hotair--2020-07-17--Michelle Goldberg: The left really does have a free speech problem

I almost never agree with anything NY Times ’ columnist Michelle Goldberg writes but today is the exception .
Goldberg was one of the people who signed ‘ the Letter ‘ about cancel culture published by Harper ’ s Magazine .
Today she offers and explanation for that decision : From my ( privileged ) vantage point , several things are happening simultaneously .
The mass uprising following the killing of George Floyd has led to a necessary expansion of the boundaries of mainstream speech .
Space has been created for daring left-wing ideas , like abolishing the police , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are reckoning with the racism that leads to mostly white leadership .
At the same time , a climate of punitive heretic-hunting , a recurrent feature of left-wing politics , has set in , enforced , in some cases , through workplace discipline , including firings .
It ’ s the involvement of human resources departments in compelling adherence with rapidly changing new norms of speech and debate that worries me the most… One reason many on the right want to be seen as free speech defenders is that they understand that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more potent than the power to create them .
Even sympathetic people will come to resent a left that refuses to make distinctions between deliberate slurs , awkward mistakes and legitimate disagreements .
Cowing people is not the same as converting them .
I agree with Goldberg as far as she goes but it ’ s worth saying that she doesn ’ t go nearly far enough .
She mentions the firing of data analyst David Shor but doesnt mention the recent resignation this week of Bari Weiss or the ousting of James @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credit for defending the content of ‘ the Letter ’ rather than running away from it dishonestly as some did .
As is often the case , some of the comments from Times readers are pretty solid .
There is clearly awareness on the left that a new strain of illiberalism is spreading : • Progressives do indeed have a free speech problem , as described here and elsewhere .
In our pursuit of idealogical purity we are alienating allies , ultimately reducing our political power and hurting our cause .
• The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it tries to get people fired from their jobs .
This goes way beyond criticizing people for their opinions .
This is Cuba-class thought policing .
• As a left-leaning individual , I have strong feelings and thoughts to share on this vital topic and many others , but will share my thoughts only with people I completely trust .
Sorry , but that is the reality today .
• I ’ m pretty far left myself and have been shut down merely for asking questions that have needled at leftist orthodoxy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ questions that I was grappling with myself seeking sincere opinions and instead of people taking the chance to have a conversation about ideas , a refusal to engage .
That ’ s no crime , but it ’ s not in the spirit of free speech .
• The most idiotic example in recent days is the Goya beans uproar .
The CEO made a complimentary comment to President Trump , which he likewise did in the presence of President Obama , and AOC and other illiberals flew off their chairs calling for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Not because of the product itself , but because of a comment .
Now , I get the concept of being personally outraged about what the guy said , but I don ’ t get the tactic of making sure to try to damage his business , or worse , alienate more people in this country who will find the entire exercise just picayune and juvenile .
• The direction this country is moving to reminds more and more of the old Soviet Union where I grew up .
You can talk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closed doors .
And this was supposed to be a country of the FREE speech !
This is just a small fraction of the more than 1,000 comments left on this article but I think it ’ s fair to say a significant percentage of them run in this same vein .
Many of the people writing them , like Goldberg herself , are on the left .
But they are aware of the need for self-censorship of their own ideas lest they cross a line some woke individual doesn ’ t want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I could probably pick out 300 comments like this from this one article , there are lots of people on the left who are still heavily invested in the idea that cancel culture , call-out culture , and all the rest of it doesn ’ t really exist .
It clearly does but they ’ ll keep denying it because , in truth , a lot of them like the idea of having a cadre of online shock troops on their side .

I almost never agree with anything NY Times’ columnist Michelle Goldberg writes but today is the exception. Goldberg was one of the people who signed ‘the Letter‘ about cancel culture published by Harper’s Magazine. Today she offers and explanation for that decision:
From my (privileged) vantage point, several things are happening simultaneously. The mass uprising following the killing of George Floyd has led to a necessary expansion of the boundaries of mainstream speech. Space has been created for daring left-wing ideas, like abolishing the police, that were once marginalized. Cultural institutions are reckoning with the racism that leads to mostly white leadership. At the same time, a climate of punitive heretic-hunting, a recurrent feature of left-wing politics, has set in, enforced, in some cases, through workplace discipline, including firings. It’s the involvement of human resources departments in compelling adherence with rapidly changing new norms of speech and debate that worries me the most… One reason many on the right want to be seen as free speech defenders is that they understand that the power to break taboos can be even more potent than the power to create them. Even sympathetic people will come to resent a left that refuses to make distinctions between deliberate slurs, awkward mistakes and legitimate disagreements. Cowing people is not the same as converting them.
I agree with Goldberg as far as she goes but it’s worth saying that she doesn’t go nearly far enough. She mentions the firing of data analyst David Shor but doesnt mention the recent resignation this week of Bari Weiss or the ousting of James Bennet. Still, Goldberg deserves some credit for defending the content of ‘the Letter’ rather than running away from it dishonestly as some did.
As is often the case, some of the comments from Times readers are pretty solid. There is clearly awareness on the left that a new strain of illiberalism is spreading:
Progressives do indeed have a free speech problem, as described here and elsewhere. In our pursuit of idealogical purity we are alienating allies, ultimately reducing our political power and hurting our cause.
The illiberal left has crossed a line when it tries to get people fired from their jobs. This goes way beyond criticizing people for their opinions. This is Cuba-class thought policing.
As a left-leaning individual, I have strong feelings and thoughts to share on this vital topic and many others, but will share my thoughts only with people I completely trust. Sorry, but that is the reality today.
I’m pretty far left myself and have been shut down merely for asking questions that have needled at leftist orthodoxy. Shut down, as in, asking questions that I was grappling with myself seeking sincere opinions and instead of people taking the chance to have a conversation about ideas, a refusal to engage. That’s no crime, but it’s not in the spirit of free speech.
The most idiotic example in recent days is the Goya beans uproar. The CEO made a complimentary comment to President Trump, which he likewise did in the presence of President Obama, and AOC and other illiberals flew off their chairs calling for an immediate boycott and take-down of beans. Not because of the product itself, but because of a comment. Now, I get the concept of being personally outraged about what the guy said, but I don’t get the tactic of making sure to try to damage his business, or worse, alienate more people in this country who will find the entire exercise just picayune and juvenile.
The direction this country is moving to reminds more and more of the old Soviet Union where I grew up. You can talk freely only with people you trust behind closed doors. And this was supposed to be a country of the FREE speech!
This is just a small fraction of the more than 1,000 comments left on this article but I think it’s fair to say a significant percentage of them run in this same vein. Many of the people writing them, like Goldberg herself, are on the left. But they are aware of the need for self-censorship of their own ideas lest they cross a line some woke individual doesn’t want crossed.
And yet, even though I could probably pick out 300 comments like this from this one article, there are lots of people on the left who are still heavily invested in the idea that cancel culture, call-out culture, and all the rest of it doesn’t really exist. It clearly does but they’ll keep denying it because, in truth, a lot of them like the idea of having a cadre of online shock troops on their side.


hotair--2020-07-17--NYT: Let's face it -- the mail-in state primary was a disaster

How badly has the state of New York handled its vote-by-mail primary ?
Only today did the Associated Press make the call on the race in NY-16 , concluding three weeks after the election that Rep. Eliot Engel lost to his primary challenger , progressive insurgent Jamaal Bowman — by sixteen points .
It took that long to get through enough of the mail-in ballots and navigate the opaque reporting on the count for the AP to reach a firm conclusion in a landslide for Bowman .
That race is no fluke , either .
The New York Times reports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of ballots counted , and that outcomes of many of the primary contests have yet to be determined , more than three weeks after the election day .
This portends disaster in November , the Times warns : More than three weeks after the New York primaries , election officials have not yet counted an untold number of mail-in absentee ballots , leaving numerous closely watched races unresolved , including three key Democratic congressional contests .
The absentee ballot count — greatly inflated this year because the state expanded the vote-by-mail option because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ painstakingly slow , and hard to track , with no running account of the vote totals available .
In some cases , the tiny number of ballots counted has bordered on the absurd : In the 12th Congressional District , where Representative Carolyn B. Maloney is fighting for her political life against her challenger , Suraj Patel , only 800 of some 65,000 absentee ballots had been tabulated as of Wednesday , according to Mr. Patel , though thousands had been disqualified .
… The delays in New York ’ s primaries raise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ handle the general election in November , and may offer a cautionary note for other states as they weigh whether to embrace , and how to implement , a vote-by-mail system because of the pandemic .
The NYT and the state of New York offer all sorts of reasons for the delays in processing .
All of them , however , relate directly to the decision to vote by mail and send ballots out to every voter , requested or not .
“ Outdated technology ” only mattered when it came to dealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ copies of ballots from both parties relate directly to the vast increase in mailed ballots , too .
The legal challenges resulting from these haven ’ t even started yet , which means it will take several weeks more of wrangling over every mailed ballot before the counts can be accepted .
And that ’ s a big problem in November , as even the progressives are starting to figure out : The NYT reports that between 20 % and 30 % of ballots in New York City may have been disqualified , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California rejected over 100,000 ballots in its March mail-in primary for defects , a stunningly high number that calls the credibility of close races into serious question .
And in Florida , nearly twenty thousand ballots got trashed in its presidential primary : More than 18,500 Floridians ’ ballots were not counted during the March presidential primary after many arrived by mail after the deadline .
In Nevada , about 6,700 ballots were rejected in June because election officials could not verify voters ’ signatures .
And during Pennsylvania ’ s primary last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevented tens of thousands of late-returned ballots from being disqualified .
… While the number of rejected ballots in Florida and Nevada represents a fraction of those cast in their primaries , the unprecedented shift toward absentee voting during the coronavirus pandemic could make such margins potentially significant in the fall .
In 2016 , roughly 80,000 votes in Michigan , Pennsylvania and Wisconsin helped Donald Trump win the White House .
The media and the GOP establishment have leaned on Trump to stop attacking mail-in balloting .
It ’ s a worthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confused the issue between normal absentee balloting , which is done by advance request , and the vote-by-mail systems that send out ballots proactively to all voters .
Republicans need to work to get absentee ballots in the hands of voters who truly need them , and also to educate them on how to cast those ballots properly and effectively .
The vote-by-mail system , however , truly is a disaster , and not just over security concerns .
The timelines in our Constitution are too tight for the kinds of delays seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are at risk of being without a legitimate Congress as well as a legitimate president by the time the deadlines for both are reached .
The only way to ensure that we can meet those deadlines is to vote in person by paper ballots utilizing optical-scan technology for fast and accurate counts .
The delay from a relative small number of contests in that system where absentee ballots could make the difference will be easy to absorb , but we can ’ t wait several weeks to confirm outcomes in races with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is a Trump problem .
This is an electoral legitimacy problem in more than one aspect , and it ’ s time we treated it as such .
If we can go to Walmart in this pandemic , we certainly can figure out how to vote in person to choose this country ’ s leadership .

How badly has the state of New York handled its vote-by-mail primary? Only today did the Associated Press make the call on the race in NY-16, concluding three weeks after the election that Rep. Eliot Engel lost to his primary challenger, progressive insurgent Jamaal Bowman — by sixteen points. It took that long to get through enough of the mail-in ballots and navigate the opaque reporting on the count for the AP to reach a firm conclusion in a landslide for Bowman.
That race is no fluke, either. The New York Times reports that some races have only a handful of ballots counted, and that outcomes of many of the primary contests have yet to be determined, more than three weeks after the election day. This portends disaster in November, the Times warns:
More than three weeks after the New York primaries, election officials have not yet counted an untold number of mail-in absentee ballots, leaving numerous closely watched races unresolved, including three key Democratic congressional contests. The absentee ballot count — greatly inflated this year because the state expanded the vote-by-mail option because of the coronavirus pandemic — has been painstakingly slow, and hard to track, with no running account of the vote totals available. In some cases, the tiny number of ballots counted has bordered on the absurd: In the 12th Congressional District, where Representative Carolyn B. Maloney is fighting for her political life against her challenger, Suraj Patel, only 800 of some 65,000 absentee ballots had been tabulated as of Wednesday, according to Mr. Patel, though thousands had been disqualified. … The delays in New York’s primaries raise huge concerns about how the state will handle the general election in November, and may offer a cautionary note for other states as they weigh whether to embrace, and how to implement, a vote-by-mail system because of the pandemic.
The NYT and the state of New York offer all sorts of reasons for the delays in processing. All of them, however, relate directly to the decision to vote by mail and send ballots out to every voter, requested or not. “Outdated technology” only mattered when it came to dealing with mailed ballots. Unprecedented requests for copies of ballots from both parties relate directly to the vast increase in mailed ballots, too. The legal challenges resulting from these haven’t even started yet, which means it will take several weeks more of wrangling over every mailed ballot before the counts can be accepted.
And that’s a big problem in November, as even the progressives are starting to figure out:
Candidates and their campaigns have nonetheless been deeply frustrated by the slow pace, and increasingly concerned about what it portends for the general election in the fall. “This is just a primary: Imagine November with the presidential race and all the Senate and House races,” said Rebecca Katz, a progressive political consultant who serves as an adviser to Mr. Bowman’s campaign. “What’s going to happen to our country?”
The NYT reports that between 20% and 30% of ballots in New York City may have been disqualified, and New York is hardly unique. California rejected over 100,000 ballots in its March mail-in primary for defects, a stunningly high number that calls the credibility of close races into serious question. And in Florida, nearly twenty thousand ballots got trashed in its presidential primary:
More than 18,500 Floridians’ ballots were not counted during the March presidential primary after many arrived by mail after the deadline. In Nevada, about 6,700 ballots were rejected in June because election officials could not verify voters’ signatures. And during Pennsylvania’s primary last month, only state and court orders prevented tens of thousands of late-returned ballots from being disqualified. … While the number of rejected ballots in Florida and Nevada represents a fraction of those cast in their primaries, the unprecedented shift toward absentee voting during the coronavirus pandemic could make such margins potentially significant in the fall. In 2016, roughly 80,000 votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin helped Donald Trump win the White House.
The media and the GOP establishment have leaned on Trump to stop attacking mail-in balloting. It’s a worthy criticism to the extent that Trump has confused the issue between normal absentee balloting, which is done by advance request, and the vote-by-mail systems that send out ballots proactively to all voters. Republicans need to work to get absentee ballots in the hands of voters who truly need them, and also to educate them on how to cast those ballots properly and effectively.
The vote-by-mail system, however, truly is a disaster, and not just over security concerns. The timelines in our Constitution are too tight for the kinds of delays seen in this year’s primaries. We are at risk of being without a legitimate Congress as well as a legitimate president by the time the deadlines for both are reached. The only way to ensure that we can meet those deadlines is to vote in person by paper ballots utilizing optical-scan technology for fast and accurate counts. The delay from a relative small number of contests in that system where absentee ballots could make the difference will be easy to absorb, but we can’t wait several weeks to confirm outcomes in races with double-digit in-person vote gaps.
Stop pretending this is a Trump problem. This is an electoral legitimacy problem in more than one aspect, and it’s time we treated it as such. If we can go to Walmart in this pandemic, we certainly can figure out how to vote in person to choose this country’s leadership.


hotair--2020-07-17--GOP officials beg Trump: If you don't endorse voting by mail we might get blown out

Voting by mail has become the electoral equivalent of mask-wearing .
In both cases , with some degree of encouragement from the president , a meaningful number of righties have concluded that it ’ s illegitimate and refuse to participate in it .
In both cases , the Republican establishment has watched that play out and been horrified by the potential electoral implications .
If Republicans don ’ t wear masks then the virus will spread more aggressively and Trump ’ s polling will suffer .
If Republicans don ’ t vote by mail then Democrats will enjoy a GOTV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states on Election Day .
In both cases , party leaders have tried to persuade Trump to change course — although that ’ s where the similarities between masks and mail-in ballots end .
Trump was never strongly anti-mask even though he was averse to wearing one in public for months and described mask-wearing at least once as “ politically correct.
” He is , however , strongly against voting by mail .
He ’ s denounced it as fraud-prone so many times that it ’ s hard to believe he ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even if GOP strategists could get through to him that the party is kneecapping itself by eschewing this method of voting .
The best-case scenario is that they keep after him and keep after him and finally after many months he relents .
That ’ s what happened with masks , when he finally donned one for his trip to Walter Reed .
The problem with mail-in voting is that he doesn ’ t have many months left before Election Day to undo the damage from his current stance .
The sooner he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by mail , the sooner Republican voters can start their applications for ballots .
But there ’ s no reason to think he ’ s willing to do that .
People have been warning him for months already that he ’ s risking his own reelection by refusing to budge on this , yet he ’ s refused to budge .
All local Republicans can do is keep trying : Behind the scenes , top Republicans are urging senior Trump campaign officials to press the President to change his messaging and embrace mail-in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lose the battle for control of Congress and the White House if he doesn ’ t change his tune , according to multiple GOP sources .
Trump officials , sources said , are fully aware of the concerns… [ Wisconsin county GOP chair Rohn ] Bishop added bluntly : “ I ’ m getting aggravated because I think we ’ re only hurting ourselves .
… Anything that ties an arm behind my back , I don ’ t like that.
” … GOP leaders in the House and Senate have publicly and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting — and hope the President changes his tune… While Trump has claimed that vote-by-mail will be a disaster for Republicans , recent election results suggest that ’ s not necessarily the case .
In California ’ s 25th District , a special election to fill former Democratic Rep. Katie Hill ’ s seat was conducted almost entirely by mail , with Republican Mike Garcia easily winning the seat over Democrat Christ Smith , 54 % -46 % .
At least one Republican state party is so frantic to get members to consider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taken to doctoring Trump ’ s tweets on the subject to make him sound more supportive of the practice than he really is : There ’ s no difference between absentee and mail-in voting in Florida , which is where the president himself votes .
According to Politico , 423,000 more Democrats than Republicans so far have signed up there for mail ballots ; the final margin between Trump and Hillary in Florida in 2016 was 113,000 votes .
One Republican consultant told the paper , “ It ’ s sad that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election is to scare the living s— out of the base with deceptive lies and conspiracy theories .
It ’ s working for now , but it ’ s a bad long-term strategy that will hurt the party in the future.
” It ’ ll be grimly ironic if the base ’ s cultish devotion to Trump ends up finishing him off this fall by marching off a cliff on the issue of voting by mail , and it ’ ll be even worse if that suspicion about mail-in ballots persists through future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than one election because of this .
Which is not to suggest that mail-in voting is optimal : Rather the opposite , as Ed explained a few days ago .
Ideally we ’ d all vote at polling places on Election Day .
But given this country ’ s abiding inability to contain the coronavirus , there ’ s every reason at the moment to think we ’ ll face a dangerous public-health situation in November .
The only thing worse than a gigantic mail-ballot clusterfark that lasts for days after November 3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 while waiting in line for hours to vote at their local high-school gyms .
If Trump ’ s serious about resisting voting by mail to the bitter end , he should be pushing hard right now to relocate as many polling places as possible outdoors this fall .
If that means Minnesotans have to bundle up and wait in line during a snowstorm to vote , that ’ s what it means .
( Sorry , Ed . )
There ’ s an eight-dimensional-chess theory for what Trump ’ s doing by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though .
If he ’ s convinced that he ’ s destined to lose this fall and if he intends to cry foul when he does then it ’ s in his interest to discourage Republicans from mail-in voting .
It achieves two things for him .
First , it sets him up to claim later that Biden ’ s victory is owed purely to ballot-stuffing , not unlike how he claimed in 2016 that Clinton ’ s popular-vote win was due to illegal aliens crashing the polls .
Second , it creates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end up way ahead by the time everyone goes to bed on Election Night thanks to the much higher percentage of Republicans who ’ ll have voted in person that day than Democrats .
Then , when Biden zooms past him as all of the Democratic votes are counted in the ensuing days , Trump can claim that an election which he “ won ” is being stolen from him after the fact .
( This nightmare scenario is so predictable that some elections experts have already begun warning about it in print @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s playing eight-dimensional chess .
He was complaining about voting by mail long before his polling against Biden began to collapse .
He probably doesn ’ t believe he ’ s likely to lose the election even now .
I think he opposes mail-in ballots for the simple reason that he suspects ( probably correctly ) that there are more Democrats than Republican in the United States and thus the easier it is for people to vote , the more likely a Democratic victory is .
But he ’ s certainly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the nightmare scenario I ’ ve described even if Biden ends up winning by 10 points once all the mail votes are counted .
He might even talk himself into believing it .
The only way to avert that outcome is for Biden to win so big that he tops Trump even among people who vote in person on November 3 .
That seems highly unlikely , but that ’ s what it ’ ll take .

Voting by mail has become the electoral equivalent of mask-wearing. In both cases, with some degree of encouragement from the president, a meaningful number of righties have concluded that it’s illegitimate and refuse to participate in it. In both cases, the Republican establishment has watched that play out and been horrified by the potential electoral implications. If Republicans don’t wear masks then the virus will spread more aggressively and Trump’s polling will suffer. If Republicans don’t vote by mail then Democrats will enjoy a GOTV advantage that may prove decisive in close-run states on Election Day.
In both cases, party leaders have tried to persuade Trump to change course — although that’s where the similarities between masks and mail-in ballots end. Trump was never strongly anti-mask even though he was averse to wearing one in public for months and described mask-wearing at least once as “politically correct.” He is, however, strongly against voting by mail. He’s denounced it as fraud-prone so many times that it’s hard to believe he’d ever change his mind about it, even if GOP strategists could get through to him that the party is kneecapping itself by eschewing this method of voting.
The best-case scenario is that they keep after him and keep after him and finally after many months he relents. That’s what happened with masks, when he finally donned one for his trip to Walter Reed. The problem with mail-in voting is that he doesn’t have many months left before Election Day to undo the damage from his current stance. The sooner he starts deprogramming MAGA Nation by embracing voting by mail, the sooner Republican voters can start their applications for ballots. But there’s no reason to think he’s willing to do that. People have been warning him for months already that he’s risking his own reelection by refusing to budge on this, yet he’s refused to budge.
All local Republicans can do is keep trying:
Behind the scenes, top Republicans are urging senior Trump campaign officials to press the President to change his messaging and embrace mail-in voting, warning that the party could lose the battle for control of Congress and the White House if he doesn’t change his tune, according to multiple GOP sources. Trump officials, sources said, are fully aware of the concerns… [Wisconsin county GOP chair Rohn] Bishop added bluntly: “I’m getting aggravated because I think we’re only hurting ourselves. … Anything that ties an arm behind my back, I don’t like that.”… GOP leaders in the House and Senate have publicly and privately called for more resources for mail-in voting — and hope the President changes his tune… While Trump has claimed that vote-by-mail will be a disaster for Republicans, recent election results suggest that’s not necessarily the case. In California’s 25th District, a special election to fill former Democratic Rep. Katie Hill’s seat was conducted almost entirely by mail, with Republican Mike Garcia easily winning the seat over Democrat Christ Smith, 54%-46%.
GOP pollster Glen Bolger sounded the alarm a few days ago:
Yikes — just finished a statewide survey in a swing state. The quarter of the voters who plan to vote by mail or absentee break 15% Trump/75% Biden on the Pres. ballot. Republicans are skeptical about voting by mail, and that's a problem up and down ballot. — Glen Bolger (@posglen) July 13, 2020
At least one Republican state party is so frantic to get members to consider voting by mail that they’ve taken to doctoring Trump’s tweets on the subject to make him sound more supportive of the practice than he really is:
In a mass-solicitation designed to boost flagging interest in registering to vote by mail, the Republican Party of Florida featured a Trump tweet from June 28 that praised absentee ballots but that had his opposition to mail-in voting strategically edited out. “Absentee Ballots are fine. A person has to go through a process to get and use them,” Trump said in the tweet. The rest of the quote was blurred out: “Mail-In Voting, on the other hand, will lead to the most corrupt Election is USA history. Bad things happen with Mail-Ins. Just look at Special Election in Patterson, N.J. 19% of Ballots a FRAUD.”
There’s no difference between absentee and mail-in voting in Florida, which is where the president himself votes. According to Politico, 423,000 more Democrats than Republicans so far have signed up there for mail ballots; the final margin between Trump and Hillary in Florida in 2016 was 113,000 votes.
One Republican consultant told the paper, “It’s sad that the GOP’s strategy to win an election is to scare the living s— out of the base with deceptive lies and conspiracy theories. It’s working for now, but it’s a bad long-term strategy that will hurt the party in the future.” It’ll be grimly ironic if the base’s cultish devotion to Trump ends up finishing him off this fall by marching off a cliff on the issue of voting by mail, and it’ll be even worse if that suspicion about mail-in ballots persists through future cycles. The party may lose more than one election because of this.
Which is not to suggest that mail-in voting is optimal: Rather the opposite, as Ed explained a few days ago. Ideally we’d all vote at polling places on Election Day. But given this country’s abiding inability to contain the coronavirus, there’s every reason at the moment to think we’ll face a dangerous public-health situation in November. The only thing worse than a gigantic mail-ballot clusterfark that lasts for days after November 3 would be forcing Americans to risk catching COVID-19 while waiting in line for hours to vote at their local high-school gyms.
If Trump’s serious about resisting voting by mail to the bitter end, he should be pushing hard right now to relocate as many polling places as possible outdoors this fall. If that means Minnesotans have to bundle up and wait in line during a snowstorm to vote, that’s what it means. (Sorry, Ed.)
There’s an eight-dimensional-chess theory for what Trump’s doing by opposing voting by mail so stridently, though. If he’s convinced that he’s destined to lose this fall and if he intends to cry foul when he does then it’s in his interest to discourage Republicans from mail-in voting. It achieves two things for him. First, it sets him up to claim later that Biden’s victory is owed purely to ballot-stuffing, not unlike how he claimed in 2016 that Clinton’s popular-vote win was due to illegal aliens crashing the polls. Second, it creates a dynamic in which he’ll end up way ahead by the time everyone goes to bed on Election Night thanks to the much higher percentage of Republicans who’ll have voted in person that day than Democrats. Then, when Biden zooms past him as all of the Democratic votes are counted in the ensuing days, Trump can claim that an election which he “won” is being stolen from him after the fact. (This nightmare scenario is so predictable that some elections experts have already begun warning about it in print.)
I don’t think he’s playing eight-dimensional chess. He was complaining about voting by mail long before his polling against Biden began to collapse. He probably doesn’t believe he’s likely to lose the election even now. I think he opposes mail-in ballots for the simple reason that he suspects (probably correctly) that there are more Democrats than Republican in the United States and thus the easier it is for people to vote, the more likely a Democratic victory is. But he’s certainly amoral enough to scream about election fraud in the nightmare scenario I’ve described even if Biden ends up winning by 10 points once all the mail votes are counted. He might even talk himself into believing it. The only way to avert that outcome is for Biden to win so big that he tops Trump even among people who vote in person on November 3. That seems highly unlikely, but that’s what it’ll take.


hotair--2020-07-17--Andrew Sullivan: I'm a critic of critical race theory so I've been shown the door

On the same day that Bari Weiss announced she was resigning her job at the NY Times , Andrew Sullivan announced he was leaving New York Magazine which is now owned by Vox Media .
Today Sullivan published his farewell column at the site in which he says he has not been cancelled but also says he was let go because people who work for the company no longer want to be associated with a critic of critical race theory .
What has happened , I think , is relatively simple : A critical mass of the staff and management @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no longer want to associate with me , and , in a time of ever tightening budgets , I ’ m a luxury item they don ’ t want to afford .
And that ’ s entirely their prerogative .
They seem to believe , and this is increasingly the orthodoxy in mainstream media , that any writer not actively committed to critical theory in questions of race , gender , sexual orientation , and gender identity is actively , physically harming co-workers merely by existing in the same virtual space .
Actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory ’ s ideas and methods , as I have done continually in this space , is therefore out of sync with the values of Vox Media .
That , to the best of my understanding , is why I ’ m out of here .
Two years ago , I wrote that we all live on campus now .
That is an understatement .
In academia , a tiny fraction of professors and administrators have not yet bent the knee to the woke program — and those few left are being purged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faculty , for example , finds that only 1.46 percent call themselves conservative .
But that ’ s probably higher than the proportion of journalists who call themselves conservative at the New York Times or CNN or New York Magazine… We have freedom of association in this country , and if the mainstream media want to cut ties with even moderate anti-Trump conservatives , because they won ’ t bend the knee to critical theory ’ s version of reality , that ’ s their prerogative .
Most of the rest of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s plan to return to blogging at his own site , which he had shut down five years ago .
He frames this as his own effort to model a more liberal ( in the older sense ) form of debate and discussion : If the mainstream media will not host a diversity of opinion , or puts the “ moral clarity ” of some self-appointed saints before the goal of objectivity in reporting , if it treats writers as mere avatars for their race and gender or gender identity , rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ largely irrelevant , then the nonmainstream needs to pick up the slack .
I have very mixed feelings about Sullivan .
His attacks on Sarah Palin years ago were unhinged .
And back when new atheism was a thing and everyone on the left was concerned about the creeping power of “ dominionists ” Sullivan coined the slur “ Christianists ” and routinely used it to attack people of faith .
More recently he was also on board with the first wave ( in 2017 ) of people on the left claiming President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of that aside , he has written several good columns in reaction to the rise of identity politics on the left which are worth reading .
Ultimately it ’ s those columns that were too much for his employers at New York Magazine/Vox Media .
His sharp attacks on other people ’ s religion were okay but not on the religion that now dominates newsrooms .
So again , I have mixed feelings about Sullivan but my feelings about his employers are more clear .
I have nothing but contempt for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it ’ s their ox getting gored by his columns .

On the same day that Bari Weiss announced she was resigning her job at the NY Times, Andrew Sullivan announced he was leaving New York Magazine which is now owned by Vox Media. Today Sullivan published his farewell column at the site in which he says he has not been cancelled but also says he was let go because people who work for the company no longer want to be associated with a critic of critical race theory.
What has happened, I think, is relatively simple: A critical mass of the staff and management at New York Magazine and Vox Media no longer want to associate with me, and, in a time of ever tightening budgets, I’m a luxury item they don’t want to afford. And that’s entirely their prerogative. They seem to believe, and this is increasingly the orthodoxy in mainstream media, that any writer not actively committed to critical theory in questions of race, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity is actively, physically harming co-workers merely by existing in the same virtual space. Actually attacking, and even mocking, critical theory’s ideas and methods, as I have done continually in this space, is therefore out of sync with the values of Vox Media. That, to the best of my understanding, is why I’m out of here. Two years ago, I wrote that we all live on campus now. That is an understatement. In academia, a tiny fraction of professors and administrators have not yet bent the knee to the woke program — and those few left are being purged. The latest study of Harvard University faculty, for example, finds that only 1.46 percent call themselves conservative. But that’s probably higher than the proportion of journalists who call themselves conservative at the New York Times or CNN or New York Magazine… We have freedom of association in this country, and if the mainstream media want to cut ties with even moderate anti-Trump conservatives, because they won’t bend the knee to critical theory’s version of reality, that’s their prerogative.
Most of the rest of the column is devoted to laying out Sullivan’s plan to return to blogging at his own site, which he had shut down five years ago. He frames this as his own effort to model a more liberal (in the older sense) form of debate and discussion:
If the mainstream media will not host a diversity of opinion, or puts the “moral clarity” of some self-appointed saints before the goal of objectivity in reporting, if it treats writers as mere avatars for their race and gender or gender identity, rather than as unique individuals whose identity is largely irrelevant, then the nonmainstream needs to pick up the slack.
I have very mixed feelings about Sullivan. His attacks on Sarah Palin years ago were unhinged. And back when new atheism was a thing and everyone on the left was concerned about the creeping power of “dominionists” Sullivan coined the slur “Christianists” and routinely used it to attack people of faith. More recently he was also on board with the first wave (in 2017) of people on the left claiming President Trump was mentally unstable.
But putting all of that aside, he has written several good columns in reaction to the rise of identity politics on the left which are worth reading. Ultimately it’s those columns that were too much for his employers at New York Magazine/Vox Media. His sharp attacks on other people’s religion were okay but not on the religion that now dominates newsrooms.
So again, I have mixed feelings about Sullivan but my feelings about his employers are more clear. I have nothing but contempt for the thin-skinned hypocrites who pushed Sullivan out now that it’s their ox getting gored by his columns.


hotair--2020-07-17--Kellyanne Conway: I want Trump to start doing coronavirus briefings again

This advice is so terrible that I half-wonder whether George has finally convinced her to join the other side and she ’ s now operating as a saboteur under deep cover .
In the abstract it ’ s good advice .
For any other politician , it ’ d be a no-brainer to go out there every day in front of the cameras , say some reassuring things about progress , evince pity for the victims of COVID-19 and their families , and tell the country to hang in there .
Look no further than Andrew Cuomo , a politician @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of many thousands of elderly people through his momentous errors in judgment yet currently enjoys a 66 percent approval rating .
Why ?
Because he managed to come across as a reasonably well-informed and empathetic leader in his daily noon coronavirus briefings .
If Trump were capable of the same thing , he might be over 50 percent approval now and on track to top his electoral vote haul from 2016 notwithstanding the garish death toll and daily case counts America is facing right now .
But he ’ s incapable of it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s why the coronavirus briefings ended in the first place .
They turned into endless grievance sessions for Trump to rant about his enemies .
Any reprise of them would be destined to end the same way .
The public did , and would , draw the same lesson from them as Clintonite Joe Lockhart has : POTUS appears to view the pandemic always and everywhere through the prism of how it affects him personally , specifically how it affects his chances at reelection .
He believes an immediate economic revival is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second term and so he ’ ll always choose the policy option that accelerates , or appears to accelerate , that revival no matter what it means for public health .
Reopen businesses ASAP .
Reopen schools ASAP .
End of discussion .
If you could convince him to stick to brief scripted remarks in introducing a daily briefing and then hand things over to Pence , Fauci , and Birx to do most of the talking then yeah , I think that would help him in the polls .
It would communicate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their sense of crisis about the virus and intends to keep them posted regularly on how we ’ re doing at containing it .
Poll after poll after poll shows that most voters prioritize limiting the spread over restoring the economy ( for the common-sense reason that we can ’ t durably restore the economy until people feel safe working and shopping again ) .
A daily briefing at which Trump stuck to that message would improve his numbers .
But he won ’ t stick to that message .
Either he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open everything up before they ’ re comfortable doing so , as he ’ s doing right now with schools , or he ’ ll just veer off into rants about the “ Russia hoax ” or dishwasher efficiency or maybe using disinfectant inside the body to kill the virus or whatever .
It ’ s unimaginable that he ’ d stand by and listen to Fauci and Birx undercut his “ reopen everything immediately ” message by urging caution in states that are currently battling major epidemics .
He ’ d need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the briefings resumed , and he ’ ll never be convinced .
If he was going to pivot from his position that plowing ahead with reopening is a good idea as we top 70,000 cases a day , he would have done it already .
Conway knows all that .
Just like she also knows that it ’ s silly for her to say in the clip , “ The president ’ s numbers were much higher when he was out there briefing everybody on his day by day basis about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but it ’ s not because of the briefings that his numbers were higher in April .
It ’ s because the country hadn ’ t yet endured the protests over George Floyd ’ s death and the wave of new infections in the south and California and the president ’ s weirdly unempathetic reactions to both .
On the contrary , the briefings back in April may end up being viewed by historians as the beginning of the end of his chances at reelection .
That ’ s when his internal polling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t stay on message and feign empathy then and he wouldn ’ t be able to do so now .
For Conway to disregard all that means she has some sort of angle she ’ s working here .
My guess is that she wants the public to view her as a dissenting strategic voice inside the White House because she thinks Trump is unlikely to be reelected at this point .
Maybe she intends to plant little Easter eggs like this on Fox News for the next several months ( “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insisted on doing Y ” ) so that she can say after the election , “ I told them they should have done X.
” Even though X in this case is completely cockamamie .
The other possibility is that Conway thinks Trump needs an excuse to be at a podium in front of a mic and a banc of cameras every day or else he ’ s going to behave even more “ erratically ” than he has been lately .
That may explain the rally-style atmosphere in his Rose Garden events @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to scratch his itch to vent to crowds as best they can , part of the project of managing the president ’ s mood that occasionally goes so far as to run campaign ads on D.C. TV in hopes that he ’ ll see them and feel better .
But that can ’ t be what Conway ’ s after .
She knows that turning coronavirus briefings into de facto rallies , a la April , would only make his current problems worse .
Maybe she ’ s a double agent for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t know .

This advice is so terrible that I half-wonder whether George has finally convinced her to join the other side and she’s now operating as a saboteur under deep cover.
In the abstract it’s good advice. For any other politician, it’d be a no-brainer to go out there every day in front of the cameras, say some reassuring things about progress, evince pity for the victims of COVID-19 and their families, and tell the country to hang in there. Look no further than Andrew Cuomo, a politician who culled New York’s population of many thousands of elderly people through his momentous errors in judgment yet currently enjoys a 66 percent approval rating. Why? Because he managed to come across as a reasonably well-informed and empathetic leader in his daily noon coronavirus briefings. If Trump were capable of the same thing, he might be over 50 percent approval now and on track to top his electoral vote haul from 2016 notwithstanding the garish death toll and daily case counts America is facing right now.
But he’s incapable of it and Conway surely understands that. That’s why the coronavirus briefings ended in the first place. They turned into endless grievance sessions for Trump to rant about his enemies. Any reprise of them would be destined to end the same way. The public did, and would, draw the same lesson from them as Clintonite Joe Lockhart has:
The most striking thing about @realDonaldTrump approach to the pandemic six months in is how little he cares. There is no emotion in talking about the victims or the fight America faces. He treats it like it's a political annoyance that hurts him more than anyone. — Joe Lockhart (@joelockhart) July 17, 2020
POTUS appears to view the pandemic always and everywhere through the prism of how it affects him personally, specifically how it affects his chances at reelection. He believes an immediate economic revival is the only chance he has at a second term and so he’ll always choose the policy option that accelerates, or appears to accelerate, that revival no matter what it means for public health. Reopen businesses ASAP. Reopen schools ASAP. End of discussion.
If you could convince him to stick to brief scripted remarks in introducing a daily briefing and then hand things over to Pence, Fauci, and Birx to do most of the talking then yeah, I think that would help him in the polls. It would communicate to the electorate that he finally shares their sense of crisis about the virus and intends to keep them posted regularly on how we’re doing at containing it. Poll after poll after poll shows that most voters prioritize limiting the spread over restoring the economy (for the common-sense reason that we can’t durably restore the economy until people feel safe working and shopping again). A daily briefing at which Trump stuck to that message would improve his numbers.
But he won’t stick to that message. Either he’ll lapse back into hectoring people to open everything up before they’re comfortable doing so, as he’s doing right now with schools, or he’ll just veer off into rants about the “Russia hoax” or dishwasher efficiency or maybe using disinfectant inside the body to kill the virus or whatever. It’s unimaginable that he’d stand by and listen to Fauci and Birx undercut his “reopen everything immediately” message by urging caution in states that are currently battling major epidemics. He’d need to be convinced to adopt their approach before the briefings resumed, and he’ll never be convinced. If he was going to pivot from his position that plowing ahead with reopening is a good idea as we top 70,000 cases a day, he would have done it already.
Conway knows all that. Just like she also knows that it’s silly for her to say in the clip, “The president’s numbers were much higher when he was out there briefing everybody on his day by day basis about the coronavirus.” It’s true, but it’s not because of the briefings that his numbers were higher in April. It’s because the country hadn’t yet endured the protests over George Floyd’s death and the wave of new infections in the south and California and the president’s weirdly unempathetic reactions to both. On the contrary, the briefings back in April may end up being viewed by historians as the beginning of the end of his chances at reelection. That’s when his internal polling began to nosedive. He couldn’t stay on message and feign empathy then and he wouldn’t be able to do so now.
For Conway to disregard all that means she has some sort of angle she’s working here. My guess is that she wants the public to view her as a dissenting strategic voice inside the White House because she thinks Trump is unlikely to be reelected at this point. Maybe she intends to plant little Easter eggs like this on Fox News for the next several months (“I wanted to do X but the others insisted on doing Y”) so that she can say after the election, “I told them they should have done X.” Even though X in this case is completely cockamamie.
The other possibility is that Conway thinks Trump needs an excuse to be at a podium in front of a mic and a banc of cameras every day or else he’s going to behave even more “erratically” than he has been lately. That may explain the rally-style atmosphere in his Rose Garden events this week. Staffers seem to be trying to scratch his itch to vent to crowds as best they can, part of the project of managing the president’s mood that occasionally goes so far as to run campaign ads on D.C. TV in hopes that he’ll see them and feel better. But that can’t be what Conway’s after. She knows that turning coronavirus briefings into de facto rallies, a la April, would only make his current problems worse.
Maybe she’s a double agent for Project Lincoln now? I don’t know.


hotair--2020-07-17--Justice Ginsburg has recurrence of cancer, has been undergoing chemotherapy since May

Just a few days ago Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was hospitalized with a fever and underwent a procedure to remove a stent from her bile duct .
Today we learn that the Justice has had a recurrence of cancer and has been receiving chemotherapy for it since May .
Here ’ s the statement on her condition released by the court : On May 19 , I began a course of chemotherapy ( gemcitabine ) to treat a recurrence of cancer .
A periodic scan in February followed by a biopsy revealed lesions on my liver .
My @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treat an infection were unrelated to this recurrence .
Immunotherapy first essayed proved unsuccessful .
The chemotherapy course , however , is yielding positive results .
Satisfied that my treatment course is now clear , I am providing this information .
My most recent scan on July 7 indicated significant reduction of the liver lesions and no new disease .
I am tolerating chemotherapy well and am encouraged by the success of my current treatment .
I will continue bi-weekly chemotherapy to keep my cancer at bay , and am able to maintain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have kept up with opinion writing and all other Court work .
I have often said I would remain a member of the Court as long as I can do the job full steam .
I remain fully able to do that .
The statement says the recurrence of cancer was picked up by a scan in Feburary .
In January Ginsburg had given CNN an interview where she announced she was cancer free : Last year at this time , Ginsburg was recovering from lung cancer surgery and missed several weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the term in June .
Soon after , she discovered a cancerous tumor on her pancreas , which was treated in August , and she resumed her active schedule .
Sounding energized and speaking animatedly , she told CNN on Tuesday that her year was off to a fine start : “ I ’ m cancer free .
That ’ s good.
” Today ’ s announcement marks the 5th time Ginsburg has battled with cancer .
She had surgery for colon cancer in 1999 .
In 2009 she had surgery for early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she had surgery for lung cancer in which a portion of her lung was removed .
Then last summer she was given radiation treatment for pancreatic cancer .
Three bouts with cancer in three years would be a lot for anyone to take but at age 87 it ’ s pretty remarkable she ’ s still able to carry on with a demanding job and do it “ full steam.
” Clearly the latter half of the letter is aimed at reassuring everyone she ’ s not in danger of resigning before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves as fighting for the cause but few are fighting the battle as personally as RBG .
She really has proven to be a tough lady and I wish her a speedy recovery .

Just a few days ago Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was hospitalized with a fever and underwent a procedure to remove a stent from her bile duct. Today we learn that the Justice has had a recurrence of cancer and has been receiving chemotherapy for it since May. Here’s the statement on her condition released by the court:
On May 19, I began a course of chemotherapy (gemcitabine) to treat a recurrence of cancer. A periodic scan in February followed by a biopsy revealed lesions on my liver. My recent hospitalizations to remove gall stones and treat an infection were unrelated to this recurrence. Immunotherapy first essayed proved unsuccessful. The chemotherapy course, however, is yielding positive results. Satisfied that my treatment course is now clear, I am providing this information. My most recent scan on July 7 indicated significant reduction of the liver lesions and no new disease. I am tolerating chemotherapy well and am encouraged by the success of my current treatment. I will continue bi-weekly chemotherapy to keep my cancer at bay, and am able to maintain an active daily routine. Throughout, I have kept up with opinion writing and all other Court work. I have often said I would remain a member of the Court as long as I can do the job full steam. I remain fully able to do that.
The statement says the recurrence of cancer was picked up by a scan in Feburary. In January Ginsburg had given CNN an interview where she announced she was cancer free:
Last year at this time, Ginsburg was recovering from lung cancer surgery and missed several weeks at the court. She finished out the term in June. Soon after, she discovered a cancerous tumor on her pancreas, which was treated in August, and she resumed her active schedule. Sounding energized and speaking animatedly, she told CNN on Tuesday that her year was off to a fine start: “I’m cancer free. That’s good.”
Today’s announcement marks the 5th time Ginsburg has battled with cancer. She had surgery for colon cancer in 1999. In 2009 she had surgery for early stage pancreatic cancer. In December 2018 she had surgery for lung cancer in which a portion of her lung was removed. Then last summer she was given radiation treatment for pancreatic cancer.
Three bouts with cancer in three years would be a lot for anyone to take but at age 87 it’s pretty remarkable she’s still able to carry on with a demanding job and do it “full steam.” Clearly the latter half of the letter is aimed at reassuring everyone she’s not in danger of resigning before the election. A lot of progressives see themselves as fighting for the cause but few are fighting the battle as personally as RBG. She really has proven to be a tough lady and I wish her a speedy recovery.


hotair--2020-07-17--Abbott: "Let me tell you, there is no shutdown coming", stop panicking!

The Republican Party of Texas ( RPT ) is off to a rocky start with its virtual convention this week .
Though the party has worked on putting together a state convention for three years , the coronavirus changed things up at the last minute .
Instead of the usual large , in-person convention , it is now a virtual convention .
When the convention tried to open Thursday , things did not go smoothly .
The RPT planned to stream the virtual convention on its Facebook page and on YouTube beginning at 9:00 a.m. After problems with electronic credentialing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chairman gaveled in the convention at 1:47 p.m. , but it wasn ’ t the live convention , it was to run the pre-recorded speeches by elected officials .
Governor Abbott delivered a strong response to critics of his handling of the coronavirus outbreak in Texas and reminded his audience that everyone must pull together and re-elect President Trump in November .
The governor has been censured by a number of county Republican parties in recent weeks for executive overreach in fighting the coronavirus , though none of the resolutions coming out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s preliminary platform process .
Turning to the politics that it is the real work of the convention , Abbott said , “ Now , I know there are issues that we may differ on .
But I also know there is so much that we agree on — things like beating Joe Biden and reelecting Donald Trump.
” “ Joe Biden he may be hiding in his basement somewhere , but we know exactly what his vision for America is , ” Abbott said .
“ Joe Biden and the Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They want to grab your guns and tax your churches .
They want to dismantle the greatest economy the world has ever known.
” Abbott urged Republicans to unite around the common goal of returning Trump to the White House .
“ We must work together to seize this defining moment in our history .
We must save our nation from the grips of socialism and ensure that we remain one nation , under God , indivisible , with liberty and justice for all , ” he said .
State Agriculture Commissioner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , spoke to the convention by pre-recorded message after the governor .
His remarks showed the strain between members of the party over how best to manage the coronavirus outbreak and its current spike in Texas .
His remarks were recorded at the Alamo .
Giddy-up .
During an interview with a Houston television station , Governor Abbott reassured viewers that there will be no second shutdown of the state .
Just last week he threatened to go back to full shutdown mode if the spike in coronavirus cases wasn ’ t brought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that people should ignore the rumors and stop panicking .
“ Let me tell you , there is no shutdown coming , ” he told KRIV-TV in Houston .
Abbott pointed to measures he ’ s taken in recent weeks , including a statewide mask mandate and an order shutting down bars , to slow the spread of the virus .
It will take a few weeks to see a reversal in coronavirus case surges , he said .
He has repeatedly stressed this week that , if people wear masks , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down the state .
On Wednesday , he told KPRC-TV in Houston that it seems like people ask him about a shutdown “ like a thousand times a day.
” “ People are panicking , thinking I ’ m about to shut down Texas again , ” he said .
“ The answer is no .
That is not the goal .
I ’ ve been abundantly clear.
” “ We are certainly not out of the woods yet , but this could be a glimmer of hope , ” Abbott said of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the only way we can avoid a shutdown is if we do get everybody buying into this process of wearing a face mask.
” Texas Democrats would like nothing more than for Abbott to shut down the state again .
The Texas economy would likely not easily survive a second lockdown and the national economy depends on the Texas economy as an economic engine .
Democrats in Texas and nationally have shown their cards – the country should remain in lockdown mode as long as possible , certainly until Election Day .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health policy .
We see you , Democrats .
Since technical difficulties got in the way of the RPT conducting business Thursday , the chairman agreed with delegates that the convention will not gavel in again until Saturday morning .
Friday will be used as a training day in hopes of everything going smoother by Saturday .
He got in a shot at Houston Mayor Turner , too .
“ So yes , I feel much more comfortable with committing to a Saturday morning start time and knowing we ’ ve got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get this done , we get it done right , we get it tested , we get it trained for our folks , so that the important parts of the convention experience , the parts where they debate , and where delegates provide their input and that that input changes and improves our end product , that ’ s what I want to have happen , and I want them to to able to focus on that , and right now , that has been overshadowed by the uncertainty caused by the ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , caused by the coronavirus , caused by all the things that we ’ ve had to deal with , and I can appreciate the dramatic increase in certainty that a Saturday start time would give us .
”

The Republican Party of Texas (RPT) is off to a rocky start with its virtual convention this week. Though the party has worked on putting together a state convention for three years, the coronavirus changed things up at the last minute. Instead of the usual large, in-person convention, it is now a virtual convention. When the convention tried to open Thursday, things did not go smoothly.
The RPT planned to stream the virtual convention on its Facebook page and on YouTube beginning at 9:00 a.m. After problems with electronic credentialing of delegates were worked out, the chairman gaveled in the convention at 1:47 p.m., but it wasn’t the live convention, it was to run the pre-recorded speeches by elected officials. Governor Abbott delivered a strong response to critics of his handling of the coronavirus outbreak in Texas and reminded his audience that everyone must pull together and re-elect President Trump in November. The governor has been censured by a number of county Republican parties in recent weeks for executive overreach in fighting the coronavirus, though none of the resolutions coming out of county parties made it through the convention’s preliminary platform process.
Turning to the politics that it is the real work of the convention, Abbott said, “Now, I know there are issues that we may differ on. But I also know there is so much that we agree on — things like beating Joe Biden and reelecting Donald Trump.” “Joe Biden he may be hiding in his basement somewhere, but we know exactly what his vision for America is,” Abbott said. “Joe Biden and the Democrats, they want to cancel conservative speech. They want to grab your guns and tax your churches. They want to dismantle the greatest economy the world has ever known.” Abbott urged Republicans to unite around the common goal of returning Trump to the White House. “We must work together to seize this defining moment in our history. We must save our nation from the grips of socialism and ensure that we remain one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all,” he said.
State Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller, an early Trump supporter, spoke to the convention by pre-recorded message after the governor. His remarks showed the strain between members of the party over how best to manage the coronavirus outbreak and its current spike in Texas. His remarks were recorded at the Alamo. Giddy-up.
“Will we defend our freedoms with the same fervor and commitment as those who in 1836 crossed over a line in the sand drawn by a sword just a few yards from where I now stand?” Miller asked. “Or will we be timid souls and allow an invisible virus, and the response to it, to erode our freedoms, our liberty and our independence?”
During an interview with a Houston television station, Governor Abbott reassured viewers that there will be no second shutdown of the state. Just last week he threatened to go back to full shutdown mode if the spike in coronavirus cases wasn’t brought under control. His message now is that people should ignore the rumors and stop panicking.
“Let me tell you, there is no shutdown coming,” he told KRIV-TV in Houston. Abbott pointed to measures he’s taken in recent weeks, including a statewide mask mandate and an order shutting down bars, to slow the spread of the virus. It will take a few weeks to see a reversal in coronavirus case surges, he said. He has repeatedly stressed this week that, if people wear masks, he’ll be able to avoid shutting down the state. On Wednesday, he told KPRC-TV in Houston that it seems like people ask him about a shutdown “like a thousand times a day.” “People are panicking, thinking I’m about to shut down Texas again,” he said. “The answer is no. That is not the goal. I’ve been abundantly clear.” “We are certainly not out of the woods yet, but this could be a glimmer of hope,” Abbott said of the recent hospitalization numbers. “But the only way we can avoid a shutdown is if we do get everybody buying into this process of wearing a face mask.”
Texas Democrats would like nothing more than for Abbott to shut down the state again. The Texas economy would likely not easily survive a second lockdown and the national economy depends on the Texas economy as an economic engine. Democrats in Texas and nationally have shown their cards – the country should remain in lockdown mode as long as possible, certainly until Election Day. It’s all about politics, not public health policy.
“Governor Abbott should start listening to public health officials and members of his own coronavirus taskforce before he makes blanket claims,” Abhi Rahman, a state party spokesperson, said in an email. “After experiencing record deaths today and over 10,000 new cases, it’s shocking that Abbott continues to double down on his failed policies and positions.”
We see you, Democrats.
Since technical difficulties got in the way of the RPT conducting business Thursday, the chairman agreed with delegates that the convention will not gavel in again until Saturday morning. Friday will be used as a training day in hopes of everything going smoother by Saturday. He got in a shot at Houston Mayor Turner, too.
“So yes, I feel much more comfortable with committing to a Saturday morning start time and knowing we’ve got all day tomorrow to make sure we get this done, we get it done right, we get it tested, we get it trained for our folks, so that the important parts of the convention experience, the parts where they debate, and where delegates provide their input and that that input changes and improves our end product, that’s what I want to have happen, and I want them to to able to focus on that, and right now, that has been overshadowed by the uncertainty caused by the (Houston) mayor (Sylvester Turner), caused by the coronavirus, caused by all the things that we’ve had to deal with, and I can appreciate the dramatic increase in certainty that a Saturday start time would give us.”


hotair--2020-07-17--Hawley to Barr: Open a civil-rights investigation into DA's "targeting" of McCloskeys

Would William Barr need Josh Hawley ’ s encouragement ?
The senator from Missouri demanded a Department of Justice intervention in the case of the McCloskeys , the couple who arguably defended their home against a mob and now face prosecution for brandishing their weapons .
Hawley accused St. Louis County DA Kimberly Gardner of targeting the couple for her own political purposes and wants Barr to open a civil-rights investigation of Gardner : Gardner ’ s office is still investigating , but no charges have been filed .
Hawley , a Missouri Republican , wrote in a letter to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seizing the couple ’ s guns , investigating them and pursuing a possible indictment .
He called her actions “ an unacceptable abuse of power and threat to the Second Amendment.
” “ There is no question under Missouri law that the McCloskeys had the right to own and use their firearms to protect themselves from threatened violence , and that any criminal prosecution for these actions is legally unsound , ” Hawley wrote .
“ The only possible motivation for the investigation , then , is a politically motivated attempt to punish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights.
” Gardner , in a statement , said , “ I am deeply disappointed that a U.S .
Senator would intervene in a local matter that is under investigation.
” … Hawley isn ’ t the only high-level Republican to express concerns about Gardner ’ s investigation .
The case caught the attention of President Donald Trump , who spoke about it in a phone conversation with Gov .
Mike Parson on Tuesday .
When he was in the Legislature , Parson co-authored Missouri ’ s “ castle doctrine ” law that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defending their homes from intruders .
He said the McCloskeys “ had every right to protect their property.
” Well , maybe .
The Castle Doctrine allows Missouri residents to defend their property without requiring a retreat first if possible , as some other states do .
It does not , however , change the circumstances of the use of lethal force in self-defense , and neither do Stand Your Ground laws , either .
All they do is remove the requirement to retreat ; a legal use of lethal force ( including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threat to life or property in circumstances that a reasonable person would be afraid of death or grave harm , among other prerequisites .
Trampling the flower bed doesn ’ t qualify , for instance , but a mob action in your front yard in the context of riots in the area and around the country certainly might .
I ’ d bet that any prosecutor would have a tough time finding twelve jurors who disagreed with the idea that a reasonable person would fear for their lives in that situation .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gardner look so politically motivated , especially with the premature seizure of the weapons involved .
The McCloskeys haven ’ t yet been charged with anything , let alone convicted , and the incident was caught on tape .
They have confirmed repeatedly that the tape is accurate and the weapons were theirs .
So why seize the weapons ?
Why not wait for the investigation to conclude ?
By the same token , however , it ’ s also a bit premature for a DoJ intervention on the basis of civil rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incident is certainly within Gardner ’ s purview , even if the seizure looks like an overreach .
The McCloskeys can challenge the seizure themselves in court in a habeas action and rely on the Second Amendment in such a motion .
( They ’ re attorneys , so presumably they know how to file such a lawsuit . )
Barr got read into the case last week along with Donald Trump , so he ’ s aware of his options , but he ’ s probably waiting for further developments .
Hawley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he can make political hay all day long on this case , but Barr needs to step more carefully at this stage .
We can expect all sides to wring as much demagoguery out of this situation as possible , but it seems very unlikely that Gardner will tempt fate by pursuing an indictment .
This case is a loser in court , and she knows it .
If she indicts and gets depantsed in court , Gardner will have to suffer the consequences of raised expectations among the progressives that elected her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that fate now as it is .

Would William Barr need Josh Hawley’s encouragement? The senator from Missouri demanded a Department of Justice intervention in the case of the McCloskeys, the couple who arguably defended their home against a mob and now face prosecution for brandishing their weapons. Hawley accused St. Louis County DA Kimberly Gardner of targeting the couple for her own political purposes and wants Barr to open a civil-rights investigation of Gardner:
Gardner’s office is still investigating, but no charges have been filed. Hawley, a Missouri Republican, wrote in a letter to Barr that Gardner abused her power in seizing the couple’s guns, investigating them and pursuing a possible indictment. He called her actions “an unacceptable abuse of power and threat to the Second Amendment.” “There is no question under Missouri law that the McCloskeys had the right to own and use their firearms to protect themselves from threatened violence, and that any criminal prosecution for these actions is legally unsound,” Hawley wrote. “The only possible motivation for the investigation, then, is a politically motivated attempt to punish this family for exercising their Second Amendment rights.” Gardner, in a statement, said, “I am deeply disappointed that a U.S. Senator would intervene in a local matter that is under investigation.” … Hawley isn’t the only high-level Republican to express concerns about Gardner’s investigation. The case caught the attention of President Donald Trump, who spoke about it in a phone conversation with Gov. Mike Parson on Tuesday. When he was in the Legislature, Parson co-authored Missouri’s “castle doctrine” law that justifies deadly force for those who are defending their homes from intruders. He said the McCloskeys “had every right to protect their property.”
Well, maybe. The Castle Doctrine allows Missouri residents to defend their property without requiring a retreat first if possible, as some other states do. It does not, however, change the circumstances of the use of lethal force in self-defense, and neither do Stand Your Ground laws, either. All they do is remove the requirement to retreat; a legal use of lethal force (including brandishing lethal weapons) still requires a threat to life or property in circumstances that a reasonable person would be afraid of death or grave harm, among other prerequisites. Trampling the flower bed doesn’t qualify, for instance, but a mob action in your front yard in the context of riots in the area and around the country certainly might.
I’d bet that any prosecutor would have a tough time finding twelve jurors who disagreed with the idea that a reasonable person would fear for their lives in that situation. That’s what makes this probe by Gardner look so politically motivated, especially with the premature seizure of the weapons involved. The McCloskeys haven’t yet been charged with anything, let alone convicted, and the incident was caught on tape. They have confirmed repeatedly that the tape is accurate and the weapons were theirs. So why seize the weapons? Why not wait for the investigation to conclude?
By the same token, however, it’s also a bit premature for a DoJ intervention on the basis of civil rights, too. An investigation of the incident is certainly within Gardner’s purview, even if the seizure looks like an overreach. The McCloskeys can challenge the seizure themselves in court in a habeas action and rely on the Second Amendment in such a motion. (They’re attorneys, so presumably they know how to file such a lawsuit.) Barr got read into the case last week along with Donald Trump, so he’s aware of his options, but he’s probably waiting for further developments. Hawley doesn’t need to wait; he can make political hay all day long on this case, but Barr needs to step more carefully at this stage.
We can expect all sides to wring as much demagoguery out of this situation as possible, but it seems very unlikely that Gardner will tempt fate by pursuing an indictment. This case is a loser in court, and she knows it. If she indicts and gets depantsed in court, Gardner will have to suffer the consequences of raised expectations among the progressives that elected her — and she’s already tempting that fate now as it is.


hotair--2020-07-17--Reports: Camouflaged feds grabbing vandals -- and protesters? -- in Portland and carting them off in

Reports: Camouflaged feds grabbing vandals -- and protesters? -- in Portland and carting them off in unmarked vans

How widespread this is , and whether they ’ re targeting vandals or casting a much broader net at demonstrators , are open questions as I write this .
The two stories about this circulating today , one from WaPo and the other from Oregon Public Broadcasting , claim that “ protesters ” are being snatched as well .
What ’ s not in question is that this is twice at least in the past two months that federal agents kitted out in military or paramilitary trappings have appeared on America ’ s streets without any markings identifying who they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with .
When it happened in D.C. last month in the first flush of George Floyd protests , the agents at least looked like cops in riot gear , not soldiers .
The agents on the streets of Portland this week look like troops ; they have a completely generic “ POLICE ” tag on their chests but otherwise they seem poised to deploy .
They ’ re with DHS , it appears .
Here ’ s acting Secretary Chad Wolf addressing the “ troops ” before battle : There are few scenarios @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cops wearing camouflage might be necessary tactically .
From the photo , it looks like they ’ re wearing a green pattern — which wouldn ’ t be especially useful in blending in with one ’ s surroundings in an urban landscape like a major city .
The only reason to wear camouflage here , it seems , is to intimidate .
They ’ re emulating troops because they want to instill the same fear of violent harm in the “ enemy ” that a combat uniform instills on the battlefield .
Same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their uniforms : To all appearances , the point of that is to suggest to vandals , protesters , whoever , that there ’ ll be no accountability for anything these guys end up doing to them .
Literally anything might happen to you if you end up in their custody , or so they want you to think .
For extra fright and unaccountability , they ’ re reportedly using unmarked vans instead of DHS agency vehicles to haul people in .
And if you believe those who claim they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t even know where they are when they arrive .
“ I see guys in camo , ” O ’ Shea said .
“ Four or five of them pop out , open the door and it was just like , ‘ Oh shit .
I don ’ t know who you are or what you want with us.
’ ” Federal law enforcement officers have been using unmarked vehicles to drive around downtown Portland and detain protesters since at least July 14 .
Personal accounts and multiple videos posted online show the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals with no explanation of why they are being arrested , and driving off… But interviews conducted by OPB show officers are also detaining people on Portland streets who aren ’ t near federal property , nor is it clear that all of the people being arrested have engaged in criminal activity .
Demonstrators like O ’ Shea and Pettibone said they think they were targeted by federal officers for simply wearing black clothing in the area of the demonstration… Blinded by his hat , in an unmarked minivan full of armed people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hadn ’ t identified themselves , Pettibone said he was driven around downtown before being unloaded inside a building .
He wouldn ’ t learn until after his release that he had been inside the federal courthouse .
Pettibone and O ’ Shea say they did nothing wrong before they were hauled in and that they were released after 90 minutes with no record of their arrest .
The U.S .
Marshals , who are apparently part of the camouflaged unit , say they have no records of detaining anyone with Pettibone ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chief source for OPB ’ s report , he ’ s also the chief source for WaPo ’ s , which is major cause for caution .
Are he and O ’ Shea making up the story of their arrest to raise alarm about the feds ?
They ’ re certainly not making up the part about guys in unmarked military uniforms .
Nor the part about them riding around in unmarked vans , it appears : Again , the point of being unmarked is to avoid accountability .
If the feds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off the books , it would stand to reason that they might have arrested Pettibone and deliberately created no record of it once they decided not to charge him with anything .
Another reason to believe Pettibone : As I write this at 11 a.m .
ET , DHS hasn ’ t bothered to deny his allegations .
On the contrary , Wolf has taken to posting defiantly in defense of his operation in Portland , which reads like confirmation .
You would think he could do better than graffiti here to illustrate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posted a long list of crimes committed against federal property in Portland by anarchists over the past six weeks , which is a strong argument for a robust police presence and no argument at all for having officers run around unmarked in military uniforms .
As he says in the clip , local officials have asked him to pack up and go home for fear that the federal presence is only making things worse .
( Skim through Wolf ’ s list of crimes and you ’ ll notice that the offenses have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lately . )
The police chief has complained that it “ complicates ” things for Portland PD to have the feds operating there .
The mayor is also upset that the feds won ’ t follow the city ’ s tactical rules , starting with not using tear gas against people .
A few days ago , one protester had his skull cracked and needed facial reconstruction surgery afterward when , it appears , federal agents fired a nonlethal munition in his direction .
“ The best thing they can do is stay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ altogether , ” the mayor said .
Both senators from Oregon ( both Democrats , of course ) also want the feds out ASAP : The jury ’ s out on what really happened to Pettibone but it ’ s clear enough that the feds are operating in an irregular way .
Pettibone told WaPo that when he was first grabbed , he wasn ’ t sure if they were real cops at all or “ far-right extremists ” cosplaying as soldiers and kidnapping people , another complication of not marking themselves clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Wolf trying to fulfill Trump ’ s strongman fantasy of sending soldiers into the streets under the Insurrection Act to crack the heads of looters in early June .
POTUS ended up not doing that after he met resistance from Mark Milley and Mark Esper , but now here ’ s Wolf doing what he can to make the dream happen .
Why aren ’ t these guys dressed like normal federal agents ?
What ’ s the excuse ?

How widespread this is, and whether they’re targeting vandals or casting a much broader net at demonstrators, are open questions as I write this. The two stories about this circulating today, one from WaPo and the other from Oregon Public Broadcasting, claim that “protesters” are being snatched as well.
What’s not in question is that this is twice at least in the past two months that federal agents kitted out in military or paramilitary trappings have appeared on America’s streets without any markings identifying who they are or what agency they’re with. When it happened in D.C. last month in the first flush of George Floyd protests, the agents at least looked like cops in riot gear, not soldiers. The agents on the streets of Portland this week look like troops; they have a completely generic “POLICE” tag on their chests but otherwise they seem poised to deploy.
They’re with DHS, it appears. Here’s acting Secretary Chad Wolf addressing the “troops” before battle:
https://twitter.com/DHS_Wolf/status/1284095516276592641
There are few scenarios I can think of in America when cops wearing camouflage might be necessary tactically. From the photo, it looks like they’re wearing a green pattern — which wouldn’t be especially useful in blending in with one’s surroundings in an urban landscape like a major city. The only reason to wear camouflage here, it seems, is to intimidate. They’re emulating troops because they want to instill the same fear of violent harm in the “enemy” that a combat uniform instills on the battlefield. Same goes for the lack of identifying markers on their uniforms: To all appearances, the point of that is to suggest to vandals, protesters, whoever, that there’ll be no accountability for anything these guys end up doing to them. Literally anything might happen to you if you end up in their custody, or so they want you to think.
For extra fright and unaccountability, they’re reportedly using unmarked vans instead of DHS agency vehicles to haul people in. And if you believe those who claim they’ve been arrested, they don’t even know where they are when they arrive.
“I see guys in camo,” O’Shea said. “Four or five of them pop out, open the door and it was just like, ‘Oh shit. I don’t know who you are or what you want with us.’” Federal law enforcement officers have been using unmarked vehicles to drive around downtown Portland and detain protesters since at least July 14. Personal accounts and multiple videos posted online show the officers driving up to people, detaining individuals with no explanation of why they are being arrested, and driving off… But interviews conducted by OPB show officers are also detaining people on Portland streets who aren’t near federal property, nor is it clear that all of the people being arrested have engaged in criminal activity. Demonstrators like O’Shea and Pettibone said they think they were targeted by federal officers for simply wearing black clothing in the area of the demonstration… Blinded by his hat, in an unmarked minivan full of armed people dressed in camouflage and body armor who hadn’t identified themselves, Pettibone said he was driven around downtown before being unloaded inside a building. He wouldn’t learn until after his release that he had been inside the federal courthouse.
Pettibone and O’Shea say they did nothing wrong before they were hauled in and that they were released after 90 minutes with no record of their arrest. The U.S. Marshals, who are apparently part of the camouflaged unit, say they have no records of detaining anyone with Pettibone’s name. Not only is Pettibone the chief source for OPB’s report, he’s also the chief source for WaPo’s, which is major cause for caution. Are he and O’Shea making up the story of their arrest to raise alarm about the feds?
They’re certainly not making up the part about guys in unmarked military uniforms. Nor the part about them riding around in unmarked vans, it appears:
Militarized Federal Agents from a patchwork of outside agencies have begun policing Portland (in rented minivans vans) without the explicit approval of the mayor, the state, or local municipalities. This is what that looks like in practice: pic.twitter.com/losap4SsgI — The Sparrow Project (@sparrowmedia) July 15, 2020
UPDATE: Several attempts were made by this mixed bag of federal officers (Marshals, Border Patrol, HSI) to grab people out of dwindling crowds. At least two people were detained in this manner and both may be released as of this time. Working to confirm. pic.twitter.com/i8j8Q6nHq3 — The Sparrow Project (@sparrowmedia) July 16, 2020
Again, the point of being unmarked is to avoid accountability. If the feds are taking measures here to keep everything off the books, it would stand to reason that they might have arrested Pettibone and deliberately created no record of it once they decided not to charge him with anything.
Another reason to believe Pettibone: As I write this at 11 a.m. ET, DHS hasn’t bothered to deny his allegations. On the contrary, Wolf has taken to posting defiantly in defense of his operation in Portland, which reads like confirmation. You would think he could do better than graffiti here to illustrate Antifa’s crimes:
https://twitter.com/DHS_Wolf/status/1284095535067136002
“I offered @DHSgov support to help locally address the situation that’s going on in Portland, and their only response was: please pack up and go home. That’s just not going to happen on my watch.” pic.twitter.com/BW8UdbNZ9c — Acting Secretary Chad Wolf (@DHS_Wolf) July 17, 2020
He also posted a long list of crimes committed against federal property in Portland by anarchists over the past six weeks, which is a strong argument for a robust police presence and no argument at all for having officers run around unmarked in military uniforms.
As he says in the clip, local officials have asked him to pack up and go home for fear that the federal presence is only making things worse. (Skim through Wolf’s list of crimes and you’ll notice that the offenses have gotten more, not less, serious lately.) The police chief has complained that it “complicates” things for Portland PD to have the feds operating there. The mayor is also upset that the feds won’t follow the city’s tactical rules, starting with not using tear gas against people. A few days ago, one protester had his skull cracked and needed facial reconstruction surgery afterward when, it appears, federal agents fired a nonlethal munition in his direction. “The best thing they can do is stay inside their building, or leave Portland altogether,” the mayor said.
Both senators from Oregon (both Democrats, of course) also want the feds out ASAP:
A peaceful protester in Portland was shot in the head by one of Donald Trump’s secret police. Now Trump and Chad Wolf are weaponizing the DHS as their own occupying army to provoke violence on the streets of my hometown because they think it plays well with right-wing media. — Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) July 16, 2020
Authoritarian governments, not democratic republics, send unmarked authorities after protesters. These Trump/Barr tactics designed to eliminate any accountability are absolutely unacceptable in America, and must end. pic.twitter.com/PE4YfZ9Vqd — Senator Jeff Merkley (@SenJeffMerkley) July 16, 2020
The jury’s out on what really happened to Pettibone but it’s clear enough that the feds are operating in an irregular way. Pettibone told WaPo that when he was first grabbed, he wasn’t sure if they were real cops at all or “far-right extremists” cosplaying as soldiers and kidnapping people, another complication of not marking themselves clearly as police. The whole episode smells like Wolf trying to fulfill Trump’s strongman fantasy of sending soldiers into the streets under the Insurrection Act to crack the heads of looters in early June. POTUS ended up not doing that after he met resistance from Mark Milley and Mark Esper, but now here’s Wolf doing what he can to make the dream happen. Why aren’t these guys dressed like normal federal agents? What’s the excuse?