hotair--2020-03-02--Wow: Klobuchar drops out, will endorse Biden tonight; <span class='red'>Update: Minnesota math</span

Wow: Klobuchar drops out, will endorse Biden tonight; Update: Minnesota math

I just got done writing a post about how Klobuchar was helping Biden by fighting on for one more day in Minnesota , where she ’ s the only candidate who can hold down Bernie ’ s totals .
The worse Sanders does there the fewer delegates he ’ ll take from the state , and thus the smaller his national delegate lead over Joe Biden will be once the votes are in tomorrow night .
Now here she is bowing out 24 hours before the vote .
Wha ’ happened ?
Ms. Klobuchar will appear with Mr. Biden at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The decision comes one day after former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend , Ind.
, departed the race , and after weeks of Democratic Party hand-wringing about a crowded field of moderate candidates splitting a finite field of centrist votes , allowing Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont to march forward unopposed among progressives and amass delegates… The Klobuchar campaign was constantly rescheduling events , oftentimes releasing public advisories for an event with less than 24 hours advance notice .
One “ get out the caucus ” rally in Nevada at Rancho High @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Days before , Pete Buttigieg , the former mayor of South Bend , Ind.
, brought more than 1,200 to the same school .
Ms. Klobuchar was forced to cancel a rally in her own backyard Sunday night , after protesters from Black Lives Matter and other local civil rights groups took over the stage in St. Louis Park , Minn .
They were calling attention to the case of Myon Burrell , a black man convicted of murder as a teenager while Ms. Klobuchar was county attorney .
The “ muddle in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much of a muddle , thanks to Biden ’ s blockbuster in South Carolina on Saturday night .
There ’ s real suspense now : What if Bloomberg tanks tomorrow night ?
Does he drop too ?
Imagine Democrats going from “ a Sanders nomination is assured thanks to a hopeless deadlock among centrists !
” to “ Joe Biden is now free to consolidate most of the party !
” in the span of four days .
My hunch when the news broke is that Klobuchar ’ s getting out in order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winning delegates himself in Minnesota tomorrow .
And that ’ s doubtless true — certainly he ’ ll get more votes there than he would have gotten if she had competed .
But check FiveThirtyEight ’ s model of Minnesota and you ’ ll find that Joe was a long longshot there until now .
He may end up north of the 15 percent threshold tomorrow thanks to Klobuchar ’ s endorsement but it seems a cinch that Bernie will win the state easily .
Wouldn ’ t it have been better for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those delegates from Sanders and then drop out endorse Biden ?
Seems like something else is going on .
It could be that Klobuchar ’ s polling showed she was likely to lose to Bernie tomorrow regardless , which would have been humiliating in her home state .
The last polls taken there , around 10 days ago , showed her ahead by six points .
It ’ s possible that her internal data had her fading after her weak finishes in Nevada and South Carolina .
She was probably going to drop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have dropped out if Sanders beat her , so why not spare herself an embarrassment and punch a ticket on the Biden express instead ?
I have a hot take about what ’ s really going on here , though , and it all comes down to the white-hot hatred with which Klobuchar regards Buttigieg .
There have been stories for months about how she resents him for elbowing into the niche she was coveting for herself , the centrist-y midwesterner who can win Iowa and then springboard that victory into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrice-elected U.S. senator who ’ s routed her opposition in elections back home ; he ’ s the ex-mayor of a small city .
Yet she ’ s gotten maybe a tenth of the buzz Buttigieg has gotten in the race , an afterthought in the primary who even finished behind him in the one state where she beat expectations , New Hampshire .
I think she fully intended to fight on until tomorrow and take her chances in Minnesota , believing she could beat Bernie there before bowing out of the race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adoring hometown crowd .
But then Buttigieg shocked the world by dropping out last night .
Suddenly the spotlight was back on him .
Suspense mounted : Would Pete endorse Biden before Super Tuesday ?
Would Pete perhaps show up as a surprise guest at a Biden rally today , with a beaming Joe showing off his new protege ?
And if he did , who would care about Klobuchar dropping out and endorsing Biden tomorrow , after her opportunity to affect the vote on Super Tuesday had passed ?
So , my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Buttigieg thing ” in that Klobuchar may have decided last night after he quit the race that she didn ’ t want to be an afterthought in resolving the “ muddle in the middle ” too .
By quitting immediately and offering her endorsement to Biden before Pete did , she ’ d have the distinction of becoming the first major candidate to endorse Joe .
She bigfooted Buttigieg , in other words , and at long last .
I wonder if there was even some negotiation in which Klobuchar agreed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Dallas on the condition that she not have to share the spotlight with Pete .
Either that or maybe she heard through the grapevine that Pete already intends to be there for a “ surprise ” endorsement and she decided that she wanted to be part of those headlines tomorrow , not elbowed aside once again .
Can ’ t wait for the behind-the-scenes reporting on this !
Update : Contrary to appearances , says Steve Kornacki , it actually might hurt Bernie in Minnesota now that Klobuchar is out .
Until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 33 delegates or thereabouts over Biden from MN .
Now , assuming Biden reaches the 15 percent viability threshold for delegates , that net margin is likely to shrink .
Update : Yep , Buttigieg is all-in on the Biden rally tonight too .
It ’ s the Pete ‘ n Amy show in Dallas , as unlikely as that may seem .
It was smart of Klobuchar to race to get a piece of that action before Pete had it all to himself .

I just got done writing a post about how Klobuchar was helping Biden by fighting on for one more day in Minnesota, where she’s the only candidate who can hold down Bernie’s totals. The worse Sanders does there the fewer delegates he’ll take from the state, and thus the smaller his national delegate lead over Joe Biden will be once the votes are in tomorrow night.
Now here she is bowing out 24 hours before the vote. Wha’ happened?
Is this … a Buttigieg thing?
Ms. Klobuchar will appear with Mr. Biden at his rally in Dallas Monday night. The decision comes one day after former Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., departed the race, and after weeks of Democratic Party hand-wringing about a crowded field of moderate candidates splitting a finite field of centrist votes, allowing Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont to march forward unopposed among progressives and amass delegates… The Klobuchar campaign was constantly rescheduling events, oftentimes releasing public advisories for an event with less than 24 hours advance notice. One “get out the caucus” rally in Nevada at Rancho High School attracted less than 100 people. Days before, Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., brought more than 1,200 to the same school. Ms. Klobuchar was forced to cancel a rally in her own backyard Sunday night, after protesters from Black Lives Matter and other local civil rights groups took over the stage in St. Louis Park, Minn. They were calling attention to the case of Myon Burrell, a black man convicted of murder as a teenager while Ms. Klobuchar was county attorney.
The “muddle in the middle” suddenly isn’t much of a muddle, thanks to Biden’s blockbuster in South Carolina on Saturday night. There’s real suspense now: What if Bloomberg tanks tomorrow night? Does he drop too? Imagine Democrats going from “a Sanders nomination is assured thanks to a hopeless deadlock among centrists!” to “Joe Biden is now free to consolidate most of the party!” in the span of four days.
My hunch when the news broke is that Klobuchar’s getting out in order to improve Biden’s chances of winning delegates himself in Minnesota tomorrow. And that’s doubtless true — certainly he’ll get more votes there than he would have gotten if she had competed. But check FiveThirtyEight’s model of Minnesota and you’ll find that Joe was a long longshot there until now. He may end up north of the 15 percent threshold tomorrow thanks to Klobuchar’s endorsement but it seems a cinch that Bernie will win the state easily. Wouldn’t it have been better for her to try to win and hoard those delegates from Sanders and then drop out endorse Biden?
Seems like something else is going on. It could be that Klobuchar’s polling showed she was likely to lose to Bernie tomorrow regardless, which would have been humiliating in her home state. The last polls taken there, around 10 days ago, showed her ahead by six points. It’s possible that her internal data had her fading after her weak finishes in Nevada and South Carolina. She was probably going to drop out tomorrow no matter what and certainly would have dropped out if Sanders beat her, so why not spare herself an embarrassment and punch a ticket on the Biden express instead?
I have a hot take about what’s really going on here, though, and it all comes down to the white-hot hatred with which Klobuchar regards Buttigieg. There have been stories for months about how she resents him for elbowing into the niche she was coveting for herself, the centrist-y midwesterner who can win Iowa and then springboard that victory into a national campaign. She’s a thrice-elected U.S. senator who’s routed her opposition in elections back home; he’s the ex-mayor of a small city. Yet she’s gotten maybe a tenth of the buzz Buttigieg has gotten in the race, an afterthought in the primary who even finished behind him in the one state where she beat expectations, New Hampshire. I think she fully intended to fight on until tomorrow and take her chances in Minnesota, believing she could beat Bernie there before bowing out of the race on a high note, before an adoring hometown crowd.
But then Buttigieg shocked the world by dropping out last night. Suddenly the spotlight was back on him. Suspense mounted: Would Pete endorse Biden before Super Tuesday? Would Pete perhaps show up as a surprise guest at a Biden rally today, with a beaming Joe showing off his new protege? And if he did, who would care about Klobuchar dropping out and endorsing Biden tomorrow, after her opportunity to affect the vote on Super Tuesday had passed?
So, my theory: I think this is “a Buttigieg thing” in that Klobuchar may have decided last night after he quit the race that she didn’t want to be an afterthought in resolving the “muddle in the middle” too. By quitting immediately and offering her endorsement to Biden before Pete did, she’d have the distinction of becoming the first major candidate to endorse Joe. She bigfooted Buttigieg, in other words, and at long last. I wonder if there was even some negotiation in which Klobuchar agreed to show up at the Biden rally tonight in Dallas on the condition that she not have to share the spotlight with Pete. Either that or maybe she heard through the grapevine that Pete already intends to be there for a “surprise” endorsement and she decided that she wanted to be part of those headlines tomorrow, not elbowed aside once again. Can’t wait for the behind-the-scenes reporting on this!
Update: Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
A private jet has filed a flight plan from south bend to Dallas tonight. pic.twitter.com/Ly37VfERv1 — Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) March 2, 2020
Update: Contrary to appearances, says Steve Kornacki, it actually might hurt Bernie in Minnesota now that Klobuchar is out. Until today it looked he’d net 33 delegates or thereabouts over Biden from MN. Now, assuming Biden reaches the 15 percent viability threshold for delegates, that net margin is likely to shrink.
Now let's say that Klobuchar, even after dropping out, still gets to 15%, with Biden moving up a little past viability and Sanders winning by double-digits. The actual delegate difference between Sanders and Biden is cut almost in half: pic.twitter.com/9umL42S5nS — Steve Kornacki (@SteveKornacki) March 2, 2020
The bottom line for Biden is that he doesn't want to fall too far behind Sanders in the overall delegate count on Tuesday, Anything that gets him viable in states where he's been in danger of missing 15% (MN, MA, CO, CA) helps — even if he's losing the state to Sanders. — Steve Kornacki (@SteveKornacki) March 2, 2020
Update: Yep, Buttigieg is all-in on the Biden rally tonight too. It’s the Pete ‘n Amy show in Dallas, as unlikely as that may seem. It was smart of Klobuchar to race to get a piece of that action before Pete had it all to himself.


hotair--2020-03-02--Report: Buttigieg "likely" to endorse Biden. But when? <span class='red'>Update: Now? Update: Tonigh

Report: Buttigieg "likely" to endorse Biden. But when? Update: Now? Update: Tonight

I shouldn ’ t be surprised by this but I am .
A little surprised .
Makes sense , no ?
Buttigieg started the race as a more or less leftist candidate , then drifted towards the center once he realized the progressive vote wasn ’ t going to budge from Bernie .
He repositioned in hopes of becoming the “ Not Bernie ” moderate in the race and did surprisingly well in seizing that niche in Iowa and New Hampshire .
But Biden foiled his plan to expand that brand nationally by blowing the doors off in South Carolina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Super Tuesday .
Logically the only move left was to get out now , back Joe , and expect some political patronage from the new president if Biden goes all the way this November .
Simple enough , so why am I surprised ?
It ’ s just because Buttigieg is a conspicuously young and ambitious politician and the next generation of Bernie-loving Democratic voters looks like they ’ ll be further left than the party is now .
And those voters are going to hate Pete for trying to derail the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They hate him already for having been a thorn in Bernie ’ s side in the primaries and they hate him for spreading the message on the biggest political stage that it ’ s okay to be young and a liberal and not buy what Bernie ’ s selling .
But they ’ re going to really hate him for trying to knife Sanders even after his own presidential chances have evaporated by siding with Old Man Biden when Bernie seemed poised to win the nomination .
And Pete ’ s going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make no mistake .
Not just in freeing up voters to move to Biden either , although of course that ’ ll happen to some extent .
He ’ s also freeing up voters to move to Bloomberg , Warren , and Klobuchar — all of which is bad news for Sanders tomorrow .
Buttigieg was projected to get under 15 percent in the vast majority of states and districts on Super Tuesday .
Thus , his votes were essentially wasted .
Redistributing his votes to other candidates will help them to meet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In particular , Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg were both close to the 15 percent line in many states or districts .
So even an extra percentage point or two would help them get over that line in more places .
For instance , both Bloomberg and Warren were projected to finish with an average of 14 percent of the vote in California before Buttigieg ’ s dropout .
Now , they ’ re forecasted for 16 percent instead .
Biden was also projected to finish under 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so Buttigieg ’ s dropout helps him out also in a few places .
Biden went from a projected 14 percent of the vote to 16 percent in Minnesota , for example .
Remember that 15 percent is the magic number in Democratic primaries for delegates .
If you hit that number in a particular district you get a piece of that district ’ s pool of delegates ; if you fall short you get jack , which means a bigger haul for the candidates who did reach the 15 percent mark .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it makes a big difference if his opponents are consistently missing the 15 percent mark or , thanks to Buttigieg ’ s voters , consistently hitting it .
If it ’ s the latter then Bernie ’ s share of delegates will be much smaller than expected .
Which means it ’ ll be easier for Biden to catch him over the course of a months-long race .
Which means the odds of a contested convention will be much higher than they were last week .
As of this morning , thanks to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Buttigieg ’ s withdrawal , Nate Silver ’ s model places the odds of a brokered convention at 64 percent .
Bernie ’ s odds of clinching the nomination have fallen to 23 percent , half of what they were after his win in Nevada .
There ’ s more bad news for Sanders : Of the three candidates left in the race who stand no chance of being nominated ( Bloomberg probably belongs in that category too but let ’ s keep him out for now ) , Buttigieg was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ downside for Bernie .
Remember that Sanders is fighting on Elizabeth Warren ’ s and Amy Klobuchar ’ s home turfs in the Massachusetts and Minnesota primaries tomorrow and in each case they ’ re the chief threat to take delegates from him , not Joe Biden .
If either of them , or both , had quit after South Carolina , Bernie would clean up in their home states tomorrow .
Yet instead of dropping out , each of them is fighting on — at least for one more day .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was ( 1 ) a Biden blowout in SC , ( 2 ) Warren and Klobuchar refusing to get out , ( 3 ) moderate voters shifting from other candidates to Biden , and ( 4 ) a strong Biden performance tomorrow night , especially in the south .
We ’ ve now seen the first three of those happen ( and may yet see a Buttigieg endorsement of Biden soon , to further shift votes ) and the fourth could be en route if Biden ’ s huge success among black Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ region-wide phenomenon .
And if it does , that would place Bernie on the brink of a true disaster — Bloomberg throwing in the towel tomorrow night after he underperforms and deciding that his money will be best spent going forward by taking out Sanders .
People were marveling last night after he announced his withdrawal that if Buttigieg runs for president again in 2060 he ’ d be younger than Bernie is now .
That ’ s how precocious he is .
( As things stand , the youngest man left in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Old Man Biden . )
But as I say , a politician with that much runway still in front of him has keen reason to notice which way the party is drifting ideologically and to do what he can to stay on its good side .
Buttigieg is … not doing that by potentially endorsing Biden .
So why ’ s he considering it ?
My guess is that it ’ s a combination of wanting to earn favors from the Democratic establishment and also wanting to continue to build goodwill among black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Buttigieg did a lot of outreach to African-Americans during this campaign with little to show for it vote-wise .
He ’ ll have to do much more going forward to be viable nationally , but it can only help if he aligns himself now with the favored candidate of black Democrats this year , the former VP to the first black president .
Meanwhile , if Biden overperforms tomorrow night and ends up holding off Sanders for the nomination , many powerful establishment Democrats will be grateful to Pete for having done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the middle ” this year at a crucial moment when Biden needed moderates to consolidate behind him .
He ’ s been a very good soldier for the party ’ s leadership by quitting and he ’ ll remind them of it as needed .
He must be betting that that leadership will remain center-left , by and large , well into the future .
And maybe it will : If socialism is as much of a nonstarter in national elections as righties and even most liberals believe , Democrats will need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” for reasons of basic viability .
I think he may be thinking short-term too , and not just in terms of Biden appointing him to be the head of HUD or whatever .
Buttigieg will have a difficult time getting elected to statewide office in Indiana but it ’ s probably less difficult now that he ’ s well-known to Democratic voters nationally *and* has conspicuously aligned himself with the centrist wing of the party .
Joe Donnelly won a Senate seat there as a Democratic moderate as recently as 2012 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Pete would need a favorable national climate to pull off something similar but he ’ s one of the more famous Dems in America right now and enjoys a big donor network .
He could win .
Or , if he wants to improve his chances , he could relocate to a state like Virginia where there are lots of well-educated suburbanites who ’ ll find his resume and centrism appealing .
Imagine Buttigieg running for governor there a few years from now with President Joe Biden helping to rally black Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He ’ d better hope that the leftward pressure on the party from below isn ’ t as strong as it seems , though , or he ’ ll be paying for his looming endorsement of Biden forever .
Imagine the Pete vs. AOC presidential death match in 2028 .
Hoo boy .
Update : Haven ’ t seen the Pete news here confirmed elsewhere yet , but : Update : And there it is .
Buttigieg will join nemesis Amy Klobuchar onstage tonight in Dallas to officially join Joementum .

I shouldn’t be surprised by this but I am. A little surprised.
New: A Buttigieg endorsement for Biden is likely, two people close to Buttigieg say, but whether he makes the decision before Super Tuesday is unclear. @jeffzeleny reporting — Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) March 2, 2020
Makes sense, no? Buttigieg started the race as a more or less leftist candidate, then drifted towards the center once he realized the progressive vote wasn’t going to budge from Bernie. He repositioned in hopes of becoming the “Not Bernie” moderate in the race and did surprisingly well in seizing that niche in Iowa and New Hampshire. But Biden foiled his plan to expand that brand nationally by blowing the doors off in South Carolina, leaving Pete as a centrist afterthought on Super Tuesday. Logically the only move left was to get out now, back Joe, and expect some political patronage from the new president if Biden goes all the way this November.
Simple enough, so why am I surprised? It’s just because Buttigieg is a conspicuously young and ambitious politician and the next generation of Bernie-loving Democratic voters looks like they’ll be further left than the party is now. And those voters are going to hate Pete for trying to derail the Sanders coronation this year by backing Biden. They hate him already for having been a thorn in Bernie’s side in the primaries and they hate him for spreading the message on the biggest political stage that it’s okay to be young and a liberal and not buy what Bernie’s selling. But they’re going to really hate him for trying to knife Sanders even after his own presidential chances have evaporated by siding with Old Man Biden when Bernie seemed poised to win the nomination.
And Pete’s going to hurt Sanders by dropping out, make no mistake. Not just in freeing up voters to move to Biden either, although of course that’ll happen to some extent. He’s also freeing up voters to move to Bloomberg, Warren, and Klobuchar — all of which is bad news for Sanders tomorrow.
Buttigieg was projected to get under 15 percent in the vast majority of states and districts on Super Tuesday. Thus, his votes were essentially wasted. Redistributing his votes to other candidates will help them to meet the 15 percent threshold, however. In particular, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg were both close to the 15 percent line in many states or districts. So even an extra percentage point or two would help them get over that line in more places. For instance, both Bloomberg and Warren were projected to finish with an average of 14 percent of the vote in California before Buttigieg’s dropout. Now, they’re forecasted for 16 percent instead. Biden was also projected to finish under 15 percent in some states and districts — so Buttigieg’s dropout helps him out also in a few places. Biden went from a projected 14 percent of the vote to 16 percent in Minnesota, for example.
Remember that 15 percent is the magic number in Democratic primaries for delegates. If you hit that number in a particular district you get a piece of that district’s pool of delegates; if you fall short you get jack, which means a bigger haul for the candidates who did reach the 15 percent mark. Bernie will win tomorrow in California but it makes a big difference if his opponents are consistently missing the 15 percent mark or, thanks to Buttigieg’s voters, consistently hitting it. If it’s the latter then Bernie’s share of delegates will be much smaller than expected. Which means it’ll be easier for Biden to catch him over the course of a months-long race. Which means the odds of a contested convention will be much higher than they were last week.
As of this morning, thanks to Biden’s landslide in South Carolina and Buttigieg’s withdrawal, Nate Silver’s model places the odds of a brokered convention at 64 percent. Bernie’s odds of clinching the nomination have fallen to 23 percent, half of what they were after his win in Nevada.
There’s more bad news for Sanders: Of the three candidates left in the race who stand no chance of being nominated (Bloomberg probably belongs in that category too but let’s keep him out for now), Buttigieg was the only one whose withdrawal would be pure downside for Bernie. Remember that Sanders is fighting on Elizabeth Warren’s and Amy Klobuchar’s home turfs in the Massachusetts and Minnesota primaries tomorrow and in each case they’re the chief threat to take delegates from him, not Joe Biden. If either of them, or both, had quit after South Carolina, Bernie would clean up in their home states tomorrow. Yet instead of dropping out, each of them is fighting on — at least for one more day.
CNN's @jeffzeleny reports that Bidenworld WANTS Warren and Klobuchar to stay in the race so they can deny Bernie a haul of delegates in MN/MA. Delegate math, boys and girls. — Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) March 1, 2020
The worst-case scenario for Sanders this past week was (1) a Biden blowout in SC, (2) Warren and Klobuchar refusing to get out, (3) moderate voters shifting from other candidates to Biden, and (4) a strong Biden performance tomorrow night, especially in the south. We’ve now seen the first three of those happen (and may yet see a Buttigieg endorsement of Biden soon, to further shift votes) and the fourth could be en route if Biden’s huge success among black Democrats in SC turns out to be a region-wide phenomenon. And if it does, that would place Bernie on the brink of a true disaster — Bloomberg throwing in the towel tomorrow night after he underperforms and deciding that his money will be best spent going forward by taking out Sanders.
As for Pete:
Source tells @abbydphillip that @PeteButtigieg made the decision to leave the race because he was unwilling to be one reason that @BernieSanders is able to get an insurmountable lead — Kyung Lah (@KyungLahCNN) March 1, 2020
People were marveling last night after he announced his withdrawal that if Buttigieg runs for president again in 2060 he’d be younger than Bernie is now. That’s how precocious he is. (As things stand, the youngest man left in the Democratic race is, uh, Old Man Biden.) But as I say, a politician with that much runway still in front of him has keen reason to notice which way the party is drifting ideologically and to do what he can to stay on its good side. Buttigieg is … not doing that by potentially endorsing Biden. So why’s he considering it?
My guess is that it’s a combination of wanting to earn favors from the Democratic establishment and also wanting to continue to build goodwill among black voters ahead of a future national run. Buttigieg did a lot of outreach to African-Americans during this campaign with little to show for it vote-wise. He’ll have to do much more going forward to be viable nationally, but it can only help if he aligns himself now with the favored candidate of black Democrats this year, the former VP to the first black president. Meanwhile, if Biden overperforms tomorrow night and ends up holding off Sanders for the nomination, many powerful establishment Democrats will be grateful to Pete for having done his part to resolve the “muddle in the middle” this year at a crucial moment when Biden needed moderates to consolidate behind him. He’s been a very good soldier for the party’s leadership by quitting and he’ll remind them of it as needed. He must be betting that that leadership will remain center-left, by and large, well into the future. And maybe it will: If socialism is as much of a nonstarter in national elections as righties and even most liberals believe, Democrats will need to remain kinda sorta formally “moderate” for reasons of basic viability.
I think he may be thinking short-term too, and not just in terms of Biden appointing him to be the head of HUD or whatever. Buttigieg will have a difficult time getting elected to statewide office in Indiana but it’s probably less difficult now that he’s well-known to Democratic voters nationally *and* has conspicuously aligned himself with the centrist wing of the party. Joe Donnelly won a Senate seat there as a Democratic moderate as recently as 2012, in a “blue wave” year. Pete would need a favorable national climate to pull off something similar but he’s one of the more famous Dems in America right now and enjoys a big donor network. He could win. Or, if he wants to improve his chances, he could relocate to a state like Virginia where there are lots of well-educated suburbanites who’ll find his resume and centrism appealing. Imagine Buttigieg running for governor there a few years from now with President Joe Biden helping to rally black Democrats to turn out on his behalf.
He’d better hope that the leftward pressure on the party from below isn’t as strong as it seems, though, or he’ll be paying for his looming endorsement of Biden forever. Imagine the Pete vs. AOC presidential death match in 2028. Hoo boy.
Update: Haven’t seen the Pete news here confirmed elsewhere yet, but:
And the 2020 news keeps coming:@amyklobuchar it out. And she's endorsing Biden, her campaign tells @ReutersPolitics.@PeteButtigieg also is getting on the Biden bandwagon, @JarrettRenshaw confirms. — Colleen Jenkins (@colleenjenk) March 2, 2020
Update: And there it is. Buttigieg will join nemesis Amy Klobuchar onstage tonight in Dallas to officially join Joementum.


hotair--2020-03-02--Venezuela: Socialist 'colectivo' aimed a weapon at Juan Guaido

This happened Saturday at an outdoor rally .
The arrows identify the gunman in the background and Juan Guaido in the foreground : Guaido himself tweeted a response to the photo which reads : “ Seeing the dictatorship sign up for me and our people neither scares me nor scares us .
When I entered this I knew what I was exposed to .
What is unforgivable is that there is a severely injured 16-year-old boy , when all he claims is his right to live in Freedom.
” Guaido ’ s staff also released this letter in English about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colectivo attack as proof the Maduro regime behaves like a criminal organization : Sen. Marco Rubio also tweeted about the incident this morning : “ The act of cowardice against the interim president of # Venezuela @ jguaido in # Barquisimeto which was carried out by armed criminals , evidence that the regime can only resort to violence because it has no international legitimacy or majority support.
” The Associated Press was given the photo by Juan Guaido ’ s staff .
It published a story about the incident Saturday : Socialist hard-liners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headed by Juan Guaido , injuring a 16-year-old demonstrator and adding to tensions in the country as the opposition leader seeks to revive his campaign to oust Nicolas Maduro .
A photo of the confrontation provided exclusively to The Associated Press shows a masked man brandishing a pistol pointed toward a group of opposition activists , including Guaido , who can be seen staring down the man… The confusing incident Saturday in the central city of Barquisimeto is believed to be the first time pro-government vigilantes known as colectivos have aimed a weapon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than 50 other countries recognize as Venezuela ’ s rightful leader after Maduro ’ s reelection in 2018 in a race marred by irregularities .
The man in the photo did not open fire after the photo was taken but later the colectivos did attack the marchers .
A 16-year-old was shot in the thigh .
The photo in this Daily Mail tweet shows the injury .
The colectivos are a long-time feature of Venezuela ’ s socialist government that were a common sight during Hugo Chavez ’ s rule .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harass and threaten anti-regime protesters .
Some additional photos of the colectivos :

This happened Saturday at an outdoor rally. The arrows identify the gunman in the background and Juan Guaido in the foreground:
Hombre armado apunta hacia grupo de opositores liderado por @jguaido durante marcha el sabado en Barquisimeto @AP https://t.co/xeIVXNstm9 pic.twitter.com/zReD5AN4wE — Joshua Goodman (@APjoshgoodman) February 29, 2020
Guaido himself tweeted a response to the photo which reads: “Seeing the dictatorship sign up for me and our people neither scares me nor scares us. When I entered this I knew what I was exposed to. What is unforgivable is that there is a severely injured 16-year-old boy, when all he claims is his right to live in Freedom.”
Ver a la dictadura apuntarnos a mí y a nuestra gente ni me amedrenta ni nos asusta. Cuando entré en esto sabía a lo que me exponía. Lo que no tiene perdón es que haya un muchacho de 16 años herido gravemente, cuando lo único que reclama es su derecho a vivir en Libertad. https://t.co/an4icGPbB3 — Juan Guaidó (@jguaido) February 29, 2020
Guaido’s staff also released this letter in English about the incident. The letter cites the colectivo attack as proof the Maduro regime behaves like a criminal organization:
INTERNATIONAL ALERT – #Venezuela
(INTERNATIONAL ALERT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE INTERIM PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC IN THE FACE OF THE ATTACKS SUFFERED DURING AN ENCOUNTER WITH THE CIVIL SOCIETY IN BARQUISIMETO- LARA STATE)@jguaido pic.twitter.com/XHvMD8YIoq — Embajada de Venezuela en Canadá (@EmbajadaVE_CA) March 1, 2020
Sen. Marco Rubio also tweeted about the incident this morning: “The act of cowardice against the interim president of #Venezuela @jguaido in #Barquisimeto which was carried out by armed criminals, evidence that the regime can only resort to violence because it has no international legitimacy or majority support.”
El acto de cobardia en contra del presidente interino de #Venezuela @jguaido en #Barquisimeto que se llevó a cabo por criminales armados, evidencia que el régimen solo puede recurrir a la violencia pues no tiene legitimidad internacional ni apoyo mayoritario. — Senator Rubio Press (@SenRubioPress) March 2, 2020
The Associated Press was given the photo by Juan Guaido’s staff. It published a story about the incident Saturday:
Socialist hard-liners in Venezuela opened fire during a march headed by Juan Guaido, injuring a 16-year-old demonstrator and adding to tensions in the country as the opposition leader seeks to revive his campaign to oust Nicolas Maduro. A photo of the confrontation provided exclusively to The Associated Press shows a masked man brandishing a pistol pointed toward a group of opposition activists, including Guaido, who can be seen staring down the man… The confusing incident Saturday in the central city of Barquisimeto is believed to be the first time pro-government vigilantes known as colectivos have aimed a weapon at Guaido, who the U.S. and more than 50 other countries recognize as Venezuela’s rightful leader after Maduro’s reelection in 2018 in a race marred by irregularities.
The man in the photo did not open fire after the photo was taken but later the colectivos did attack the marchers. A 16-year-old was shot in the thigh. The photo in this Daily Mail tweet shows the injury.
Shocking moment masked man points gun at Venezuela's opposition leader during a march https://t.co/uhbkg1cddX — Daily Mail Online (@MailOnline) March 2, 2020
The colectivos are a long-time feature of Venezuela’s socialist government that were a common sight during Hugo Chavez’s rule. They usually ride motorcycles and show up to harass and threaten anti-regime protesters. Some additional photos of the colectivos:


hotair--2020-03-02--How news coverage changed for the worse

How news coverage changed for the worse

News is what is , well , new .
The trouble with the Internet age is its insistent , nonstop demand for news faster than news happens .
To satisfy this perceived need for new news products , writers are forced to improvise .
The result is consumers are too often offered instead questions : Will Obama finally take sides ?
Can Bernie be beaten ?
Or , What ’ s at stake on Super Tuesday ?
Worse , 5 takeaways from South Carolina .
None of them have real answers , just conjecture .
Which isn ’ t news @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when , to be honest , nothing new has actually happened .
Most of such pieces are empty of much new except opinion , which is called analysis , and reworked information from previous things you ’ ve read .
During the 1962 Cuban missile crisis I was in college , desperately eager to enter the news business .
Russian missiles in Cuba .
President Kennedy ’ s naval blockade .
Russia removing its missiles .
Every morning and again after lunch , I walked to a nearby newsstand to get the latest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden thumped everyone else in South Carolina ’ s primary Saturday .
So , he ’ s now enjoying the best 72 hours of news media coverage since his April campaign announcement — what was it ?
— three years ago .
Back on track .
Rallying the middle road .
Can he block Bernie ?
What ’ s next ?
Bernie knew he was not going to win South Carolina .
He wanted to lose by as little as possible .
So , he was campaigning up in New England , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren ’ s hopes , send her off-camera to grab herself another beer .
These may also be the last 72 hours of realistic hope for Biden , the hapless candidate .
Media has set itself ( and us ) up for the next stage in its non-stop , minute-by-minute coverage of this political horse race .
Tuesday night when results from 14 different states in a half dozen time zones start coming in , the new media narrative will likely be Bernie bounces back .
Joe ’ s comeback derailed .
Can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recover again ?
What ’ s next for Joe ?
The Kentucky Derby is 1.25 miles long .
It ’ s called “ The most exciting two minutes in sports.
” When John Kennedy ran for president , he announced on Jan. 3 of an election year .
Elizabeth Warren announced on New Year ’ s Eve just weeks after the 2018 midterm elections .
She and others have been conniving to draw free media attention ever since .
And they ’ ve gotten it .
U.S. presidential campaigns are no longer horse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They ’ re marathons and require some serious adjustments in news coverage .
Do we really need to know who ’ s ahead today , as opposed to Sunday ?
Is that the role of the once vital Fourth Estate ?
In our industry ’ s understandable desperate drive to draw in customers , we may well be driving them away .
Who would , by choice , subject themselves to a recounting of a 25-month-long horse race ?
Coming into the 800th turn…… No wonder barely half of Americans bother to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government , voters risk dying by gunfire or explosion in order to cast their lone vote .
In ours by the time an American election season actually arrives , 46 percent of us are so sick of the whole thing , we ’ d rather stop off for a cold one Not pointing fingers here .
I ’ m looking in the mirror .

News is what is, well, new. The trouble with the Internet age is its insistent, nonstop demand for news faster than news happens. To satisfy this perceived need for new news products, writers are forced to improvise.
The result is consumers are too often offered instead questions: Will Obama finally take sides? Can Bernie be beaten? Or, What’s at stake on Super Tuesday? Worse, 5 takeaways from South Carolina.
None of them have real answers, just conjecture. Which isn’t news.
Anything to attract eyes and clicks when, to be honest, nothing new has actually happened.
Most of such pieces are empty of much new except opinion, which is called analysis, and reworked information from previous things you’ve read.
During the 1962 Cuban missile crisis I was in college, desperately eager to enter the news business. Russian missiles in Cuba. President Kennedy’s naval blockade. Russia removing its missiles. Every morning and again after lunch, I walked to a nearby newsstand to get the latest newspaper copy of what was new.
Sounds painfully quaint today.
Joe Biden thumped everyone else in South Carolina’s primary Saturday. So, he’s now enjoying the best 72 hours of news media coverage since his April campaign announcement — what was it? — three years ago. Back on track. Rallying the middle road. Can he block Bernie? What’s next?
Bernie knew he was not going to win South Carolina. He wanted to lose by as little as possible. So, he was campaigning up in New England, trying to win Massachusetts and crush Elizabeth Warren’s hopes, send her off-camera to grab herself another beer.
These may also be the last 72 hours of realistic hope for Biden, the hapless candidate. Media has set itself (and us) up for the next stage in its non-stop, minute-by-minute coverage of this political horse race.
Tuesday night when results from 14 different states in a half dozen time zones start coming in, the new media narrative will likely be Bernie bounces back. Joe’s comeback derailed. Can Joe recover from this? Can Joe recover again? What’s next for Joe?
The Kentucky Derby is 1.25 miles long. It’s called “The most exciting two minutes in sports.”
When John Kennedy ran for president, he announced on Jan. 3 of an election year. Elizabeth Warren announced on New Year’s Eve just weeks after the 2018 midterm elections. She and others have been conniving to draw free media attention ever since. And they’ve gotten it.
U.S. presidential campaigns are no longer horse races, if they ever were. They’re marathons and require some serious adjustments in news coverage. Do we really need to know who’s ahead today, as opposed to Sunday? Is that the role of the once vital Fourth Estate?
In our industry’s understandable desperate drive to draw in customers, we may well be driving them away. Who would, by choice, subject themselves to a recounting of a 25-month-long horse race? Coming into the 800th turn……
No wonder barely half of Americans bother to vote. In some countries fighting for representative government, voters risk dying by gunfire or explosion in order to cast their lone vote.
In ours by the time an American election season actually arrives, 46 percent of us are so sick of the whole thing, we’d rather stop off for a cold one
Not pointing fingers here. I’m looking in the mirror.


hotair--2020-03-02--Report: Officials feared lab where CDC coronavirus test kits were being made was "contaminated"

This Axios story is vague on the nature of the contamination .
They don ’ t mean — I hope — that the lab was contaminated ( or at risk of contamination ) by coronavirus itself .
What they mean , I think , is that some chemical that wasn ’ t supposed to be part of the test kit was at risk of being accidentally introduced into it , leading to false positives .
Local health authorities have been at their wits ’ ends over the past week or two because the CDC couldn ’ t manage to put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even though countries like China and Italy are testing many thousands of people every day .
The delay was so exasperating that the FDA decided to let state labs start producing their own tests to ease the bottleneck .
The CDC has supposedly finally worked out the bugs and will be sending out functioning kits this week , but in the meantime coronavirus has had weeks to spread in American communities with doctors and scientists almost completely blind to its presence .
What the Axios story tells us is that the CDC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than suspected .
Even now , they ’ re being conspicuously tight-lipped about the nature of the “ contamination.
” An HHS official told Politico that there was a “ problem with lab test cleanliness ” but there are no specifics beyond that .
And that ’ s only the tip of the iceberg in how the agency has screwed up , as you ’ ll see .
The big question : It was not immediately clear if or how possible contamination in the Atlanta lab played a role in delays or problems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how significant or systemic the contamination concerns may be ; whether it was a one-time issue that ’ s easily resolved , or a broader concern involving protocols , safeguards or leadership… [ FDA official Richard ] Stenzel was alarmed by the procedures he witnessed in the Atlanta laboratory and raised concerns with multiple CDC officials , per a source familiar with the situation in Atlanta .
Stenzel is a highly-regarded scientist and diagnostics expert .
He was on the ground in Atlanta to deal with technical issues and happened to stumble upon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He is not a laboratory inspector and thus was not charged with producing an inspection report on the lab conditions .
Stenzel wasn ’ t even supposed to be there .
He was dispatched to the lab to help work out the bugs in the test and recognized some sort of contamination problem that apparently hadn ’ t been noticed by CDC personnel .
Those concerns were deemed sufficiently credible that manufacturing of the test kits was moved out of the CDC lab altogether , to a third-party contractor .
Why didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kits that the WHO has been supplying to other countries , you ask ?
Good question .
Politico asked around and no one could say for sure , although some believe the agency feared the WHO kits weren ’ t sensitive enough in distinguishing coronavirus from other viruses like flu .
But it gets worse .
An update from the mayor of San Antonio : They released an asymptomatic patient after two straight negative tests — only to have him test “ weakly positive ” on a third test .
You can let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on grounds that they can ’ t be expected to know with certainty how long a novel virus takes to incubate , but why wouldn ’ t they err on the side of caution when it ’ s still ( sort of ) possible to prevent community spread ?
Especially when , for the moment , they had some reason not to trust their own tests ?
Several US patients have recovered from coronavirus , but so far , the CDC has shared detailed clinical information about only one of those patients .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ received and how they fared… That means doctors who now unexpectedly find themselves treating new coronavirus patients aren ’ t able to benefit from the findings of doctors who preceded them .
“ It ’ s a medical truism that it ’ s absolutely essential that physicians with experience with a particular condition disseminate information to others , ” said Dr. Irwin Redlener , director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University .
Not sharing such information is “ is inexplicable and inappropriate , ” Redlener added .
Doctors who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand why that information isn ’ t being shared expeditiously .
There are papers co-authored by the CDC that are awaiting publication but time is obviously of the essence in limiting contagion while the number of infected Americans is still small .
This list of CDC screw-ups isn ’ t exhaustive either .
Screening protocols continued to focus exclusively on China even after the outbreaks in Italy and Iran .
( If you want to lump in HHS screw-ups here too , don ’ t forget this . )
These people are under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be expected to perform perfectly in every instance , but “ we need a few more weeks to get our act together on tests ” and “ we can ’ t share information right now on how to successfully treat patients ” seem like momentous errors that ’ ll cost lives .
Potentially many lives .
I don ’ t know why people aren ’ t angrier about it .
Matt McCarthy , a doctor at Weill Cornell Medicine , called the bottleneck on tests a “ national scandal ” on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll see below .
I think part of the reason the public is blasé — for the moment — is because the official number of infected people is so low .
It ’ s something like 90 people nationally as I write this .
But that ’ s only because so few people have been tested , thanks to the CDC ’ s incompetence .
That was the point of yesterday ’ s post too .
There are probably thousands of undetected cases in the U.S. right now — watch Scott Gottlieb ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clip below — and there ’ ll be thousands more soon because the genie is too far out of the bottle to shove it back in .
I wonder too , though , if the CDC is inadvertently being shielded politically by the fact that critics of the Trump administration usually strain to find reasons to tie government incompetence to Trump himself .
Every story in the Trump era is a “ Trump story , ” and Trump did himself no favors with the happy talk recently about how few people were infected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus spread isn ’ t a “ Trump story.
” It ’ s a CDC story .
He trusted them to be on top of this out of the gate .
So did everyone else .
Oops ?

This Axios story is vague on the nature of the contamination. They don’t mean — I hope — that the lab was contaminated (or at risk of contamination) by coronavirus itself. What they mean, I think, is that some chemical that wasn’t supposed to be part of the test kit was at risk of being accidentally introduced into it, leading to false positives. Local health authorities have been at their wits’ ends over the past week or two because the CDC couldn’t manage to put together a workable test for the illness, even though countries like China and Italy are testing many thousands of people every day. The delay was so exasperating that the FDA decided to let state labs start producing their own tests to ease the bottleneck. The CDC has supposedly finally worked out the bugs and will be sending out functioning kits this week, but in the meantime coronavirus has had weeks to spread in American communities with doctors and scientists almost completely blind to its presence.
What the Axios story tells us is that the CDC’s incompetence might be even worse than suspected. Even now, they’re being conspicuously tight-lipped about the nature of the “contamination.” An HHS official told Politico that there was a “problem with lab test cleanliness” but there are no specifics beyond that.
And that’s only the tip of the iceberg in how the agency has screwed up, as you’ll see.
The big question: It was not immediately clear if or how possible contamination in the Atlanta lab played a role in delays or problems with testing. Nor was it clear how significant or systemic the contamination concerns may be; whether it was a one-time issue that’s easily resolved, or a broader concern involving protocols, safeguards or leadership… [FDA official Richard] Stenzel was alarmed by the procedures he witnessed in the Atlanta laboratory and raised concerns with multiple CDC officials, per a source familiar with the situation in Atlanta. Stenzel is a highly-regarded scientist and diagnostics expert. He was on the ground in Atlanta to deal with technical issues and happened to stumble upon the inappropriate procedures and possible contaminants. He is not a laboratory inspector and thus was not charged with producing an inspection report on the lab conditions.
Stenzel wasn’t even supposed to be there. He was dispatched to the lab to help work out the bugs in the test and recognized some sort of contamination problem that apparently hadn’t been noticed by CDC personnel. Those concerns were deemed sufficiently credible that manufacturing of the test kits was moved out of the CDC lab altogether, to a third-party contractor. Why didn’t the CDC just use the test kits that the WHO has been supplying to other countries, you ask? Good question. Politico asked around and no one could say for sure, although some believe the agency feared the WHO kits weren’t sensitive enough in distinguishing coronavirus from other viruses like flu.
But it gets worse. An update from the mayor of San Antonio:
Today we learned that the CDC mistakenly released a patient from the Texas Center for Infectious Disease who later returned a positive COVID-19 reading. The fact that the CDC allowed the public to be exposed to a patient with a positive COVID-19 reading is unacceptable. Full: pic.twitter.com/hE2xTMETw7 — Mayor Ron | Wear a mask! 😷 (@Ron_Nirenberg) March 2, 2020
They released an asymptomatic patient after two straight negative tests — only to have him test “weakly positive” on a third test. You can let them slide on that if you like on grounds that they can’t be expected to know with certainty how long a novel virus takes to incubate, but why wouldn’t they err on the side of caution when it’s still (sort of) possible to prevent community spread? Especially when, for the moment, they had some reason not to trust their own tests?
But wait. There’s more:
Several US patients have recovered from coronavirus, but so far, the CDC has shared detailed clinical information about only one of those patients. That information includes what treatments the patients received and how they fared… That means doctors who now unexpectedly find themselves treating new coronavirus patients aren’t able to benefit from the findings of doctors who preceded them. “It’s a medical truism that it’s absolutely essential that physicians with experience with a particular condition disseminate information to others,” said Dr. Irwin Redlener, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University. Not sharing such information is “is inexplicable and inappropriate,” Redlener added.
Doctors who specialize in infectious disease can’t understand why that information isn’t being shared expeditiously. There are papers co-authored by the CDC that are awaiting publication but time is obviously of the essence in limiting contagion while the number of infected Americans is still small.
This list of CDC screw-ups isn’t exhaustive either. Screening protocols continued to focus exclusively on China even after the outbreaks in Italy and Iran. (If you want to lump in HHS screw-ups here too, don’t forget this.) These people are under tremendous pressure, obviously, and can’t be expected to perform perfectly in every instance, but “we need a few more weeks to get our act together on tests” and “we can’t share information right now on how to successfully treat patients” seem like momentous errors that’ll cost lives. Potentially many lives.
I don’t know why people aren’t angrier about it. Matt McCarthy, a doctor at Weill Cornell Medicine, called the bottleneck on tests a “national scandal” on CNBC this morning, as you’ll see below. I think part of the reason the public is blasé — for the moment — is because the official number of infected people is so low. It’s something like 90 people nationally as I write this. But that’s only because so few people have been tested, thanks to the CDC’s incompetence. That was the point of yesterday’s post too. There are probably thousands of undetected cases in the U.S. right now — watch Scott Gottlieb’s comment on that in the second clip below — and there’ll be thousands more soon because the genie is too far out of the bottle to shove it back in. I wonder too, though, if the CDC is inadvertently being shielded politically by the fact that critics of the Trump administration usually strain to find reasons to tie government incompetence to Trump himself. Every story in the Trump era is a “Trump story,” and Trump did himself no favors with the happy talk recently about how few people were infected. But to all appearances, the coronavirus spread isn’t a “Trump story.” It’s a CDC story. He trusted them to be on top of this out of the gate. So did everyone else. Oops?


hotair--2020-03-02--Little Rocket Man is back to his old tricks

As if you didn ’ t already have enough to worry about between the coronavirus tanking the stock market and Turkey melting down the Syria situation again .
Now another bad actor who ’ s been rather quiet for a while is looking to generate more headlines .
North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un has apparently grown tired of waiting for President Trump to cave to his demands and decided to kick his missile testing program back into gear .
The Associated Press reports that two short to medium-range missiles were fired from North Korea over the weekend , and Little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come .
North Korea fired two unidentified projectiles into its eastern sea on Monday as it begins to resume weapons demonstrations after a months-long hiatus that could have been forced by the coronavirus crisis in Asia .
The launches came two days after North Korea ’ s state media said leader Kim Jong Un supervised an artillery drill aimed at testing the combat readiness of units in front-line and eastern areas .
Seoul ’ s Joint Chiefs of Staff said the projectiles fired from an area near the coastal town of Wonsan flew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ northeast on an apogee of about 35 kilometers ( 22 miles ) .
Both American and South Korean military personnel are still examining the data on these “ unidentified projectiles , ” but we ’ ve got a pretty good handle on what they were .
It looks like these two missiles were part of the latest generation of Kim ’ s short-range weapons that are designed to be able to hit targets in South Korea and Japan , including U.S. bases .
The two interesting features about these weapons are their fuel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that are more reliable and less volatile than the older , liquid-fuel rockets .
Also , the launching equipment allows for them to be highly mobile , with the ability to rapidly deploy a larger number of missiles , each with multiple warheads potentially capable of hitting multiple targets .
So why is Kim back to running these provocative tests now ?
He may either be hoping to pressure President Trump into making some big concessions on sanctions or releasing some aid .
Alternately , he may have simply grown tired of waiting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to throw his lot in with Russia and China entirely .
If he ’ s waiting for Trump to blink first , he was probably going be waiting a long time .
I think the current state of affairs demonstrates what many followers of events on the Korean peninsula have suspected all along .
Kim Jong-un never had any intention of seriously dismantling his nuclear weapons and ICBM programs .
He talked a good game for a while , but what he was really seeking was respect on the world stage as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump , Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping gave him that .
Kim is also reportedly terrified that if he gave up his nuclear arsenal , forces from the west would surely invade his nation and remove him from power .
In reality , I don ’ t think anyone has the stomach for that currently unless he actually decides to nuke somebody , but one never knows where the paranoid mind will wander .
Absent any dramatic changes in the near future , we appear to be right back where we were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and started a conversation .
It was a nice break from the madness and it lasted longer than I ’ d originally anticipated .
But if it ’ s over , Trump may as well go back to calling him Little Rocket Man at this point .

As if you didn’t already have enough to worry about between the coronavirus tanking the stock market and Turkey melting down the Syria situation again. Now another bad actor who’s been rather quiet for a while is looking to generate more headlines. North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un has apparently grown tired of waiting for President Trump to cave to his demands and decided to kick his missile testing program back into gear. The Associated Press reports that two short to medium-range missiles were fired from North Korea over the weekend, and Little Rocket Man is promising more surprises to come.
North Korea fired two unidentified projectiles into its eastern sea on Monday as it begins to resume weapons demonstrations after a months-long hiatus that could have been forced by the coronavirus crisis in Asia. The launches came two days after North Korea’s state media said leader Kim Jong Un supervised an artillery drill aimed at testing the combat readiness of units in front-line and eastern areas. Seoul’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said the projectiles fired from an area near the coastal town of Wonsan flew about 240 kilometers (149 miles) northeast on an apogee of about 35 kilometers (22 miles).
Both American and South Korean military personnel are still examining the data on these “unidentified projectiles,” but we’ve got a pretty good handle on what they were. It looks like these two missiles were part of the latest generation of Kim’s short-range weapons that are designed to be able to hit targets in South Korea and Japan, including U.S. bases.
The two interesting features about these weapons are their fuel and mobility. These are solid-fuel rockets that are more reliable and less volatile than the older, liquid-fuel rockets. Also, the launching equipment allows for them to be highly mobile, with the ability to rapidly deploy a larger number of missiles, each with multiple warheads potentially capable of hitting multiple targets.
So why is Kim back to running these provocative tests now? He may either be hoping to pressure President Trump into making some big concessions on sanctions or releasing some aid. Alternately, he may have simply grown tired of waiting for Trump to cave and has decided to throw his lot in with Russia and China entirely. If he’s waiting for Trump to blink first, he was probably going be waiting a long time.
I think the current state of affairs demonstrates what many followers of events on the Korean peninsula have suspected all along. Kim Jong-un never had any intention of seriously dismantling his nuclear weapons and ICBM programs. He talked a good game for a while, but what he was really seeking was respect on the world stage as a recognized state leader. His summits with Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping gave him that.
Kim is also reportedly terrified that if he gave up his nuclear arsenal, forces from the west would surely invade his nation and remove him from power. In reality, I don’t think anyone has the stomach for that currently unless he actually decides to nuke somebody, but one never knows where the paranoid mind will wander.
Absent any dramatic changes in the near future, we appear to be right back where we were before Trump originally reached out to Kim and started a conversation. It was a nice break from the madness and it lasted longer than I’d originally anticipated. But if it’s over, Trump may as well go back to calling him Little Rocket Man at this point.


hotair--2020-03-02--OK, so where do Mayor Pete's followers go now?

So , you probably saw that Pete Buttigieg dropped out of the Democratic primary race over the weekend after another disappointing finish , this time in South Carolina .
Conventional wisdom holds that the departures of the Hoosier and Minnesota ’ s Amy Klobuchar will most benefit Joe Biden , who isn ’ t moderate , as hard as he tries to make it seem , as Taylor wrote here Sunday .
But he is less far left than most of the other survivors .
That could be helpful , at least in the sense that a smaller field consolidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Steyer suspended his campaign too .
( Under FEC rules , ‘ suspending ’ a campaign allows it to continue fundraising to pay off debts and late bills . )
But is it true that Pete ’ s people will walk over to Joe ’ s corner ?
Turns out , no .
It isn ’ t .
The clever folks over at Morning Consult , who come up with the most interesting poll questions this cycle , have been checking the followers of all the Dems , asking about their second and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s followers plan to go in several different directions , to most everyone left – Joe , Bernie Sanders , Mike Bloomberg and Elizabeth Warren .
Not equally but pretty close .
Results showed 21 percent of Buttigieg ’ s first-choice backers said their second choice was Sanders , while 19 percent said Biden or Warren and 17 percent said Bloomberg .
Those switches would give each a two point bump in their national standing , according to Morning Consult .
But not likely that much in Super Tuesday voting since Buttigieg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain on pre-printed ballots .
The poll of 13,428 Democrats found Buttigieg was pretty popular among 13,428 Democrats .
He drew a 57 percent favorable rating vs 22 percent unfavorable .
That suggests the 38-year-old could have a political future in his party , if he so chooses .
Only eight percent had never heard of the ex-mayor , which is a smaller figure than Amy Klobuchar and Tulsi Gabbard drew .

So, you probably saw that Pete Buttigieg dropped out of the Democratic primary race over the weekend after another disappointing finish, this time in South Carolina.
Conventional wisdom holds that the departures of the Hoosier and Minnesota’s Amy Klobuchar will most benefit Joe Biden, who isn’t moderate, as hard as he tries to make it seem, as Taylor wrote here Sunday. But he is less far left than most of the other survivors. That could be helpful, at least in the sense that a smaller field consolidates the anti-Bernie voters.
BTW, Tom Steyer suspended his campaign too. (Under FEC rules, ‘suspending’ a campaign allows it to continue fundraising to pay off debts and late bills.)
(Memo to Tom: California TV stations in Bakersfield are still running your ads during every break. Tell them to stop. Please!)
But is it true that Pete’s people will walk over to Joe’s corner?
Turns out, no. It isn’t.
The clever folks over at Morning Consult, who come up with the most interesting poll questions this cycle, have been checking the followers of all the Dems, asking about their second and third choices.
It seems Mayor Pete’s followers plan to go in several different directions, to most everyone left – Joe, Bernie Sanders, Mike Bloomberg and Elizabeth Warren. Not equally but pretty close.
Results showed 21 percent of Buttigieg’s first-choice backers said their second choice was Sanders, while 19 percent said Biden or Warren and 17 percent said Bloomberg.
Those switches would give each a two point bump in their national standing, according to Morning Consult. But not likely that much in Super Tuesday voting since Buttigieg’s and Steyer’s names remain on pre-printed ballots.
The poll of 13,428 Democrats found Buttigieg was pretty popular among 13,428 Democrats. He drew a 57 percent favorable rating vs 22 percent unfavorable. That suggests the 38-year-old could have a political future in his party, if he so chooses.
Only eight percent had never heard of the ex-mayor, which is a smaller figure than Amy Klobuchar and Tulsi Gabbard drew.


hotair--2020-03-02--Biden's latest explanation of his South Africa "arrest" story is worse than the previous ones

Joe Biden went on Fox News this weekend to talk with Chris Wallace ( who he called “ Chuck ” at one point ) to take another stab at explaining his South African “ arrest ” story .
Yes , that would be the story that even the Washington Post awarded him Four Pinocchios for .
Unfortunately for Uncle Joe , his meandering answer ( s ) wound up sounding even worse than his first explanation .
First , he attempted to write it off as some sort of allegory showing that he was strongly opposed to apartheid .
Fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apartheid .
But what does that have to do with claiming to be arrested ?
When Wallace pushed back on that issue , Joe ’ s next defense sounded even worse .
( Free Beacon , emphasis added ) Biden retold the story about how he was separated from the Congressional Black Caucus at an airport in South Africa in 1977 and was forced to go through a racially segregated doorway labeled “ white , ” despite initially refusing .
He then told Wallace that he should have said he was “ detained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CNN Friday that he wasn ’ t actually arrested , saying , “ I wasn ’ t arrested , I was stopped .
I was not able to move where I wanted to go.
“ This issue is increasingly turning into a dangerous quagmire for Biden , or at least it would be if the press wasn ’ t largely ignoring it .
( Wallace was the only Sunday show host to ask Joe about the story , despite appearing on multiple outlets to celebrate his South Carolina victory . )
Biden was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just trying to embellish a story.
” Both of the options Wallace offered are bad news for Joe .
If he goes with the “ embellish ” line , that means he was caught lying .
If he chooses “ confused ” then it calls his mental faculties into question yet again .
Instead , Joe is trying to write this off as a poor choice of words to describe what happened .
But if you look at the excerpt I included above , that ’ s a complete flop of an answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very specific meaning .
It involves official law enforcement records , being restrained and generally includes at least some brief period of being confined .
He was obviously never arrested .
But was he even “ detained ” as he now claims ?
It ’ s true that you can be detained by law enforcement officials without technically being arrested .
But that ’ s not what Joe is describing either .
Being detained means that you are being held at a particular location against your will and not being offered the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assume that every word of Joe ’ s current version of the story is true , he was simply denied the ability to exit the area along the path he would have preferred , instead being told to leave through the doorway labeled “ white.
” That ’ s not being arrested or detained .
That ’ s being part of a group of people who are redirected .
He was directed to take a detour .
Allow me to offer a personal example .
At CPAC this week , when both Mike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ area , the Secret Service blocked off the normal route to the media check-in office and other facilities as part of the security perimeter they had established .
We were forced to go to a different floor and use an escalator that led to the magnetometers you had to go through for secure access .
Was it inconvenient ?
I suppose so .
But at no time did I feel either arrested or detained .
I was simply redirected to a different route .
That ’ s what happened to Joe Biden , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I said above , this is more than just a bad look for Biden .
He told that story repeatedly during this campaign .
So he ’ s either unable to recall the events properly or he was deliberately altering the story to make himself look better .
If it ’ s the former , then we have one more piece of evidence to toss on the pile suggesting that Joe is losing the narrative in his later years .
If the later , then… well , we have another politician pulling a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his record .
I remain unsure which would be worse for him , but it ’ s probably the mental health storyline .

Joe Biden went on Fox News this weekend to talk with Chris Wallace (who he called “Chuck” at one point) to take another stab at explaining his South African “arrest” story. Yes, that would be the story that even the Washington Post awarded him Four Pinocchios for. Unfortunately for Uncle Joe, his meandering answer(s) wound up sounding even worse than his first explanation.
First, he attempted to write it off as some sort of allegory showing that he was strongly opposed to apartheid. Fair enough. Lots of people rightly opposed apartheid. But what does that have to do with claiming to be arrested? When Wallace pushed back on that issue, Joe’s next defense sounded even worse. (Free Beacon, emphasis added)
Biden retold the story about how he was separated from the Congressional Black Caucus at an airport in South Africa in 1977 and was forced to go through a racially segregated doorway labeled “white,” despite initially refusing. He then told Wallace that he should have said he was “detained,” not arrested… Biden admitted on CNN Friday that he wasn’t actually arrested, saying, “I wasn’t arrested, I was stopped. I was not able to move where I wanted to go.“
This issue is increasingly turning into a dangerous quagmire for Biden, or at least it would be if the press wasn’t largely ignoring it. (Wallace was the only Sunday show host to ask Joe about the story, despite appearing on multiple outlets to celebrate his South Carolina victory.) Biden was asked if he was “confused or just trying to embellish a story.”
Both of the options Wallace offered are bad news for Joe. If he goes with the “embellish” line, that means he was caught lying. If he chooses “confused” then it calls his mental faculties into question yet again.
Instead, Joe is trying to write this off as a poor choice of words to describe what happened. But if you look at the excerpt I included above, that’s a complete flop of an answer also. Being “arrested” has a very specific meaning. It involves official law enforcement records, being restrained and generally includes at least some brief period of being confined. He was obviously never arrested.
But was he even “detained” as he now claims? It’s true that you can be detained by law enforcement officials without technically being arrested. But that’s not what Joe is describing either. Being detained means that you are being held at a particular location against your will and not being offered the option of leaving. Even if we assume that every word of Joe’s current version of the story is true, he was simply denied the ability to exit the area along the path he would have preferred, instead being told to leave through the doorway labeled “white.”
That’s not being arrested or detained. That’s being part of a group of people who are redirected. He was directed to take a detour. Allow me to offer a personal example.
At CPAC this week, when both Mike Pence and President Trump were in the area, the Secret Service blocked off the normal route to the media check-in office and other facilities as part of the security perimeter they had established. We were forced to go to a different floor and use an escalator that led to the magnetometers you had to go through for secure access. Was it inconvenient? I suppose so. But at no time did I feel either arrested or detained. I was simply redirected to a different route. That’s what happened to Joe Biden, assuming anything happened at all.
As I said above, this is more than just a bad look for Biden. He told that story repeatedly during this campaign. So he’s either unable to recall the events properly or he was deliberately altering the story to make himself look better. If it’s the former, then we have one more piece of evidence to toss on the pile suggesting that Joe is losing the narrative in his later years. If the later, then… well, we have another politician pulling a Brian Williams maneuver and lying to embellish his record. I remain unsure which would be worse for him, but it’s probably the mental health storyline.


hotair--2020-03-02--What an ally! Turkey's Erdogan sets refugee flood on NATO

Turkey has been a member of NATO since the earliest days in 1952 .
Its current president , Recep Tayyip Erdogan , is now playing chummy with Iran ’ s mullahs and with Russian President Vladimir Putin , who ’ s building a multi-billion dollar nuclear reactor in Turkey .
Erdogan has also purchased a sophisticated Russian system of anti-aircraft missiles that is incompatible with NATO weapons .
He also planned to purchase F-35 ’ s from the United States until President Trump put a hold on that last summer and on training Turkish pilots .
Now , Erdogan has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Turkey and sent thousands on their way to Europe , where their predecessors have created significant social tensions .
It ’ s true , Turkey is hosting some 3.7 million refugees from Afghanistan and the Syrian civil war next door , more than any other country in the region .
A previous flood of one million refugees entered Europe in 2015 , the largest mass migration since World War II .
The European Union agreed then to pay Turkey regular sums to help with costs and Turkey closed its border since 2016 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ its promises and threatens to sanction Turkey for its ongoing military incursion into Syria ’ s Idlib province .
Nearly three dozen Turkish troops were killed in clashes there in recent days .
Although recent U.S. news coverage is more concerned with South Carolina ’ s primary , Syrian civil war fighting has flared with Russian help .
So , late last week Erdogan let 18,000 refugees move toward the border where they clashed with Greek police while trying to break through .
Turkish government spokesmen warned another half-million refugees were prepared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the border neared 30,000 over the weekend .
‘ What did we do ( Friday ) ?
” Erdogan said in Istanbul .
“ We opened the doors .
We will not close those doors …Why ?
Because the European Union should keep its promises.
” All of which suits Putin just fine since it fuels turmoil throughout his nemesis , the NATO alliance , while an inattentive U.S. concerns itself with Democratic domestic politics .

Turkey has been a member of NATO since the earliest days in 1952. Its current president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is now playing chummy with Iran’s mullahs and with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who’s building a multi-billion dollar nuclear reactor in Turkey.
Erdogan has also purchased a sophisticated Russian system of anti-aircraft missiles that is incompatible with NATO weapons. He also planned to purchase F-35’s from the United States until President Trump put a hold on that last summer and on training Turkish pilots.
Now, Erdogan has opened the floodgates of Syrian refugees in Turkey and sent thousands on their way to Europe, where their predecessors have created significant social tensions.
It’s true, Turkey is hosting some 3.7 million refugees from Afghanistan and the Syrian civil war next door, more than any other country in the region.
A previous flood of one million refugees entered Europe in 2015, the largest mass migration since World War II. The European Union agreed then to pay Turkey regular sums to help with costs and Turkey closed its border since 2016.
But Erdogan claims Europe has reneged on its promises and threatens to sanction Turkey for its ongoing military incursion into Syria’s Idlib province. Nearly three dozen Turkish troops were killed in clashes there in recent days.
Although recent U.S. news coverage is more concerned with South Carolina’s primary, Syrian civil war fighting has flared with Russian help.
So, late last week Erdogan let 18,000 refugees move toward the border where they clashed with Greek police while trying to break through. Turkish government spokesmen warned another half-million refugees were prepared to move soon. Some reports said refugees on the border neared 30,000 over the weekend.
‘What did we do (Friday)?” Erdogan said in Istanbul. “We opened the doors. We will not close those doors …Why? Because the European Union should keep its promises.”
All of which suits Putin just fine since it fuels turmoil throughout his nemesis, the NATO alliance, while an inattentive U.S. concerns itself with Democratic domestic politics.


hotair--2020-03-02--Border tension: Remain in Mexico policy confusion, border bridge shutdown

Paso Del Norte international bridge in El Paso was temporarily closed on Friday and part of Saturday in response to a federal appellate court blocking the Migrant Protection Protocols , also known as the Remain in Mexico policy .
Confusion occurred as the halting of the program was short-lived due to the fact that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed its own order .
The Remain in Mexico program for those seeking asylum in America , mostly from Central American countries , has been very successful , thanks to cooperation from the Mexican government .
It should be noted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to more than a hundred mostly Cuban migrants tried to cross after the court ruling .
Naturally , the very liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is intent on shutting down any success on curbing illegal immigration .
When word got out about the original appellate court order blocking the program the response of migrants was immediate .
Authorities on the border shut down the international bridge as a response to the mass migration .
The temporary closing of downtown ’ s Paso Del Norte international bridge capped off a day of confusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blocked the Migrant Protection Protocols , one of President Trump ’ s signature immigration policies .
But the end of the program , also called “ Remain in Mexico ” , was short-lived after the same court , the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals , stayed its own order .
Word of the reversal came after hundreds of migrants in Ciudad Juárez had gathered at the foot of the international bridge with the hopes of entering the United States .
Customs and Border Protection officers then halted northbound vehicular traffic and subsequently shut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paso Police Department officers cordoned off several blocks near the bridge with red police tape and several people were turned back on the most direct route to the PDN bridge and instead told to take a longer route to the nearby Stanton bridge , which was operating normally and closes at 11 pm .
“ [ Customs and Border Protection ] officers stopped the flow of northbound traffic at the Paso Del Norte bridge at approximately 7:20 p.m. Friday in an effort to eliminate the ability for a large group of migrants that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the border to illegally and forcefully surge through the ports of entry , ” CBP spokesperson Roger Maier said in an email .
“ This step helps CBP ensure safety of travelers , facilities and CBP employees.
” The bridge was re-opened Saturday .
While immigrants rights groups were hopeful that the original order ending the policy would allow migrants into the United States , thanks to the Trump administration ’ s quick response , the order was put on hold pending further consideration by the court .
Additional filings are due Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calling the stay of the order a temporary setback .
Judy Rabinovitz , the special counsel at the ACLU ’ s Immigrants ’ Rights Project who argued the case , said Friday ’ s latest ruling is a limited setback .
“ This is a temporary step and does not change the fact that courts have ruled multiple times against this illegal policy .
We will continue working to permanently end this unspeakably cruel policy , ” she said in a statement .
This issue is expected to go all the way to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Homeland Security rolled out the Remain in Mexico policy in January 2019 , over 60,000 people have been sent back to seven Mexican border cities .
Currently , there are about 25,000 people in the program .
Robert Perez , CBP ’ s deputy commissioner , said in a court filing on Friday that ending the program would place an enormous strain on border facilities and personnel , which is why it was put into action in the first place .
The program stops migrants who would otherwise be released into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ until the date of their immigration hearing .
One pastor in Nuevo Laredo who oversees two shelters said he was fielding phone calls asking if migrants should storm the bridge in order to cross over the border .
Pastor Lorenzo Ortiz said , “ There was a little bit of a panic.
” He advised them to just wait , as any illegal action would jeopardize their cases .
While migrants vulnerable to crimes like kidnapping , rape , robbery , and human trafficking may face violence on the Mexican border as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such large numbers of migrants seeking asylum overruns the resources on the American side of the border .
It poses a national security risk and illegal immigration exploits immigration law .
Much of this could be alleviated if Congress would do its job and write legislation to reform immigration law .

Paso Del Norte international bridge in El Paso was temporarily closed on Friday and part of Saturday in response to a federal appellate court blocking the Migrant Protection Protocols, also known as the Remain in Mexico policy. Confusion occurred as the halting of the program was short-lived due to the fact that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed its own order.
The Remain in Mexico program for those seeking asylum in America, mostly from Central American countries, has been very successful, thanks to cooperation from the Mexican government. It should be noted that the bridge was closed Friday due to more than a hundred mostly Cuban migrants tried to cross after the court ruling. Naturally, the very liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is intent on shutting down any success on curbing illegal immigration. When word got out about the original appellate court order blocking the program the response of migrants was immediate. Authorities on the border shut down the international bridge as a response to the mass migration.
The temporary closing of downtown’s Paso Del Norte international bridge capped off a day of confusion and chaos after a federal appellate court blocked the Migrant Protection Protocols, one of President Trump’s signature immigration policies. But the end of the program, also called “Remain in Mexico”, was short-lived after the same court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, stayed its own order. Word of the reversal came after hundreds of migrants in Ciudad Juárez had gathered at the foot of the international bridge with the hopes of entering the United States. Customs and Border Protection officers then halted northbound vehicular traffic and subsequently shut down pedestrian crossings as well. El Paso Police Department officers cordoned off several blocks near the bridge with red police tape and several people were turned back on the most direct route to the PDN bridge and instead told to take a longer route to the nearby Stanton bridge, which was operating normally and closes at 11 pm. “[Customs and Border Protection] officers stopped the flow of northbound traffic at the Paso Del Norte bridge at approximately 7:20 p.m. Friday in an effort to eliminate the ability for a large group of migrants that had formed on the Mexican side of the border to illegally and forcefully surge through the ports of entry,” CBP spokesperson Roger Maier said in an email. “This step helps CBP ensure safety of travelers, facilities and CBP employees.”
CBP stopped traffic at Paso Del Norte bridge at 7:20 pm Friday preventing the ability for a group of migrants to illegally and forcefully surge through the port of entry. Safety of travelers, facilities and employees paramount. PDN will remain closed overnight. Other ports open. — CBP West Texas (@CBPWestTexas) February 29, 2020
The El Paso port of entry Paso Del Norte international crossing is open. CBP officers began processing pedestrian and vehicular traffic at 6 a.m. following overnight closure related to massing of migrants on Mexican side of the crossing. — CBP West Texas (@CBPWestTexas) February 29, 2020
The bridge was re-opened Saturday. While immigrants rights groups were hopeful that the original order ending the policy would allow migrants into the United States, thanks to the Trump administration’s quick response, the order was put on hold pending further consideration by the court. Additional filings are due Tuesday. Groups like the ACLU are already calling the stay of the order a temporary setback.
Judy Rabinovitz, the special counsel at the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project who argued the case, said Friday’s latest ruling is a limited setback. “This is a temporary step and does not change the fact that courts have ruled multiple times against this illegal policy. We will continue working to permanently end this unspeakably cruel policy,” she said in a statement.
This issue is expected to go all the way to the Supreme Court.
Since the Department of Homeland Security rolled out the Remain in Mexico policy in January 2019, over 60,000 people have been sent back to seven Mexican border cities. Currently, there are about 25,000 people in the program. Robert Perez, CBP’s deputy commissioner, said in a court filing on Friday that ending the program would place an enormous strain on border facilities and personnel, which is why it was put into action in the first place. The program stops migrants who would otherwise be released into the United States and left on their own until the date of their immigration hearing.
One pastor in Nuevo Laredo who oversees two shelters said he was fielding phone calls asking if migrants should storm the bridge in order to cross over the border. Pastor Lorenzo Ortiz said, “There was a little bit of a panic.” He advised them to just wait, as any illegal action would jeopardize their cases.
While migrants vulnerable to crimes like kidnapping, rape, robbery, and human trafficking may face violence on the Mexican border as they await entry into the United States, such large numbers of migrants seeking asylum overruns the resources on the American side of the border. It poses a national security risk and illegal immigration exploits immigration law. Much of this could be alleviated if Congress would do its job and write legislation to reform immigration law.


hotair--2020-03-02--Chris Matthews resigns after two decades at MSNBC (Update: Source says he was pushed out)

Just three days after a renewed allegation of sexist behavior was published by GQ magazine , Chris Matthews announced his resignation from the network on air today .
Matthews reference the allegations saying , “ Compliments on a women ’ s appearance that some men , including me , might have once incorrectly thought were okay were never okay.
” He continued , “ Not then and certainly not today and for making such comments in the past , I ’ m sorry.
” Friday , GQ published a piece by freelance journalist Laura Bassett .
Bassett had previously made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but at the time didn ’ t name the person she was writing about .
In the GQ piece , she made clear that person was Chris Matthews : In 2017 , I wrote a personal essay about a much older , married cable-news host who inappropriately flirted with me in the makeup room a few times before we went live on his show , making me noticeably uncomfortable on air .
I was afraid to name him at the time for fear of retaliation from the network ; I ’ m not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In 2016 , right before I had to go on his show and talk about sexual-assault allegations against Donald Trump , Matthews looked over at me in the makeup chair next to him and said , “ Why haven ’ t I fallen in love with you yet ?
” When I laughed nervously and said nothing , he followed up to the makeup artist .
“ Keep putting makeup on her , I ’ ll fall in love with her.
” Another time , he stood between me and the mirror and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the segment .
“ You going out tonight ?
” he asked .
I said I didn ’ t know , and he said—again to the makeup artist— “ Make sure you wipe this off her face after the show .
We don ’ t make her up so some guy at a bar can look at her like this.
” That sound fairly mild , but Bassett connects it to a long history of comments Matthews has made about women ’ s appearance both on air and off .
Last week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called “ Lookin ’ Good !
with Uncle Chris.
” There have also been a couple of specific instances which have outraged the left in the past two weeks .
One was his questioning of Elizabeth Warren over Mike Bloomberg denying he told a pregnant woman to get an abortion .
That exchange prompted the head of women ’ s advocacy group UltraViolet , to call for Matthews to be fired : But the misfire that really got the ball rolling on Matthews ’ retirement happened a few days earlier .
Matthews compared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taking over France .
Here ’ s how Bernie ’ s communications director responded to that : Matthews offered an on-air apology for that bit of free association , but looking back it was the beginning of the end .
After those comments , he lasted nine days .
Here ’ s his announcement that tonight will be his final appearance on the network .
Update : This popped up as I was writing this .
At least one source said the resignation was actually a firing .

Just three days after a renewed allegation of sexist behavior was published by GQ magazine, Chris Matthews announced his resignation from the network on air today. Matthews reference the allegations saying, “Compliments on a women’s appearance that some men, including me, might have once incorrectly thought were okay were never okay.” He continued, “Not then and certainly not today and for making such comments in the past, I’m sorry.”
Friday, GQ published a piece by freelance journalist Laura Bassett. Bassett had previously made some of the accusations back in 2017 but at the time didn’t name the person she was writing about. In the GQ piece, she made clear that person was Chris Matthews:
In 2017, I wrote a personal essay about a much older, married cable-news host who inappropriately flirted with me in the makeup room a few times before we went live on his show, making me noticeably uncomfortable on air. I was afraid to name him at the time for fear of retaliation from the network; I’m not anymore. It was Chris Matthews. In 2016, right before I had to go on his show and talk about sexual-assault allegations against Donald Trump, Matthews looked over at me in the makeup chair next to him and said, “Why haven’t I fallen in love with you yet?” When I laughed nervously and said nothing, he followed up to the makeup artist. “Keep putting makeup on her, I’ll fall in love with her.” Another time, he stood between me and the mirror and complimented the red dress I was wearing for the segment. “You going out tonight?” he asked. I said I didn’t know, and he said—again to the makeup artist—“Make sure you wipe this off her face after the show. We don’t make her up so some guy at a bar can look at her like this.”
That sound fairly mild, but Bassett connects it to a long history of comments Matthews has made about women’s appearance both on air and off. Last week the Daily Show put together a supercut called “Lookin’ Good! with Uncle Chris.”
There have also been a couple of specific instances which have outraged the left in the past two weeks. One was his questioning of Elizabeth Warren over Mike Bloomberg denying he told a pregnant woman to get an abortion.
Chris Matthews demands to know why Warren believes the woman who accused Bloomberg of telling her to "kill" her unborn child: "You’re confident of your accusation?" pic.twitter.com/sroztgr9kB — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 26, 2020
That exchange prompted the head of women’s advocacy group UltraViolet, to call for Matthews to be fired:
Matthews’ refusal to believe women, and history of sexual harassment, make it clear that he is not fit to continue to cover this election. MSNBC can and must do better, and they can start by firing Chris Matthews. (2/5) — Shaunna Thomas (@SLThomas) February 26, 2020
But the misfire that really got the ball rolling on Matthews’ retirement happened a few days earlier. Matthews compared Sanders win in Nevada to the Nazis taking over France. Here’s how Bernie’s communications director responded to that:
never thought part of my job would be pleading with a national news network to stop likening the campaign of a jewish presidential candidate whose family was wiped out by the nazis to the third reich. but here we are. https://t.co/2G1bqZ6bkI — mike casca (@cascamike) February 22, 2020
Matthews offered an on-air apology for that bit of free association, but looking back it was the beginning of the end. After those comments, he lasted nine days. Here’s his announcement that tonight will be his final appearance on the network.
Finally, here’s Laura Bassett’s reaction:
All I gotta say is… it’s about time. — Laura Bassett (@LEBassett) March 3, 2020
Update: This popped up as I was writing this. At least one source said the resignation was actually a firing.