hotair--2020-12-22--Chicago medical center suspends vaccinations after more negative reactions

The total number of these instances we ’ re seeing still remains thankfully small as compared to the total number of vaccinations being given , but it ’ s still probably a trend to keep an eye on .
In Chicago , yet another medical center suspended COVID vaccinations after four healthcare workers fell ill after being vaccinated .
None of the reactions appeared to be life-threatening and three of the four are “ resting at home ” and apparently doing well .
A fourth worker was still receiving additional treatment yesterday .
( CBS Chicago ) Advocate Condell Medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employees experienced reactions shortly after receiving the vaccine , according to a statement from Advocate Aurora Health .
Since Thursday four team members experience reactions , including tingling and elevated heart rate .
The four team members represent less than .15 % of the approximately 3,000 people who have received the vaccine across Advocate Aurora Health so far .
A statement from the medical center described the decision to halt vaccinations as one that was made out of “ an abundance of caution.
” That sounds about right , particularly since they didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eight other outlets across the region .
This means that of the roughly 3,000 people that Advocate Aurora Health has vaccinated thus far , four of them have had adverse , but not critical negative reactions so far .
That works out to a little more than one-tenth of one percent of patients who ran into an issue with allergic reactions or other complications .
This pattern isn ’ t dissimilar to the issue I wrote about the other day .
0.1 percent is certainly a small fraction , but when you apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who are expected to be vaccinated in the coming months in the United States , we can expect somewhere in the range of between 400,000 to half a million people to encounter this issue .
Among that half a million , it ’ s almost certain that we ’ ll see some number of worst-case scenarios where the reaction is very severe , if not fatal .
But the thing is , that ’ s still such a low number that the government can ’ t afford to simply throw up its hands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The cost of not vaccinating everyone who is willing to take the shot would undoubtedly be massively higher than pushing forward .
Every time a new drug is rolled out and put into wide distribution , there are always some number of patients who develop problems that didn ’ t show up during the product ’ s development and test trials .
But it ’ s that phrase “ everyone who is willing to take the shot ” that I keep coming back to .
How many stories like this one will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ losing confidence and deciding not to do it ?
Keep in mind that I ’ m asking this question as one of the people who has already made the decision to hold off on getting the vaccine myself until I see a lot more data , particularly for those in my general age group and those with underlying conditions .
And I mean a lot more data .
Even if I was informed that I was eligible in the second round of people being offered vaccinations , I seriously don ’ t see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s office and volunteering for this for at least several months .
The last factor we ’ re all waiting to learn about is the duration of the immunity these vaccines offer .
If it ’ s at least good for a few years , it ’ s probably worth the stress and angst to go ahead and do it .
But if this turns out to be like the flu vaccine where they tell us you need to get a fresh one every autumn , I ’ ll probably be thinking twice @ @ @

The total number of these instances we’re seeing still remains thankfully small as compared to the total number of vaccinations being given, but it’s still probably a trend to keep an eye on. In Chicago, yet another medical center suspended COVID vaccinations after four healthcare workers fell ill after being vaccinated. None of the reactions appeared to be life-threatening and three of the four are “resting at home” and apparently doing well. A fourth worker was still receiving additional treatment yesterday. (CBS Chicago)
Advocate Condell Medical Center has suspended COVID-19 vaccinations after four employees experienced reactions shortly after receiving the vaccine, according to a statement from Advocate Aurora Health. Since Thursday four team members experience reactions, including tingling and elevated heart rate. The four team members represent less than .15% of the approximately 3,000 people who have received the vaccine across Advocate Aurora Health so far.
A statement from the medical center described the decision to halt vaccinations as one that was made out of “an abundance of caution.” That sounds about right, particularly since they didn’t stop the procedure at their eight other outlets across the region.
This means that of the roughly 3,000 people that Advocate Aurora Health has vaccinated thus far, four of them have had adverse, but not critical negative reactions so far. That works out to a little more than one-tenth of one percent of patients who ran into an issue with allergic reactions or other complications. This pattern isn’t dissimilar to the issue I wrote about the other day. 0.1 percent is certainly a small fraction, but when you apply that to the roughly 300 million people who are expected to be vaccinated in the coming months in the United States, we can expect somewhere in the range of between 400,000 to half a million people to encounter this issue.
Among that half a million, it’s almost certain that we’ll see some number of worst-case scenarios where the reaction is very severe, if not fatal. But the thing is, that’s still such a low number that the government can’t afford to simply throw up its hands and put a halt to the program. The cost of not vaccinating everyone who is willing to take the shot would undoubtedly be massively higher than pushing forward. Every time a new drug is rolled out and put into wide distribution, there are always some number of patients who develop problems that didn’t show up during the product’s development and test trials.
But it’s that phrase “everyone who is willing to take the shot” that I keep coming back to. How many stories like this one will we need to see before people start losing confidence and deciding not to do it? Keep in mind that I’m asking this question as one of the people who has already made the decision to hold off on getting the vaccine myself until I see a lot more data, particularly for those in my general age group and those with underlying conditions. And I mean a lot more data. Even if I was informed that I was eligible in the second round of people being offered vaccinations, I seriously don’t see myself going down to my doctor’s office and volunteering for this for at least several months.
The last factor we’re all waiting to learn about is the duration of the immunity these vaccines offer. If it’s at least good for a few years, it’s probably worth the stress and angst to go ahead and do it. But if this turns out to be like the flu vaccine where they tell us you need to get a fresh one every autumn, I’ll probably be thinking twice about it.


hotair--2020-12-22--Texas strays from federal guidance on COVID vaccine plan

State health officials in Texas announced Monday who will be next in line to receive the COVID-19 vaccine after health care workers and long term care residents .
Instead of following federal guidelines , Texans over the age of 65 and those over 16 who have chronic medical conditions will be the next group of people offered the vaccine .
This decision strays from federal guidelines which recommend people over 75 and essential workers receive priority .
The second group will include about eight million Texans who will be eligible for the vaccinations .
The state is offering 1.9 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are residents in long-term facilities first , as the federal guidelines recommend .
The guidelines recommend that those 75 years of age and essential workers be the next group to be offered the vaccine .
As Jazz wrote about ( subscription required ) , those essential workers include teachers and public safety employees .
Texas state health officials are going with the recommendations of a 17-member Expert Vaccine Advisory Panel led by Imelda Garcia .
She is the associate commissioner for laboratory and infectious disease services for the Department of State Health Services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health commissioner has the final decision on prioritization .
The decision was data-driven , according to the panel .
It is to protect the most vulnerable in Texas .
People who are elderly makeup more than 70 % of COVID-19 cases in Texas .
Adults with underlying medical conditions are more likely to develop severe cases of the virus .
Garcia said , “ This approach ensures that Texans at the most severe risk from COVID-19 can be protected across races and ethnicities and regardless of where they work.
” The state data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disproportionally affected by COVID-19 .
Governor Abbott said that he thinks teachers should be near the front of the line .
The panel of experts was heavily lobbied by leaders in major industries like airlines , ride-sharing companies , and the energy sector to be vaccinated next .
No specific industries are named in the second group .
Workers with chronic health conditions or who are over age 65 will qualify .
It looks like that following the science will mean individual needs will come before sweeping group generalizations .
“ There have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ industries who have had risk factors that have caused them to have a worse experience with the disease , ” said Dr. John Zerwas , executive vice chancellor for health affairs at the University of Texas System .
“ The thinking behind it is let ’ s follow the epidemiology , ” he said .
“ Let ’ s get the vaccine to people who have a higher risk of a bad outcome and work our way through as much of the population as we can.
” Roughly 9.5 million Texans have high-risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over age 65 ; and 3.2 million work in essential jobs , according to earlier state estimates .
Some people fall into multiple categories , though it ’ s not clear how many .
As is being reported in other places , some Texas health care workers are taking a pass on the vaccines , at least for now .
So many workers at a hospital in South Texas declined their shots over the weekend that they were offered to others in the community .
One person who took advantage and jumped the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Brownsville Democrat who is on the state ’ s vaccine advisory panel .
That isn ’ t going over very well with some of his constituents .
Doctors are blaming mistrust and misinformation for the lack of participation by medical staff .
So many workers at a hospital in the Rio Grande Valley declined the new COVID-19 vaccine that the facility offered doses to other medical workers in the region .
Many showed up , but so did a state lawmaker , a police officer and a sheriff ’ s deputy who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s priority list for vaccination .
Dr. Robert Martinez , the DHR Health chief medical officer , said hospital officials prioritized employees considered in the first tier for a dose , like hospital staff who work directly with COVID-19 patients and long-term care workers .
But administrators realized not enough people eligible for the vaccine were initially going to opt to get it , Martinez said .
“ You start to see similar numbers across the country , all this mistrust and misinformation , ” he said .
Initially , about 40 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hospital survey said they ’ d get the vaccine , Martinez said .
The lower-than-expected vaccine adoption rate was first reported by The Monitor .
DHR Health didn ’ t want to waste the vaccine doses .
After the first day of distribution , the hospital started to go “ down the rung … down the ladder a little bit , ” Martinez said .
Hospital employees called health care workers at other medical institutions — like hospitals , nursing homes , behavioral health facilities and anyone with workers on the front @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and counties in the Valley .
It will be weeks before the second group will be able to receive the vaccine .
The state just began vaccinating the first group .
Texas officials are planning to receive about 1.4 million doses by the end of the year .
Front line workers including teachers and their unions are lobbying for school employees to go to the head of the line .
It seems to me that a distinction has to be made between those teachers who are in the classroom and those who continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be needed , certainly , as long as the supply of vaccines is so limited in the beginning .
There has been a flurry of lobbying in Texas for priority access to the vaccines , including from teachers and other school employees , who expect more students to return for in-class instruction in the spring .
“ We believe teachers and all of the other school employees should be given priority and we are going to be very disappointed if they are not , ” said Clay Robison , a spokesman for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had not yet seen the specifics of the announcement .
There are between 600,000 and 700,000 estimated school employees across the state , Robinson said .
Governor Abbott is scheduled to receive his vaccination on-camera today .

State health officials in Texas announced Monday who will be next in line to receive the COVID-19 vaccine after health care workers and long term care residents. Instead of following federal guidelines, Texans over the age of 65 and those over 16 who have chronic medical conditions will be the next group of people offered the vaccine. This decision strays from federal guidelines which recommend people over 75 and essential workers receive priority.
The second group will include about eight million Texans who will be eligible for the vaccinations. The state is offering 1.9 million Texans in health care and those who are residents in long-term facilities first, as the federal guidelines recommend. The guidelines recommend that those 75 years of age and essential workers be the next group to be offered the vaccine. As Jazz wrote about (subscription required), those essential workers include teachers and public safety employees. Texas state health officials are going with the recommendations of a 17-member Expert Vaccine Advisory Panel led by Imelda Garcia. She is the associate commissioner for laboratory and infectious disease services for the Department of State Health Services. Dr. John Hellerstedt, the state health commissioner has the final decision on prioritization.
The decision was data-driven, according to the panel. It is to protect the most vulnerable in Texas. People who are elderly makeup more than 70% of COVID-19 cases in Texas. Adults with underlying medical conditions are more likely to develop severe cases of the virus. Garcia said, “This approach ensures that Texans at the most severe risk from COVID-19 can be protected across races and ethnicities and regardless of where they work.” The state data shows that black and Hispanic Texans are disproportionally affected by COVID-19.
Governor Abbott said that he thinks teachers should be near the front of the line. The panel of experts was heavily lobbied by leaders in major industries like airlines, ride-sharing companies, and the energy sector to be vaccinated next. No specific industries are named in the second group. Workers with chronic health conditions or who are over age 65 will qualify. It looks like that following the science will mean individual needs will come before sweeping group generalizations.
“There have been people in all of these essential industries who have had risk factors that have caused them to have a worse experience with the disease,” said Dr. John Zerwas, executive vice chancellor for health affairs at the University of Texas System. “The thinking behind it is let’s follow the epidemiology,” he said. “Let’s get the vaccine to people who have a higher risk of a bad outcome and work our way through as much of the population as we can.” Roughly 9.5 million Texans have high-risk medical conditions; 3.9 million Texans are over age 65; and 3.2 million work in essential jobs, according to earlier state estimates. Some people fall into multiple categories, though it’s not clear how many.
As is being reported in other places, some Texas health care workers are taking a pass on the vaccines, at least for now. So many workers at a hospital in South Texas declined their shots over the weekend that they were offered to others in the community. One person who took advantage and jumped the line was state Sen. Eddie Lucio, a Brownsville Democrat who is on the state’s vaccine advisory panel. That isn’t going over very well with some of his constituents. Doctors are blaming mistrust and misinformation for the lack of participation by medical staff.
So many workers at a hospital in the Rio Grande Valley declined the new COVID-19 vaccine that the facility offered doses to other medical workers in the region. Many showed up, but so did a state lawmaker, a police officer and a sheriff’s deputy who weren’t on the state’s priority list for vaccination. Dr. Robert Martinez, the DHR Health chief medical officer, said hospital officials prioritized employees considered in the first tier for a dose, like hospital staff who work directly with COVID-19 patients and long-term care workers. But administrators realized not enough people eligible for the vaccine were initially going to opt to get it, Martinez said. “You start to see similar numbers across the country, all this mistrust and misinformation,” he said. Initially, about 40% to 60% of people who answered a hospital survey said they’d get the vaccine, Martinez said. The lower-than-expected vaccine adoption rate was first reported by The Monitor. DHR Health didn’t want to waste the vaccine doses. After the first day of distribution, the hospital started to go “down the rung … down the ladder a little bit,” Martinez said. Hospital employees called health care workers at other medical institutions — like hospitals, nursing homes, behavioral health facilities and anyone with workers on the front lines of COVID-19 — in neighboring cities and counties in the Valley.
It will be weeks before the second group will be able to receive the vaccine. The state just began vaccinating the first group. Texas officials are planning to receive about 1.4 million doses by the end of the year.
Front line workers including teachers and their unions are lobbying for school employees to go to the head of the line. It seems to me that a distinction has to be made between those teachers who are in the classroom and those who continue to teach virtually. A common-sense approach will be needed, certainly, as long as the supply of vaccines is so limited in the beginning.
There has been a flurry of lobbying in Texas for priority access to the vaccines, including from teachers and other school employees, who expect more students to return for in-class instruction in the spring. “We believe teachers and all of the other school employees should be given priority and we are going to be very disappointed if they are not,” said Clay Robison, a spokesman for the Texas State Teachers Association. He had not yet seen the specifics of the announcement. There are between 600,000 and 700,000 estimated school employees across the state, Robinson said.
Governor Abbott is scheduled to receive his vaccination on-camera today.


hotair--2020-12-22--"Extreme confidence": Fauci gets the COVID vaccine

This came two days after he told America ’ s children not to worry about Christmas presents arriving on time this year because he ’ d already been to the North Pole and vaccinated Santa himself .
Which raised the question : Why would Fauci put himself at risk by interacting with Santa ’ s household before being vaccinated himself ?
The “ trip to the North Pole ” story is clearly just another of the medical bureaucracy ’ s COVID lies .
Everyone knows that Santa has magical powers and is therefore naturally immune .
Even Fauci !
Get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you are a doctor , I mean .
Yesterday on social media , as photos of congressmen getting vaccinated were circulating , I saw some guy say , “ It ’ s interesting that Dr. Fauci hasn ’ t submitted to the vaccine yet.
” Now that Fauci has received it , I ’ m sure that same guy is somewhere tweeting , “ I wonder what was really in that shot they gave to Fauci.
” Sigh .
What was in it was Moderna ’ s vaccine , not Pfizer ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given to Mike Pence and various members of Congress .
That ’ s because NIH , which includes Fauci ’ s agency , partnered with Moderna on that vaccine ’ s development .
Fauci was demonstrating his faith here not just in the concept of COVID vaccination generally but in the particular product his own office worked on .
It ’ s the fruits of their labor .
As for the frightening COVID variant now circulating in the UK , which somehow isn ’ t frightening enough to Fauci to convince him to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s partner announced this morning that they could have a vaccine specifically tailored to provide immunity from that variant ready in just six weeks if need be .
“ [ T ] he beauty of the messenger mRNA technology is we can directly start to engineer a vaccine that completely mimics this new mutation and we could manufacture a new vaccine within six weeks , ” Sahin told the FT. How it works : The new variant has multiple mutations , but most of the sites that trigger immune response have not mutated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] makes us confident that the T cell response will still work , but we need to do experiments to quantify how well it works , ” he added .
“ In principle , what we would do is change the insert [ of the vaccine ] and replace a virus variant with another variant without touching the platform , ” said BioNTech chief medical officer Ozlem Tureci .
It ’ s plug-and-play .
If I ’ m understanding the technology correctly , it ’ s not wildly different from changing a few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alter a software program .
( Moderna ’ s vaccine took all of two days to develop . )
The question is how long the modified vaccine would need to be tested before we could feel confident that it ’ s as safe as the current one .
Is that another 10 months , essentially starting from scratch with phase one , two , and three trials ?
Or would the safety data for the current vaccine provide some degree of reassurance that there ’ ll be no scary side effects from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to phase three or whatever ?
There ’ s always the possibility of challenge trials if the British variant really does seem to require a modified vaccine ASAP in order to tame it .
Fauci ’ s vaccination today is uncontroversial because he ’ s part of a group that ’ s already receiving the shot but the debate over whether to vaccinate members of Congress has led to some strange political bedfellows .
On the pro side : Marco Rubio and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , both of whom \ received the shot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On the anti side : Ilhan Omar and New Hampshire Republican Gov .
Chris Sununu , who called it “ outrageous ” and “ insulting ” that members of Congress would be cutting the line after doing nothing on COVID stimulus for months .
I don ’ t usually disagree with Patterico but we ’ re on different sides of this too .
He thinks there ’ s no good reason for lawmakers to get vaccinated early : All politicians , especially younger ones , should simply wait their turn .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an example ” is simply their excuse to do what they always do : treat themselves better than they treat you… This vaccine is a precious , limited resource .
At some point it will be available to everyone , but right now access must be prioritized .
If you are the type of person who won ’ t take it unless you see your favorite politico take it first , then guess what ?
You can wait .
I don ’ t see why such people should be prioritized over people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a politician from their tribe take it first .
( Read : less stupid people . )
Once it ’ s your favorite politician ’ s turn , he or she can take it , and then the political fanatics will be comforted , and they can take it then .
Frankly , it ’ s inexcusable privilege that politicians even get to decide whether to prioritize themselves .
These people are supposed to be our servants , but they treat themselves like our betters , in every way , all the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I have senior citizens in my family who are in “ wait and see ” mode even though their opportunity to get the vaccine will be coming relatively soon .
( Late January/early February , maybe ? )
I ’ m leaning on them to get it on the first day it ’ s available , knowing that every day they go unvaccinated with the pandemic raging means they ’ re risking their lives .
I think it ’ s useful to have them see geriatrics like Pelosi and McConnell getting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old folks running the government have enough confidence in the product to subject themselves to it .
But I think it ’ s also basic sound practice to have a group as aged as Congress getting vaxxed up before an outbreak emerges that cuts a swath through it .
We don ’ t want a third of the House sick or in quarantine at a moment when emergency legislation might be needed to address some crisis or another .
We ’ re talking about 535 doses of a vaccine during a week when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across the country .
Not a gigantic ask for basic government continuity .
I ’ d share the outrage if members of Congress *and their families* were getting early access .
But it would be bananas to go nine months with our fingers crossed , hoping Congress can dodge a debilitating rash of cases , only to deny them something that would prevent that outcome now that it ’ s available .
“ The highest levels of the U.S. government need to function ” is a good excuse as excuses go .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ age cut-off if need be — no congressmen over 50 get early access , say — but it ’ s loony to me to make the Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader wait another six weeks or whatever on principle when we could immunize them now .

This came two days after he told America’s children not to worry about Christmas presents arriving on time this year because he’d already been to the North Pole and vaccinated Santa himself.
Which raised the question: Why would Fauci put himself at risk by interacting with Santa’s household before being vaccinated himself?
The “trip to the North Pole” story is clearly just another of the medical bureaucracy’s COVID lies. Everyone knows that Santa has magical powers and is therefore naturally immune. Even Fauci!
Get your story straight, doctor. Assuming you are a doctor, I mean.
WATCH: Dr. Fauci receives first dose of Moderna Covid-19 vaccine. "I want to encourage everyone who has the opportunity to get vaccinated so that we could have a veil of protection over this country that would end this pandemic." pic.twitter.com/dXoIpDXWfa — MSNBC (@MSNBC) December 22, 2020
Yesterday on social media, as photos of congressmen getting vaccinated were circulating, I saw some guy say, “It’s interesting that Dr. Fauci hasn’t submitted to the vaccine yet.” Now that Fauci has received it, I’m sure that same guy is somewhere tweeting, “I wonder what was really in that shot they gave to Fauci.” Sigh. What was in it was Moderna’s vaccine, not Pfizer’s, which I believe is what was given to Mike Pence and various members of Congress. That’s because NIH, which includes Fauci’s agency, partnered with Moderna on that vaccine’s development. Fauci was demonstrating his faith here not just in the concept of COVID vaccination generally but in the particular product his own office worked on. It’s the fruits of their labor.
As for the frightening COVID variant now circulating in the UK, which somehow isn’t frightening enough to Fauci to convince him to endorse a travel ban, Pfizer’s partner announced this morning that they could have a vaccine specifically tailored to provide immunity from that variant ready in just six weeks if need be.
“[T]he beauty of the messenger mRNA technology is we can directly start to engineer a vaccine that completely mimics this new mutation and we could manufacture a new vaccine within six weeks,” Sahin told the FT. How it works: The new variant has multiple mutations, but most of the sites that trigger immune response have not mutated, Sahin said. “[This] makes us confident that the T cell response will still work, but we need to do experiments to quantify how well it works,” he added. “In principle, what we would do is change the insert [of the vaccine] and replace a virus variant with another variant without touching the platform,” said BioNTech chief medical officer Ozlem Tureci.
It’s plug-and-play. If I’m understanding the technology correctly, it’s not wildly different from changing a few lines of some very basic code to alter a software program. (Moderna’s vaccine took all of two days to develop.) The question is how long the modified vaccine would need to be tested before we could feel confident that it’s as safe as the current one. Is that another 10 months, essentially starting from scratch with phase one, two, and three trials? Or would the safety data for the current vaccine provide some degree of reassurance that there’ll be no scary side effects from the modified vaccine, allowing Pfizer to skip right to phase three or whatever?
There’s always the possibility of challenge trials if the British variant really does seem to require a modified vaccine ASAP in order to tame it.
Fauci’s vaccination today is uncontroversial because he’s part of a group that’s already receiving the shot but the debate over whether to vaccinate members of Congress has led to some strange political bedfellows. On the pro side: Marco Rubio and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, both of whom received the shot months ahead of their respective age cohorts. On the anti side: Ilhan Omar and New Hampshire Republican Gov. Chris Sununu, who called it “outrageous” and “insulting” that members of Congress would be cutting the line after doing nothing on COVID stimulus for months. I don’t usually disagree with Patterico but we’re on different sides of this too. He thinks there’s no good reason for lawmakers to get vaccinated early:
All politicians, especially younger ones, should simply wait their turn. The claim that they need to “set an example” is simply their excuse to do what they always do: treat themselves better than they treat you… This vaccine is a precious, limited resource. At some point it will be available to everyone, but right now access must be prioritized. If you are the type of person who won’t take it unless you see your favorite politico take it first, then guess what? You can wait. I don’t see why such people should be prioritized over people who are willing to take it without seeing a politician from their tribe take it first. (Read: less stupid people.) Once it’s your favorite politician’s turn, he or she can take it, and then the political fanatics will be comforted, and they can take it then. Frankly, it’s inexcusable privilege that politicians even get to decide whether to prioritize themselves. These people are supposed to be our servants, but they treat themselves like our betters, in every way, all the time. I’m sick of it.
I have senior citizens in my family who are in “wait and see” mode even though their opportunity to get the vaccine will be coming relatively soon. (Late January/early February, maybe?) I’m leaning on them to get it on the first day it’s available, knowing that every day they go unvaccinated with the pandemic raging means they’re risking their lives. I think it’s useful to have them see geriatrics like Pelosi and McConnell getting the shot, to reassure them that the old folks running the government have enough confidence in the product to subject themselves to it. But I think it’s also basic sound practice to have a group as aged as Congress getting vaxxed up before an outbreak emerges that cuts a swath through it. We don’t want a third of the House sick or in quarantine at a moment when emergency legislation might be needed to address some crisis or another. We’re talking about 535 doses of a vaccine during a week when something like seven million are rolling out across the country. Not a gigantic ask for basic government continuity.
I’d share the outrage if members of Congress *and their families* were getting early access. But it would be bananas to go nine months with our fingers crossed, hoping Congress can dodge a debilitating rash of cases, only to deny them something that would prevent that outcome now that it’s available. “The highest levels of the U.S. government need to function” is a good excuse as excuses go. I’m willing to compromise on an age cut-off if need be — no congressmen over 50 get early access, say — but it’s loony to me to make the Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader wait another six weeks or whatever on principle when we could immunize them now.


hotair--2020-12-22--Professor Shi welcomes visit to Wuhan virology lab, lab quickly says that's not approved

Yesterday the BBC published an interesting piece about the origin of the coronavirus .
The piece notes that a team of scientists working for WHO are belatedly examining the evidence for the virus ’ origins in China .
The group of 10 is scheduled to visit Wuhan next month to examine the wet market once thought to be the site where the virus may have jumped from some intermediate mammal to humans .
In light of that pending visit the BBC sent questions to Dr. Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology .
Dr. Shi is the person who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bats in the south of China and bringing them back to Wuhan for study .
She seemed eager to do anything that would clear her name and that of the WIV from the suspicion that a lab leak of some kind was the origin of the virus : “ I have communicated with the WHO experts twice , ” she wrote , when asked if an investigation might help rule out a lab leak and end the speculation .
“ I have personally and clearly expressed that I would welcome them to visit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To a follow-up question about whether that would include a formal investigation with access to the WIV ’ s experimental data and laboratory records , Prof Shi said : “ I would personally welcome any form of visit based on an open , transparent , trusting , reliable and reasonable dialogue .
But the specific plan is not decided by me.
” The BBC subsequently received a call from the WIV ’ s press office , saying that Prof Shi was speaking in a personal capacity and her answers had not been approved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , don ’ t count on that visit to the WIV happening anytime soon .
There ’ s another interesting aspect of the BBC story .
One of the viruses Dr. Shi collected from bats is the closest known relative to COVID-19 .
The virus called RaTG13 is 96.2 % similar to COVID and was discovered in a mine shaft in Tongguan , a remote district in south China .
The remaining difference seems small but is considered far too significant to bridge with a few tweaks in a lab .
Still , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ six workers in the same mine “ succumbed to a mystery illness that eventually claimed the lives of three of them.
” The fact that these workers died and that COVID-19s nearest known relative was found in the same mine seems like an avenue for further investigation , but when the BBC tried to travel to the mine they were literally blocked by Chinese officials : The remote district of Tongguan , in China ’ s south-western province of Yunnan , is hard to reach at the best of times .
But when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it was impossible .
Plain-clothes police officers and other officials in unmarked cars followed us for miles along the narrow , bumpy roads , stopping when we did , backtracking with us when we were forced to turn around .
We found obstacles in our way , including a “ broken-down ” lorry , which locals confirmed had been placed across the road a few minutes before we arrived .
And we ran into checkpoints at which unidentified men told us their job was to keep us out .
…the attempts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ site are a sign of how hard they ’ re working to control the narrative .
The BBC crew didn ’ t have scientists on hand to collect samples .
They were there to take pictures .
So the effort to block them isn ’ t about stopping the scientific effort to identify the origin of the virus , it ’ s about preventing a possible origin site being splashed on front pages around the world .
As it has been for a year , China is mostly focused on public relations for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BBC points out , state news outlets continue to suggest the virus may have originated somewhere outside China ’ s borders .
So it ’ s possible that Dr. Shi is legitimately frustrated that she can ’ t prove her lab had nothing to do with this .
But doing that would mean opening the lab to examination which would once again raise questions China doesn ’ t want to see raised .

Yesterday the BBC published an interesting piece about the origin of the coronavirus. The piece notes that a team of scientists working for WHO are belatedly examining the evidence for the virus’ origins in China. The group of 10 is scheduled to visit Wuhan next month to examine the wet market once thought to be the site where the virus may have jumped from some intermediate mammal to humans.
In light of that pending visit the BBC sent questions to Dr. Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Dr. Shi is the person who has been collecting hundreds of coronaviruses from bats in the south of China and bringing them back to Wuhan for study. She seemed eager to do anything that would clear her name and that of the WIV from the suspicion that a lab leak of some kind was the origin of the virus:
“I have communicated with the WHO experts twice,” she wrote, when asked if an investigation might help rule out a lab leak and end the speculation. “I have personally and clearly expressed that I would welcome them to visit the WIV,” she said. To a follow-up question about whether that would include a formal investigation with access to the WIV’s experimental data and laboratory records, Prof Shi said: “I would personally welcome any form of visit based on an open, transparent, trusting, reliable and reasonable dialogue. But the specific plan is not decided by me.” The BBC subsequently received a call from the WIV’s press office, saying that Prof Shi was speaking in a personal capacity and her answers had not been approved by the WIV.
In other words, don’t count on that visit to the WIV happening anytime soon.
There’s another interesting aspect of the BBC story. One of the viruses Dr. Shi collected from bats is the closest known relative to COVID-19. The virus called RaTG13 is 96.2% similar to COVID and was discovered in a mine shaft in Tongguan, a remote district in south China. The remaining difference seems small but is considered far too significant to bridge with a few tweaks in a lab.
Still, the BBC reports that back in 2012 six workers in the same mine “succumbed to a mystery illness that eventually claimed the lives of three of them.” The fact that these workers died and that COVID-19s nearest known relative was found in the same mine seems like an avenue for further investigation, but when the BBC tried to travel to the mine they were literally blocked by Chinese officials:
The remote district of Tongguan, in China’s south-western province of Yunnan, is hard to reach at the best of times. But when a BBC team tried to visit recently, it was impossible. Plain-clothes police officers and other officials in unmarked cars followed us for miles along the narrow, bumpy roads, stopping when we did, backtracking with us when we were forced to turn around. We found obstacles in our way, including a “broken-down” lorry, which locals confirmed had been placed across the road a few minutes before we arrived. And we ran into checkpoints at which unidentified men told us their job was to keep us out. …the attempts of Chinese authorities to stop us reaching the site are a sign of how hard they’re working to control the narrative.
The BBC crew didn’t have scientists on hand to collect samples. They were there to take pictures. So the effort to block them isn’t about stopping the scientific effort to identify the origin of the virus, it’s about preventing a possible origin site being splashed on front pages around the world. As it has been for a year, China is mostly focused on public relations for the CCP. Meanwhile, as the BBC points out, state news outlets continue to suggest the virus may have originated somewhere outside China’s borders.
So it’s possible that Dr. Shi is legitimately frustrated that she can’t prove her lab had nothing to do with this. But doing that would mean opening the lab to examination which would once again raise questions China doesn’t want to see raised.


hotair--2020-12-22--Breaking: Newsom appoints Padilla to replace Harris in Senate

The talking point from Gavin Newsom ’ s office will be Governor appoints first California Latino to US Senate .
The subtext will be Newsom snubs blacks , women in replacing Kamala Harris .
The New York Times leads with the former in reporting Alex Padilla ’ s appointment , but they don ’ t overlook the latter : Alex Padilla , California ’ s secretary of state , has been appointed to fill the Senate seat held by Vice President-elect Kamala Harris , Gov .
Gavin Newsom announced on Tuesday , capping months of intense political jockeying among Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Mexican-born immigrants who settled in Los Angeles ’ s San Fernando Valley , Mr. Padilla , 47 , will be the first Latino senator from California , where Latinos are about 40 percent of the population .
… The decision followed months of deliberation by Mr. Newsom and lobbying by California ’ s myriad political factions for a position whose occupant will need not only the experience to work effectively in Washington , but also the money and political base to hold the seat in 2022 , when Ms. Harris ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr. Newsom to appoint Representative Barbara Lee or another like-minded Democrat .
Mr. Newsom was also under pressure to appoint a Black woman to take the place of Ms. Harris , the only Black woman in the Senate .
Representative Karen Bass and Ms. Lee were at the top of that list .
Unless Newsom had taken leave of his senses , Lee would never have been the choice .
Bass , however , had her profile raised substantially over the summer when she got shortlisted as a potential Joe Biden running mate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to mention her embrace of Fidel himself , made her toxic for Biden in a national election , but that might not have been much of a problem in the People ’ s Republic of California .
Appointing Bass would have allowed Newsom to claim credit for maintaining a presence of a black woman in the US Senate , no small issue these days .
Instead , Newsom chose a Latino male to replace Harris , which is an eyebrow-raising choice regardless of Padilla ’ s qualities in a party obsessed with identity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he might face a serious recall effort in the next few weeks .
Strengthening support with 40 % of the population does make a certain amount of political sense .
This seems to signal that Dianne Feinstein isn ’ t inclined to pull Newsom ’ s chestnuts out of the fire after all , or at least not at the moment .
Pressure had been mounting in California to get Feinstein to resign so that Newsom could appoint two senators , allowing him to pander to both constituencies .
If Newsom thought a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice for replacing Harris would have been Bass , and then reserving the other seat for either Padilla or Xavier Becerra to score on both identity-politics points .
Becerra ’ s been nominated for HHS by Joe Biden , but he ’ s not likely to get through a Senate confirmation hearing for multiple reasons .
Appointing Becerra would have saved Biden a headache in the first days of his administration , and allowed Biden the chance to rethink the HHS choice in the middle of a pandemic .
As it is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and see whether he ever gets a chance to make things up with blacks and women in California .
Don ’ t expect them to let this slide quietly in the meantime .

The talking point from Gavin Newsom’s office will be Governor appoints first California Latino to US Senate. The subtext will be Newsom snubs blacks, women in replacing Kamala Harris.
The New York Times leads with the former in reporting Alex Padilla’s appointment, but they don’t overlook the latter:
Alex Padilla, California’s secretary of state, has been appointed to fill the Senate seat held by Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced on Tuesday, capping months of intense political jockeying among Democratic factions in the state. The son of Mexican-born immigrants who settled in Los Angeles’s San Fernando Valley, Mr. Padilla, 47, will be the first Latino senator from California, where Latinos are about 40 percent of the population. … The decision followed months of deliberation by Mr. Newsom and lobbying by California’s myriad political factions for a position whose occupant will need not only the experience to work effectively in Washington, but also the money and political base to hold the seat in 2022, when Ms. Harris’s term ends. California progressives had pushed Mr. Newsom to appoint Representative Barbara Lee or another like-minded Democrat. Mr. Newsom was also under pressure to appoint a Black woman to take the place of Ms. Harris, the only Black woman in the Senate. Representative Karen Bass and Ms. Lee were at the top of that list.
Unless Newsom had taken leave of his senses, Lee would never have been the choice. Bass, however, had her profile raised substantially over the summer when she got shortlisted as a potential Joe Biden running mate. Her flirtations with Castroism, not to mention her embrace of Fidel himself, made her toxic for Biden in a national election, but that might not have been much of a problem in the People’s Republic of California. Appointing Bass would have allowed Newsom to claim credit for maintaining a presence of a black woman in the US Senate, no small issue these days. Instead, Newsom chose a Latino male to replace Harris, which is an eyebrow-raising choice regardless of Padilla’s qualities in a party obsessed with identity politics.
Of course, Newsom knows he might face a serious recall effort in the next few weeks. Strengthening support with 40% of the population does make a certain amount of political sense.
This seems to signal that Dianne Feinstein isn’t inclined to pull Newsom’s chestnuts out of the fire after all, or at least not at the moment. Pressure had been mounting in California to get Feinstein to resign so that Newsom could appoint two senators, allowing him to pander to both constituencies. If Newsom thought a Feinstein resignation/retirement was imminent, the safer choice for replacing Harris would have been Bass, and then reserving the other seat for either Padilla or Xavier Becerra to score on both identity-politics points. Becerra’s been nominated for HHS by Joe Biden, but he’s not likely to get through a Senate confirmation hearing for multiple reasons. Appointing Becerra would have saved Biden a headache in the first days of his administration, and allowed Biden the chance to rethink the HHS choice in the middle of a pandemic.
As it is, though, Newsom will have to wait and see whether he ever gets a chance to make things up with blacks and women in California. Don’t expect them to let this slide quietly in the meantime.


hotair--2020-12-22--Susan Rice: We regret to inform you that immigration and asylum changes have been moved from Day 1 t

Susan Rice: We regret to inform you that immigration and asylum changes have been moved from Day 1 to Day ...

Seventeen ?
Thirty-four ?
Eleventy-seven ?
Back in January , Joe Biden promised big reversals on immigration-enforcement policies “ on day one ” if elected , especially regarding asylum decisions : Promises , promises , say Susan Rice and Jake Sullivan .
Now that they have the actual responsibility for immigration enforcement , suddenly the idea of immediate reversals don ’ t seem quite so palatable .
That ’ s especially true given what might result from sending those signals : Top advisers to president-elect Joe Biden said Monday they will not immediately roll back asylum restrictions at the Mexico @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , walking back some of Biden ’ s campaign promises for “ Day One ” changes .
Susan E. Rice , incoming domestic policy adviser , and Jake Sullivan , Biden ’ s pick for national security adviser , provided written statements in an exclusive interview with the Spanish wire service EFE saying they will “ need time ” to undo Trump ’ s immigration policies .
Rice said Biden will use executive authority to implement his immigration agenda , but her statements urging patience appeared to reflect the incoming administration ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s enforcement system could trigger a new migration surge at the border .
You don ’ t say .
Might that not be a good reason to have implemented Trump ’ s policies in the first place ?
It certainly appears to have Rice worried , slamming reports that are being “ peddled ” about the border opening up on January 21 : Well , who exactly was “ peddling ” this as a Day One consequence in the first place ?
Joe Biden and the Democrats , that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Bidenesque rhetorical sense of the word .
Biden ’ s pledge to end the MPP program “ on day one ” would have the consequence of opening the border again to anyone who claimed asylum status , whether justified or not .
What about the use of the CDC to reject asylum seekers on medical grounds ?
That should be pretty easy to reverse by executive order , but Rice says that will also take some time to unwind : Asked about the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quickly returned to their home countries for public health reasons – often within minutes or hours – Rice indicated that such a change will not be immediate .
“ The current administration has badly damaged our asylum laws and processing capacity at the border at great cost to migrants seeking asylum , ” she said .
“ Because of that , as well as the challenges presented by COVID-19 , the Biden administration will need time to fix the situation.
” Translation : These policies might be more popular — and effective — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ admit in the election cycle .
At the very least , opening the border in the middle of a pandemic would be a political disaster , if not an epidemiological disaster .
How do you tell Americans to stay within the walls of their houses while opening the walls of the country ?
Clearly , the answer is : you don ’ t .
That ’ s not to say that these policies won ’ t change , eventually .
Biden and Democrats favor open-border policies , and we can expect to see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The fact that they won ’ t make that a Day One goal shows , however , that those policies are not just popular but also useful .
It won ’ t be the last promise that Biden breaks with progressives , either .

Seventeen? Thirty-four? Eleventy-seven? Back in January, Joe Biden promised big reversals on immigration-enforcement policies “on day one” if elected, especially regarding asylum decisions:
Donald Trump has slammed the door shut in the face of families fleeing persecution and violence. On day one, I will eliminate President Trump’s decision to limit asylum and end the MPP program. #RestoreAsylumNOW https://t.co/3KLjtwEtNE — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) January 30, 2020
Promises, promises, say Susan Rice and Jake Sullivan. Now that they have the actual responsibility for immigration enforcement, suddenly the idea of immediate reversals don’t seem quite so palatable. That’s especially true given what might result from sending those signals:
Top advisers to president-elect Joe Biden said Monday they will not immediately roll back asylum restrictions at the Mexico border and other restrictive Trump administration policies, walking back some of Biden’s campaign promises for “Day One” changes. Susan E. Rice, incoming domestic policy adviser, and Jake Sullivan, Biden’s pick for national security adviser, provided written statements in an exclusive interview with the Spanish wire service EFE saying they will “need time” to undo Trump’s immigration policies. Rice said Biden will use executive authority to implement his immigration agenda, but her statements urging patience appeared to reflect the incoming administration’s worries that easing up too quickly on Trump’s enforcement system could trigger a new migration surge at the border.
You don’t say. Might that not be a good reason to have implemented Trump’s policies in the first place? It certainly appears to have Rice worried, slamming reports that are being “peddled” about the border opening up on January 21:
“Migrants and asylum seekers absolutely should not believe those in the region peddling the idea that the border will suddenly be fully open to process everyone on Day 1. It will not,” Rice said, according to a translation of the interview transcript.
Well, who exactly was “peddling” this as a Day One consequence in the first place? Joe Biden and the Democrats, that’s who. Literally, and not just in the Bidenesque rhetorical sense of the word. Biden’s pledge to end the MPP program “on day one” would have the consequence of opening the border again to anyone who claimed asylum status, whether justified or not.
What about the use of the CDC to reject asylum seekers on medical grounds? That should be pretty easy to reverse by executive order, but Rice says that will also take some time to unwind:
Asked about the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) order that allows migrants to be quickly returned to their home countries for public health reasons – often within minutes or hours – Rice indicated that such a change will not be immediate. “The current administration has badly damaged our asylum laws and processing capacity at the border at great cost to migrants seeking asylum,” she said. “Because of that, as well as the challenges presented by COVID-19, the Biden administration will need time to fix the situation.”
Translation: These policies might be more popular — and effective — than Biden and his team wanted to admit in the election cycle. At the very least, opening the border in the middle of a pandemic would be a political disaster, if not an epidemiological disaster. How do you tell Americans to stay within the walls of their houses while opening the walls of the country? Clearly, the answer is: you don’t.
That’s not to say that these policies won’t change, eventually. Biden and Democrats favor open-border policies, and we can expect to see a policy drift in that direction. The fact that they won’t make that a Day One goal shows, however, that those policies are not just popular but also useful. It won’t be the last promise that Biden breaks with progressives, either.


hotair--2020-12-22--John Thune: Any attempt to overturn the electoral college vote on January 6 is going down "like a sh

John Thune: Any attempt to overturn the electoral college vote on January 6 is going down "like a shot dog"

He ’ s right , but it ’ s not an altogether bad thing to have the president convinced that January 6 is the day this all turns around for him .
As I said last night , there are bad , very bad , and duck-and-cover bad ways that his presidency could end .
A last stand on the 6th featuring a round of speeches by MAGA congressmen before Congress certifies the electoral college results is the least bad by far .
The more Trump is focused on that date , the more incentive he has not to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next two weeks .
Unfortunately , there ’ s no way around the fact that he ’ ll be free to do something rash between the 6th and Inauguration Day .
Maybe his advisors can start talking up 2024 to him , convincing him that the uglier this gets on his way out , the less likely voters will be willing to take another chance on him four years from now .
But yeah , hopefully needless to say , the kabuki effort to block Biden ’ s win on January 6 is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There ’ s no question that multiple Republican members of the House , led by Mo Brooks , will object to the results from certain swing states on the 6th .
The suspense has to do with whether Trump or McConnell will win the tug of war over whether any Republican in the Senate will join them .
Thune is stating the leadership ’ s position : No , no , no .
The votes to overturn the election aren ’ t there so why force your colleagues to go on the record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Whereas Trump ’ s position is : Might as well try everything .
Even if we lose , at least we “ fought.
” And the floor votes on whether to overturn the results in a given state will provide him and his fans with a handy list of who ’ s loyal and who isn ’ t .
Which makes perfect sense if you view MAGA ’ s ultimate “ fight ” as not with Democrats but with their own party ’ s establishment .
How many liberals get under the skin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Jeff Flake or ( more recently ) Chris Christie do ?
The least populists can get out of this futile effort to overturn the election is an official enemies list of Republican members of Congress .
That ’ s January 6 .
The president met with some of the ringleaders of the House effort yesterday at the White House .
The plan is simply to put up a good show , it seems , by delaying the certification for a number hours .
Remember that if one member of the House and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accepting a state ’ s votes , that forces a two-hour debate followed by a floor vote .
If there are objections to the results in six or seven states , we ’ re talking about many hours of floor debate .
That ’ s a *lot* of speechmaking time for congressmen eager for a platform from which to grandstand .
Rep. Mo Brooks ( R-Ala. ) — who is spearheading the long-shot push to overturn the election results in Congress — organized the trio of White House meetings , which lasted over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawmakers .
The group also met with Vice President Mike Pence , who will be presiding over the joint session of Congress when lawmakers officially certify the Electoral College votes on Jan. 6 , as well as members of Trump ’ s legal team… In addition to the “ dozens ” of House Republicans who are committed to objecting to the election results , Brooks said there are “ multiple ” Senate Republicans who are now receptive to the effort , though he declined to name names .
Sen.-elect Tommy Tuberville ( R-Ala. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Twitter recently , has said he is considering the idea… Still , the whole episode could turn messy — and become one last Trump loyalty test .
Brooks , who said there are plans to challenge the results in six states , said total debate time could clock in at around 18 hours .
That means the vote-counting process could bleed into the wee hours of Jan. 7 .
It ’ s unclear how specific the objections to each state ’ s results will be , whether they ’ ll get into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just register an objection in order to proceed to the floor-debate phase .
But that phase will be lengthy : Brooks told CNN that there may be as many as 72 five-minute speeches on the Republican side , an opportunity for GOP incumbents to cut campaign commercials on the taxpayer dime by pushing conspiracy theories about fraud that Trump ’ s lawyers remain unable to prove in court .
Another unknown is the extent to which House Democrats will participate in the process .
Will they boycott the floor debate , returning only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accept a state ’ s results , or will they push back by delivering speeches of their own ?
I assume they ’ ll push back , not wanting to give Republicans an uncontested open forum in which to denigrate the election results .
I ’ m also curious to see how many GOPers dare to amplify the smears about Dominion and Smartmatic rigging the vote for Biden now that the companies have begun to fight back against smear merchants .
There ’ s nothing either one can do if January 6 turns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business before a national audience , as the Constitution ’ s Speech or Debate Clause makes the floor of the House one of the few places in the United States where defamation law doesn ’ t reach .
But that ’ s what makes it interesting : How many congressmen , knowing that the companies are seeking legal redress for the enormous damage they ’ ve suffered , will exploit their constitutional privilege to do further damage to them just because they know some of their voters would relish it ?
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demagoguery .
There ’ s one more verrrrrry interesting element to the spectacle on January 6 .
Axios mentioned it today as part of a hair-raising new report about the president turning on his closest White House allies because they won ’ t lie to him about still having a path to victory the way Sidney Powell will .
( “ We can not stress enough how unnerved Trump officials are by the conversations unfolding inside the White House.
” ) The suspicion extends all the way to the ultimate Trump loyalist , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presiding over Congress ’ s session .
It ’ s 100 percent true that Pence has largely stayed away from the “ we wuz robbed ” messaging about voter fraud .
But he can ’ t hide on the 6th — unless , I suppose , he wimps out and finds an excuse not to be at the Capitol that day , leaving it to Chuck Grassley to do the honors .
Pence was reportedly part of the meetings yesterday with Trump and Brooks ’ s cohort , making sure they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proper procedure on registering objections , etc , which makes me think Pence *will* show up on the 6th .
But if he does , it ’ s unthinkable that he ’ ll try to disrupt Congress or reject the results somehow after the final floor vote to certify the electoral college votes .
It ’ s not who Pence is .
And even if he was that guy , I ’ m not sure what he could do , precisely , to “ reject ” the results .
Once Congress has voted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most he could do , I assume , would be to protest the vote by refusing to formally record the floor vote or whatever and then leave , forcing Grassley to do it .
But even that probably wouldn ’ t placate Trump .
Anything short of actually blocking Biden ’ s victory , which is impossible , will be regarded as a failure .
And Mike Pence will be an inextricable part of that failure in Trump ’ s eyes , especially if ( as expected ) he ends up doing his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Imagine having spent the past five years bowing and scraping to the president every day , believing it ’ s your ticket to your party ’ s presidential nomination in 2024 or 2028 , only to have him turn on you viciously with two weeks left in his term because you wouldn ’ t plunge the country into crisis by refusing to accept the will of the voters .
Here ’ s your reward for loyal service , Mike .
You earned it .
By the way , according to Axios , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of “ a Lincoln Project ad that claims that Pence is ‘ backing away ’ from Trump .
This ad has clearly got inside Trump ’ s head , the source said.
” I ’ ve embedded the ad below .
It was *clearly designed* to try to get inside the president ’ s head , even addressing him directly .
It ’ s surreal to think of an outfit running a psy op so brazenly on the leader of the free world and having it work like a charm , but @ @ @ @

He’s right, but it’s not an altogether bad thing to have the president convinced that January 6 is the day this all turns around for him. As I said last night, there are bad, very bad, and duck-and-cover bad ways that his presidency could end. A last stand on the 6th featuring a round of speeches by MAGA congressmen before Congress certifies the electoral college results is the least bad by far. The more Trump is focused on that date, the more incentive he has not to do anything, er, rash over the next two weeks.
Unfortunately, there’s no way around the fact that he’ll be free to do something rash between the 6th and Inauguration Day. Maybe his advisors can start talking up 2024 to him, convincing him that the uglier this gets on his way out, the less likely voters will be willing to take another chance on him four years from now.
But yeah, hopefully needless to say, the kabuki effort to block Biden’s win on January 6 is going down like a shot dog.
Thune to me: “I think the thing they got to remember is, it’s not going anywhere. I mean in the Senate, it would go down like a shot dog. I just don't think it makes a lot of sense to put everybody through this when you know what the ultimate outcome is going to be.” — Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 22, 2020
There’s no question that multiple Republican members of the House, led by Mo Brooks, will object to the results from certain swing states on the 6th. The suspense has to do with whether Trump or McConnell will win the tug of war over whether any Republican in the Senate will join them. Thune is stating the leadership’s position: No, no, no. The votes to overturn the election aren’t there so why force your colleagues to go on the record on such an explosively divisive issue? Whereas Trump’s position is: Might as well try everything. Even if we lose, at least we “fought.” And the floor votes on whether to overturn the results in a given state will provide him and his fans with a handy list of who’s loyal and who isn’t.
Which makes perfect sense if you view MAGA’s ultimate “fight” as not with Democrats but with their own party’s establishment. How many liberals get under the skin of Trump fans the way Mitt Romney or Jeff Flake or (more recently) Chris Christie do? The least populists can get out of this futile effort to overturn the election is an official enemies list of Republican members of Congress. That’s January 6.
The president met with some of the ringleaders of the House effort yesterday at the White House. The plan is simply to put up a good show, it seems, by delaying the certification for a number hours. Remember that if one member of the House and one member of the Senate object to accepting a state’s votes, that forces a two-hour debate followed by a floor vote. If there are objections to the results in six or seven states, we’re talking about many hours of floor debate. That’s a *lot* of speechmaking time for congressmen eager for a platform from which to grandstand.
Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) — who is spearheading the long-shot push to overturn the election results in Congress — organized the trio of White House meetings, which lasted over three hours and included roughly a dozen lawmakers. The group also met with Vice President Mike Pence, who will be presiding over the joint session of Congress when lawmakers officially certify the Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, as well as members of Trump’s legal team… In addition to the “dozens” of House Republicans who are committed to objecting to the election results, Brooks said there are “multiple” Senate Republicans who are now receptive to the effort, though he declined to name names. Sen.-elect Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), whom Trump has repeatedly praised on Twitter recently, has said he is considering the idea… Still, the whole episode could turn messy — and become one last Trump loyalty test. Brooks, who said there are plans to challenge the results in six states, said total debate time could clock in at around 18 hours. That means the vote-counting process could bleed into the wee hours of Jan. 7.
It’s unclear how specific the objections to each state’s results will be, whether they’ll get into detail about claims of voter fraud or just register an objection in order to proceed to the floor-debate phase. But that phase will be lengthy: Brooks told CNN that there may be as many as 72 five-minute speeches on the Republican side, an opportunity for GOP incumbents to cut campaign commercials on the taxpayer dime by pushing conspiracy theories about fraud that Trump’s lawyers remain unable to prove in court. Another unknown is the extent to which House Democrats will participate in the process. Will they boycott the floor debate, returning only for the final vote on whether to accept a state’s results, or will they push back by delivering speeches of their own? I assume they’ll push back, not wanting to give Republicans an uncontested open forum in which to denigrate the election results.
I’m also curious to see how many GOPers dare to amplify the smears about Dominion and Smartmatic rigging the vote for Biden now that the companies have begun to fight back against smear merchants. There’s nothing either one can do if January 6 turns into a series of lies about their business before a national audience, as the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause makes the floor of the House one of the few places in the United States where defamation law doesn’t reach. But that’s what makes it interesting: How many congressmen, knowing that the companies are seeking legal redress for the enormous damage they’ve suffered, will exploit their constitutional privilege to do further damage to them just because they know some of their voters would relish it? That’ll be an opportunity for truly nihilistic demagoguery.
There’s one more verrrrrry interesting element to the spectacle on January 6. Axios mentioned it today as part of a hair-raising new report about the president turning on his closest White House allies because they won’t lie to him about still having a path to victory the way Sidney Powell will. (“We cannot stress enough how unnerved Trump officials are by the conversations unfolding inside the White House.”) The suspicion extends all the way to the ultimate Trump loyalist, Mike Pence, who’ll be presiding over Congress’s session.
Trump is lashing out, and everyone is in the blast zone: At this point, if you’re not in the “use the Department of Homeland Security or the military to impound voting machines” camp, the president considers you weak and beneath contempt… Trump views Pence as not fighting hard enough for him — the same complaint he uses against virtually everybody who works for him and has been loyal to him. Pence’s role on Jan. 6 has begun to loom large in Trump’s mind, according to people who’ve discussed the matter with him. Trump would view Pence performing his constitutional duty — and validating the election result — as the ultimate betrayal.
It’s 100 percent true that Pence has largely stayed away from the “we wuz robbed” messaging about voter fraud. But he can’t hide on the 6th — unless, I suppose, he wimps out and finds an excuse not to be at the Capitol that day, leaving it to Chuck Grassley to do the honors. Pence was reportedly part of the meetings yesterday with Trump and Brooks’s cohort, making sure they’re on the same page in terms of proper procedure on registering objections, etc, which makes me think Pence *will* show up on the 6th. But if he does, it’s unthinkable that he’ll try to disrupt Congress or reject the results somehow after the final floor vote to certify the electoral college votes. It’s not who Pence is. And even if he was that guy, I’m not sure what he could do, precisely, to “reject” the results. Once Congress has voted, that’s that. The most he could do, I assume, would be to protest the vote by refusing to formally record the floor vote or whatever and then leave, forcing Grassley to do it.
But even that probably wouldn’t placate Trump. Anything short of actually blocking Biden’s victory, which is impossible, will be regarded as a failure. And Mike Pence will be an inextricable part of that failure in Trump’s eyes, especially if (as expected) he ends up doing his duty and accepting the results after all. Imagine having spent the past five years bowing and scraping to the president every day, believing it’s your ticket to your party’s presidential nomination in 2024 or 2028, only to have him turn on you viciously with two weeks left in his term because you wouldn’t plunge the country into crisis by refusing to accept the will of the voters. Here’s your reward for loyal service, Mike. You earned it.
By the way, according to Axios, Trump’s suspicion of Pence deepened because of “a Lincoln Project ad that claims that Pence is ‘backing away’ from Trump. This ad has clearly got inside Trump’s head, the source said.” I’ve embedded the ad below. It was *clearly designed* to try to get inside the president’s head, even addressing him directly. It’s surreal to think of an outfit running a psy op so brazenly on the leader of the free world and having it work like a charm, but here we are.


hotair--2020-12-23--Breaking: Trump pardons Manafort, Stone ... and Jared's dad; <span class='r

Breaking: Trump pardons Manafort, Stone ... and Jared's dad; Sasse: "Rotten to the core"

It ’ s beginning to look a lot like … Pardon-mas .
For the second evening in a row , Donald Trump has issued clemency actions to more than two dozen people , but three in particular will grab headlines .
In another rebuke to Robert Mueller , Trump has given full pardons to Paul Manafort and to Roger Stone , the latter of whom already had received a commutation ( via Jeff Dunetz ) : President Donald Trump on Wednesday pardoned over two dozen people , including longtime confidant Roger Stone , former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Charles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump previously commuted Stone ’ s sentence in July of this year but offered a full pardon to Stone , citing his age and health conditions .
Manafort , who was sentenced to 47 months last year on fraud and tax charges , was also offered a full pardon .
The White House also alleged “ prosecutorial overreach ” in Manafort ’ s case and “ potential political bias ” in Stone ’ s jury trial .
The pardons for Kushner and Stone had been widely predicted , but the one for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Manafort ’ s conviction came on charges that the Department of Justice had developed in 2014 but never pressed as part of a wider investigation of corruption in Ukraine .
Mueller used the old charges — as well as new charges related to the Foreign Agent Registration Act — as leverage against Trump , but ended up with nothing at all .
In both explanations for their pardons , Trump explicitly attacked Mueller ’ s special-counsel operation .
“ As a result of blatant prosecutorial overreach , ” the White House statement declares @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years of unfair treatment and is one of the most prominent victims of what has been revealed to be perhaps the greatest witch hunt in American history.
” Before Mueller , the statement claims to quote the trial judge , “ Mr .
Manafort had led an “ otherwise blameless life.
” ” Er , that ’ s not entirely true , as the pre-existing DoJ investigation made clear .
As for Stone , Trump argues , the special counsel team treated him “ very unfairly.
” He also claims that the jury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s trial ; if so , Stone might well have contributed to that with his PR antics before and during the trial .
The judge had to tell him more than once to quit going to the media .
As for Charles Kushner , well … you know .
Still , the parameters of pardons and commutations rest entirely with the president .
The explanations are only necessary for public relations , and for an exiting president , necessary is far too strong a word .
The good news is that Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now , which means he probably thinks it ’ s barely necessary to explain it , too .
Trump apparently now recognizes he ’ s on his way out , and wants to take every opportunity to stick his finger in the eyes of all his enemies on the way .
Update : Someone else is very unhappy about it : Before addressing Senator Ben Sasse ’ s comment , let me include a related thought from a longtime reader : Who said it was right ?
It ’ s certainly open for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Article II Section 2 , this power is plenary for presidents .
It can not be reviewed , and can not be undone once issued .
The purpose of this was to allow presidents ( and governors , in some states ) to take potentially unpopular decisions to right injustices .
Exercising this power does not make the Constitution a “ dead document ” ; it ’ s an exercise of authority explicitly and exclusively granted in the Constitution to the president .
It doesn ’ t even require a report , let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t mean clemency actions can ’ t still be “ rotten , ” but that ’ s a political consideration rather than a legal one .
The only way that it might become a legal problem is if evidence emerges that a president took a bribe to issue a clemency action , which certainly doesn ’ t apply to Trump in any of these cases .
He ’ s clearly operating from his personal animus to Mueller and his familial connection to Kushner .
If presidents issue “ rotten ” pardons , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re-election bid … which is why the “ rotten ” pardons usually only emerge in the final days of a presidency .

It’s beginning to look a lot like … Pardon-mas. For the second evening in a row, Donald Trump has issued clemency actions to more than two dozen people, but three in particular will grab headlines. In another rebuke to Robert Mueller, Trump has given full pardons to Paul Manafort and to Roger Stone, the latter of whom already had received a commutation (via Jeff Dunetz):
President Donald Trump on Wednesday pardoned over two dozen people, including longtime confidant Roger Stone, former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Charles Kushner, the father of his son-in-law. Trump previously commuted Stone’s sentence in July of this year but offered a full pardon to Stone, citing his age and health conditions. Manafort, who was sentenced to 47 months last year on fraud and tax charges, was also offered a full pardon. The White House also alleged “prosecutorial overreach” in Manafort’s case and “potential political bias” in Stone’s jury trial.
The pardons for Kushner and Stone had been widely predicted, but the one for Manafort is still a bit surprising. Manafort’s conviction came on charges that the Department of Justice had developed in 2014 but never pressed as part of a wider investigation of corruption in Ukraine. Mueller used the old charges — as well as new charges related to the Foreign Agent Registration Act — as leverage against Trump, but ended up with nothing at all.
In both explanations for their pardons, Trump explicitly attacked Mueller’s special-counsel operation. “As a result of blatant prosecutorial overreach,” the White House statement declares, “Mr. Manafort has endured years of unfair treatment and is one of the most prominent victims of what has been revealed to be perhaps the greatest witch hunt in American history.” Before Mueller, the statement claims to quote the trial judge, “Mr. Manafort had led an “otherwise blameless life.”” Er, that’s not entirely true, as the pre-existing DoJ investigation made clear.
As for Stone, Trump argues, the special counsel team treated him “very unfairly.” He also claims that the jury could have been politically biased at Stone’s trial; if so, Stone might well have contributed to that with his PR antics before and during the trial. The judge had to tell him more than once to quit going to the media.
As for Charles Kushner, well … you know.
Still, the parameters of pardons and commutations rest entirely with the president. The explanations are only necessary for public relations, and for an exiting president, necessary is far too strong a word. The good news is that Donald Trump is clearing the decks in earnest now, which means he probably thinks it’s barely necessary to explain it, too. Trump apparently now recognizes he’s on his way out, and wants to take every opportunity to stick his finger in the eyes of all his enemies on the way.
Update: Someone’s pretty happy about it:
History will record that your Presidency accomplished more in 4 years than any of your modern-day predecessors. — Paul Manafort (@PaulManafort) December 24, 2020
Update: Someone else is very unhappy about it:
Before addressing Senator Ben Sasse’s comment, let me include a related thought from a longtime reader:
When did it become dogma on the right that “if I can do it, then it makes it right to do it?” — adub (@AlanWindham) December 24, 2020
Who said it was right? It’s certainly open for criticism, but under the Constitution in Article II Section 2, this power is plenary for presidents. It cannot be reviewed, and cannot be undone once issued. The purpose of this was to allow presidents (and governors, in some states) to take potentially unpopular decisions to right injustices. Exercising this power does not make the Constitution a “dead document”; it’s an exercise of authority explicitly and exclusively granted in the Constitution to the president. It doesn’t even require a report, let alone an explanation.
That doesn’t mean clemency actions can’t still be “rotten,” but that’s a political consideration rather than a legal one. The only way that it might become a legal problem is if evidence emerges that a president took a bribe to issue a clemency action, which certainly doesn’t apply to Trump in any of these cases. He’s clearly operating from his personal animus to Mueller and his familial connection to Kushner. If presidents issue “rotten” pardons, then voters can vote against him/her in a re-election bid … which is why the “rotten” pardons usually only emerge in the final days of a presidency.
For what it’s worth, I think the pardons for Manafort and Stone are ill-considered, even if they were expected. I’m wondering now whether we’ll see pardons for Edward Snowden and Julian Assange. Those seemed doubtful to me, but I also thought that the best Manafort would get would be a commutation.


hotair--2020-12-23--NC county manager told everyone to stay home for the holidays - And then this happened...

Mecklenburg County ( NC ) Manager Dena Diorio unwittingly made a point in favor of personal responsibility instead of government mandates during a virtual press conference .
She told county residents to stay home for the holidays and only associate with those in their own households .
And , just like that , she admitted that she would not be doing that herself .
Ms. Diorio plans to hop in her car and go to visit a home with two people in it for Christmas .
A reporter asked about that – isn ’ t that precisely what she told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Well , yes , was her response , but she knows these people and there will be only two of them , you see .
She feels perfectly comfortable going for the visit .
She will travel to Durham , N.C. “ to see some close family , small group.
” “ I was confused a little bit by Dena ’ s answer going to see her family in Durham , ” said WBT ’ s Brett Jensen .
“ Isn ’ t that what we ’ re not supposed to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people that we actually live with ?
” Diorio defended her plans by explaining that the specifics of the situation led to her making the decision .
“ I know who the family is , I know where they spend their time , so I feel comfortable making that trip , ” she said .
“ It ’ s two people in a household , it ’ s not a group .
It ’ s a very small number of people and I feel very confident about their safety.
” So , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t everyone be able to make the same decision , using their own discretion in their own lives ?
What this arrogant public official did was lower the mask and show acknowledgment that there is more government overreach going on in these lockdown orders than are practical .
She clearly doesn ’ t believe what she was saying to the county residents because she ’ s not taking her own advice .
Diorio is a longtime civil servant and she knows better than to announce that she is above the rules she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It seems that this kind of story is a daily event .
While it may be redundant to continue posting stories of these hypocrites , I think that each and every one of them needs to be called out and held accountable for their actions .
Ms.Diorio ends up making the same argument that anti-lockdown people make , only she did so unintentionally .
People should be able to make their own decisions by weighing the advice of professionals in the medical community and the circumstances in their own lives .
In this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ car instead of an airplane which limits her exposure to strangers .
She says she ’ ll be spending the holiday with only two other people in that household .
How does she know that they haven ’ t been exposed to the virus ?
She doesn ’ t completely know that , it ’ s an educated guess on her part .
That is exactly how anyone else would make the decision .
If , for instance , the two people she is visiting are elderly and have remained housebound during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good calculation that she ’ ll be fine going there .
The two of them have probably had everything they need delivered to them , thus eliminating the necessity of going out among the general public .
I ’ m just spitballing here but it is an entirely reasonable scenario .
Millions of other small families can make the same choice without the threat of doom and gloom .
Larger family gatherings should reasonably be reduced this year , we understand that logic .
The point is that everyone wants the freedom to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the excuse to scare others by addressing the spread of coronavirus cases in the county .
How does she know she won ’ t bring the virus into the home of those other people ?
She doesn ’ t .
It ’ s a risk , as is every other decision we make .
All any of us can do is remain diligent , follow reasonable advice , and live our lives .
The list of public officials selfishly living their lives one way while telling others to live differently will continue to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be sure .
We truly are not all in this together .

Mecklenburg County (NC) Manager Dena Diorio unwittingly made a point in favor of personal responsibility instead of government mandates during a virtual press conference. She told county residents to stay home for the holidays and only associate with those in their own households. And, just like that, she admitted that she would not be doing that herself.
Ms. Diorio plans to hop in her car and go to visit a home with two people in it for Christmas. A reporter asked about that – isn’t that precisely what she told people in the county not to do? Well, yes, was her response, but she knows these people and there will be only two of them, you see. She feels perfectly comfortable going for the visit. She will travel to Durham, N.C. “to see some close family, small group.”
“I was confused a little bit by Dena’s answer going to see her family in Durham,” said WBT’s Brett Jensen. “Isn’t that what we’re not supposed to be doing, by spending only time with people that we actually live with?” Diorio defended her plans by explaining that the specifics of the situation led to her making the decision. “I know who the family is, I know where they spend their time, so I feel comfortable making that trip,” she said. “It’s two people in a household, it’s not a group. It’s a very small number of people and I feel very confident about their safety.”
So, the reporter asked an obvious question – shouldn’t everyone be able to make the same decision, using their own discretion in their own lives?
“I’m making a personal decision based on information that I have, and so that’s the decision that I’ve made and I think everybody needs to do the same,” Diorio said, despite having already recommended that everyone stay home.
What this arrogant public official did was lower the mask and show acknowledgment that there is more government overreach going on in these lockdown orders than are practical. She clearly doesn’t believe what she was saying to the county residents because she’s not taking her own advice. Diorio is a longtime civil servant and she knows better than to announce that she is above the rules she expects everyone else to abide by. It seems that this kind of story is a daily event. While it may be redundant to continue posting stories of these hypocrites, I think that each and every one of them needs to be called out and held accountable for their actions.
Ms.Diorio ends up making the same argument that anti-lockdown people make, only she did so unintentionally. People should be able to make their own decisions by weighing the advice of professionals in the medical community and the circumstances in their own lives. In this case, Diorio is traveling in her car instead of an airplane which limits her exposure to strangers. She says she’ll be spending the holiday with only two other people in that household. How does she know that they haven’t been exposed to the virus? She doesn’t completely know that, it’s an educated guess on her part. That is exactly how anyone else would make the decision. If, for instance, the two people she is visiting are elderly and have remained housebound during the pandemic, it’s a pretty good calculation that she’ll be fine going there. The two of them have probably had everything they need delivered to them, thus eliminating the necessity of going out among the general public. I’m just spitballing here but it is an entirely reasonable scenario. Millions of other small families can make the same choice without the threat of doom and gloom. Larger family gatherings should reasonably be reduced this year, we understand that logic.
The point is that everyone wants the freedom to make their own decisions. She uses the excuse to scare others by addressing the spread of coronavirus cases in the county.
“For this holiday season, we ask that you stay home and only be around those who you live with,” Mecklenburg County Manager Dena Diorio said during a Monday press conference. “Our data shows that COVID is still very widespread in our community, and holidays and holiday gatherings are some of the most dangerous places to be. So please, stay home, and stay safe.”
How does she know she won’t bring the virus into the home of those other people? She doesn’t. It’s a risk, as is every other decision we make. All any of us can do is remain diligent, follow reasonable advice, and live our lives.
County Manager Dena R. Diorio and Public Health Director Gibbie Harris provide an update on COVID-19 in Meck County. https://t.co/yrnHmetfcM — Mecklenburg County (@MeckCounty) December 21, 2020
The list of public officials selfishly living their lives one way while telling others to live differently will continue to grow, of that, we can be sure. We truly are not all in this together.


hotair--2020-12-23--Former Google diversity recruiter: 'F**K GOOGLE AND F**K THE WAY GOOGLE TREATS BLACK WOMEN and BLACK

Former Google diversity recruiter: 'F**K GOOGLE AND F**K THE WAY GOOGLE TREATS BLACK WOMEN and BLACK PEOPLE'

I think it ’ s safe to say that April Christina Curley is the dictionary definition of a disgruntled former employee .
Curley announced on Twitter this week that she ’ d been fired in September after six years with Google where she worked as a diversity recruiter .
Her particular project was to help Google hire students straight out of HBUCs , something she said the company had never once done prior to hiring her .
She quickly determined that the problem at Google was “ racist s**t. ” There ’ s a fine line here .
On the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assume the curriculum at an HBCU isn ’ t any good .
That ’ s a broad generalization .
On the other hand , it ’ s not necessarily crazy to think that Harvard or Yale might have better curriculums than other schools of all types , including HBCUs .
Otherwise what ’ s the point of going to an Ivy League school ?
The fact that recruiters everywhere assume excellence at those schools , over and above others , is why getting in to them is so difficult and why a degree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Acknowledging excellence isn ’ t racist .
And here ’ s where she really starts to tear into Google ’ s corporate culture : And the big finale of this fireworks show : NBC News points out that Curley is the second high profile black employee to announce leaving Google this month : Earlier this month , one of Google ’ s top female executives , Timnit Gebru — a highly respected research scientist , well known for her advocacy for increased diversity in the tech industry — said she also had been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of research said Gebru had resigned… In the three weeks since Gebru announced on Twitter that she was fired , over 2,690 Google employees signed a letter of support for her .
“ Instead of being embraced by Google as an exceptionally talented and prolific contributor , Dr. Gebru has faced defensiveness , racism , gaslighting , research censorship , and now a retaliatory firing , ” the statement reads .
The backlash within the company has led to a group called the Black Googler Network meeting with Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of things .
But the group was apparently disappointed that all Pichai would commit to was to “ improve leadership representation of underrepresented groups by 30 percent by 2025.
” It ’ s a bit hard for me to believe that this extremely progressive company is a hotbed of anti-black racism but that ’ s apparently what people inside believe .
It does make me wonder if this isn ’ t comparable to the campus takeover of Evergreen State College .
There too , a campus known as one of the most progressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that racism was a threat to the very lives of students on campus , leading to any number of extreme actions .
I guess we ’ ll see how Google responds to this latest attack , though frankly they have bigger problems right now .

I think it’s safe to say that April Christina Curley is the dictionary definition of a disgruntled former employee. Curley announced on Twitter this week that she’d been fired in September after six years with Google where she worked as a diversity recruiter. Her particular project was to help Google hire students straight out of HBUCs, something she said the company had never once done prior to hiring her.
Please read that shit again. It’s as egregious as it sounds. At the time of my departure, I had single handedly increased Google’s black engineering hiring from HBCUs by over 300%. Meaning- I brought in over 300 Black and Brown students from HBCUs who were hired into eng roles — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
She quickly determined that the problem at Google was “racist s**t.”
When I started at Google, I quickly became aware of all the racist shit put in place to keep black and brown students out of their pipeline. I routinely called out shady recruitment practices such as “screening out” resumes of students with “unfamiliar” school/university names. — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
In several cases, students were questioned IN INTERVIEWS about the quality of the computer science curriculum that they were receiving at their HBCU and criticized for “not meeting the bar” compared to “elite”, white institutions. — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
There’s a fine line here. On the one hand it would be racist to assume the curriculum at an HBCU isn’t any good. That’s a broad generalization. On the other hand, it’s not necessarily crazy to think that Harvard or Yale might have better curriculums than other schools of all types, including HBCUs. Otherwise what’s the point of going to an Ivy League school? The fact that recruiters everywhere assume excellence at those schools, over and above others, is why getting in to them is so difficult and why a degree from these schools is so valuable. Acknowledging excellence isn’t racist.
Often, I found myself arguing and pleading with white women who lead recruitment teams for internships and full time roles, BEGGING for students who were MORE than qualified to be considered for offers. — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
And here’s where she really starts to tear into Google’s corporate culture:
Despite STELLAR performance metrics which can be supported by multiple data points, I was repeatedly denied promotions, had my compensation cut, placed on performance improvement plans, denied leadership opportunities, yelled at, intentionally excluded from meetings, etc. — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
My skip-level manager, a white woman, told me VERBATIM that the way I speak (oftentimes with a heavy Baltimore accent) was a disability that I should disclose when meeting with folks internally. — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
I could write FOR DAYS about alllllll the awfully racist recruitment and hiring practices I saw at Google, WITH RECEIPTS. But I’ll stop here for today and summarize my sentiment by saying… — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
And the big finale of this fireworks show:
Take it from ME- their most successful BLACK QUEER WOMAN recruiter who they fired in the middle of a MF pandemic because they were tired of hearing me call them out on their racist bullshit. — Real Abril🌈 (@RealAbril) December 21, 2020
NBC News points out that Curley is the second high profile black employee to announce leaving Google this month:
Earlier this month, one of Google’s top female executives, Timnit Gebru — a highly respected research scientist, well known for her advocacy for increased diversity in the tech industry — said she also had been fired. The company’s head of research said Gebru had resigned… In the three weeks since Gebru announced on Twitter that she was fired, over 2,690 Google employees signed a letter of support for her. “Instead of being embraced by Google as an exceptionally talented and prolific contributor, Dr. Gebru has faced defensiveness, racism, gaslighting, research censorship, and now a retaliatory firing,” the statement reads.
The backlash within the company has led to a group called the Black Googler Network meeting with Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai with a list of demands regarding all sorts of things. But the group was apparently disappointed that all Pichai would commit to was to “improve leadership representation of underrepresented groups by 30 percent by 2025.”
It’s a bit hard for me to believe that this extremely progressive company is a hotbed of anti-black racism but that’s apparently what people inside believe. It does make me wonder if this isn’t comparable to the campus takeover of Evergreen State College. There too, a campus known as one of the most progressive places in the country suddenly became convinced that racism was a threat to the very lives of students on campus, leading to any number of extreme actions. I guess we’ll see how Google responds to this latest attack, though frankly they have bigger problems right now.