hotair--2020-03-07--#MeToo fall-out: Woody Allen's memoir release has been canceled

On Monday an announcement was made by Grand Central Publishing , a division of Hachette Book Group , that Woody Allen ’ s memoir would be released on April 7 , 2020 .
Hachette said the book would be released in Canada , Italy , France , Germany , and Spain , with other releases around the world .
By Friday the publisher canceled it .
Talk about a quick change of mind .
It ’ s been reported that Woody Allen secured a multimillion-dollar deal with Penguin in 2003 but he backed out of it .
By 2018 his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but by then the # MeToo movement was a factor so publishers took a pass .
The New York Times reported ‘ In the last year , Allen quietly tried to sell a memoir , according to executives at four major publishing houses , only to be met with indifference or hard passes.
’ Because of Woody Allen ’ s personal history with allegations of molesting his adopted daughter with Mia Farrow , Dylan , and his marriage to Farrow ’ s adopted daughter , Soon-Yi , let ’ s just say it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a deal was made after publisher and SVP Ben Sevier read a completed draft of the book .
Dylan ’ s brother Ronan is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author of a book of his # MeToo reporting in the Harvey Weinstein case .
Ronan ’ s book was published by a subsidiary of the Hachette Book Group .
He immediately voiced his disapproval and ended his relationship with Hachette when the announcement was made .
He called their decision “ a betrayal ” in an email .
“ Your policy of editorial independence among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your moral and professional obligations as the publisher of ‘ Catch and Kill , ’ and as the leader of a company being asked to assist in efforts by abusive men to whitewash their crimes , ” Mr. Farrow wrote in an email to Michael Pietsch , the chief executive of Hachette , whose Little , Brown imprint published “ Catch and Kill.
” “ As you and I worked on ‘ Catch and Kill ’ ” — a book “ in part about the damage Woody Allen did to my family , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were secretly planning to publish a book by the person who committed those acts of sexual abuse.
” “ Obviously I can ’ t in good conscience work with you any more , ” he wrote at the end of his message .
“ Imagine this were your sister.
” Pietsch responded as you might expect a publishing executive to do – he said there is a market for Allen ’ s book .
Interested fans want to know his side of the story , as well as the rest of the story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one publishing division does not interfere with another publishing division .
Then events took a turn – employees of Little , Brown , and Co. ( Ronan ’ s publisher ) staged a walk-out in support of Ronan and Dylan the day after the announcement .
They were joined by employees from the imprints Basic , Orbit , Forever and Hachette Books .
On Thursday Hachette emailed a statement to the Los Angeles Times : “ We respect and understand the perspective of our employees who have decided to express their concern over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will engage our staff in a fuller discussion about this at the earliest opportunity.
” By Friday , Hachette caved to the demands of its staff and announced the book release is canceled .
“ The decision to cancel Mr. Allen ’ s book was a difficult one .
At HBG we take our relationships with authors very seriously , and do not cancel books lightly .
We have published and will continue to publish many challenging books , ” Sophie Cottrell , a spokesperson for the publisher said in an emailed statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we make sure every day in our work that different voices and conflicting points of views can be heard.
” The statement continued : “ Also , as a company , we are committed to offering a stimulating , supportive and open work environment for all our staff .
Over the past few days , HBG leadership had extensive conversations with our staff and others .
After listening , we came to the conclusion that moving forward with publication would not be feasible for HBG.
” So , the cancel culture won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 84-year-old man .
Let me be upfront here and state that I am not a fan of Woody Allen .
I never understood the success of his movies .
I think he ’ s one of those entertainment personalities that you either really like his work or you don ’ t at all .
Then , when the turmoil in his family life was exposed , I quit even trying to understand him .
But here ’ s the thing – after more than one investigation into the allegations made by Dylan ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old ) , and lawsuits and court appearances , plus therapy , the process played out .
The judge in Allen ’ s custody case against Mia Farrow found Allen ’ s behavior toward Dylan to be “ grossly inappropriate ” and that Dylan needed to be protected .
The state attorney declined to press charges against Allen .
It ’ s reasonable to think of Allen as a troubled , sick man .
It ’ s also reasonable to assume he is entitled to the same rights as any other American .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ story of his family ’ s history but not Woody Allen ?
I don ’ t care about Woody Allen but I do care about the First Amendment .
Silencing others because of a different point of view is wrong .
Also , why is the staff of a company making the decisions over that of the executives in charge ?
Ronan is pleased that Hachette isn ’ t going to publish the book , as is Dylan .
Author Stephen King isn ’ t happy about Hachette ’ s decision .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case , I do .

On Monday an announcement was made by Grand Central Publishing, a division of Hachette Book Group, that Woody Allen’s memoir would be released on April 7, 2020. Hachette said the book would be released in Canada, Italy, France, Germany, and Spain, with other releases around the world. By Friday the publisher canceled it. Talk about a quick change of mind.
It’s been reported that Woody Allen secured a multimillion-dollar deal with Penguin in 2003 but he backed out of it. By 2018 his representative was looking for a book deal but by then the #MeToo movement was a factor so publishers took a pass. The New York Times reported ‘In the last year, Allen quietly tried to sell a memoir, according to executives at four major publishing houses, only to be met with indifference or hard passes.’ Because of Woody Allen’s personal history with allegations of molesting his adopted daughter with Mia Farrow, Dylan, and his marriage to Farrow’s adopted daughter, Soon-Yi, let’s just say it’s complicated. In March 2019 a deal was made after publisher and SVP Ben Sevier read a completed draft of the book.
Dylan’s brother Ronan is a Pulitzer Prize-winning author of a book of his #MeToo reporting in the Harvey Weinstein case. Ronan’s book was published by a subsidiary of the Hachette Book Group. He immediately voiced his disapproval and ended his relationship with Hachette when the announcement was made. He called their decision “a betrayal” in an email.
“Your policy of editorial independence among your imprints does not relieve you of your moral and professional obligations as the publisher of ‘Catch and Kill,’ and as the leader of a company being asked to assist in efforts by abusive men to whitewash their crimes,” Mr. Farrow wrote in an email to Michael Pietsch, the chief executive of Hachette, whose Little, Brown imprint published “Catch and Kill.” “As you and I worked on ‘Catch and Kill’” — a book “in part about the damage Woody Allen did to my family,” Mr. Farrow added — “you were secretly planning to publish a book by the person who committed those acts of sexual abuse.” “Obviously I can’t in good conscience work with you any more,” he wrote at the end of his message. “Imagine this were your sister.”
Pietsch responded as you might expect a publishing executive to do – he said there is a market for Allen’s book. Interested fans want to know his side of the story, as well as the rest of the story of his life. He said that one publishing division does not interfere with another publishing division.
Then events took a turn – employees of Little, Brown, and Co. (Ronan’s publisher) staged a walk-out in support of Ronan and Dylan the day after the announcement. They were joined by employees from the imprints Basic, Orbit, Forever and Hachette Books. On Thursday Hachette emailed a statement to the Los Angeles Times: “We respect and understand the perspective of our employees who have decided to express their concern over the publication of this book. We will engage our staff in a fuller discussion about this at the earliest opportunity.”
By Friday, Hachette caved to the demands of its staff and announced the book release is canceled.
“The decision to cancel Mr. Allen’s book was a difficult one. At HBG we take our relationships with authors very seriously, and do not cancel books lightly. We have published and will continue to publish many challenging books,” Sophie Cottrell, a spokesperson for the publisher said in an emailed statement to USA TODAY. “As publishers, we make sure every day in our work that different voices and conflicting points of views can be heard.” The statement continued: “Also, as a company, we are committed to offering a stimulating, supportive and open work environment for all our staff. Over the past few days, HBG leadership had extensive conversations with our staff and others. After listening, we came to the conclusion that moving forward with publication would not be feasible for HBG.”
So, the cancel culture won over the free speech rights of one 84-year-old man. Let me be upfront here and state that I am not a fan of Woody Allen. I never understood the success of his movies. I think he’s one of those entertainment personalities that you either really like his work or you don’t at all. Then, when the turmoil in his family life was exposed, I quit even trying to understand him. But here’s the thing – after more than one investigation into the allegations made by Dylan (in 1992 when she was 7 years old), and lawsuits and court appearances, plus therapy, the process played out. The judge in Allen’s custody case against Mia Farrow found Allen’s behavior toward Dylan to be “grossly inappropriate” and that Dylan needed to be protected. The state attorney declined to press charges against Allen.
It’s reasonable to think of Allen as a troubled, sick man. It’s also reasonable to assume he is entitled to the same rights as any other American. Why is Ronan allowed to publish his story of his family’s history but not Woody Allen? I don’t care about Woody Allen but I do care about the First Amendment. Silencing others because of a different point of view is wrong. Also, why is the staff of a company making the decisions over that of the executives in charge?
Ronan is pleased that Hachette isn’t going to publish the book, as is Dylan.
To all the employees of @HachetteUS, @littlebrown, and @GrandCentralPub who took a stand, I’m in awe and so very grateful. pic.twitter.com/Si4oXpudde — Dylan Farrow (@RealDylanFarrow) March 6, 2020
Author Stephen King isn’t happy about Hachette’s decision. I rarely agree with him but in this case, I do.


hotair--2020-03-07--Sanders campaign co-chair floats the idea of Warren as VP

Rep. Ro Khanna is a Bernie Sanders campaign co-chair so it ’ s probably safe to assume he ’ s not talking off the cuff when he goes on MSNBC and suggests Elizabeth Warren would be an “ outstanding ” VP choice for Sanders : The California Democrat told MSNBC he would “ absolutely ” advise Sanders to name a woman as his vice presidential pick , and singled out the Vermont senator ’ s colleague from Massachusetts when asked who specifically he would recommend .
“ Maybe Sen. Warren , ” Khanna said .
“ I mean , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an outstanding choice .
There will be other outstanding choices.
” The words of praise from the top Sanders campaign official come after Warren declined to immediately endorse another candidate after dropping out of the Democratic primary Thursday — further irking some Sanders supporters who argued that she siphoned progressive voters from Sanders on Super Tuesday .
Did you notice the caveat “ There will be other outstanding choices.
” It sounds like he ’ s leaving himself an out .
Either he doesn ’ t really want to push this too hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might endorse Biden , in which case this could become embarrassing .
Some people seem to assume it ’ s obvious Warren should and will endorse Sanders .
After all , they were fighting for the same wing of the party .
But if it was really that obvious she probably would have made the endorsement when she announced she was withdrawing from the race or immediately after .
That ’ s what Klobuchar and Buttigieg did .
That ’ s what Bloomberg did .
Is this a tactical delay ?
Is Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sweeten the offer , maybe the VP slot ?
After she dropped out , Warren told Rachel Maddow she wasn ’ t looking for that , “ Hey , look , the job of senator is a good job .
As a matter of fact , the job of teacher is a good job.
” I guess that ’ s the kind of thing you do say when you don ’ t want to appear desperate .
I think there ’ s some genuine bad feeling between Warren and Sanders at this point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debate ( about saying a woman couldn ’ t win ) she was angry .
And after Super Tuesday , a lot of Bernie Bros were out on social media asking ( or demanding ) that she drop out to clear the lane for Bernie .
Warren has expressed her distaste for Bernie ’ s supporters a couple of times already , including when she left the race .
I ’ m sure having them turn on her to get out of Bernie ’ s way didn ’ t make her feel warm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe this is tactical , but I think it ’ s hard feelings .
That said , while she may be angry with Bernie and his people right now , they ’ ll probably both be back in the Senate soon .
I don ’ t think Warren wants to go nuclear by endorsing Biden .
That would be seen as a harsh blow if she did it now .
But the fact is that this race could be over in 10 days , about the time Sanders gets blown out in Florida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couple weeks , Warren could effectively let Bernie know she ’ s angry without actually endorsing his opponent and helping his demise .
That ’ s what I think is happening .
I think Warren is just angry enough about Bernie ’ s jerk supporters that she ’ s going to stand on the sidelines and watch him go under without offering an endorsement but I don ’ t think she ’ s angry enough to endorse Biden .
It ’ s a middle-ground , though if the Bernie Bros start demanding her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could change her mind .
My guess is that the mention of Warren as an ideal VP was meant as a peace offering .
I guess we ’ ll find out over the next few days if it was enough for her to change her mind .

Rep. Ro Khanna is a Bernie Sanders campaign co-chair so it’s probably safe to assume he’s not talking off the cuff when he goes on MSNBC and suggests Elizabeth Warren would be an “outstanding” VP choice for Sanders:
The California Democrat told MSNBC he would “absolutely” advise Sanders to name a woman as his vice presidential pick, and singled out the Vermont senator’s colleague from Massachusetts when asked who specifically he would recommend. “Maybe Sen. Warren,” Khanna said. “I mean, I’ve said Senator Warren would be an outstanding choice. There will be other outstanding choices.” The words of praise from the top Sanders campaign official come after Warren declined to immediately endorse another candidate after dropping out of the Democratic primary Thursday — further irking some Sanders supporters who argued that she siphoned progressive voters from Sanders on Super Tuesday.
Did you notice the caveat “There will be other outstanding choices.” It sounds like he’s leaving himself an out. Either he doesn’t really want to push this too hard or maybe he’s worried she might endorse Biden, in which case this could become embarrassing.
Some people seem to assume it’s obvious Warren should and will endorse Sanders. After all, they were fighting for the same wing of the party. But if it was really that obvious she probably would have made the endorsement when she announced she was withdrawing from the race or immediately after. That’s what Klobuchar and Buttigieg did. That’s what Bloomberg did.
Is this a tactical delay? Is Warren holding out because she wants Sanders to sweeten the offer, maybe the VP slot? After she dropped out, Warren told Rachel Maddow she wasn’t looking for that, “Hey, look, the job of senator is a good job. As a matter of fact, the job of teacher is a good job.” I guess that’s the kind of thing you do say when you don’t want to appear desperate.
I think there’s some genuine bad feeling between Warren and Sanders at this point. When Warren confronted him after that debate (about saying a woman couldn’t win) she was angry. And after Super Tuesday, a lot of Bernie Bros were out on social media asking (or demanding) that she drop out to clear the lane for Bernie. Warren has expressed her distaste for Bernie’s supporters a couple of times already, including when she left the race. I’m sure having them turn on her to get out of Bernie’s way didn’t make her feel warm and fuzzy about endorsing him.
So maybe this is tactical, but I think it’s hard feelings. That said, while she may be angry with Bernie and his people right now, they’ll probably both be back in the Senate soon. I don’t think Warren wants to go nuclear by endorsing Biden. That would be seen as a harsh blow if she did it now. But the fact is that this race could be over in 10 days, about the time Sanders gets blown out in Florida. So by holding out just a couple weeks, Warren could effectively let Bernie know she’s angry without actually endorsing his opponent and helping his demise.
That’s what I think is happening. I think Warren is just angry enough about Bernie’s jerk supporters that she’s going to stand on the sidelines and watch him go under without offering an endorsement but I don’t think she’s angry enough to endorse Biden. It’s a middle-ground, though if the Bernie Bros start demanding her endorsement with their usual charm, she could change her mind.
My guess is that the mention of Warren as an ideal VP was meant as a peace offering. I guess we’ll find out over the next few days if it was enough for her to change her mind.


hotair--2020-03-07--Hollywood's favorite commie endorses Sanders, the "climate candidate"

On Friday a Fire Drill Friday rally was held in front of Councilmember Joe Buscaino ’ s office in San Pedro , California .
The protesters delivered a letter to the councilman demanding that oil wells be restricted to at least 2500 feet from residential areas .
After that , a march was held in Wilmington at local oil refinery Warren E & P .
Jane Fonda , the founder , and leader of Fire Drill Friday protests took the opportunity to endorse Bernie Sanders as her choice for president .
The two cities south of Los Angeles were chosen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fields in the country and with extremely close proximity to homes and schools .
In past months Fonda has expressed approval of the environmental platforms of Sanders , Elizabeth Warren , and Tom Steyer but of those three , Bernie is the last to remain in the race .
Fonda likes to have her celebrity friends join in – this week Lily Tomlin , Sam Waterson , Diane Lane , and Rosanna Arquette answered the call .
Tomlin and Waterson are co-stars with Fonda in Grace and Frankie , a Netflix series currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any action that might find her under arrest .
She isn ’ t quite woke enough to do any more jail time after she spent a night in jail in Washington , D.C .
Her friends now volunteer to be arrested in her place .
This week , though , Sam Waterson took a page from Fonda ’ s playbook and also bowed out of anything that might lead to his arrest as he had an interview to get to after the rally .
In other words , Fonda and Waterson didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stars did mingle with the little people , though , even with the looming threat of the coronavirus .
No hugs , just elbow bumps .
To kick off the day , dozens of supporters and “ Fire Drill Friday ” staffers gathered in a San Pedro ballroom —most wearing red to mirror Fonda ’ s now-iconic coat — to lay out the day ’ s schedule , take a pledge for nonviolence and discuss what would happen at the oil refinery march , where Fonda was not allowed to physically take part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrests last year : “ The judge in DC said I had to have three months with no arrests , so I can risk arrest again in May , ” she said .
Fonda , Tomlin , Waterston and Lane mingled with many of the activists ahead of the 11 a.m. rally — opting for elbow bumps instead of hugs and handshakes amid coronavirus concerns — as Fonda celebrated how though her A-list friends came to support , the stars are not the centerpiece of the event : “ One of the things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ celebrities aren ’ t making speeches themselves , they ’ re introducing the people whose voices aren ’ t usually heard , ” as Tomlin chimed in , “ Jane is a premiere friend and I like to be on her side of any issue , but when you see all these people come out , especially during the corona , and just here because they have the spirit to be here , that ’ s sort of moving and terrific .
I want to be here to put in my two cents.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the “ climate candidate ” in the race .
Sam Waterson endorsed Joe Biden after Mike Bloomberg dropped out .
Waterson calls himself a moderate who hopes Biden will make climate change his top priority .
In their endorsements , Fonda sounds dazed and confused as to what exactly Bernie ’ s plan is and Waterson sounds naive about Joe Biden .
Doesn ’ t he remember that Joe and his grifter son Hunter were thick as thieves with Burisma , an energy company in Ukraine ?
“ Bernie is the climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and because climate to me is the most important thing I ’ m urging people to support the climate candidate , ” she told THR ahead of the rally .
Tomlin , meanwhile , said , “ Bernie hasn ’ t really put out a specific plan but I know he ’ s very much on the right side of that issue — I don ’ t know about Biden , I ’ m not sure that he is .
I feel like Elizabeth was and she probably had a real plan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was pulling for , of course now we ’ ve lost her for the moment , ” adding with the remaining two candidate ’ s climate change policies , “ I don ’ t know what we ’ re going to do .
I hope they do enough.
” Waterston , the self-declared “ moderate ” in comparison to his Grace and Frankie co-stars , said that he was a supporter of Michael Bloomberg , who has now endorsed Biden since dropping out of the race .
“ I hope , expect , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have , will advocate for [ climate change ] being at the absolute top of Joe Biden ’ s agenda , ” he told THR .
“ I think it ’ s actually a winning strategy , I think people are very ready to hear , this is the one great issue of our time and we ’ re going to go at it .
I think all of the other issues of our time , and there ’ s lots of them and they are terribly important — it ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s that they all get impact and importance from their connection to climate change.
” Protest organizers said about 500 people gathered for the rally and about 100 participated in the march .
The message is the same each time – fossil fuels must be eliminated within the next 30 years , and begin by cutting fossil fuel emissions by 50 % in the next decade .
What is never acknowledged during her rallies is that emissions in the United States already are dropping .
No matter the progress , the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the total elimination of the fossil fuels energy sector .
Meanwhile , they all live quite comfortably thanks to fossil fuels .
Hanoi Jane was honored Thursday by Visionary Women in Beverly Hills during an International Women ’ s Day event .
She told the crowd that she ’ s “ building an army ” for climate change , with the approval of some U.S. senators with whom she recently met .
“ I said , ‘ Am I doing the right thing ?
’ And they said , ‘ Yes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ … Make it big.
’ ” The use of the word army is rich , given her infamous trip to Hanoi during the Vietnam war where she accused the American military of war crimes as she aided and abetted the enemy .
It ’ s good to be a tone-deaf hypocrite in Hollywood .
Instead of being regarded as a hero , she should have been shunned and run out of the spotlight years ago .

On Friday a Fire Drill Friday rally was held in front of Councilmember Joe Buscaino’s office in San Pedro, California. The protesters delivered a letter to the councilman demanding that oil wells be restricted to at least 2500 feet from residential areas. After that, a march was held in Wilmington at local oil refinery Warren E&P. Jane Fonda, the founder, and leader of Fire Drill Friday protests took the opportunity to endorse Bernie Sanders as her choice for president.
The two cities south of Los Angeles were chosen because they have the biggest urban oil fields in the country and with extremely close proximity to homes and schools. In past months Fonda has expressed approval of the environmental platforms of Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Tom Steyer but of those three, Bernie is the last to remain in the race. Fonda likes to have her celebrity friends join in – this week Lily Tomlin, Sam Waterson, Diane Lane, and Rosanna Arquette answered the call. Tomlin and Waterson are co-stars with Fonda in Grace and Frankie, a Netflix series currently filming.
As usual, Fonda avoided any action that might find her under arrest. She isn’t quite woke enough to do any more jail time after she spent a night in jail in Washington, D.C. Her friends now volunteer to be arrested in her place. This week, though, Sam Waterson took a page from Fonda’s playbook and also bowed out of anything that might lead to his arrest as he had an interview to get to after the rally. In other words, Fonda and Waterson didn’t participate in the march. The stars did mingle with the little people, though, even with the looming threat of the coronavirus. No hugs, just elbow bumps.
To kick off the day, dozens of supporters and “Fire Drill Friday” staffers gathered in a San Pedro ballroom —most wearing red to mirror Fonda’s now-iconic coat — to lay out the day’s schedule, take a pledge for nonviolence and discuss what would happen at the oil refinery march, where Fonda was not allowed to physically take part in the protest following her number of arrests last year: “The judge in DC said I had to have three months with no arrests, so I can risk arrest again in May,” she said. Fonda, Tomlin, Waterston and Lane mingled with many of the activists ahead of the 11 a.m. rally — opting for elbow bumps instead of hugs and handshakes amid coronavirus concerns — as Fonda celebrated how though her A-list friends came to support, the stars are not the centerpiece of the event: “One of the things that I really like is that the celebrities aren’t making speeches themselves, they’re introducing the people whose voices aren’t usually heard,” as Tomlin chimed in, “Jane is a premiere friend and I like to be on her side of any issue, but when you see all these people come out, especially during the corona, and just here because they have the spirit to be here, that’s sort of moving and terrific. I want to be here to put in my two cents.”
Jane Fonda chose Sanders because he is the “climate candidate” in the race. Sam Waterson endorsed Joe Biden after Mike Bloomberg dropped out. Waterson calls himself a moderate who hopes Biden will make climate change his top priority. In their endorsements, Fonda sounds dazed and confused as to what exactly Bernie’s plan is and Waterson sounds naive about Joe Biden. Doesn’t he remember that Joe and his grifter son Hunter were thick as thieves with Burisma, an energy company in Ukraine?
“Bernie is the climate candidate, he has a good plan, and because climate to me is the most important thing I’m urging people to support the climate candidate,” she told THR ahead of the rally. Tomlin, meanwhile, said, “Bernie hasn’t really put out a specific plan but I know he’s very much on the right side of that issue — I don’t know about Biden, I’m not sure that he is. I feel like Elizabeth was and she probably had a real plan, and Elizabeth is the person I was pulling for, of course now we’ve lost her for the moment,” adding with the remaining two candidate’s climate change policies, “I don’t know what we’re going to do. I hope they do enough.” Waterston, the self-declared “moderate” in comparison to his Grace and Frankie co-stars, said that he was a supporter of Michael Bloomberg, who has now endorsed Biden since dropping out of the race. “I hope, expect, and for whatever small impact I can have, will advocate for [climate change] being at the absolute top of Joe Biden’s agenda,” he told THR. “I think it’s actually a winning strategy, I think people are very ready to hear, this is the one great issue of our time and we’re going to go at it. I think all of the other issues of our time, and there’s lots of them and they are terribly important — it’s not that they pale by comparison, it’s that they all get impact and importance from their connection to climate change.”
Protest organizers said about 500 people gathered for the rally and about 100 participated in the march. The message is the same each time – fossil fuels must be eliminated within the next 30 years, and begin by cutting fossil fuel emissions by 50% in the next decade. What is never acknowledged during her rallies is that emissions in the United States already are dropping. No matter the progress, the only satisfactory response for the climate change alarmists is the total elimination of the fossil fuels energy sector. Meanwhile, they all live quite comfortably thanks to fossil fuels.
Hanoi Jane was honored Thursday by Visionary Women in Beverly Hills during an International Women’s Day event. She told the crowd that she’s “building an army” for climate change, with the approval of some U.S. senators with whom she recently met. “I said, ‘Am I doing the right thing?’ And they said, ‘Yes. You’re building an army. … Make it big.’” The use of the word army is rich, given her infamous trip to Hanoi during the Vietnam war where she accused the American military of war crimes as she aided and abetted the enemy.
It’s good to be a tone-deaf hypocrite in Hollywood. Instead of being regarded as a hero, she should have been shunned and run out of the spotlight years ago.


hotair--2020-03-07--Democrats block measure to prevent terrorists from working at TSA

Well , not just terrorists , but that ’ s probably the more alarming part of the headline .
With all of the coronavirus and Democratic primary news swamping the networks , you might think that Congress was basically shut down , but it turns out that they ’ re actually trying to get some work done .
One example of this effort was a vote this week on the Rights for Transportation Security Officers Act .
The bill is designed to bring the handling of TSA employees more in line with other federal workers , possibly making it easier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of the process , an amendment was offered that would require screening applicants and conducting background checks .
These would specifically prevent the hiring of people convicted of sexual assault and other violent crimes or those whose names appear on the terror watch lists .
Given all of the complaints about TSA agents misbehaving when screening travelers at airports , that seems to make sense , doesn ’ t it ?
Apparently not to a lot of the House Democrats .
Nearly all of them , led by “ the Squad , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
( Daily Caller ) The vast majority of Democrats voted against the amendment , which was authored by Democratic Illinois Rep. Lauren Underwood .
Republican House Leader Kevin McCarthy was quick to criticize the Democratic leadership for rejecting the law .
“ [ The amendment ] was pulled back by leadership because the socialist wing of the party did not want to have that amendment go forward on this bill , ” the California representative said Thursday , according to the Washington Free Beacon .
“ When it was offered , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like to see the TSA not hire terrorists or those who have been convicted of sexual misconduct with minors and others .
But the socialist wing of the party , that controls now the Democratic Party , said that that could not be offered.
” The first question that comes to mind for most of us is probably along the lines of , wait a minute .
You mean they weren ’ t already screening TSA applicants to see if they were terrorists or sex offenders ?
These proceedings give the impression that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were , but it was just being done as a normal HR function and not written specifically into the laws governing the process .
No matter what the current process may be , what possible justification would there be to not conduct such screening for the people on the front lines of keeping radical Islamists with suicide vests off of our planes ?
And why would you hire somebody with a track record of sexual predation to monitor the “ nudie ” scanners and pat down the ladies trying to make it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Democrats were protesting this amendment because it prohibits a “ second chance for sex offenders ” to get their lives back on track .
In other words , this is more criminal justice reform nonsense .
If you ’ re somebody who ’ s been convicted of shoplifting a few times but then kept your nose clean for a few years , I can see letting you apply for a job as a TSA screener .
But if you ’ ve been found aiding and abetting ISIS or sexually assaulting women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sorry . )
This simply isn ’ t the job for you .
We ’ ve already run into instances where TSA agents were found working with drug cartels to facilitate the smuggling of large quantities of illegal drugs .
And other agents have forced women to strip down over some very dubious reasons .
You can ’ t catch every bad apple in the screening process , but clearly there ’ s room for improvement .
So if you find yourself getting felt up by a TSA agent at the airport next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to thank .
It will be AOC and her fellow “ squad ” members , along with the rest of their friends in the Democratic caucus .
Apparently the rights of convicted sex offenders trump yours .

Well, not just terrorists, but that’s probably the more alarming part of the headline. With all of the coronavirus and Democratic primary news swamping the networks, you might think that Congress was basically shut down, but it turns out that they’re actually trying to get some work done. One example of this effort was a vote this week on the Rights for Transportation Security Officers Act. The bill is designed to bring the handling of TSA employees more in line with other federal workers, possibly making it easier to attract new applicants.
But as part of the process, an amendment was offered that would require screening applicants and conducting background checks. These would specifically prevent the hiring of people convicted of sexual assault and other violent crimes or those whose names appear on the terror watch lists. Given all of the complaints about TSA agents misbehaving when screening travelers at airports, that seems to make sense, doesn’t it? Apparently not to a lot of the House Democrats. Nearly all of them, led by “the Squad,” voted against the amendment and defeated it. (Daily Caller)
The vast majority of Democrats voted against the amendment, which was authored by Democratic Illinois Rep. Lauren Underwood. Republican House Leader Kevin McCarthy was quick to criticize the Democratic leadership for rejecting the law. “[The amendment] was pulled back by leadership because the socialist wing of the party did not want to have that amendment go forward on this bill,” the California representative said Thursday, according to the Washington Free Beacon. “When it was offered, overwhelmingly the majority of the House would like to see the TSA not hire terrorists or those who have been convicted of sexual misconduct with minors and others. But the socialist wing of the party, that controls now the Democratic Party, said that that could not be offered.”
The first question that comes to mind for most of us is probably along the lines of, wait a minute. You mean they weren’t already screening TSA applicants to see if they were terrorists or sex offenders? These proceedings give the impression that they weren’t. Or maybe they were, but it was just being done as a normal HR function and not written specifically into the laws governing the process.
No matter what the current process may be, what possible justification would there be to not conduct such screening for the people on the front lines of keeping radical Islamists with suicide vests off of our planes? And why would you hire somebody with a track record of sexual predation to monitor the “nudie” scanners and pat down the ladies trying to make it to their departure gate?
It appears that the Democrats were protesting this amendment because it prohibits a “second chance for sex offenders” to get their lives back on track. In other words, this is more criminal justice reform nonsense. If you’re somebody who’s been convicted of shoplifting a few times but then kept your nose clean for a few years, I can see letting you apply for a job as a TSA screener. But if you’ve been found aiding and abetting ISIS or sexually assaulting women and girls, sorry. (Not sorry.) This simply isn’t the job for you.
We’ve already run into instances where TSA agents were found working with drug cartels to facilitate the smuggling of large quantities of illegal drugs. And other agents have forced women to strip down over some very dubious reasons. You can’t catch every bad apple in the screening process, but clearly there’s room for improvement.
So if you find yourself getting felt up by a TSA agent at the airport next year, you’ll know who to thank. It will be AOC and her fellow “squad” members, along with the rest of their friends in the Democratic caucus. Apparently the rights of convicted sex offenders trump yours.


hotair--2020-03-07--Shocker: The Taliban reportedly doesn't plan to honor their deal

When I wrote about the proposed peace deal with the Taliban last month , I ’ ll confess that I took a rather dismal , Eeyore approach to our prospects for success .
It ’ s seemed obvious for some time that the Taliban is doing what the natives in Afghanistan have always done when foreign powers overrun their territory .
They wait for the foreigners to go home because they always do , sooner or later .
And being essentially little more than a terrorist organization themselves , the Taliban can ’ t be trusted to keep their word @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interests .
As it turns out , we ’ ve been busy gathering intelligence on what the Taliban is up to these days .
And it should come as no surprise that the United States is already aware that the Taliban leadership has no intention of keeping their promises .
( NBC News ) The U.S. government has collected persuasive intelligence that the Taliban do not intend to honor the promises they have made in the recently signed deal with the United States , three American officials tell NBC News , undercutting what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Donald Trump and his top aides .
“ They have no intention of abiding by their agreement , ” said one official briefed on the intelligence , which two others described as explicit evidence shedding light on the Taliban ’ s intentions .
Trump himself acknowledged that reality in extraordinary comments Friday , saying the Taliban could “ possibly ” overrun the Afghan government after U.S. troops withdraw .
Taliban leaders in Pakistan flatly told reporters that they believe this peace deal represents the United States “ recognizing ” them officially .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ our troops are gone , they plan to ask the current , American-backed government to “ accept us and give us our country peacefully.
” There was no need for him to expand further into what would happen if they didn ’ t immediately surrender .
The big question on the table is what if any impact this information should have on our plans moving forward .
I ’ m sure some people found President Trump ’ s comments a bit on the brusque side when he said “ countries have to take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you can only hold someone ’ s hand for so long.
” But the fact is that he ’ s got a point .
We can ’ t realistically be expected to stay there forever .
And yes , as I acknowledged before , we ’ re violating the Pottery Barn rule if we do this .
( You break it , you bought it . )
But the Taliban were in charge and running an oppressive , 7th-century style government there when we arrived .
For the past 18 years , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the chance to see what living under an elected and at least somewhat less oppressive government looks like .
If that ’ s what they truly want , they can fight back against the Taliban .
Perhaps the focus now should be to take the expected chaos our troop withdrawal will trigger for granted as if it ’ s baked into the cake already .
What we need to avoid at all costs is another “ fall of Saigon ” situation , where the last of our troops are scrambling to get away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Also , we don ’ t want to strand those who assisted us and leave them to be killed off .
I ’ m referring specifically to the translators and informants who served us loyally with the expectation that we would be taking care of them .
They should be moved out of the country well ahead of our major , final troop withdrawal , not as an afterthought .
We gave ourselves a black eye in Iraq when we left some of our translators and helpers behind .
If the Afghanis in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come to the United States , we should find some safe ( or at least safer ) third country where they can wait to be vetted for their eventual arrival in the United States , assuming they wish to come .
I ’ m picturing someplace like Qatar , Egypt or Saudi Arabia .
But beyond that , there ’ s only so much we can do .
Afghanistan was never going to become America ’ s 51st state or some flowering bastion of freedom and democracy .
It ’ s just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take root .
It ’ s time for our troops to come home .
Afghanistan is going to be a mess when we leave , and we ’ re just going to have to be prepared for that eventuality .
But let ’ s face it .
Afghanistan was a mess when we arrived .

When I wrote about the proposed peace deal with the Taliban last month, I’ll confess that I took a rather dismal, Eeyore approach to our prospects for success. It’s seemed obvious for some time that the Taliban is doing what the natives in Afghanistan have always done when foreign powers overrun their territory. They wait for the foreigners to go home because they always do, sooner or later. And being essentially little more than a terrorist organization themselves, the Taliban can’t be trusted to keep their word on anything unless it directly serves their interests.
As it turns out, we’ve been busy gathering intelligence on what the Taliban is up to these days. And it should come as no surprise that the United States is already aware that the Taliban leadership has no intention of keeping their promises. (NBC News)
The U.S. government has collected persuasive intelligence that the Taliban do not intend to honor the promises they have made in the recently signed deal with the United States, three American officials tell NBC News, undercutting what has been days of hopeful talk by President Donald Trump and his top aides. “They have no intention of abiding by their agreement,” said one official briefed on the intelligence, which two others described as explicit evidence shedding light on the Taliban’s intentions. Trump himself acknowledged that reality in extraordinary comments Friday, saying the Taliban could “possibly” overrun the Afghan government after U.S. troops withdraw.
Taliban leaders in Pakistan flatly told reporters that they believe this peace deal represents the United States “recognizing” them officially. And with that in mind, once our troops are gone, they plan to ask the current, American-backed government to “accept us and give us our country peacefully.” There was no need for him to expand further into what would happen if they didn’t immediately surrender.
The big question on the table is what if any impact this information should have on our plans moving forward. I’m sure some people found President Trump’s comments a bit on the brusque side when he said “countries have to take care of themselves,” and “you can only hold someone’s hand for so long.” But the fact is that he’s got a point. We can’t realistically be expected to stay there forever.
And yes, as I acknowledged before, we’re violating the Pottery Barn rule if we do this. (You break it, you bought it.) But the Taliban were in charge and running an oppressive, 7th-century style government there when we arrived. For the past 18 years, the people of Afghanistan have at least had the chance to see what living under an elected and at least somewhat less oppressive government looks like. If that’s what they truly want, they can fight back against the Taliban.
Perhaps the focus now should be to take the expected chaos our troop withdrawal will trigger for granted as if it’s baked into the cake already. What we need to avoid at all costs is another “fall of Saigon” situation, where the last of our troops are scrambling to get away as the Taliban fighters move in. Also, we don’t want to strand those who assisted us and leave them to be killed off. I’m referring specifically to the translators and informants who served us loyally with the expectation that we would be taking care of them. They should be moved out of the country well ahead of our major, final troop withdrawal, not as an afterthought.
We gave ourselves a black eye in Iraq when we left some of our translators and helpers behind. If the Afghanis in similar situations can’t be cleared to come to the United States, we should find some safe (or at least safer) third country where they can wait to be vetted for their eventual arrival in the United States, assuming they wish to come. I’m picturing someplace like Qatar, Egypt or Saudi Arabia. But beyond that, there’s only so much we can do. Afghanistan was never going to become America’s 51st state or some flowering bastion of freedom and democracy. It’s just not fertile ground for such a system to take root.
It’s time for our troops to come home. Afghanistan is going to be a mess when we leave, and we’re just going to have to be prepared for that eventuality. But let’s face it. Afghanistan was a mess when we arrived.


hotair--2020-03-07--Major crimes in NYC <i>unexpectedly</i> surge after bail reform law

We recently looked at some new proposals for fixing New York ’ s disastrous new “ bail reform ” law or at least mitigating some of the damage it ’ s causing .
They may want to get off the stick and start looking at those suggestions in a hurry because a newly released report shows that major crimes in New York City took a very sharp turn upward in February as compared to the same period of time last year .
And the police have the data to show that the bail reform policies are playing a significant role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daily Mail ) New York City saw a big increase in crime last month compared to the same period in 2019 .
Major crimes grew 22.5 % in February according to the NYPD with a 7.1 % increase in shootings .
robbery , assault , burglary , grand larceny , and grand larceny auto crimes .
Murders , however , fell some 20 % with 20 people killed in the Big Apple during February .
Police are blaming recent criminal justice reforms for the rise in crime , according to Fox5 .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Murders were down 20 % and there was a slight drop in rapes in February ( 125 versus 133 in February of 2019 ) .
But that only goes to support the explanation being offered by the NYPD .
Murders , attempted murders and rapes aren ’ t eligible for the no-bail , criminal revolving door program ( thank God ) , at least not yet .
But the numbers for crimes that do qualify for no-bail release went in the opposite direction .
The report shows that no less than 482 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ felony were then rearrested for committing an additional 846 crimes in January and February .
More than one-third of those incidents ( 299 ) were crimes that fell into one of the seven major crimes categories of murder , rape , robbery , felony assault , burglary , grand larceny , and grand larceny auto .
By this point , the numbers have become too stark to ignore .
This isn ’ t some sort of “ scare tactic ” as liberal supporters of the new law constantly insist .
And it isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to stir up trouble for the unpopular mayor .
This is a documented 22.5 % increase in major crimes for the month of February in a single year , and that is far outside of the normal fluctuations you tend to see from year to year .
Combining those facts , the story becomes clear and we can no longer deny that the new bail reform law is the largest factor .
Heck , even the Mayor previously was forced to admit that it was the “ only significant new factor ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This law isn ’ t just “ giving oppressed minorities a chance at freedom from a system of mass incarceration ” as its proponents so often say .
It ’ s taking known criminals and dumping them back out on the streets in droves , where they immediately return to their usual routines .
This was an experiment in so-called “ social justice ” that was predicted to fail by law enforcement and sane analysts and it ’ s lived up to those predictions in a spectacular fashion .
It ’ s time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply repeal it before Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo manage to turn back the clock in Gotham to the bad old days of the late 80s and early 90s .
Maybe now that Bloomberg is out of the presidential race you could bring him back for another spin .
For all of his faults , he at least kept the crime rates down in the basement .

We recently looked at some new proposals for fixing New York’s disastrous new “bail reform” law or at least mitigating some of the damage it’s causing. They may want to get off the stick and start looking at those suggestions in a hurry because a newly released report shows that major crimes in New York City took a very sharp turn upward in February as compared to the same period of time last year. And the police have the data to show that the bail reform policies are playing a significant role in this very bad development. (Daily Mail)
New York City saw a big increase in crime last month compared to the same period in 2019. Major crimes grew 22.5% in February according to the NYPD with a 7.1% increase in shootings. robbery, assault, burglary, grand larceny, and grand larceny auto crimes. Murders, however, fell some 20% with 20 people killed in the Big Apple during February. Police are blaming recent criminal justice reforms for the rise in crime, according to Fox5.
So the news isn’t entirely bad. Murders were down 20% and there was a slight drop in rapes in February (125 versus 133 in February of 2019). But that only goes to support the explanation being offered by the NYPD. Murders, attempted murders and rapes aren’t eligible for the no-bail, criminal revolving door program (thank God), at least not yet.
But the numbers for crimes that do qualify for no-bail release went in the opposite direction. The report shows that no less than 482 people who were arrested for committing a felony were then rearrested for committing an additional 846 crimes in January and February. More than one-third of those incidents (299) were crimes that fell into one of the seven major crimes categories of murder, rape, robbery, felony assault, burglary, grand larceny, and grand larceny auto.
By this point, the numbers have become too stark to ignore. This isn’t some sort of “scare tactic” as liberal supporters of the new law constantly insist. And it isn’t a case of the police trying to stir up trouble for the unpopular mayor. This is a documented 22.5% increase in major crimes for the month of February in a single year, and that is far outside of the normal fluctuations you tend to see from year to year.
Combining those facts, the story becomes clear and we can no longer deny that the new bail reform law is the largest factor. Heck, even the Mayor previously was forced to admit that it was the “only significant new factor” to explain the increase in crime. This law isn’t just “giving oppressed minorities a chance at freedom from a system of mass incarceration” as its proponents so often say. It’s taking known criminals and dumping them back out on the streets in droves, where they immediately return to their usual routines.
This was an experiment in so-called “social justice” that was predicted to fail by law enforcement and sane analysts and it’s lived up to those predictions in a spectacular fashion. It’s time to stop tinkering around with it and simply repeal it before Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo manage to turn back the clock in Gotham to the bad old days of the late 80s and early 90s. Maybe now that Bloomberg is out of the presidential race you could bring him back for another spin. For all of his faults, he at least kept the crime rates down in the basement.


hotair--2020-03-08--First Lady's new project has critics seeing red, she responds perfectly

You would think that the haters would have learned by now – First Lady Melania Trump can take care of herself in the midst of a storm of criticism .
An example emerged Thursday when she tweeted about her latest project .
She is supervising the construction of a tennis pavilion at the White House .
It is being paid for with private funds , not taxpayer dollars .
Melanie Trump broke ground on the South Lawn last October and said at the time she hoped “ this private space will function as a place to gather and spend leisure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first ladies before her , she is making the White House a family-friendly home .
For example , the Obamas built a play space for their then young daughters , complete with a large swing set .
At the time of the groundbreaking for the new tennis pavilion , Melania took some heat for this because it was during Impeachmentpalooza .
The plans are for the pavilion to unify the tennis court and two existing gardens .
When she posted an update on the project Thursday the critics surfaced again .
Melania was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the others in the photo were wearing and she was looking at blueprints .
That ’ s a pretty standard picture for a construction project , right ?
Well , in this case , apparently it was the worse possible thing the first lady could have done… because of the coronavirus outbreak .
As the Trump administration works to combat the outbreak of coronavirus , the first lady stuck to her agenda and checked in on the construction of the White House ’ s new tennis pavilion .
Donning a white hard hat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the construction site in a black turtleneck dress that featured flared sleeves .
“ I am excited to share the progress of the Tennis Pavillion at @ WhiteHouse , ” Trump captioned a series of pictures on Instagram and Twitter Thursday .
“ Thank you to the talented team for their hard work and dedication.
” Her critics said she was being insensitive because of the COVID-19 outbreak the administration is dealing with and a recent tornado in Tennessee that resulted in lives lost .
Both of those events , though , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his administration , not the Office of the First Lady .
Just as the administration is , she is going about doing her own work .
What exactly did her critics expect her to be doing ?
Wait till Mia Farrow and the other haters find out this pavilion is the first of two structures the first lady is planning .
The second is a maintenance building that will be used by the National Parks Service .
The National Parks Service is the official public steward of the White House .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going on when the ground is broken for that project , too .
It ’ s not like Melania is the Commander-in-Chief and flying off for a fundraiser in Las Vegas and partying with Jay-Z and Beyonce hours after the attack on an American embassy overseas .
Just sayin ’ .
The design is a classic one and in line with the existing architecture of the White House .
The pavilion rises to a height of 18-feet and is designed as a rectangular structure topped by a copper hipped roof .
The building @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by four Doric columns .
The arcade is sandwiched between two slightly protruding wings , each marked by a fan window-topped glass door .
The entire structure is wrapped on four sides by a cornice and parapet wall , with the hipped roof rising beyond the parapet .
An architect for the project has not been named .
Text accompanying the proposal states that “ the proposed designs are specifically informed by the existing architecture of the White House , including the East and West Colonnades , fan windows , columns , stonework @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drawn from the symbolic images of the White House that are so recognizable to the American public.
” This project isn ’ t unusual , given others in past administrations .
The White House putting green , for example , was first installed by President Eisenhower .
The White House tennis court was installed during the Teddy Roosevelt administration .
George H.W .
Bush enlarged it during his time in the White House .
Barack Obama had lines drawn and removable baskets added so he could play full-court basketball .
The White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Truman .
Let the haters hate .
Melania Trump responded perfectly .
She told them to go out and do something positive for their own communities .
# BeBest

You would think that the haters would have learned by now – First Lady Melania Trump can take care of herself in the midst of a storm of criticism. An example emerged Thursday when she tweeted about her latest project. She is supervising the construction of a tennis pavilion at the White House. It is being paid for with private funds, not taxpayer dollars.
Melanie Trump broke ground on the South Lawn last October and said at the time she hoped “this private space will function as a place to gather and spend leisure time for First Families.” Like the first ladies before her, she is making the White House a family-friendly home. For example, the Obamas built a play space for their then young daughters, complete with a large swing set. At the time of the groundbreaking for the new tennis pavilion, Melania took some heat for this because it was during Impeachmentpalooza. The plans are for the pavilion to unify the tennis court and two existing gardens.
According to CNN, a June building proposal from the National Park Service states the pavilion will “provide a unifying element for the tennis court, the Children’s Garden and the Kitchen Garden.” The Children’s Garden was installed in 1968 by former first lady Lady Bird Johnson, while the Kitchen Garden was created in 2009 by then-first lady Michelle Obama.
Exciting to break ground on the new tennis pavilion project at the White House today. Thank you to all who will help in making this legacy piece possible for future first families to gather at and enjoy for years to come. @theNationalMall @NatlParkService pic.twitter.com/UcYLeJ27Ni — Melania Trump 45 Archived (@FLOTUS45) October 8, 2019
When she posted an update on the project Thursday the critics surfaced again. Melania was shown in a hard hat, as the others in the photo were wearing and she was looking at blueprints. That’s a pretty standard picture for a construction project, right? Well, in this case, apparently it was the worse possible thing the first lady could have done… because of the coronavirus outbreak.
As the Trump administration works to combat the outbreak of coronavirus, the first lady stuck to her agenda and checked in on the construction of the White House’s new tennis pavilion. Donning a white hard hat, Trump fashionably overlooked blueprints with contractors at the construction site in a black turtleneck dress that featured flared sleeves. “I am excited to share the progress of the Tennis Pavillion at @WhiteHouse,” Trump captioned a series of pictures on Instagram and Twitter Thursday. “Thank you to the talented team for their hard work and dedication.”
https://www.instagram.com/p/B9XDKv4gkrA/?utm_source=ig_embed
Her critics said she was being insensitive because of the COVID-19 outbreak the administration is dealing with and a recent tornado in Tennessee that resulted in lives lost. Both of those events, though, are being handled by President Trump and his administration, not the Office of the First Lady. Just as the administration is, she is going about doing her own work. What exactly did her critics expect her to be doing?
29 people were killed by a tornado in Tennessee, the world is shuddering as a pandemic expands and what is a tennis pavilion? — Mia Farrow (@MiaFarrow) March 5, 2020
Wait till Mia Farrow and the other haters find out this pavilion is the first of two structures the first lady is planning. The second is a maintenance building that will be used by the National Parks Service. The National Parks Service is the official public steward of the White House. I’m sure something else horrible will be going on when the ground is broken for that project, too. It’s not like Melania is the Commander-in-Chief and flying off for a fundraiser in Las Vegas and partying with Jay-Z and Beyonce hours after the attack on an American embassy overseas. Just sayin’.
The design is a classic one and in line with the existing architecture of the White House.
The pavilion rises to a height of 18-feet and is designed as a rectangular structure topped by a copper hipped roof. The building is marked by a central arcade framed by four Doric columns. The arcade is sandwiched between two slightly protruding wings, each marked by a fan window-topped glass door. The entire structure is wrapped on four sides by a cornice and parapet wall, with the hipped roof rising beyond the parapet. An architect for the project has not been named. Text accompanying the proposal states that “the proposed designs are specifically informed by the existing architecture of the White House, including the East and West Colonnades, fan windows, columns, stonework, and cornices. Architectural inspiration is drawn from the symbolic images of the White House that are so recognizable to the American public.”
This project isn’t unusual, given others in past administrations. The White House putting green, for example, was first installed by President Eisenhower. The White House tennis court was installed during the Teddy Roosevelt administration. George H.W. Bush enlarged it during his time in the White House. Barack Obama had lines drawn and removable baskets added so he could play full-court basketball. The White House bowling alley was a birthday gift to President Truman.
Let the haters hate. Melania Trump responded perfectly. She told them to go out and do something positive for their own communities. #BeBest


hotair--2020-03-08--Bernie: The establishment "forced" Klobuchar and Buttigieg out of the race

Meh .
If he wants to call Buttigieg and Klobuchar establishment shills , he should just do it .
By claiming without evidence that they were “ forced ” out , he ’ s trying to walk a line between satisfying the populist impulse to blame all misfortunes on “ the establishment ” on the one hand while on the other staying on the good side of any Pete/Amy supporters who might momentarily be undecided between him and Biden .
He needs Buttigieg and Klobuchar to be part of the great corporate/media/centrist conspiracy against him while also absolving them of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ forced.
” Watch , then read on .
If you ’ re looking for proof that anyone was “ forced , ” this is as close as it gets : Mr. Buttigieg talked with Mr. Biden and former President Barack Obama on Sunday night , according to a Democratic official familiar with the conversations .
Mr. Biden asked for Mr. Buttigieg ’ s support and the former mayor indicated he would consider the request .
Mr. Buttigieg wants to sleep on the decision , he told aides , some of whom believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden .
Mr. Obama did not specifically encourage Mr. Buttigieg to endorse Mr. Biden , said the official , who insisted on anonymity to discuss private conversations .
But Mr. Obama did note that Mr. Buttigieg has considerable leverage at the moment and should think about how best to use it .
A young Democratic politician with a promising national career wouldn ’ t want to disappoint the Obamas .
But Buttigieg didn ’ t need O or anyone else to pitch him on endorsing Biden .
He ’ s intelligent ; he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week and imagining the results on Super Tuesday if the “ muddle in the middle ” remained unresolved .
He wasn ’ t going to win anywhere .
His money was surely about to dry up .
If he enabled Bernie ’ s march to the nomination by drawing votes from Biden , centrists would lambaste him for running a vanity candidacy that ended up damaging the party ’ s chances against Trump in November while progressives would continue to hate him for reasons various and sundry .
Quitting in order to resolve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rational thing to do .
Buttigieg is a highly rational character .
I can ’ t find any evidence of Obama leaning on Klobuchar , which is probably because there ’ s no way to lean on her effectively .
She has a death grip on her Senate seat in Minnesota .
Her enemies within the party wouldn ’ t dare primary her , partly due to the futility of the effort and party because Minnesota is trending purple and can ’ t be taken for granted .
There would have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stayed in despite the dismay of party leaders .
She had the same rational calculation before her as Buttigieg did , not wanting to be the scapegoat if she inadvertently helped Bernie prevail on Super Tuesday and also well aware that her fundraising was headed down the tubes after a series of fourth- or fifth-place finishes .
Bernie should have just said what he meant : Pete and Amy are part of the establishment and they want Biden to win .
It ’ s in their self-interest , ideologically and professionally , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Buttigieg and Klobuchar voters would be a dumb thing for him to do right now so this is what we get instead .
The hard fact for Sanders is that he wouldn ’ t have to worry about establishment candidates dropping out and endorsing Biden if the working class liked him more .
Despite his overt message of class warfare , Bernie trailed Biden on Tuesday night across counties with higher unemployment .
In places where the unemployment rate was below 4.0 percent , Biden led Sanders 33/29 ; in places where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led 43/26 .
Biden also did much better in counties with fewer college grads .
In places where 25.7 percent or more of residents hold bachelor ’ s degrees , Joe led by just four points ; in counties where fewer than 14.9 percent of residents do , he led by 27 .
Obviously , race is mixed up to some degree in those numbers : Bernie finished a point ahead of Biden in counties where the population is 88.7 percent white or higher whereas Biden led in counties where it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s socialist agenda hasn ’ t made the kind of inroads it needed to make among poorer Americans , especially African-Americans , to give him an advantage over Joe .
Still , I don ’ t think he ’ s going to get blanked on Tuesday .
Two recent polls of Washington state show him trailing Biden by one and three points , respectively , with Warren at 10 percent in the former and at five percent in the latter .
I have to believe that the coronavirus epidemic in the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which probably favors the candidate with more enthusiastic supporters .
That ’ s Bernie .
So he ’ s likely to win Washington but he reeeeally wants to win Michigan in order to prove that he ’ s still a force in the midwest and isn ’ t losing ground since 2016 by dropping states now that he won then .
Stay tuned .

Meh. If he wants to call Buttigieg and Klobuchar establishment shills, he should just do it. By claiming without evidence that they were “forced” out, he’s trying to walk a line between satisfying the populist impulse to blame all misfortunes on “the establishment” on the one hand while on the other staying on the good side of any Pete/Amy supporters who might momentarily be undecided between him and Biden. He needs Buttigieg and Klobuchar to be part of the great corporate/media/centrist conspiracy against him while also absolving them of blame for it. Hence the word “forced.” Watch, then read on.
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Super Tuesday results: "One of the things I was kind of not surprised by was the power of the establishment to force Amy Klobuchar, who had worked so hard, Pete Buttigieg who had really worked extremely hard as well out of the race." https://t.co/FMsEFyFDY3 pic.twitter.com/9C5lLFJCR5 — ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) March 8, 2020
If you’re looking for proof that anyone was “forced,” this is as close as it gets:
Mr. Buttigieg talked with Mr. Biden and former President Barack Obama on Sunday night, according to a Democratic official familiar with the conversations. Mr. Biden asked for Mr. Buttigieg’s support and the former mayor indicated he would consider the request. Mr. Buttigieg wants to sleep on the decision, he told aides, some of whom believe he should move quickly to endorse Mr. Biden. Mr. Obama did not specifically encourage Mr. Buttigieg to endorse Mr. Biden, said the official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss private conversations. But Mr. Obama did note that Mr. Buttigieg has considerable leverage at the moment and should think about how best to use it.
A young Democratic politician with a promising national career wouldn’t want to disappoint the Obamas. But Buttigieg didn’t need O or anyone else to pitch him on endorsing Biden. He’s intelligent; he was perfectly capable of looking ahead a week and imagining the results on Super Tuesday if the “muddle in the middle” remained unresolved. He wasn’t going to win anywhere. His money was surely about to dry up. If he enabled Bernie’s march to the nomination by drawing votes from Biden, centrists would lambaste him for running a vanity candidacy that ended up damaging the party’s chances against Trump in November while progressives would continue to hate him for reasons various and sundry. Quitting in order to resolve the muddle in the middle expeditiously was the rational thing to do. Buttigieg is a highly rational character.
I can’t find any evidence of Obama leaning on Klobuchar, which is probably because there’s no way to lean on her effectively. She has a death grip on her Senate seat in Minnesota. Her enemies within the party wouldn’t dare primary her, partly due to the futility of the effort and party because Minnesota is trending purple and can’t be taken for granted. There would have been no repercussions for Klobuchar if she had stayed in despite the dismay of party leaders. She had the same rational calculation before her as Buttigieg did, not wanting to be the scapegoat if she inadvertently helped Bernie prevail on Super Tuesday and also well aware that her fundraising was headed down the tubes after a series of fourth- or fifth-place finishes.
Bernie should have just said what he meant: Pete and Amy are part of the establishment and they want Biden to win. It’s in their self-interest, ideologically and professionally, to help him. But picking a fight with Buttigieg and Klobuchar voters would be a dumb thing for him to do right now so this is what we get instead.
The hard fact for Sanders is that he wouldn’t have to worry about establishment candidates dropping out and endorsing Biden if the working class liked him more. Despite his overt message of class warfare, Bernie trailed Biden on Tuesday night across counties with higher unemployment. In places where the unemployment rate was below 4.0 percent, Biden led Sanders 33/29; in places where it was above 7.2 percent, he led 43/26. Biden also did much better in counties with fewer college grads. In places where 25.7 percent or more of residents hold bachelor’s degrees, Joe led by just four points; in counties where fewer than 14.9 percent of residents do, he led by 27. Obviously, race is mixed up to some degree in those numbers: Bernie finished a point ahead of Biden in counties where the population is 88.7 percent white or higher whereas Biden led in counties where it’s lower. The takeaway is that Sanders’s socialist agenda hasn’t made the kind of inroads it needed to make among poorer Americans, especially African-Americans, to give him an advantage over Joe.
Still, I don’t think he’s going to get blanked on Tuesday. Two recent polls of Washington state show him trailing Biden by one and three points, respectively, with Warren at 10 percent in the former and at five percent in the latter. I have to believe that the coronavirus epidemic in the state will also drive turnout sharply down, which probably favors the candidate with more enthusiastic supporters. That’s Bernie. So he’s likely to win Washington but he reeeeally wants to win Michigan in order to prove that he’s still a force in the midwest and isn’t losing ground since 2016 by dropping states now that he won then. Stay tuned.


hotair--2020-03-08--Vigilantes blocking migrants at the Greece-Turkey border

We learned last week that Turkish dictator Recep Tayyip Erdogan decided to punish the European Union by opening up his border with Greece and allowing a flood of migrants to swarm northward .
Adopting a not very globalist response , Greece quickly moved to seal the border from their side and keep the flood of humanity out .
But it ’ s a big border and keeping it sealed is quite the task , so reports of Syrian and Iraqi migrants entering the country were common over the past several days .
It seems that the citizens of Greece weren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and some of them began taking matters into their own hands .
Groups of vigilantes have begun patrolling some sections of the borders and turning back migrants , sometimes beating them down in the process .
The situation on that border is now pretty much falling into chaos .
( Boston Globe ) The farmers and pensioners wore black clothes and heavy boots , imitating Greece ’ s special forces , and trod along a rural road on a night patrol looking for migrants trying to cross the northern land border with Turkey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next time !
” they shouted at a small group of men who had made it over and fled .
Two hundred miles to the south , on the border island of Lesbos , locals angrily blocked a dinghy full of migrants from Turkey , including a pregnant woman and children , from getting off on a pier .
On land and at sea , one thing is clear along Greece ’ s meandering border with Turkey : This is not 2015 anymore .
My , how things have changed in five short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back in 2015 the Greeks were generally welcoming of the migrants fleeing the wars in Syria and Iraq , helping them find their way to refugee camps and then on to the north , deeper into Europe .
The Greeks on the Isle of Lesbos were even nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts .
But now , after more than a million migrants have flooded Europe , straining resources and bringing increased incidents of terror attacks , people seem to have had enough .
Greece has suspended all asylum requests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to turn all of these people back toward Turkey .
And the civilians aren ’ t just attacking the migrants .
There have been reports of vigilantes attacking journalists and aid workers who they accuse of encouraging the migrants to come and facilitating their journies .
While there ’ s plenty of tension and trouble around the rest of the world to divert our attention , this will always be one border to keep an eye on .
It ’ s not as if the Greeks and the Turks haven ’ t had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it comes to border issues ( to put it mildly ) .
They ’ ve been at war with each other off and on for almost all of recorded history .
That finally changed in the 20th century when Turkey was angling to join NATO and pushing for entrance into the European Union .
But in recent years , Erdogan has been cozying up to Russia , China , and Iran far more than his supposed NATO allies .
The Syrian refugee situation is only inflaming the relationship even more now that Turkey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bargain .
A fight that ’ s starting out as a battle to block immigrants could , at some point , run the risk of open conflict between two traditional enemies .
Just as a brief reminder of the historical context , keep in mind that the last war between these two wasn ’ t exactly in ancient times .
The Greco-Turkish war raged from 1919 to 1922 .
They were fighting over disputed lands that have been bones of contention since the earliest days of the Ottoman Empire .
Some people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hold a grudge and the bad blood existing on both sides of that border has never entirely vanished .

We learned last week that Turkish dictator Recep Tayyip Erdogan decided to punish the European Union by opening up his border with Greece and allowing a flood of migrants to swarm northward. Adopting a not very globalist response, Greece quickly moved to seal the border from their side and keep the flood of humanity out. But it’s a big border and keeping it sealed is quite the task, so reports of Syrian and Iraqi migrants entering the country were common over the past several days.
It seems that the citizens of Greece weren’t satisfied with the government response and some of them began taking matters into their own hands. Groups of vigilantes have begun patrolling some sections of the borders and turning back migrants, sometimes beating them down in the process. The situation on that border is now pretty much falling into chaos. (Boston Globe)
The farmers and pensioners wore black clothes and heavy boots, imitating Greece’s special forces, and trod along a rural road on a night patrol looking for migrants trying to cross the northern land border with Turkey. “We’ll get you next time!” they shouted at a small group of men who had made it over and fled. Two hundred miles to the south, on the border island of Lesbos, locals angrily blocked a dinghy full of migrants from Turkey, including a pregnant woman and children, from getting off on a pier. “No more!” they yelled, cursing. On land and at sea, one thing is clear along Greece’s meandering border with Turkey: This is not 2015 anymore.
My, how things have changed in five short years. As the report notes, back in 2015 the Greeks were generally welcoming of the migrants fleeing the wars in Syria and Iraq, helping them find their way to refugee camps and then on to the north, deeper into Europe. The Greeks on the Isle of Lesbos were even nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts.
But now, after more than a million migrants have flooded Europe, straining resources and bringing increased incidents of terror attacks, people seem to have had enough. Greece has suspended all asylum requests for the time being and is attempting to turn all of these people back toward Turkey. And the civilians aren’t just attacking the migrants. There have been reports of vigilantes attacking journalists and aid workers who they accuse of encouraging the migrants to come and facilitating their journies.
While there’s plenty of tension and trouble around the rest of the world to divert our attention, this will always be one border to keep an eye on. It’s not as if the Greeks and the Turks haven’t had something of a “history” when it comes to border issues (to put it mildly). They’ve been at war with each other off and on for almost all of recorded history. That finally changed in the 20th century when Turkey was angling to join NATO and pushing for entrance into the European Union.
But in recent years, Erdogan has been cozying up to Russia, China, and Iran far more than his supposed NATO allies. The Syrian refugee situation is only inflaming the relationship even more now that Turkey has stopped holding up their end of the bargain. A fight that’s starting out as a battle to block immigrants could, at some point, run the risk of open conflict between two traditional enemies.
Just as a brief reminder of the historical context, keep in mind that the last war between these two wasn’t exactly in ancient times. The Greco-Turkish war raged from 1919 to 1922. They were fighting over disputed lands that have been bones of contention since the earliest days of the Ottoman Empire. Some people just seem to really be able to hold a grudge and the bad blood existing on both sides of that border has never entirely vanished.


hotair--2020-03-08--Dept of Defense orders crisis response force to southern border

More troops are heading for the southern border .
The Department of Defense is sending members of a Crisis Response Force to two ports of entry in preparation for a deadline fast approaching .
The Trump administration is waiting for the Supreme Court to rule on the Migrant Protection Protocols policy .
The deadline is Wednesday .
On February 28 a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the Remain in Mexico policy .
Groups of asylum-seeking migrants gathered at the southern border causing concern by the Border Patrol that they would try to storm the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of past chaos at the border , including caravans from Central America .
The Paso del Norte International Bridge in downtown El Paso was closed , as well as other crossings .
CBP spokesman Ralph DeSio addressed the growing tension and the fact that ports of entry are not equipped to handle large groups arriving all at the same time .
After the ruling by the 9th Circuit Court , about 30 migrants enrolled in the Remain in Mexico program and waited with their attorneys , requesting to be admitted into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The migrants were turned away and the Ninth Circuit Court panel agreed to stay its own order .
The Remain in Mexico policy stays in place until the Wednesday deadline .
If the Supreme Court rules against taking up the Trump administration ’ s appeal , the Ninth Circuit Court has ruled that the Remain in Mexico policy will be blocked in the border states within its jurisdiction – California and Arizona .
That court does not have jurisdiction over New Mexico or Texas .
The Department of Defense is deploying 160 troops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spots should the Remain in Mexico policy end .
Eighty active-duty troops will go to San Diego ’ s San Ysidro border crossing and eighty active-duty troops will go to the Paso del Norte bridge in El Paso .
The troops are equipped to provide military police support , as well as engineer , and aviation support .
They are part of the DOD ’ s Crisis Response Force .
The 160 troops are part of the Defense Department ’ s Crisis Response Force , which the Pentagon has made available to CBP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ border in November 2018 in anticipation of the arrival of a large caravan .
A CBP spokesman said the deployment to San Diego and El Paso would begin Saturday and last for two weeks .
The agency has the option , based on current needs , to extend the deployment and even “ lift and shift ” to other border crossings , he said .
There is the consideration of the government ’ s efforts to contain the coronavirus at the border , too .
COVID-19 screenings have been implemented at the border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Acting Commissioner Mark Morgan told reporters on Thursday morning they are working with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to monitor and evaluate health risks along the entire border to determine the best approach to contain the virus , known as COVID-19 .
“ If the health risk shifts and the CDC and the medical experts decide that there is an increased risk to the Southwest border , and CBP will be part of those discussions on what we need to do then to operationalize and reduce that risk , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 60,000 people have been referred to the CDC for additional screenings .
Most screenings take place at airports , though , but CBP is following the same protocols on the northern and southern borders .
The perpetually outraged open-borders crowd is not happy with the additional deployment of troops to the border .
Some are accusing the Trump administration of using concern over the spread of COVID-19 as a justification for the order .
U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar , a freshman Democrat from El Paso , said in a written statement that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ an excuse to sow fear about asylum seekers in an effort to continue to violate the law.
” “ While it is no surprise , it is nonetheless deeply disappointing that the Trump administration would use the coronavirus as an excuse to sow fear about asylum seekers in an effort to continue to violate the law , ” Escobar said .
“ It is because we are all concerned about the coronavirus that we need to focus our resources on our real challenges , like the limited number of tests available , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t address.
” Escobar ’ s complaint doesn ’ t hold water .
The Trump administration , especially President Trump himself , has been very careful to not “ sow fear ” to anyone over COVID-19 while trying to get the message out about its potential spread , which is likely .
Trump shut down flights from China early and assembled a team of public health professionals to tackle the problem .
The storming of the border by migrants hoping to receive asylum and be released into the United States , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be allowed .
Not only is it a national security risk , but it is also a public health risk .
The open-borders crowd will never be happy until the southern border , in particular , no longer exists .
They are not concerned with protecting the sovereignty of the United States .
Fortunately , President Trump is and continues to do a good job on that front .

More troops are heading for the southern border. The Department of Defense is sending members of a Crisis Response Force to two ports of entry in preparation for a deadline fast approaching. The Trump administration is waiting for the Supreme Court to rule on the Migrant Protection Protocols policy. The deadline is Wednesday.
On February 28 a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the Remain in Mexico policy. Groups of asylum-seeking migrants gathered at the southern border causing concern by the Border Patrol that they would try to storm the border. It was a legitimate concern because of past chaos at the border, including caravans from Central America. The Paso del Norte International Bridge in downtown El Paso was closed, as well as other crossings.
CBP spokesman Ralph DeSio addressed the growing tension and the fact that ports of entry are not equipped to handle large groups arriving all at the same time. After the ruling by the 9th Circuit Court, about 30 migrants enrolled in the Remain in Mexico program and waited with their attorneys, requesting to be admitted into the U.S. Fortunately the migrants remained orderly.
“The balance between facilitating the flow of legitimate trade and travel while upholding our national border security mission and the safety of the public and our personnel is delicate,” DeSio said in a statement. “Ports of entry are not designed or equipped to handle extremely large groups of travelers arriving all at the same time, and temporary closure of a [port of entry] is contemplated as an extreme option, as necessary for public safety and border security.”
The migrants were turned away and the Ninth Circuit Court panel agreed to stay its own order. The Remain in Mexico policy stays in place until the Wednesday deadline. If the Supreme Court rules against taking up the Trump administration’s appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court has ruled that the Remain in Mexico policy will be blocked in the border states within its jurisdiction – California and Arizona. That court does not have jurisdiction over New Mexico or Texas.
The Department of Defense is deploying 160 troops to two cities determined to be key spots should the Remain in Mexico policy end. Eighty active-duty troops will go to San Diego’s San Ysidro border crossing and eighty active-duty troops will go to the Paso del Norte bridge in El Paso. The troops are equipped to provide military police support, as well as engineer, and aviation support. They are part of the DOD’s Crisis Response Force.
The 160 troops are part of the Defense Department’s Crisis Response Force, which the Pentagon has made available to CBP since Trump initially deployed soldiers to the border in November 2018 in anticipation of the arrival of a large caravan. A CBP spokesman said the deployment to San Diego and El Paso would begin Saturday and last for two weeks. The agency has the option, based on current needs, to extend the deployment and even “lift and shift” to other border crossings, he said.
There is the consideration of the government’s efforts to contain the coronavirus at the border, too. COVID-19 screenings have been implemented at the border by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Acting Commissioner Mark Morgan told reporters on Thursday morning they are working with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to monitor and evaluate health risks along the entire border to determine the best approach to contain the virus, known as COVID-19. “If the health risk shifts and the CDC and the medical experts decide that there is an increased risk to the Southwest border, and CBP will be part of those discussions on what we need to do then to operationalize and reduce that risk,” he said.
Morgan says that more than 60,000 people have been referred to the CDC for additional screenings. Most screenings take place at airports, though, but CBP is following the same protocols on the northern and southern borders.
The perpetually outraged open-borders crowd is not happy with the additional deployment of troops to the border. Some are accusing the Trump administration of using concern over the spread of COVID-19 as a justification for the order.
U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar, a freshman Democrat from El Paso, said in a written statement that the Trump administration is using COVID-19 as “an excuse to sow fear about asylum seekers in an effort to continue to violate the law.” “While it is no surprise, it is nonetheless deeply disappointing that the Trump administration would use the coronavirus as an excuse to sow fear about asylum seekers in an effort to continue to violate the law,” Escobar said. “It is because we are all concerned about the coronavirus that we need to focus our resources on our real challenges, like the limited number of tests available, something that troops on the border won’t address.”
Escobar’s complaint doesn’t hold water. The Trump administration, especially President Trump himself, has been very careful to not “sow fear” to anyone over COVID-19 while trying to get the message out about its potential spread, which is likely. Trump shut down flights from China early and assembled a team of public health professionals to tackle the problem. The storming of the border by migrants hoping to receive asylum and be released into the United States, as has happened in the past, cannot be allowed. Not only is it a national security risk, but it is also a public health risk. The open-borders crowd will never be happy until the southern border, in particular, no longer exists. They are not concerned with protecting the sovereignty of the United States. Fortunately, President Trump is and continues to do a good job on that front.