’s RECOVERY project and focused on patients who’d reached the point of needing hospital treatment for COVID-19:
🦠BREAKING🦠 RECOVERY TRIAL, a randomized controlled trial dividing patients to receive hydroxychloroquine or usual care when hospitalized is live on @medrxivpreprint. No difference in deaths. HCQ worse on progression to ventilator. High quality data.https://t.co/x2ZXPt6gpH pic.twitter.com/jtu4lmVDsB — Brief19, your daily roundup of SARS-CoV-2. (@Brief_19) July 16, 2020
Patients who received hydroxychloroquine randomly were less likely to have been discharged from the hospital by the end of the study than patients who didn’t get it. The other study came from the University of Minnesota and focused on patients who didn’t (yet) require hospitalization:
We observed no effect of early outpatient therapy with #hydroxychloroquine in reducing symptom severity or duration. 56% enrolled within 1 day of symptom onset. Manuscript at: https://t.co/LcTlazPB79 pic.twitter.com/A5fnZtafoM — David Boulware, MD MPH (@boulware_dr) July 16, 2020
#Hydroxychloroquine did not improve symptom severity or duration statistically faster than placebo in this double-blind randomized trial. No further benefit of zinc use (In the Appendix Table S2). pic.twitter.com/y1TXBmW8xl — David Boulware, MD MPH (@boulware_dr) July 16, 2020
Yes, they tried giving the drug with zinc too. (And vitamin C.) That didn’t help.
But can we trust these studies? Some doctors are skeptical:
To conduct these studies, the researchers made significant compromises. They could not obtain diagnostic testing for all patients, so included people who had symptoms but couldn’t get a test result. In the end, only 58% of the people in this study had diagnostic test results. The researchers mailed study drug or placebo to patients without examining them after they enrolled over the internet, meaning they used data patients self-reported. In the end, the study randomized 491 patients, 432 of whom contributed data to the final analysis… “The study was of such low quality that it was fundamentally uninterpretable,” said Steven Nissen, a veteran clinical trialist at the Cleveland Clinic. Still, he said, the evidence against hydroxychloroquine is mounting. “In this study there is no evidence of a benefit for hydroxychloroquine, and it is probably time to move on and start testing other therapies,” he said.
Hard to believe the FDA’s going to re-authorize HCQ without any randomized data supporting the drug’s efficacy. Maybe a future study will alter the balance of opinion, but it’s an open question at this point how many scientists will want to continue devoting resources to testing hydroxychloroquine when there are other, potentially more beneficial drugs coming online. The Times has a webpage set up to track the status of various COVID treatments: As of today, five drugs show strong evidence of working against COVID-19 and another three are “promising” but require further study. Hydroxychloroquine is now listed as “not promising.” Why spend money on running that experiment when you might get more bang for your buck elsewhere?
In lieu of an exit question, go read this Gizmodo post about the French study that ignited a global frenzy over hydroxychloroquine in March after it purported to show tremendous results in treating coronavirus patients with the drug. Various scientists have since shredded it for its methodological errors. Anthony Fauci’s skepticism about HCQ was the crowning indictment of his scientific expertise in the dopey op-ed published by Peter Navarro a few days ago.


hotair--2020-07-16--CHAZ/CHOP cases still being prosecuted: Attempted arson at a police precinct and the shooting of a p

CHAZ/CHOP cases still being prosecuted: Attempted arson at a police precinct and the shooting of a protester

Tuesday a man was arrested on a federal arson charge for trying to set fire to a police precinct that was at the center of the former CHAZ/CHOP protest area in Seattle .
A press release from the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the western district of Washington identified the attempted arsonist as Isaiah Thomas Willoughby , age thirty-five .
According to the criminal complaint , in the early morning hours of June 12 , 2020 , a person in distinctive clothing was captured on surveillance video near debris piled next to the wall of the Seattle Police East @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspect appears to use a small can , similar to a gas can , to pour a liquid on the debris .
The suspect steps out of frame , then appears to return with something that he lights on fire and tosses on the debris pile .
The pile begins to burn , and the suspect walks away .
The fire scorched the side of the building , but was extinguished by those nearby using fire extinguishers , and pulling the flaming debris from the building .
According to the criminal complaint , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 12 , 2020 , a person in distinctive clothing was captured on surveillance video near debris piled next to the wall of the Seattle Police East Precinct .
In the video , the suspect appears to use a small can , similar to a gas can , to pour a liquid on the debris .
The suspect steps out of frame , then appears to return with something that he lights on fire and tosses on the debris pile .
The pile begins to burn , and the suspect walks away .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but was extinguished by those nearby using fire extinguishers , and pulling the flaming debris from the building .
The police released the surveillance video of the incident last month : Willloughby faces a minimum of five years in prison if convicted .
The second case currently underway connected to CHAZ/CHOP involves a man named Nikolas Fernandez who decided to drive by the protest to back in June to see “ how bad ” it had gotten .
He drove his car down a street full of protesters , scaring them , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone .
One protester , Dan Gregory , reached through his open driver ’ s side window and grabbed the steering wheel while the car was still moving , allegedly to prevent Fernandez from hitting someone .
Having grabbed the wheel , Gregory quickly realized turning the car might injure someone so instead he punched Fernandez in the face .
Fernandez had a handgun and responded by shooting Gregory in the shoulder .
He then got out of his car and brandished the gun before walking to the police line and turning himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ degree assault for the shooting though he and his attorney argue this was a clear case of self defense .
There are several videos of this incident .
This one shows Fernandez car turning onto the street full of protesters : This KIRO7 news clip shows video of the moment Fernandez came down that street and when Dan Gregory reached into his car .
Fernandez ’ lawyer notes that the street in question had not been closed to traffic , though as you can see in the clip above protesters had set up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fernandez has pleaded not guilty .
It ’ s not clear what kind of time he ’ s facing if convicted on the assault charge .

Tuesday a man was arrested on a federal arson charge for trying to set fire to a police precinct that was at the center of the former CHAZ/CHOP protest area in Seattle. A press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the western district of Washington identified the attempted arsonist as Isaiah Thomas Willoughby, age thirty-five.
According to the criminal complaint, in the early morning hours of June 12, 2020, a person in distinctive clothing was captured on surveillance video near debris piled next to the wall of the Seattle Police East Precinct. In the video, the suspect appears to use a small can, similar to a gas can, to pour a liquid on the debris. The suspect steps out of frame, then appears to return with something that he lights on fire and tosses on the debris pile. The pile begins to burn, and the suspect walks away. The fire scorched the side of the building, but was extinguished by those nearby using fire extinguishers, and pulling the flaming debris from the building. According to the criminal complaint, in the early morning hours of June 12, 2020, a person in distinctive clothing was captured on surveillance video near debris piled next to the wall of the Seattle Police East Precinct. In the video, the suspect appears to use a small can, similar to a gas can, to pour a liquid on the debris. The suspect steps out of frame, then appears to return with something that he lights on fire and tosses on the debris pile. The pile begins to burn, and the suspect walks away. The fire scorched the side of the building, but was extinguished by those nearby using fire extinguishers, and pulling the flaming debris from the building.
The police released the surveillance video of the incident last month:
Willloughby faces a minimum of five years in prison if convicted.
The second case currently underway connected to CHAZ/CHOP involves a man named Nikolas Fernandez who decided to drive by the protest to back in June to see “how bad” it had gotten. He drove his car down a street full of protesters, scaring them, though he apparently didn’t hit anyone. One protester, Dan Gregory, reached through his open driver’s side window and grabbed the steering wheel while the car was still moving, allegedly to prevent Fernandez from hitting someone.
Having grabbed the wheel, Gregory quickly realized turning the car might injure someone so instead he punched Fernandez in the face. Fernandez had a handgun and responded by shooting Gregory in the shoulder. He then got out of his car and brandished the gun before walking to the police line and turning himself in. Fernandez was charged with first degree assault for the shooting though he and his attorney argue this was a clear case of self defense. There are several videos of this incident. This one shows Fernandez car turning onto the street full of protesters:
NEW: Video provided to CHS shows car in shooting incident speeding onto 11th Ave https://t.co/rt3tIX5Tw7 pic.twitter.com/WdhnEm0qtt — jseattle (@jseattle) June 9, 2020
This KIRO7 news clip shows video of the moment Fernandez came down that street and when Dan Gregory reached into his car. Fernandez’ lawyer notes that the street in question had not been closed to traffic, though as you can see in the clip above protesters had set up some trash cans in the street.
Fernandez has pleaded not guilty. It’s not clear what kind of time he’s facing if convicted on the assault charge.


hotair--2020-07-16--McEnany's getting a bad rap for saying, "The science should not stand in the way of reopening school

McEnany's getting a bad rap for saying, "The science should not stand in the way of reopening schools"

Some lefties are taking her out of context .
In isolation , the idea of not letting science stand in the way of doing what the president wants to do seems like an admission that Trump cares little for the health of students and parents as he rushes to get everything open before the election .
But that ’ s not McEnany ’ s point .
In context , as you ’ ll see in the clip below , it ’ s clear that she means that the science is on Trump ’ s side .
The reason it shouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” of reopening schools is because it supports the administration ’ s position that reopening can be done safely .
I ’ ll be curious to see how many news outlets edit this clip tonight to distort her meaning by making it seem as though she ’ s encouraging people to ignore science when she ’ s really doing the opposite .
She ’ s in the process of citing a JAMA study at the end there as the clip cuts off to bolster her point that reopening is a safe — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case she wasn ’ t clear enough , she went on to say explicitly that the science is on their side : So , no , we ’ re not yet at the point where the White House is openly encouraging people to stop worrying about their kids ’ health and get back to work to get this economy rollin ’ for the president .
( Although check back in September . )
I believe this is the JAMA study McEnany mentioned in the clip , by the way .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of the concerns parents and teachers have .
The conclusion : We found the severity of illness in infants and children with COVID-19 to be far less than that documented in adults , with most PICUs across North America reporting no children admitted with this disease during the study period .
Of the critically ill children with COVID-19 , more than 80 % had significant long-term underlying medical conditions .
Overall survival and outcomes from critical illness in infants and children with COVID-19 in this series was far better than reported for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , our data indicate that children are at far greater risk of critical illness from influenza than from COVID-19 .
It ’ s very unlikely that a child will become sufficiently ill as to require ICU treatment if they ’ re infected , especially if they don ’ t have comorbidities .
That ’ s great .
What ’ s less clear is whether infected children will spread the disease to their teachers in class and to their parents when they bring it home from school .
The data on that appears mixed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hold their case counts down since they reopened schools and Israel having a much harder time since they did so .
Presumably the extent of local community spread as schools reopen is a factor .
If there ’ s less virus circulating nearby , there ’ s less of a chance that children will pick it up — but there are many U.S. states right now where the virus is circulating robustly , shall we say .
What do we do there ?
Kids won ’ t end up in the ICU , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eh .
I ’ m sure it ’ ll be fine in red states : As she walked up to the podium to speak , one of the moms grabbed a face mask and spit her gum out into it .
“ It ’ s garbage , ” she shrugged , wadding it up .
“ It doesn ’ t work anyway .
Not for me and not for my kids.
” A dad who spoke after her said he , too , doesn ’ t think the masks are effective , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of school this fall if the state doesn ’ t lift its mandate requiring all K-12 students to wear a face covering… They packed into the small boardroom to talk , pulling tape off the seats meant to maintain social distancing and crowding in against the walls .
They wore “ Trump 2020 ” hats and carried little American flags , and every time someone said “ freedom ” or “ constitutional rights ” the whole room cheered .
Almost no one wore a mask ; those who did had them pulled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blue-state weirdness to laugh/cry at this afternoon too .
New York City is currently planning to have students in class just three days a week in order to reduce the risk of infection .
That creates a problem for parents who need to be at work five days a week .
Who ’ s going to watch the children during those other two days ?
No problem , says Bill de Blasio : The City ’ s going to do it , opening up day care for 100,000 children .
…If they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day care and risk infection that way , why don ’ t they just hold class five days a week and risk infection that way instead ?
Is it a teachers ’ union thing ?
I.e .
maybe they can ’ t get teachers to agree to five days of class given the risk of infection , so they ’ re forced to get others to warehouse kids for two days a week ?
Or is this just de Blasio being de Blasio ?
Your exit quotation comes from an epidemiologist quoted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ merry title of “ Public ’ s disconnect from COVID-19 reality worries experts ” : “ We do know that kids can get sick and they can even die .
It ’ s definitely a much lower number… Even if they aren ’ t as infectious , if there are millions of them gathering in schools not having great hygiene , it ’ s a multiplier effect .
”

Some lefties are taking her out of context. In isolation, the idea of not letting science stand in the way of doing what the president wants to do seems like an admission that Trump cares little for the health of students and parents as he rushes to get everything open before the election.
But that’s not McEnany’s point. In context, as you’ll see in the clip below, it’s clear that she means that the science is on Trump’s side. The reason it shouldn’t “stand in the way” of reopening schools is because it supports the administration’s position that reopening can be done safely.
I’ll be curious to see how many news outlets edit this clip tonight to distort her meaning by making it seem as though she’s encouraging people to ignore science when she’s really doing the opposite.
Kayleigh: The President has said unmistakably he wants schools to open up… When he says open, he means open in full… the science should not stand in the way of this.. pic.twitter.com/y5qeiblKHu — Acyn (@Acyn) July 16, 2020
She’s in the process of citing a JAMA study at the end there as the clip cuts off to bolster her point that reopening is a safe — and healthy — thing to do. In case she wasn’t clear enough, she went on to say explicitly that the science is on their side:
Shortly after she said “the science is on our side” and encouraged localities and states to follow the science pic.twitter.com/alICGOPdMY — Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) July 16, 2020
So, no, we’re not yet at the point where the White House is openly encouraging people to stop worrying about their kids’ health and get back to work to get this economy rollin’ for the president. (Although check back in September.) I believe this is the JAMA study McEnany mentioned in the clip, by the way. It’s interesting, but doesn’t address all of the concerns parents and teachers have. The conclusion:
We found the severity of illness in infants and children with COVID-19 to be far less than that documented in adults, with most PICUs across North America reporting no children admitted with this disease during the study period. Of the critically ill children with COVID-19, more than 80% had significant long-term underlying medical conditions. Overall survival and outcomes from critical illness in infants and children with COVID-19 in this series was far better than reported for adult patients. At the present time, our data indicate that children are at far greater risk of critical illness from influenza than from COVID-19.
It’s very unlikely that a child will become sufficiently ill as to require ICU treatment if they’re infected, especially if they don’t have comorbidities. That’s great. What’s less clear is whether infected children will spread the disease to their teachers in class and to their parents when they bring it home from school. The data on that appears mixed, with some European countries managing to hold their case counts down since they reopened schools and Israel having a much harder time since they did so. Presumably the extent of local community spread as schools reopen is a factor. If there’s less virus circulating nearby, there’s less of a chance that children will pick it up — but there are many U.S. states right now where the virus is circulating robustly, shall we say. What do we do there? Kids won’t end up in the ICU, but what about mom and dad?
Eh. I’m sure it’ll be fine in red states:
As she walked up to the podium to speak, one of the moms grabbed a face mask and spit her gum out into it. “It’s garbage,” she shrugged, wadding it up. “It doesn’t work anyway. Not for me and not for my kids.” A dad who spoke after her said he, too, doesn’t think the masks are effective, and said he’s pulling his kids out of school this fall if the state doesn’t lift its mandate requiring all K-12 students to wear a face covering… They packed into the small boardroom to talk, pulling tape off the seats meant to maintain social distancing and crowding in against the walls. They wore “Trump 2020” hats and carried little American flags, and every time someone said “freedom” or “constitutional rights” the whole room cheered. Almost no one wore a mask; those who did had them pulled under their chins.
There’s blue-state weirdness to laugh/cry at this afternoon too. New York City is currently planning to have students in class just three days a week in order to reduce the risk of infection. That creates a problem for parents who need to be at work five days a week. Who’s going to watch the children during those other two days? No problem, says Bill de Blasio: The City’s going to do it, opening up day care for 100,000 children.
…If they’re going to pack kids together for day care and risk infection that way, why don’t they just hold class five days a week and risk infection that way instead?
Is it a teachers’ union thing? I.e. maybe they can’t get teachers to agree to five days of class given the risk of infection, so they’re forced to get others to warehouse kids for two days a week? Or is this just de Blasio being de Blasio?
Your exit quotation comes from an epidemiologist quoted in a piece at The Hill with the merry title of “Public’s disconnect from COVID-19 reality worries experts”: “We do know that kids can get sick and they can even die. It’s definitely a much lower number… Even if they aren’t as infectious, if there are millions of them gathering in schools not having great hygiene, it’s a multiplier effect.”


hotair--2020-07-16--What it's like to be a black police officer on the front lines of Portland's nightly BLM protests

There have been a seemingly endless series of Black Lives Matter protests in Portland , some of which eventually get declared riots as the protesters get out of hand .
One week ago KGW8 was on hand for a press availability where Officer Jakhary Jackson was questioned by Lt. Tina Jones about what it ’ s like to be on the front line of those nightly protests .
His responses were eye-opening to say the least .
“ I got to see folks who really do want to see change like the rest of us that have been impacted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued , “ And then I got to see those people get faded out by people that have no idea what racism is all about .
Never experienced racism .
They don ’ t even know that the tactics that they are using are the same tactics that were used against my people.
” He added , “ Coming from someone who graduated from PSU with a history degree it ’ s actually frightening…They say if you don ’ t know your history you ’ re doomed to repeat it .
And watching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of what they ’ ve decided to do with their life.
” Asked for an example , Jackson said people of color will frequently come up to speak to him during protest to ask him what he thinks about the death of George Floyd or some other issue .
But inevitably when he tries to engage with these people , “ someone white comes up ‘ F the police .
Don ’ t talk to him . '
” Jackson said that after a while he could see it coming .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him at a recent protest to ask why he wouldn ’ t speak to the protesters he said he started to explain that every time he tried to do so a white protester would cut him off .
Jackson said , “ right when I said that this white girl pops right in front of her.
” The girl was amazed and said , “ He just said that was going to happen.
” Jackson said to the girl , “ I told you.
” Jackson then said to the white girl who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been called the N-word .
She ’ s been called the N-word .
Why are you talking to me this way ?
Why do you feel that she can ’ t speak for herself to me ?
Why is it that you feel you need to speak for her when we ’ re having a conversation ?
” The white girl replied , “ Someone told me to do it.
” But it hasn ’ t been all conversations .
Officer Jackson described some of the other experience he ’ s had with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explosive , I had been hit with a full beer can , a rock in my chest , frozen water bottle had hit me ” and after all of that he met two young black men who were out cleaning up the street .
“ I was so moved by that and so impressed , ” Jackson said .
He went over to shake their hands .
At that point the interviewer turned to “ some of the hateful and racist things ” that Officer Jackson and other officers of color have experienced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something when you ’ re at a Black Lives Matter protest ; you have more minorities on the police side than you have in a violent crowd , ” Jackson said .
He continued , “ And you have white people screaming at black officers ‘ you have the biggest nose I ’ ve ever seen.
’ You hear these things and you go ‘ Are these people , are they going to say something to this person ?
’ No .
“ And that ’ s just one example .
Having people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life , that you need to quit your job , that you ’ re hurting your community but they ’ re not even a part of the community .
Once again you as a privileged white person telling someone of color what to do with their life.
” The interviewer suggested it was “ hypocrisy ” and Jackson agreed “ absolutely.
” Jackson also took offense on behalf of some of his fellow officers who are white .
He said he ’ s seen these officers jump in when someone has used the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen them try to save black residents of the city in dangerous situations where people ’ s lives are at risk .
“ When you ’ re standing on the line and they ’ re getting called those names and they ’ re being accused of being racist when you ’ ve seen those officers helping people of color , getting blood on them trying to rescue someone who has been shot—gang violence , domestic violence—and you see them and they ’ re truly trying to help save someone ’ s life and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a racist by people that have never seen anything like that , that have never had to put themselves out there .
It ’ s disgusting.
” There ’ s a lot more in this interview including a Q & A section at the end .

There have been a seemingly endless series of Black Lives Matter protests in Portland, some of which eventually get declared riots as the protesters get out of hand. One week ago KGW8 was on hand for a press availability where Officer Jakhary Jackson was questioned by Lt. Tina Jones about what it’s like to be on the front line of those nightly protests. His responses were eye-opening to say the least.
“I got to see folks who really do want to see change like the rest of us that have been impacted by racism,” Jackson said. He continued, “And then I got to see those people get faded out by people that have no idea what racism is all about. Never experienced racism. They don’t even know that the tactics that they are using are the same tactics that were used against my people.”
He added, “Coming from someone who graduated from PSU with a history degree it’s actually frightening…They say if you don’t know your history you’re doomed to repeat it. And watching people do that to other people just because of what they’ve decided to do with their life.”
Asked for an example, Jackson said people of color will frequently come up to speak to him during protest to ask him what he thinks about the death of George Floyd or some other issue. But inevitably when he tries to engage with these people, “someone white comes up ‘F the police. Don’t talk to him.'” Jackson said that after a while he could see it coming.
When a young African-American girl came up to him at a recent protest to ask why he wouldn’t speak to the protesters he said he started to explain that every time he tried to do so a white protester would cut him off. Jackson said, “right when I said that this white girl pops right in front of her.” The girl was amazed and said, “He just said that was going to happen.” Jackson said to the girl, “I told you.”
Jackson then said to the white girl who had interrupted, “I’ve been called the N-word. She’s been called the N-word. Why are you talking to me this way? Why do you feel that she can’t speak for herself to me? Why is it that you feel you need to speak for her when we’re having a conversation?” The white girl replied, “Someone told me to do it.”
But it hasn’t been all conversations. Officer Jackson described some of the other experience he’s had with protesters: “I had taken an explosive, I had been hit with a full beer can, a rock in my chest, frozen water bottle had hit me” and after all of that he met two young black men who were out cleaning up the street. “I was so moved by that and so impressed,” Jackson said. He went over to shake their hands.
At that point the interviewer turned to “some of the hateful and racist things” that Officer Jackson and other officers of color have experienced during the protests. “It says something when you’re at a Black Lives Matter protest; you have more minorities on the police side than you have in a violent crowd,” Jackson said. He continued, “And you have white people screaming at black officers ‘you have the biggest nose I’ve ever seen.’ You hear these things and you go ‘Are these people, are they going to say something to this person?’ No.
“And that’s just one example. Having people tell you what to do with your life, that you need to quit your job, that you’re hurting your community but they’re not even a part of the community. Once again you as a privileged white person telling someone of color what to do with their life.” The interviewer suggested it was “hypocrisy” and Jackson agreed “absolutely.”
Jackson also took offense on behalf of some of his fellow officers who are white. He said he’s seen these officers jump in when someone has used the N-word toward him. He’s seen them try to save black residents of the city in dangerous situations where people’s lives are at risk.
“When you’re standing on the line and they’re getting called those names and they’re being accused of being racist when you’ve seen those officers helping people of color, getting blood on them trying to rescue someone who has been shot—gang violence, domestic violence—and you see them and they’re truly trying to help save someone’s life and they they turn around and are called a racist by people that have never seen anything like that, that have never had to put themselves out there. It’s disgusting.”
There’s a lot more in this interview including a Q&A section at the end.


hotair--2020-07-16--Today's hot topics on #TEMS: McCloskey's blues, de Blasio's news, Vice bemused, COVID breakthroughs,

Today's hot topics on #TEMS: McCloskey's blues, de Blasio's news, Vice bemused, COVID breakthroughs, Iran's bruise, and more!

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show ( 4 pm ET ) , we have another great lineup for the news of the day !
The show will be streamed on Hot Air ’ s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook .
Join us as we welcome : • Duane “ Generalissimo ” Patterson brings us up to date on the week ’ s top stories and gives us a preview of tomorrow ’ s Hugh Hewitt show .
• Will the St. Louis County DA indict the McCloskeys ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Bill de Blasio won ’ t open up the schools full time , but instead will expand daycare .
Huh ?
• What really happened in yesterday ’ s Twitter hack ?
And why won ’ t Vice ask the tough follow-up questions the answer prompts ?
• Will the Trump campaign get a reboot from its shake-up at the top ?
• All this and more !
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page .
Be sure to join us , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the debate on my Facebook page , too !
How can Republicans and conservatives keep winning after 2016 ?
Find out in GOING RED , published in April from Crown Forum !

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have another great lineup for the news of the day! The show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook.
Join us as we welcome:
Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson brings us up to date on the week’s top stories and gives us a preview of tomorrow’s Hugh Hewitt show.
Will the St. Louis County DA indict the McCloskeys? What can Trump do about it?
Bill de Blasio won’t open up the schools full time, but instead will expand daycare. Huh?
What really happened in yesterday’s Twitter hack? And why won’t Vice ask the tough follow-up questions the answer prompts?
Will the Trump campaign get a reboot from its shake-up at the top?
All this and more!
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, and don’t forget to keep up with the debate on my Facebook page, too!
How can Republicans and conservatives keep winning after 2016? Find out in GOING RED, published in April from Crown Forum!


hotair--2020-07-16--Vice: The worst part of the Twitter hack is that it feeds conservatives' "conspiracy theories" on sh

Vice: The worst part of the Twitter hack is that it feeds conservatives' "conspiracy theories" on shadowbanning

Vice did a very good job in drilling down into yesterday ’ s massive hack on Twitter .
In fact , Vice apparently thinks they did too good of a job on it , after conservatives pointed out that their screen shots suggested that Twitter might not have been telling the whole truth about their moderation practices .
The images published included nomenclature such as “ blacklist ” that Twitter never before revealed , and demonstrated a capability they claim never to employ .
Michael Coudrey pointed it out , among others , after Vice published the images from Twitter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you thought that might prove to be an intriguing entrée for some investigative journalism , though , think again .
Vice provided a rebuttal to this earlier today with the headline that it ’ s “ another Trump supporter conspiracy , ” presumably meaning conspiracy theory .
“ The bad takes came roaring back ” after the blue-check restriction was lifted , and they call this argument “ the most tiresome and toxic among them.
” So much for journalistic curiosity .
Even though their own screenshots show that Twitter hasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the past , Vice lectures readers by essentially regurgitating Twitter ’ s press releases : Twitter explained this moderation tactic in 2018 , after Trump ’ s tweet .
Twitter said it made changes to how it ranks its search results for accounts from what it considers to be “ bad-faith actors who intend to manipulate or divide the conversation.
” A Twitter spokesperson told Motherboard on the phone that these blacklists are the same ones it explained in 2018 ( though it didn ’ t use the term “ blacklist ” at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ word publicly . )
“ We have very clear rules around trends and what we don ’ t allow to trend , ” a Twitter spokesperson told Motherboard when asked about the “ Blacklist ” tags we see in screenshots of the internal moderation tool .
Twitter also directed us to its “ Twitter trends FAQs ” page , where it makes clear the platform prevents content from trending if it contains profanity or adult/graphic reference , incites hate , or otherwise violates Twitter ’ s rules .
Reached by phone , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ not new.
” “ We do disclose in this FAQ that accounts that violate the rules are prevented from trending , ” the spokesperson said .
“ This isn ’ t new and it ’ s not something that has been hidden , but it ’ s in the help center.
” Two points remain , however .
First , as Coudrey says , these screenshots show that Twitter has the capability of shadow-banning on the basis of viewpoint , not that Twitter does so .
Conservatives have raised questions about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , not whether it moderates it at all , based on their anecdotal experiences with the platform .
Operation of content moderation is certainly a worthy subject of criticism , or at the very least debate , and why Vice thinks it isn ’ t is never explained in its scornful dismissal of those concerns .
Second , we only have Twitter ’ s word that it doesn ’ t employ these tools on the basis of viewpoint .
And one reason we can ’ t confirm this is that Twitter doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blacklists or fully disclose who operates them and how , as Vice admits : People who are buying into a Twitter conspiracy are not completely wrong to be worried , however .
While Twitter has explained before that these blacklists exist and the types of accounts that might get put on one , it does not alert users if they ’ ve been put onto a blacklist .
It has not used the term “ blacklist ” publicly in this context , a term more loaded than “ Twitter filters search results for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twitter may automatically remove accounts engaging in [ rule breaking ] behaviors from search ” is a bit closer . )
It has not explained if the blacklists are automated , administered by human moderators , or a mix of both , and it has not been specific about how or why an account it put on a “ Trends Blacklist ” or “ Search Blacklist.
” And not even Vice has figured out how Twitter uses them : This , by the way , is the second-to-last paragraph in a report that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservatives who have raised questions about this practice .
Rather than poke fun , shouldn ’ t Vice ’ s tech team get answers to those questions , rather than just blithely accepting Twitter ’ s “ carefully crafted blog posts and announcements ” ?
They do make the point that Twitter ’ s “ opaque ” approach allows these allegations to fester , but somehow ends up defending the company ’ s process without ever bothering to force the company to disclose them .
Maybe we can call this brand of corporate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t journalism , even if their report on the hack itself was .
Meanwhile , let ’ s see if anyone else gets an answer to this question : Update : How could I have missed the whole “ Republicans pounce !
® ” aspect of this report ?
Mea culpa , mea culpa , mea maxima culpa , but fortunately my friend Adam Baldwin backstopped me on this one :

Vice did a very good job in drilling down into yesterday’s massive hack on Twitter. In fact, Vice apparently thinks they did too good of a job on it, after conservatives pointed out that their screen shots suggested that Twitter might not have been telling the whole truth about their moderation practices. The images published included nomenclature such as “blacklist” that Twitter never before revealed, and demonstrated a capability they claim never to employ.
Michael Coudrey pointed it out, among others, after Vice published the images from Twitter’s moderation tools:
https://twitter.com/MichaelCoudrey/status/1283572997534572544
Oopsie! If you thought that might prove to be an intriguing entrée for some investigative journalism, though, think again. Vice provided a rebuttal to this earlier today with the headline that it’s “another Trump supporter conspiracy,” presumably meaning conspiracy theory. “The bad takes came roaring back” after the blue-check restriction was lifted, and they call this argument “the most tiresome and toxic among them.”
So much for journalistic curiosity. Even though their own screenshots show that Twitter hasn’t exactly described this tool accurately in the past, Vice lectures readers by essentially regurgitating Twitter’s press releases:
Twitter explained this moderation tactic in 2018, after Trump’s tweet. Twitter said it made changes to how it ranks its search results for accounts from what it considers to be “bad-faith actors who intend to manipulate or divide the conversation.” A Twitter spokesperson told Motherboard on the phone that these blacklists are the same ones it explained in 2018 (though it didn’t use the term “blacklist” at the time and has not used that word publicly.) “We have very clear rules around trends and what we don’t allow to trend,” a Twitter spokesperson told Motherboard when asked about the “Blacklist” tags we see in screenshots of the internal moderation tool. Twitter also directed us to its “Twitter trends FAQs” page, where it makes clear the platform prevents content from trending if it contains profanity or adult/graphic reference, incites hate, or otherwise violates Twitter’s rules. Reached by phone, a Twitter spokesperson said the blacklist tags are “not new.” “We do disclose in this FAQ that accounts that violate the rules are prevented from trending,” the spokesperson said. “This isn’t new and it’s not something that has been hidden, but it’s in the help center.”
Two points remain, however. First, as Coudrey says, these screenshots show that Twitter has the capability of shadow-banning on the basis of viewpoint, not that Twitter does so. Conservatives have raised questions about the manner in which Twitter conducts its moderation, not whether it moderates it at all, based on their anecdotal experiences with the platform. Operation of content moderation is certainly a worthy subject of criticism, or at the very least debate, and why Vice thinks it isn’t is never explained in its scornful dismissal of those concerns.
Second, we only have Twitter’s word that it doesn’t employ these tools on the basis of viewpoint. And one reason we can’t confirm this is that Twitter doesn’t disclose who’s on their blacklists or fully disclose who operates them and how, as Vice admits:
People who are buying into a Twitter conspiracy are not completely wrong to be worried, however. While Twitter has explained before that these blacklists exist and the types of accounts that might get put on one, it does not alert users if they’ve been put onto a blacklist. It has not used the term “blacklist” publicly in this context, a term more loaded than “Twitter filters search results for quality tweets and results.” (“Twitter may automatically remove accounts engaging in [rule breaking] behaviors from search” is a bit closer.) It has not explained if the blacklists are automated, administered by human moderators, or a mix of both, and it has not been specific about how or why an account it put on a “Trends Blacklist” or “Search Blacklist.”
And not even Vice has figured out how Twitter uses them:
We can’t say with 100 percent certainty how the “Blacklist” tags work because we don’t have full visibility into Twitter’s moderation mechanism. We can see its public facing policy, but not debates inside the company, and more critically, the technical process by which accounts are suspended, banned, or prevented from appearing in search.
This, by the way, is the second-to-last paragraph in a report that spends several leading paragraphs making fun of conservatives who have raised questions about this practice. Rather than poke fun, shouldn’t Vice’s tech team get answers to those questions, rather than just blithely accepting Twitter’s “carefully crafted blog posts and announcements”? They do make the point that Twitter’s “opaque” approach allows these allegations to fester, but somehow ends up defending the company’s process without ever bothering to force the company to disclose them.
Maybe we can call this brand of corporate press-release regurgitation “shadowflacking.” It ain’t journalism, even if their report on the hack itself was. Meanwhile, let’s see if anyone else gets an answer to this question:
Hey @Twitter, what’s up with you blocking people from sharing this AP News story about the abuse of Uighurs in China? pic.twitter.com/mDrv8X0C7x — Micah Rate (@Micah_Rate) July 16, 2020
Update: How could I have missed the whole “Republicans pounce!®” aspect of this report? Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa, but fortunately my friend Adam Baldwin backstopped me on this one:
https://twitter.com/AdamBaldwin/status/1283849683865964544