hotair--2020-07-10--Goya Foods CEO praises Trump's leadership, calls for a boycott quickly ensue

President Trump held a White House event with Hispanic politicians , business leaders , and supporters Thursday .
During that event , the CEO of the largest Hispanic-owned food company in the U.S. openly praised the president for his leadership .
Naturally , the inevitable calls from a boycott followed .
# BoycottGoya quickly started trending on social media .
Goya Foods CEO Robert Unanue participated in the press conference in the Rose Garden with President and the other attendees .
He was asked to speak by the president and when he did so , he did what must never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a case of Trump Derangement Syndrome .
Unanue dared to speak freely of his thoughts about the president .
“ We ’ re all truly blessed at the same time to have a leader like President Trump , who is a builder , ” CEO Robert Unanue said during a Thursday event at the White House that featured a group of Hispanic politicians , business leaders and other supporters .
“ We have an incredible builder .
And we pray .
We pray for our leadership , our president , and we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will continue to prosper and to grow , ” Unanue said .
Sorry , Mr. Unanue , you and your company must now be canceled .
There is no room for independent thought within the party of identity politics , the Democrats .
Lawmakers and other public officials weighed in with their support of a boycott of Goya Foods .
The event at the White House included President Trump signing an expansion of the “ Hispanic Prosperity Initiative ” .
The initiative includes support for Opportunity Zones , charter schools , and tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the CEO ’ s words , right ?
He spoke favorably of a man who was going against teachers ’ unions and other Democrat-controlled organizations that limit opportunities for poor and middle-class communities .
Trump reached out to Latino voters Thursday with a promised expansion of his “ Hispanic Prosperity Initiative , ” an effort said to include more taxpayer support for charter and private schools , and added tax benefits for “ Opportunity Zone ” development in urban neighborhoods .
School choice “ is a great civil rights issue and may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the president said .
For the event , which included the signing of an executive order on the initiative , Trump hosted a group of Hispanic supporters — including politicians and business magnates — one day after he met with Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador , who was facing a backlash of his own .
Goya Foods CEO Robert Unanue attended the event and used the occasion to announce a donation of 1 million cans of chickpeas and 1 million pounds of other food to food banks .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Mr. Unanue in an interview on FNC .
He pointed out that he worked with the Obama administration when Michelle Obama reached out to him “ as the most recognized Hispanic brand in the U.S. ” He went to the White House and helped introduce Hispanic Heritage Month with President Obama , he said .
The point is , he ’ s a businessman .
He works with presidents in both parties .
Unanue announced a donation of his company ’ s food products to food banks during the event .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does – he works with everyone for the benefit of his company and his workers .
The workers will be hurt if the boycott gains legs and actually shrinks the company ’ s bottom line – Hispanic workers .
The cancel culture ends up harming the very people they claim they are helping .
Their hatred of President Trump overrides common sense and decency .
Goya Foods is a New Jersey-based Goya , founded in 1936 by European immigrants .
The company was founded in Manhattan in 1936 by Don Prudencio Unanue and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Robert Unanue is the grandson of the founders .
Recently , the company made food donations to people in the Bronx and Harlem who are suffering from the coronavirus pandemic .
The company also donates to New York public schools .
It ’ s all about Democrat politics , especially with a presidential election coming soon .
A petition has been started online , of course , created by United We Dream .
It ’ s important for the Democrats to keep young potential Hispanic voters under their control .
The narrative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Hispanics .
Democrats aren ’ t interested in initiatives that Republican administrations put forward , right ?
School choice for a better educational opportunity for low-income kids ?
Nah .
Tax incentives for the middle class to open small businesses ?
Nah .
Who needs all that ?
That is how insane this kind of politicization of free speech is in today ’ s toxic atmosphere .
The bad Orange Man must be defeated , no matter what , even if it includes a successful minority-owned business doing good in the United @ @

President Trump held a White House event with Hispanic politicians, business leaders, and supporters Thursday. During that event, the CEO of the largest Hispanic-owned food company in the U.S. openly praised the president for his leadership. Naturally, the inevitable calls from a boycott followed. #BoycottGoya quickly started trending on social media.
Goya Foods CEO Robert Unanue participated in the press conference in the Rose Garden with President and the other attendees. He was asked to speak by the president and when he did so, he did what must never be done, according to those suffering from a case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Unanue dared to speak freely of his thoughts about the president.
“We’re all truly blessed at the same time to have a leader like President Trump, who is a builder,” CEO Robert Unanue said during a Thursday event at the White House that featured a group of Hispanic politicians, business leaders and other supporters. “We have an incredible builder. And we pray. We pray for our leadership, our president, and we pray for our country — that we will continue to prosper and to grow,” Unanue said.
Sorry, Mr. Unanue, you and your company must now be canceled. There is no room for independent thought within the party of identity politics, the Democrats. Lawmakers and other public officials weighed in with their support of a boycott of Goya Foods.
.@GoyaFoods has been a staple of so many Latino households for generations. Now their CEO, Bob Unanue, is praising a president who villainizes and maliciously attacks Latinos for political gain. Americans should think twice before buying their products. #Goyaway https://t.co/lZDQlK6TcU — Julián Castro (@JulianCastro) July 9, 2020
Oh look, it’s the sound of me Googling “how to make your own Adobo” https://t.co/YOScAcyAnC — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) July 10, 2020
The CEO of @GoyaFoods is at a White House event saying we're
"blessed to have a leader" like Trump. Make your shopping decisions accordingly. pic.twitter.com/lLHSz4mEUV — igorvolsky (@igorvolsky) July 9, 2020
The event at the White House included President Trump signing an expansion of the “Hispanic Prosperity Initiative”. The initiative includes support for Opportunity Zones, charter schools, and tax benefits. No wonder the left objects to the CEO’s words, right? He spoke favorably of a man who was going against teachers’ unions and other Democrat-controlled organizations that limit opportunities for poor and middle-class communities.
Trump reached out to Latino voters Thursday with a promised expansion of his “Hispanic Prosperity Initiative,” an effort said to include more taxpayer support for charter and private schools, and added tax benefits for “Opportunity Zone” development in urban neighborhoods. School choice “is a great civil rights issue and may be the great one of our times,” the president said. For the event, which included the signing of an executive order on the initiative, Trump hosted a group of Hispanic supporters — including politicians and business magnates — one day after he met with Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who was facing a backlash of his own. Goya Foods CEO Robert Unanue attended the event and used the occasion to announce a donation of 1 million cans of chickpeas and 1 million pounds of other food to food banks.
“It’s suppression of speech”, said Mr. Unanue in an interview on FNC. He pointed out that he worked with the Obama administration when Michelle Obama reached out to him “as the most recognized Hispanic brand in the U.S.” He went to the White House and helped introduce Hispanic Heritage Month with President Obama, he said. The point is, he’s a businessman. He works with presidents in both parties.
Unanue announced a donation of his company’s food products to food banks during the event. He is doing what any smart business leader does – he works with everyone for the benefit of his company and his workers. The workers will be hurt if the boycott gains legs and actually shrinks the company’s bottom line – Hispanic workers. The cancel culture ends up harming the very people they claim they are helping. Their hatred of President Trump overrides common sense and decency.
Goya Foods is a New Jersey-based Goya, founded in 1936 by European immigrants. The company was founded in Manhattan in 1936 by Don Prudencio Unanue and his wife Carolina, immigrants from Spain. Robert Unanue is the grandson of the founders. Recently, the company made food donations to people in the Bronx and Harlem who are suffering from the coronavirus pandemic. The company also donates to New York public schools.
It’s all about Democrat politics, especially with a presidential election coming soon. A petition has been started online, of course, created by United We Dream. It’s important for the Democrats to keep young potential Hispanic voters under their control. The narrative continues that Trump is bad for immigration and Hispanics. Democrats aren’t interested in initiatives that Republican administrations put forward, right? School choice for a better educational opportunity for low-income kids? Nah. Tax incentives for the middle class to open small businesses? Nah. Who needs all that? That is how insane this kind of politicization of free speech is in today’s toxic atmosphere. The bad Orange Man must be defeated, no matter what, even if it includes a successful minority-owned business doing good in the United States.


hotair--2020-07-10--Abbott to Texans: Wear masks, or we're going to have to shut down again

Consider this Greg Abbott ’ s version of don ’ t make me stop this car and come back there .
Frustration in Texas has been growing in direct proportion with rising hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19 , enough so that the conservative governor of the still-red state now says it might take drastic action to get the pandemic back under control .
With deaths hitting a new high yesterday , Abbott says a new statewide shutdown could be next unless Texans get serious about wearing masks and keeping up social-distancing protocols .
And that ’ s just based on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week will look even worse , Abbott told KRIV in Houston : As Texas on Thursday set single-day records for deaths from coronavirus and how many people the disease has put in the hospital , Gov .
Greg Abbott was bracing for even more bad news .
“ The numbers are going to look worse as we go into next week , ” he told KRIV-TV in Houston late Thursday .
… Texans aren ’ t accustomed to wearing masks , but they ’ ve worked to contain spread in other countries and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having our economy shut down again , ” he said on KRIV , the Houston Fox affiliate .
“ The last thing we want to do is shut things down again , ” Abbott said .
“ The only strategy we have to prevent that from happening is by everybody wearing a mask.
” Abbott ’ s not the only Texas authority warning of another shutdown .
Former commerce secretary Don Evans , a member of Abbott ’ s task force , says they are keeping a close eye on numbers from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to overwhelm hospitals in that area , and if capacity entirely disappears , Evans expects Abbott to impose a new shutdown : “ [ Abbott ] ’ s laser-focused on Midland-Odessa , ” Evans said .
“ I also know that he ’ s saying that if we can ’ t turn this trend around in the next couple of weeks or so , there is going to be a serious threat the economy has to be shut down again.
” That ’ s partially because of the strain the virus is putting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ When you see beds begin to disappear that might be able to be available for somebody that , say , is in a car accident or has a heart attack or has something else — you have to keep beds available for that , ” he said .
“ And when the hospitals get filled up with COVID-19 patients , that just doesn ’ t work.
” After Midland Memorial Hospital reported they ’ re treating 34 coronavirus patients – the most hospitalizations they ’ ve had throughout the pandemic – Abbott @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would once again be required to halt elective surgeries , including Midland and Ector counties .
There are exceptions only for surgeries that are immediately and medically necessary or life-saving , according to the executive order .
This is all part of the process for reopening , although this part involves the trip switches on it .
The point of the original shutdown was to prepare enough resources in the short run in order to deal with mid- and long-term impacts of the pandemic .
Reopen in phases , test and measure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some states , it hasn ’ t been necessary to adjust backward .
In New York , for instance , the numbers have been so encouraging that Andrew Cuomo accelerated some expansion of reopening protocols .
In Texas , though , the numbers are approaching the trip switches , and Abbott may be forced to act — at least in and around the hot spots .
Texas is a big state and it ’ s not likely to need a statewide shutdown , but he could order reclosure in specific areas .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for vigilance elsewhere , although one might think the spike in deaths and hospitalizations would have made that point obvious anyway .
That won ’ t go over well with the White House , nor with conservatives who have been arguing that we ’ re better off with a no-holds-barred reopening .
That seems to have been what happened in some parts of Texas anyway , which might explain why their deaths and hospitalizations have gone up while other states ( like Minnesota , for instance ) have remained relatively flat while reopening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Abbott has more to worry about from Texans than he does from the White House , which is why he ’ s on TV offering a slightly more gentle announcement than Dad used to give on road trips .

Consider this Greg Abbott’s version of don’t make me stop this car and come back there. Frustration in Texas has been growing in direct proportion with rising hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19, enough so that the conservative governor of the still-red state now says it might take drastic action to get the pandemic back under control. With deaths hitting a new high yesterday, Abbott says a new statewide shutdown could be next unless Texans get serious about wearing masks and keeping up social-distancing protocols.
And that’s just based on the numbers we have now. Next week will look even worse, Abbott told KRIV in Houston:
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is warning that another shutdown may be necessary as the state battles a massive coronavirus outbreak. @GarrettHaake has more. pic.twitter.com/IzARFTj1n5 — TODAY (@TODAYshow) July 10, 2020
As Texas on Thursday set single-day records for deaths from coronavirus and how many people the disease has put in the hospital, Gov. Greg Abbott was bracing for even more bad news. “The numbers are going to look worse as we go into next week,” he told KRIV-TV in Houston late Thursday. … Texans aren’t accustomed to wearing masks, but they’ve worked to contain spread in other countries and are the only recourse “to avoid having our economy shut down again,” he said on KRIV, the Houston Fox affiliate. “The last thing we want to do is shut things down again,” Abbott said. “The only strategy we have to prevent that from happening is by everybody wearing a mask.”
Abbott’s not the only Texas authority warning of another shutdown. Former commerce secretary Don Evans, a member of Abbott’s task force, says they are keeping a close eye on numbers from the Midland-Odessa area. The virus is beginning to overwhelm hospitals in that area, and if capacity entirely disappears, Evans expects Abbott to impose a new shutdown:
“[Abbott]’s laser-focused on Midland-Odessa,” Evans said. “I also know that he’s saying that if we can’t turn this trend around in the next couple of weeks or so, there is going to be a serious threat the economy has to be shut down again.” That’s partially because of the strain the virus is putting on local hospitals, he said. “When you see beds begin to disappear that might be able to be available for somebody that, say, is in a car accident or has a heart attack or has something else — you have to keep beds available for that,” he said. “And when the hospitals get filled up with COVID-19 patients, that just doesn’t work.” After Midland Memorial Hospital reported they’re treating 34 coronavirus patients – the most hospitalizations they’ve had throughout the pandemic – Abbott announced later on Thursday that certain counties would once again be required to halt elective surgeries, including Midland and Ector counties. There are exceptions only for surgeries that are immediately and medically necessary or life-saving, according to the executive order.
This is all part of the process for reopening, although this part involves the trip switches on it. The point of the original shutdown was to prepare enough resources in the short run in order to deal with mid- and long-term impacts of the pandemic. Reopen in phases, test and measure, and then adjust as necessary. In some states, it hasn’t been necessary to adjust backward. In New York, for instance, the numbers have been so encouraging that Andrew Cuomo accelerated some expansion of reopening protocols.
In Texas, though, the numbers are approaching the trip switches, and Abbott may be forced to act — at least in and around the hot spots. Texas is a big state and it’s not likely to need a statewide shutdown, but he could order reclosure in specific areas. That might be enough to emphasize the need for vigilance elsewhere, although one might think the spike in deaths and hospitalizations would have made that point obvious anyway.
That won’t go over well with the White House, nor with conservatives who have been arguing that we’re better off with a no-holds-barred reopening. That seems to have been what happened in some parts of Texas anyway, which might explain why their deaths and hospitalizations have gone up while other states (like Minnesota, for instance) have remained relatively flat while reopening under clearer guidelines. At this point, Abbott has more to worry about from Texans than he does from the White House, which is why he’s on TV offering a slightly more gentle announcement than Dad used to give on road trips.


hotair--2020-07-10--Finally: Who's up for the first 2024 Republican primary poll?

It ’ s the first 2024 Republican primary poll that I ’ ve seen , anyway .
This isn ’ t a national poll or even a state poll .
It ’ s a poll of Maine ’ s second district , which gave Trump a single electoral vote four years ago by breaking 51/41 for him — the first time the district had ever voted differently than Maine did statewide .
It ’ s also the second-most rural district in America .
Does that make it a useful bellwether for the GOP primary electorate nationwide ?
Ah , not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re currently mired in is dull and grim , and its outcome increasingly predictable .
Let ’ s start looking ahead .
Via Survey USA : Congrats to Marco Rubio , who ’ s been a senator for 10 years and has run for president once before , on finishing last in a field that includes Ivanka Trump .
The menu here is obviously incomplete .
Tom Cotton and Josh Hawley may be little-known among Republicans but they ’ ve made noise lately on issues like the Insurrection Act and Big Tech regulation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2024 .
They should have been included .
As should Tucker Carlson , the most effective communicator of Trumpian nationalism in American politics at the moment .
Certainly he ’ s sufficiently well-known to Republican voters because of his Fox News show to have rated here .
If you combine voters ’ preferences for first and second choice , the field looks like this : Few surprises there since early-early polls are basically tests of name recognition .
Pence is the sitting VP so he ’ s ahead .
Cruz was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frequent presence in right-wing media so he ’ s second .
Trump Jr shares a name with his father so he ’ s third .
All things considered , I ’ d say a tie for second place overall and a de facto tie for third in the first/second choice total isn ’ t bad for Haley .
She ’ s well-known to right-wing activists but the only real exposure Republican voters nationally have had to her was a not quite two-year stint as ambassador to the UN .
If she ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s evidence that a certain “ Ready for Haley ” bloc is already forming among Republican voters .
Whether she can build on it is , of course , a separate matter .
Another way to look at this field is in terms of lanes .
Between Don Jr and Ivanka , there looks to be ~20 percent or so who ’ ll vote for the Trump brand regardless of the alternatives .
Between Haley and Rubio , there ’ s another ~20 percent that ’ ll vote for a centrist turn away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Cruz , ~40 percent will support a Trump-allied populist-pandering evangelical — although I ’ m not sure that ’ s the right way to assess Pence , frankly .
He is a Trump-allied populist-pandering evangelical but some meaningful amount of his support here is likely due to Republican voters just naming Trump ’ s VP because they have no firm thoughts about the field yet .
There are the true undecideds who ’ ll tell a pollster they ’ re undecided and then there are the people who are undecided but feel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Pence.
” That support is soft .
Because Trump dominates the party so completely it ’ s seductive to think Don Jr will be a force in 2024 .
He might be ; I ’ ve made that claim before myself .
But as the president ’ s polling sinks , the argument for it gets weaker .
Under what scenario this fall would GOP voters be left clamoring for four more years of Trumps ?
Either he loses and the Trump brand loses its aura of invincibility within the party or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to spend four more years feeling completely exhausted and enervated by his antics .
Most American voters have already reached their Trump saturation point .
Republican voters will too ; it ’ ll just take longer .
As for Ivanka , she has no Republican cred .
Don Jr marinates in right-wing media and social-media sh*tposting , which endears him to activists .
Ivanka will leave the White House as a presumed Democrat , scapegoated along with her husband for all of the president ’ s problems .
It ’ s hard to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either .
Cruz ’ s chief contribution to Republican politics lately has been lightly trolling people on Twitter ; his political brand , as a populist “ constitutional conservative , ” is no longer in fashion on the right .
He seems to be suffering an identity crisis , a figure who ’ s not quite as visible as Hawley and Carlson in the culture-war battles of the day despite his best efforts .
Maybe he can leverage evangelical votes for a win the way he did in Iowa 2016 but there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll have a stranglehold on that bloc in 2024 , especially with Pence likely running .
And Pence is an interesting figure : Although he ’ s bland as can be , another bland former vice president who served a much more charismatic president is doing okay for himself in the 2020 election .
In theory Pence could be the GOP ’ s version of Biden , the guy who ’ s palatable enough for populists by dint of his Trump pedigree and palatable enough to establishmentarians because he ’ s very clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence administration would look more like a Romney administration than a Trump administration .
But that ’ s why I think he won ’ t end up pulling a Biden .
Trump ’ s base knows a counterfeit when they see one , which is why they ended up siding with Trump over Cruz in 2016 .
And as the GOP becomes more of a cultural movement in retreat than a political party bent on governing , a character like Pence seems unequal to the task of leading it .
The base wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ libs by yelling in their faces , not some genial white-haired dude from Indiana who ’ s into “ values.
” You wouldn ’ t bet on Pence if he ended up head-to-head with someone like Carlson .
And then there ’ s Haley .
Most days I think her balloon ’ s going to pop the same way Rubio ’ s popped in 2016 .
Hypothetically there ’ s a demand for a younger nonwhite ( possibly/preferably female ) leader of the party since that ’ s the way national electoral demographics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s all too easy to imagine her getting steamrolled in a primary by angry populists like Hawley .
Two things hold me back from counting her out , though .
One : There ’ s a scenario in 2024 in which Haley ’ s effectively the only candidate *not* pandering aggressively to the populist base and ends up winning by consolidating that centrist vote .
That would be something of a reversal from 2016 , in which Trump ran as the only non-politician in the field and racked up some early primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as more ideological Republican voters splintered among the likes of Cruz , Rubio , etc .
Next time we could see populists divide between Cruz , Hawley , Cotton , Tucker , Don Jr , etc etc , and there ’ s Haley all alone in the middle with 30 percent of the vote , which sweeps her to victory in New Hampshire and then her home state of South Carolina .
Two : Haley ’ s stock will rise depending in part on how far Trump ’ s stock falls in November @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holds — in particular , if his huge lead holds among women voters — and Trump gets obliterated , the GOP will have a collective panic attack about how to win women back in 2024 .
That alone will help build a strong case for a woman nominee next time and Haley ’ s really the only game in town .
But note : In the poll above , she ’ s in fourth place with single digits among the Republican women voters of ME-02 .
She actually does better with men than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a blip .
If it isn ’ t , then one of the strongest arguments for nominating her would be up in smoke .

It’s the first 2024 Republican primary poll that I’ve seen, anyway.
This isn’t a national poll or even a state poll. It’s a poll of Maine’s second district, which gave Trump a single electoral vote four years ago by breaking 51/41 for him — the first time the district had ever voted differently than Maine did statewide. It’s also the second-most rural district in America. Does that make it a useful bellwether for the GOP primary electorate nationwide? Ah, not really.
But the campaign we’re currently mired in is dull and grim, and its outcome increasingly predictable. Let’s start looking ahead. Via Survey USA:
Congrats to Marco Rubio, who’s been a senator for 10 years and has run for president once before, on finishing last in a field that includes Ivanka Trump.
The menu here is obviously incomplete. Tom Cotton and Josh Hawley may be little-known among Republicans but they’ve made noise lately on issues like the Insurrection Act and Big Tech regulation and they’re both certainly running in 2024. They should have been included. As should Tucker Carlson, the most effective communicator of Trumpian nationalism in American politics at the moment. Certainly he’s sufficiently well-known to Republican voters because of his Fox News show to have rated here.
If you combine voters’ preferences for first and second choice, the field looks like this:
Pence 47%
Cruz 32%
Trump Jr 23%
Haley 22%
Rubio 20%
Ivanka 17%
Few surprises there since early-early polls are basically tests of name recognition. Pence is the sitting VP so he’s ahead. Cruz was the second-place finisher in 2016 and is a frequent presence in right-wing media so he’s second. Trump Jr shares a name with his father so he’s third. All things considered, I’d say a tie for second place overall and a de facto tie for third in the first/second choice total isn’t bad for Haley. She’s well-known to right-wing activists but the only real exposure Republican voters nationally have had to her was a not quite two-year stint as ambassador to the UN. If she’s starting with 22 percent, that’s evidence that a certain “Ready for Haley” bloc is already forming among Republican voters.
Whether she can build on it is, of course, a separate matter.
Another way to look at this field is in terms of lanes. Between Don Jr and Ivanka, there looks to be ~20 percent or so who’ll vote for the Trump brand regardless of the alternatives. Between Haley and Rubio, there’s another ~20 percent that’ll vote for a centrist turn away from Trumpism. Then, between Pence and Cruz, ~40 percent will support a Trump-allied populist-pandering evangelical — although I’m not sure that’s the right way to assess Pence, frankly. He is a Trump-allied populist-pandering evangelical but some meaningful amount of his support here is likely due to Republican voters just naming Trump’s VP because they have no firm thoughts about the field yet. There are the true undecideds who’ll tell a pollster they’re undecided and then there are the people who are undecided but feel obliged to pick a name and say “Pence.” That support is soft.
Because Trump dominates the party so completely it’s seductive to think Don Jr will be a force in 2024. He might be; I’ve made that claim before myself. But as the president’s polling sinks, the argument for it gets weaker. Under what scenario this fall would GOP voters be left clamoring for four more years of Trumps? Either he loses and the Trump brand loses its aura of invincibility within the party or he wins and the entire country gets to spend four more years feeling completely exhausted and enervated by his antics. Most American voters have already reached their Trump saturation point. Republican voters will too; it’ll just take longer. As for Ivanka, she has no Republican cred. Don Jr marinates in right-wing media and social-media sh*tposting, which endears him to activists. Ivanka will leave the White House as a presumed Democrat, scapegoated along with her husband for all of the president’s problems.
It’s hard to imagine Pence or Cruz going the distance either. Cruz’s chief contribution to Republican politics lately has been lightly trolling people on Twitter; his political brand, as a populist “constitutional conservative,” is no longer in fashion on the right. He seems to be suffering an identity crisis, a figure who’s not quite as visible as Hawley and Carlson in the culture-war battles of the day despite his best efforts. Maybe he can leverage evangelical votes for a win the way he did in Iowa 2016 but there’s no reason to think he’ll have a stranglehold on that bloc in 2024, especially with Pence likely running. And Pence is an interesting figure: Although he’s bland as can be, another bland former vice president who served a much more charismatic president is doing okay for himself in the 2020 election. In theory Pence could be the GOP’s version of Biden, the guy who’s palatable enough for populists by dint of his Trump pedigree and palatable enough to establishmentarians because he’s very clearly an establishment politician by nature. A Pence administration would look more like a Romney administration than a Trump administration.
But that’s why I think he won’t end up pulling a Biden. Trump’s base knows a counterfeit when they see one, which is why they ended up siding with Trump over Cruz in 2016. And as the GOP becomes more of a cultural movement in retreat than a political party bent on governing, a character like Pence seems unequal to the task of leading it. The base wants an advocate who’ll own the libs by yelling in their faces, not some genial white-haired dude from Indiana who’s into “values.” You wouldn’t bet on Pence if he ended up head-to-head with someone like Carlson.
And then there’s Haley. Most days I think her balloon’s going to pop the same way Rubio’s popped in 2016. Hypothetically there’s a demand for a younger nonwhite (possibly/preferably female) leader of the party since that’s the way national electoral demographics are trending, but in reality it’s all too easy to imagine her getting steamrolled in a primary by angry populists like Hawley. Two things hold me back from counting her out, though. One: There’s a scenario in 2024 in which Haley’s effectively the only candidate *not* pandering aggressively to the populist base and ends up winning by consolidating that centrist vote. That would be something of a reversal from 2016, in which Trump ran as the only non-politician in the field and racked up some early primary wins with 30-35 percent of the electorate as more ideological Republican voters splintered among the likes of Cruz, Rubio, etc. Next time we could see populists divide between Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, Tucker, Don Jr, etc etc, and there’s Haley all alone in the middle with 30 percent of the vote, which sweeps her to victory in New Hampshire and then her home state of South Carolina.
Two: Haley’s stock will rise depending in part on how far Trump’s stock falls in November. If Biden’s current lead holds — in particular, if his huge lead holds among women voters — and Trump gets obliterated, the GOP will have a collective panic attack about how to win women back in 2024. That alone will help build a strong case for a woman nominee next time and Haley’s really the only game in town. But note: In the poll above, she’s in fourth place with single digits among the Republican women voters of ME-02. She actually does better with men than with women. Maybe that’s a blip. If it isn’t, then one of the strongest arguments for nominating her would be up in smoke.


hotair--2020-07-10--COVID campaigning: Team Trump, RNC consider shift to all-outdoor rallies ... and convention?

A smart choice , if the reports from NBC News and the Washington Post are accurate .
Donald Trump has champed at the bit to return to the campaign trail , hoping to reinvigorate his political base and stoke enthusiasm ahead of the November election .
That impatience ended up backfiring in Tulsa , where the indoor venue and a clear reluctance of even his fervent backers to risk exposure to COVID-19 led to much smaller crowds than expected .
Rather than risk more poor optics , Team Trump has shifted its thinking on venues , NBC reports .
Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ highest , they now want to focus on staying outdoors , where transmission risk is much lower : “ We can ’ t have a repeat of Tulsa , ” a campaign official said , bluntly conceding that a rally on Saturday in Portsmouth , New Hampshire , must be approached differently as the coronavirus pandemic sets daily case records and creates havoc for political planners .
Instead of opting for an indoor venue , as it did in Tulsa , the Trump campaign selected an open-air airport tarmac hangar to minimize its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who stress that outdoor events are safer , although mass gatherings are still considered risky .
… A White House official said the president “ sees now , ” after the disappointing turnout three weeks ago in Tulsa , that his supporters may not turn out for him at his rallies — or the convention — as they did four years ago because of concerns about the virus .
“ It can ’ t be 2016 , ” the official said .
It ’ s clearly not 2016 , not in several ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difference by far .
Trump ’ s rallies in 2015-16 were a new phenomenon then too , and neither the media nor the Democrats knew what to make of that raw enthusiasm for the populist outsider .
This time around , neither will get surprised by the rallies , and both may have a more effective counter to them — treat them like a health hazard .
That worked in Tulsa , and it will continue to work as long as the virus keeps up its kinetic spread .
Moving venues to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in part .
And that may be why the RNC is considering yet another plan for the GOP convention at the end of next month : The Republican convention in Jacksonville , Fla. , next month could be moved to an outdoor stadium as cases of the novel coronavirus in the state increase , according to several officials with knowledge of the plans .
While no decision has been made , Republican officials are studying two outdoor professional sports stadiums near the VyStar Veterans Memorial Arena where the convention is currently slated to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more broadly into the logistics of pulling off an outdoor convention , according to two Republicans involved in the planning .
… Trump was recently briefed on the options of moving the convention away from the indoor arena , officials said , and is expected to make a final decision in upcoming days .
Republicans involved in the planning believe there could be less risk of transmission and spreading for attendees in a larger outdoor arena than in the stadium , and attendees may be less concerned about taking part in such an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key issue .
By normal measures , Tulsa was actually a success ; they got thousands of people to turn out to a campaign event , even in the pandemic .
But compared against the track record of Trump ’ s rallies — by the metric of his earlier successes — it was a flop .
People just didn ’ t want to turn out in huge numbers for an indoor rally , and it ’ s the huge numbers that make those events a phenomenon .
Trump can ’ t win if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; he has to remain bigger than life to score those points .
Outdoor venues give Trump a better chance of matching his earlier successes .
One has to wonder , though , just how many more people will choose to attend on the basis of venue choice .
This may not rescue Team Trump from its rally dilemma , but they should start getting an answer to that question over the next couple of weeks , long enough to make a decision on the convention question .

A smart choice, if the reports from NBC News and the Washington Post are accurate. Donald Trump has champed at the bit to return to the campaign trail, hoping to reinvigorate his political base and stoke enthusiasm ahead of the November election. That impatience ended up backfiring in Tulsa, where the indoor venue and a clear reluctance of even his fervent backers to risk exposure to COVID-19 led to much smaller crowds than expected.
Rather than risk more poor optics, Team Trump has shifted its thinking on venues, NBC reports. Instead of indoor arenas where the risk is highest, they now want to focus on staying outdoors, where transmission risk is much lower:
“We can’t have a repeat of Tulsa,” a campaign official said, bluntly conceding that a rally on Saturday in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, must be approached differently as the coronavirus pandemic sets daily case records and creates havoc for political planners. Instead of opting for an indoor venue, as it did in Tulsa, the Trump campaign selected an open-air airport tarmac hangar to minimize its footprint Saturday and to appease health experts who stress that outdoor events are safer, although mass gatherings are still considered risky. … A White House official said the president “sees now,” after the disappointing turnout three weeks ago in Tulsa, that his supporters may not turn out for him at his rallies — or the convention — as they did four years ago because of concerns about the virus. “It can’t be 2016,” the official said.
It’s clearly not 2016, not in several ways, but COVID-19 is the most dramatic difference by far. Trump’s rallies in 2015-16 were a new phenomenon then too, and neither the media nor the Democrats knew what to make of that raw enthusiasm for the populist outsider. This time around, neither will get surprised by the rallies, and both may have a more effective counter to them — treat them like a health hazard. That worked in Tulsa, and it will continue to work as long as the virus keeps up its kinetic spread.
Moving venues to the outdoors counters that narrative, at least in part. And that may be why the RNC is considering yet another plan for the GOP convention at the end of next month:
The Republican convention in Jacksonville, Fla., next month could be moved to an outdoor stadium as cases of the novel coronavirus in the state increase, according to several officials with knowledge of the plans. While no decision has been made, Republican officials are studying two outdoor professional sports stadiums near the VyStar Veterans Memorial Arena where the convention is currently slated to be held. They are also looking more broadly into the logistics of pulling off an outdoor convention, according to two Republicans involved in the planning. … Trump was recently briefed on the options of moving the convention away from the indoor arena, officials said, and is expected to make a final decision in upcoming days. Republicans involved in the planning believe there could be less risk of transmission and spreading for attendees in a larger outdoor arena than in the stadium, and attendees may be less concerned about taking part in such an event.
That’s really the key issue. By normal measures, Tulsa was actually a success; they got thousands of people to turn out to a campaign event, even in the pandemic. But compared against the track record of Trump’s rallies — by the metric of his earlier successes — it was a flop. People just didn’t want to turn out in huge numbers for an indoor rally, and it’s the huge numbers that make those events a phenomenon. Trump can’t win if he’s holding ordinary campaign events; he has to remain bigger than life to score those points.
Outdoor venues give Trump a better chance of matching his earlier successes. One has to wonder, though, just how many more people will choose to attend on the basis of venue choice. This may not rescue Team Trump from its rally dilemma, but they should start getting an answer to that question over the next couple of weeks, long enough to make a decision on the convention question.


hotair--2020-07-10--De Blasio: We're banning all "large gatherings" -- except maybe Black Lives Matter protests

Didn ’ t a federal court just slap down Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo for this kind of viewpoint-determined enforcement ?
In fact , the court explicitly cited the cheerleading by the two New York execs for Black Lives Matter protests as the crux of his injunction against their restrictions on indoor worship services .
And yet , here ’ s de Blasio on CNN yesterday having not learned a damned thing from that experience , apparently carving out a protest exemption for Black Lives Matter while restricting all other viewpoints from similar access .
At least that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might be a little ambiguous : MAYOR BILL DE BLASIO , ( D ) NEW YORK : Well , it ’ s all about health and safety first , and this is obviously the thing that President Trump doesn ’ t understand that we don ’ t just decree that we want things to happen regardless of the human impact .
We actually look at the science , we look at the data .
And the data is telling us it is not time for large gatherings .
Just like we said we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York City because we saw the really painful reality in Texas and Florida and other places .
You got to be smart .
And what Dr. Fauci keeps telling us is pay attention to the facts and the facts lead you to the safe solution .
So , now we don ’ t need big events anytime soon .
We got — we ’ ve had a lot of success making New York City healthier .
We got to really stick to that plan .
BLITZER : So describe large events for us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BLASIO : It means like street fairs , it means , you know , big outdoor concerts , and it means things like parades .
You know , things here in this city can mean not just thousands , tens of thousands , hundreds of thousands of people .
It ’ s just not time for that now .
BLITZER : What about protests if people want to march on Fifth Avenue , are they going to be allowed to do so ?
DE BLASIO : Look , Wolf , this is always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re just talking about health , we would always say , hey , folks , you know , stay at home if you can .
But we understand at this moment in history , people are talking about the need for his historic changes .
I mean today in New York City , you know , recognizing the power and the meaning of the message Black Lives Matter which we did in front of Trump Tower today , this is a historic moment of change .
We have to respect that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kinds of gatherings we ’ re used to , the parades , the fares , we just can ’ t have that while we ’ re focusing on health right now .
Here ’ s the question , though ; did de Blasio actually say that he would allow Black Lives Matter protests ?
Not quite , although he certainly seems to imply it .
At the very least , de Blasio hails his own participation in a public demonstration yesterday .
However , if de Blasio says he meant “ respect ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ barring those gatherings , he could perhaps make that argument .
Too bad a reporter wasn ’ t on hand to ask that question , however .
Here ’ s Wolf Blitzer ’ s follow-up question : You have got to be kidding me .
An American mayor tells a national news anchor that he ’ s shutting down street gatherings and protests and hints that he ’ s going to infringe on the First Amendment on the basis of political viewpoint , and the first and only reaction to it is can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This comes from the network that routinely stokes hysteria about Donald Trump ’ s supposed war on civil liberties in practically everything he does , warranted or not .
When it comes to Democrats , however — even those explicitly rebuked by a federal court for trampling on First Amendment rights not three weeks ago — CNN ’ s featured anchor can ’ t be bothered to even speak questions to power .
Assuming that de Blasio tries this , it won ’ t last long .
This is Con Law 101 stuff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over access to public protests .
It ’ s so basic that it ’ s amazing that de Blasio and Cuomo blundered on it the first time , let alone suggest they ’ ll try it again here .
The first time New York City approves one demonstration but shuts down another , a federal judge will be waiting with a figurate bat for Hizzoner .
In the meantime , Blitzer needs a new soundtrack for The Situation Room .
This tune by Cream ( one of my favorites ) should work nicely @

Didn’t a federal court just slap down Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo for this kind of viewpoint-determined enforcement? In fact, the court explicitly cited the cheerleading by the two New York execs for Black Lives Matter protests as the crux of his injunction against their restrictions on indoor worship services. And yet, here’s de Blasio on CNN yesterday having not learned a damned thing from that experience, apparently carving out a protest exemption for Black Lives Matter while restricting all other viewpoints from similar access.
At least that’s how this sounds, although it might be a little ambiguous:
.@NYCMayor Bill de Blasio tells Wolf Blitzer that he is banning all large gatherings in New York City except for Black Lives Matter protests. Wolf Blitzer follows up by asking about the U.S. Open. pic.twitter.com/KGsnAdXDhK — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) July 9, 2020
MAYOR BILL DE BLASIO, (D) NEW YORK: Well, it’s all about health and safety first, and this is obviously the thing that President Trump doesn’t understand that we don’t just decree that we want things to happen regardless of the human impact. We actually look at the science, we look at the data. And the data is telling us it is not time for large gatherings. Just like we said we would not have indoor dining in New York City because we saw the really painful reality in Texas and Florida and other places. You got to be smart. And what Dr. Fauci keeps telling us is pay attention to the facts and the facts lead you to the safe solution. So, now we don’t need big events anytime soon. We got — we’ve had a lot of success making New York City healthier. We got to really stick to that plan. BLITZER: So describe large events for us. What does that mean? DE BLASIO: It means like street fairs, it means, you know, big outdoor concerts, and it means things like parades. You know, things here in this city can mean not just thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people. It’s just not time for that now. BLITZER: What about protests if people want to march on Fifth Avenue, are they going to be allowed to do so? DE BLASIO: Look, Wolf, this is always an area of real sensitivity. If you’re just talking about health, we would always say, hey, folks, you know, stay at home if you can. But we understand at this moment in history, people are talking about the need for his historic changes. I mean today in New York City, you know, recognizing the power and the meaning of the message Black Lives Matter which we did in front of Trump Tower today, this is a historic moment of change. We have to respect that but also say the people, the kinds of gatherings we’re used to, the parades, the fares, we just can’t have that while we’re focusing on health right now.
Here’s the question, though; did de Blasio actually say that he would allow Black Lives Matter protests? Not quite, although he certainly seems to imply it. At the very least, de Blasio hails his own participation in a public demonstration yesterday. However, if de Blasio says he meant “respect” and “recognizing the power” while barring those gatherings, he could perhaps make that argument.
Too bad a reporter wasn’t on hand to ask that question, however. Here’s Wolf Blitzer’s follow-up question:
BLITZER: What about the U.S. Open? I’m curious. I love going to the U.S. Open. I love tennis. What’s happening with that?
You have got to be kidding me. An American mayor tells a national news anchor that he’s shutting down street gatherings and protests and hints that he’s going to infringe on the First Amendment on the basis of political viewpoint, and the first and only reaction to it is can I still watch my tennis matches? This comes from the network that routinely stokes hysteria about Donald Trump’s supposed war on civil liberties in practically everything he does, warranted or not. When it comes to Democrats, however — even those explicitly rebuked by a federal court for trampling on First Amendment rights not three weeks ago — CNN’s featured anchor can’t be bothered to even speak questions to power.
Assuming that de Blasio tries this, it won’t last long. This is Con Law 101 stuff; you cannot discriminate by viewpoint over access to public protests. It’s so basic that it’s amazing that de Blasio and Cuomo blundered on it the first time, let alone suggest they’ll try it again here. The first time New York City approves one demonstration but shuts down another, a federal judge will be waiting with a figurate bat for Hizzoner.
In the meantime, Blitzer needs a new soundtrack for The Situation Room. This tune by Cream (one of my favorites) should work nicely.


hotair--2020-07-10--What could go wrong? "Decriminalize Seattle" lines up majority council support for 50% cut in police

What could go wrong? "Decriminalize Seattle" lines up majority council support for 50% cut in police budget

Didn ’ t we just see this movie ?
“ It is the institution of policing itself that must be dismantled , ” one Seattle city council member declared as a majority announced its support for cutting the police budget by 50 % .
That would create a reduction of 1,000 personnel , with the council mulling ways in which the funding could be redirected to “ community organizations ” rather than policing .
Would that be more “ community organizations ” like the CHAZ Patrol ?
The majority of Seattle City Council is now backing proposals to defund Seattle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , despite concerns from the mayor ’ s office and Seattle ’ s police chief that council members are moving too quickly and without enough widespread community engagement .
A coalition called Decriminalize Seattle presented a plan to the budget committee to redirect millions from the city budget to community organizations .
“ The status quo is no longer acceptable , ” Council President Lorena Gonzalez said Thursday , adding that while she previously believed in police reform , she now believes in rebuilding .
“ We have to take away the things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ belonged to law enforcement in the first place , ” she said .
Well , a cut of 50 % would certainly dismantle much of Seattle ’ s law enforcement , certainly .
What would replace it ?
More seminars on dialing down the “ whiteness ” ?
Those are particularly useful when people are setting your business on fire or shooting teenagers in cars passing by , which were just a couple of the many incidents in the three-week life of the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone .
The truth is that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — has no real plan for that transformation .
The only solid proposal at the moment is to take the 911 center out of the police department ’ s jurisdiction and put it under “ civilian ” authority .
That ’ s almost literally just a change of letterhead , however , and it has nothing to do with policing practices : The council also heard details about how the city ’ s 911 system is used , with some members saying they would like to remove Seattle ’ s 911 dispatchers from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Decriminalize Seattle .
The types of 911 calls that Seattle police respond to most are reported disturbances , suspicious circumstances , parking issues , public assistance needs and car crashes , accounting for 41 % of all calls .
Those are mostly noncriminal issues .
The Police Department ’ s call center already is staffed almost exclusively by civilian dispatchers , rather than sworn officers , and has an annual budget of about $ 36 million ( its dispatchers transfer some calls to the Fire Department ) .
The SPD probably wouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a call center anyway , but that doesn ’ t mean that this is a savings .
The call center will have to exist in some form and the city will still have to pay for it whether the PD runs it or not .
Most of the calls will still end up going to the police too .
Parking issues and public assistance calls could easily be redirected to other agencies in the current setup simply by policy change , but the rest of those calls will require law enforcement .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 200 million a year , too .
After the $ 36 million call center cost gets transferred to some other agency , that still leaves over $ 160 million in cuts , which means massive cuts to actual sworn-officer positions .
That means less community engagement and more emergency-response policing , which is the worst of all possible worlds .
Practically every situation into which police get called will be those where armed force is a more likely outcome , and it will be by police officers with even less connection to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carmen Best warns that this choice is “ rash and irrational , ” and that the city council had better engage with a wider group of voters before making it : “ I respect Councilmember Mosqueda .
I think she is very passionate about what she ’ s doing , but she also needs to think about the fact that public safety and the budget are intertwined , ” Best said , “ And we need to make sure we ’ re doing what ’ s in the best interests of everybody .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ anybody recognizes issues of system racism and institutional racism , it ’ s me.
” The city has cautioned that removing 50 % of the SPD ’ s funding would mean losing 1,000 personnel .
“ I think it ’ s rash and irrational to make that decision without having a thoughtful conversation with community members , ” Best said , “ And I ’ m hoping that the City Council will rethink the plan to do that — without having a plan for how we ’ re going to re-envision policing and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ council in Seattle would have to think before it could rethink .
Even on first thought , this is a dangerous and empty-headed move , especially when the same people pushing this can ’ t even produce a lightly detailed plan to deal with the consequences of cutting the police in half .

Didn’t we just see this movie? “It is the institution of policing itself that must be dismantled,” one Seattle city council member declared as a majority announced its support for cutting the police budget by 50%. That would create a reduction of 1,000 personnel, with the council mulling ways in which the funding could be redirected to “community organizations” rather than policing.
Would that be more “community organizations” like the CHAZ Patrol?
The majority of Seattle City Council is now backing proposals to defund Seattle’s police department by 50%, despite concerns from the mayor’s office and Seattle’s police chief that council members are moving too quickly and without enough widespread community engagement. A coalition called Decriminalize Seattle presented a plan to the budget committee to redirect millions from the city budget to community organizations. “The status quo is no longer acceptable,” Council President Lorena Gonzalez said Thursday, adding that while she previously believed in police reform, she now believes in rebuilding. “We have to take away the things that no longer and should have never belonged to law enforcement in the first place,” she said.
Well, a cut of 50% would certainly dismantle much of Seattle’s law enforcement, certainly. What would replace it? More seminars on dialing down the “whiteness”? Those are particularly useful when people are setting your business on fire or shooting teenagers in cars passing by, which were just a couple of the many incidents in the three-week life of the Capital Hill Autonomous Zone.
The truth is that the city council — like its Minneapolis counterpart — has no real plan for that transformation. The only solid proposal at the moment is to take the 911 center out of the police department’s jurisdiction and put it under “civilian” authority. That’s almost literally just a change of letterhead, however, and it has nothing to do with policing practices:
The council also heard details about how the city’s 911 system is used, with some members saying they would like to remove Seattle’s 911 dispatchers from Police Department control, as recommended by Decriminalize Seattle. The types of 911 calls that Seattle police respond to most are reported disturbances, suspicious circumstances, parking issues, public assistance needs and car crashes, accounting for 41% of all calls. Those are mostly noncriminal issues. The Police Department’s call center already is staffed almost exclusively by civilian dispatchers, rather than sworn officers, and has an annual budget of about $36 million (its dispatchers transfer some calls to the Fire Department).
The SPD probably wouldn’t mind losing the responsibility for running a call center anyway, but that doesn’t mean that this is a savings. The call center will have to exist in some form and the city will still have to pay for it whether the PD runs it or not. Most of the calls will still end up going to the police too. Parking issues and public assistance calls could easily be redirected to other agencies in the current setup simply by policy change, but the rest of those calls will require law enforcement.
The cuts to the SPD will run over $200 million a year, too. After the $36 million call center cost gets transferred to some other agency, that still leaves over $160 million in cuts, which means massive cuts to actual sworn-officer positions. That means less community engagement and more emergency-response policing, which is the worst of all possible worlds. Practically every situation into which police get called will be those where armed force is a more likely outcome, and it will be by police officers with even less connection to the people involved.
Seattle police chief Carmen Best warns that this choice is “rash and irrational,” and that the city council had better engage with a wider group of voters before making it:
“I respect Councilmember Mosqueda. I think she is very passionate about what she’s doing, but she also needs to think about the fact that public safety and the budget are intertwined,” Best said, “And we need to make sure we’re doing what’s in the best interests of everybody. It’s really interesting — if anybody recognizes issues of system racism and institutional racism, it’s me.” The city has cautioned that removing 50% of the SPD’s funding would mean losing 1,000 personnel. “I think it’s rash and irrational to make that decision without having a thoughtful conversation with community members,” Best said, “And I’m hoping that the City Council will rethink the plan to do that — without having a plan for how we’re going to re-envision policing and how it will work.”
The city council in Seattle would have to think before it could rethink. Even on first thought, this is a dangerous and empty-headed move, especially when the same people pushing this can’t even produce a lightly detailed plan to deal with the consequences of cutting the police in half.


hotair--2020-07-11--More than 150 Minneapolis police officers file PTSD claims, prepare to leave the force

A lawyer who represents police officers has been contacted by more than 150 current officers who seek to file for disability benefits , a move taken before they leave the force .
Most of the officers claim they are suffering from PTSD and that the stressful situation since the killing of George Floyd has become the last straw .
“ While law enforcement is a high-stress career , the last two months in Minneapolis have pushed many officers to their breaking point , ” Meuser said… Among Meuser ’ s clients are officers who were inside the city ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abandoned and subsequently burned during the May protests here .
At least 13 officers were inside the building at the time , Meuser said , and some wrote what they thought were final texts to family members and loved ones fearing they would be killed .
Ordered to stand down to protesters , some of the officers had fearfully counted their ammunition to make sure they would have a bullet for themselves to avoid being beaten to death , he said… The 150 officers represent about 20 percent of the Minneapolis Police Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Meuser warned Friday that the number of officers seeking to file disability claims is likely to grow based on the inquiries his office has received .
The back story to all of this is that the Minneapolis City Council is working to “ reimagine ” the police force , a process that could take years to work out assuming the council can get its plan on the ballot and that it passes .
Meanwhile , some neighborhoods have committed themselves to not calling police at all .
The immediate result of all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the city : More than 240 people have been shot , 13 fatally , since May 25 , according to police .
On Thursday evening , nine people were shot and one was killed in a span of six hours .
One of the wounded was a pregnant woman .
More than 1,500 instances of gunfire have been reported across the city , nearly double the number during the same period a year ago , according to police data citing 911 calls and ShotSpotter technology .
Police scanner traffic has been jammed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including robberies and carjackings .
So at the very moment the city has become the wild , wild west , the city council is trying to get rid of the police .
Can you blame officers for wanting to get out ?
The Associated Press points out , the decision to file PTSD claims comes with substantial monetary benefits : Meuser said in recent weeks , 150 officers have retained his office for help in filing for duty disability benefits through the state ’ s Public Employment Retirement Association , or PERA… Doug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said 150 officers seeking duty disability from one department would be high .
PERA approved 105 disability applications from both police and firefighters statewide in all of 2019 , including 60 claims for duty-related PTSD and 20 for other work-related injuries .
PERA is primarily a retirement plan , in which members and employers contribute funds .
Members who become disabled can receive a disability benefit until age 55 , at which time retirement benefits kick in .
In order to be granted this disability benefit , two doctors have to agree with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so I guess we ’ ll see how many of these claims are upheld .
Whatever happens with these claims , the fact that 20 percent of the force is looking for an exit is a pretty clear sign of where morale is in the department .
And the result is going to be more crime and fewer officers to deal with it .
How long before the progressives running these places realize they ’ ve made a terrible mistake ?

A lawyer who represents police officers has been contacted by more than 150 current officers who seek to file for disability benefits, a move taken before they leave the force. Most of the officers claim they are suffering from PTSD and that the stressful situation since the killing of George Floyd has become the last straw.
“While law enforcement is a high-stress career, the last two months in Minneapolis have pushed many officers to their breaking point,” Meuser said… Among Meuser’s clients are officers who were inside the city’s 3rd Precinct police station, which was abandoned and subsequently burned during the May protests here. At least 13 officers were inside the building at the time, Meuser said, and some wrote what they thought were final texts to family members and loved ones fearing they would be killed. Ordered to stand down to protesters, some of the officers had fearfully counted their ammunition to make sure they would have a bullet for themselves to avoid being beaten to death, he said… The 150 officers represent about 20 percent of the Minneapolis Police Department’s force of approximately 800. Meuser warned Friday that the number of officers seeking to file disability claims is likely to grow based on the inquiries his office has received.
The back story to all of this is that the Minneapolis City Council is working to “reimagine” the police force, a process that could take years to work out assuming the council can get its plan on the ballot and that it passes. Meanwhile, some neighborhoods have committed themselves to not calling police at all. The immediate result of all of this has been a surge in violence in the city:
More than 240 people have been shot, 13 fatally, since May 25, according to police. On Thursday evening, nine people were shot and one was killed in a span of six hours. One of the wounded was a pregnant woman. More than 1,500 instances of gunfire have been reported across the city, nearly double the number during the same period a year ago, according to police data citing 911 calls and ShotSpotter technology. Police scanner traffic has been jammed with reports of other violent incidents, including robberies and carjackings.
So at the very moment the city has become the wild, wild west, the city council is trying to get rid of the police. Can you blame officers for wanting to get out? The Associated Press points out, the decision to file PTSD claims comes with substantial monetary benefits:
Meuser said in recent weeks, 150 officers have retained his office for help in filing for duty disability benefits through the state’s Public Employment Retirement Association, or PERA… Doug Anderson, executive director for PERA, said 150 officers seeking duty disability from one department would be high. PERA approved 105 disability applications from both police and firefighters statewide in all of 2019, including 60 claims for duty-related PTSD and 20 for other work-related injuries. PERA is primarily a retirement plan, in which members and employers contribute funds. Members who become disabled can receive a disability benefit until age 55, at which time retirement benefits kick in.
In order to be granted this disability benefit, two doctors have to agree with the diagnosis and submit documents confirming it so I guess we’ll see how many of these claims are upheld.
Whatever happens with these claims, the fact that 20 percent of the force is looking for an exit is a pretty clear sign of where morale is in the department. And the result is going to be more crime and fewer officers to deal with it. How long before the progressives running these places realize they’ve made a terrible mistake?


hotair--2020-07-11--The Happiest Place on Earth re-opens despite COVID-19 case surge in Florida, cast member petitions

Mickey Mouse is going back to work .
Walt Disney World ’ s Magic Kingdom and Animal Kingdom reopened Saturday in Orlando , Florida .
Epcot and Disney ’ s Hollywood Studios will re-open on July 15 .
As you might expect , the experience will be different than in the days of our pre-coronavirus lives .
These aren ’ t the first parks to re-open in Florida .
SeaWorld is open , and Universal ’ s three parks opened up June 5 with limited capacity .
Overseas , Disney has also re-opened four theme parks in Asia .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with public safety for both park-goers and employees in mind .
Let ’ s hope it works .
Public safety and economic concerns both played a role in the decision to re-open .
Let ’ s face it , Disney World has been closed for four months .
Disney needs to open up .
The company is desperate to get it open and going again because Disney World breaths life into the entire Disney ecosystem .
A media analyst reports that Disney World generated 16 % of Disney ’ s total revenue in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The profits from the theme parks allow Disney to invest in products that may not make money right away .
The pandemic has made some investments , like Disney + , a really smart venture .
People hunkered down at home are dependent on entertainment and streaming services are filling that need .
Disney World is “ the heart of the brand , ” according to Trip Miller , a Disney shareholder and managing partner at Gullane Capital Partners .
“ When you think about Disney , I think for a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to mind , ” he said .
Disney ’ s media empire is vast .
The company has blockbuster film franchises , a popular and growing streaming service , and a robust cable network in ESPN .
Still , all those things may not be as vital to the company ’ s bottom line in the near term as its parks and resorts .
And no Disney park is as essential as Walt Disney World .
“ It ’ s three times the size of Disneyland in terms of revenue , ” Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partner at MoffettNathanson , told CNN Business .
Nathanson estimates that Disney World alone generated $ 11.2 billion , or about 16 % of the company ’ s total revenue in 2019 and added that it ’ s a massive driver of growth for the company .
“ It ’ s probably their most important single asset , ” Nathanson said .
The analyst points to the fact that while Disney can ’ t control other areas of revenue – television , sports , advertising revenue , or movies during the pandemic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ putting into place the mitigation guidelines to control the possibility of an outbreak of the coronavirus .
Disney can ’ t control the virus but it can control how to make its parks as safe as possible for visitors .
So , that is what is happening during the re-opening process .
All visitors over the age of two and all cast members are required to wear face masks .
Disney has increased the number of hand sanitizer locations and handwashing stations throughout the parks and resorts .
Social distancing will be implemented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in effect .
Not everyone is thrilled with the decision to re-open Disney World , though , and that includes some of its employees .
One petition has been posted by cast members on MoveOn.org .
stating it is too early to re-open .
“ This virus is not gone , unfortunately , it ’ s only become worse in this state , ” reads the petition , which was approaching 4,000 signatures Monday , a small showing of the resort ’ s 78,000 staffers .
“ While theme parks are a great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it is a non-essential business ; it is not fair to the people who work there to risk their lives , especially if they are at risk or have family members who are at risk .
People are more important than making a profit .
Mayors , theme park executives , government officials — please hear what we are saying.
” A second petition from Orlando cast members is located at Change.org .
and it calls for a later re-opening .
And , another petition is on Change.org.
, posted by cast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closure of Disney Land to be extended .
A demand from Actors ’ Equity , which represents 750 Walt Disney World performers , that Disney provides regular Covid-19 testing for its members when the park reopens , was made due to the nature of their performance jobs .
The union says that the actors ’ jobs are not conducive to social distancing and wearing personal protective equipment .
Disney has rejected the demand by saying the tests provide false negatives which lead to a false sense of security .
One thing led to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now the park is re-opening without the union members .
The union calls it retaliation .
Sure looks like unions , in general , whether it is actors or school teachers , would like to keep the country shut down at least until the upcoming presidential election , amirite ?
This isn ’ t just important for Disney .
The re-opening is also important for the financial health of the state .
Florida is dependent on tourism .
I may be one of the few people in the United States that has never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or California ) but the parks remain popular , especially with families .
Re-opening now is a worthwhile gamble , I think because it is an outdoor venue and it is being done gradually .
There won ’ t be the usual huge crowds of visitors for now and precautions have been taken for the rides – some of them have plexiglass barriers and guests will be spaced out .
Getting to the park entrance will be different , too , as there will no longer be parking lot trams .
Everyone will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ following some new rules .
I imagine that families looking for something to do this summer before ( or if ) school opens in the fall will be willing to visit a Disney park in Orlando .

Mickey Mouse is going back to work. Walt Disney World’s Magic Kingdom and Animal Kingdom reopened Saturday in Orlando, Florida. Epcot and Disney’s Hollywood Studios will re-open on July 15. As you might expect, the experience will be different than in the days of our pre-coronavirus lives.
These aren’t the first parks to re-open in Florida. SeaWorld is open, and Universal’s three parks opened up June 5 with limited capacity. Overseas, Disney has also re-opened four theme parks in Asia. It’s a gradual, slow process with public safety for both park-goers and employees in mind. Let’s hope it works. Public safety and economic concerns both played a role in the decision to re-open.
Let’s face it, Disney World has been closed for four months. Disney needs to open up. The company is desperate to get it open and going again because Disney World breaths life into the entire Disney ecosystem. A media analyst reports that Disney World generated 16% of Disney’s total revenue in 2019. That amounted to 11.2 billion. The profits from the theme parks allow Disney to invest in products that may not make money right away. The pandemic has made some investments, like Disney +, a really smart venture. People hunkered down at home are dependent on entertainment and streaming services are filling that need.
Disney World is “the heart of the brand,” according to Trip Miller, a Disney shareholder and managing partner at Gullane Capital Partners. “When you think about Disney, I think for a lot of people, Disney World immediately comes to mind,” he said. Disney’s media empire is vast. The company has blockbuster film franchises, a popular and growing streaming service, and a robust cable network in ESPN. Still, all those things may not be as vital to the company’s bottom line in the near term as its parks and resorts. And no Disney park is as essential as Walt Disney World. “It’s three times the size of Disneyland in terms of revenue,” Michael Nathanson, a media analyst and founding partner at MoffettNathanson, told CNN Business.
Nathanson estimates that Disney World alone generated $11.2 billion, or about 16% of the company’s total revenue in 2019 and added that it’s a massive driver of growth for the company. “It’s probably their most important single asset,” Nathanson said.
The analyst points to the fact that while Disney can’t control other areas of revenue – television, sports, advertising revenue, or movies during the pandemic, the theme parks can be managed by putting into place the mitigation guidelines to control the possibility of an outbreak of the coronavirus. Disney can’t control the virus but it can control how to make its parks as safe as possible for visitors. So, that is what is happening during the re-opening process.
Disney’s new rules include mandatory masks and social distancing. Visitors will need reservations to enter a park, and they won’t be allowed to hop between parks. Both visitors and employees will receive temperature checks when they enter. Fireworks shows and parades have been suspended to prevent drawing too many people together.
All visitors over the age of two and all cast members are required to wear face masks. Disney has increased the number of hand sanitizer locations and handwashing stations throughout the parks and resorts. Social distancing will be implemented and limited capacity in the parks is in effect.
Not everyone is thrilled with the decision to re-open Disney World, though, and that includes some of its employees. One petition has been posted by cast members on MoveOn.org. stating it is too early to re-open.
“This virus is not gone, unfortunately, it’s only become worse in this state,” reads the petition, which was approaching 4,000 signatures Monday, a small showing of the resort’s 78,000 staffers. “While theme parks are a great way to relax and enjoy free time, it is a non-essential business; it is not fair to the people who work there to risk their lives, especially if they are at risk or have family members who are at risk. People are more important than making a profit. Mayors, theme park executives, government officials — please hear what we are saying.”
A second petition from Orlando cast members is located at Change.org. and it calls for a later re-opening. And, another petition is on Change.org., posted by cast members in California. They want the closure of Disney Land to be extended.
A demand from Actors’ Equity, which represents 750 Walt Disney World performers, that Disney provides regular Covid-19 testing for its members when the park reopens, was made due to the nature of their performance jobs. The union says that the actors’ jobs are not conducive to social distancing and wearing personal protective equipment. Disney has rejected the demand by saying the tests provide false negatives which lead to a false sense of security. One thing led to another between Disney and the union and now the park is re-opening without the union members. The union calls it retaliation. Sure looks like unions, in general, whether it is actors or school teachers, would like to keep the country shut down at least until the upcoming presidential election, amirite?
This isn’t just important for Disney. The re-opening is also important for the financial health of the state. Florida is dependent on tourism. I may be one of the few people in the United States that has never visited a Disney park in Florida (or California) but the parks remain popular, especially with families. Re-opening now is a worthwhile gamble, I think because it is an outdoor venue and it is being done gradually. There won’t be the usual huge crowds of visitors for now and precautions have been taken for the rides – some of them have plexiglass barriers and guests will be spaced out. Getting to the park entrance will be different, too, as there will no longer be parking lot trams. Everyone will just have to get on board with following some new rules. I imagine that families looking for something to do this summer before (or if) school opens in the fall will be willing to visit a Disney park in Orlando.


hotair--2020-07-11--Elizondo: The government has "a lot more" UFO videos

We recently learned that the Senate ’ s Intelligence Authorization Act for 2021 includes a provision for our intelligence agencies to prepare a report on UFO/UAP activities in our airspace and publish it for the public within six months .
We don ’ t know yet if that language will survive the legislative process and make it to the President ’ s desk intact , but it ’ s proving to be one of the more exciting developments in the ufology community in the past couple of years .
But even if we assume that it ’ s going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get out of it ?
For one thing , we might see some additional photos or videos of these enigmatic craft .
Earlier this year , Pentagon Spokeswoman Susan Gough confirmed that three previously released videos were real and that the military can ’ t explain the craft being shown in them .
But surely there ’ s got to be a lot more evidence than just those three , right ?
I mean , they ’ ve been studying this situation for decades and Navy pilots have reported periods where they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There must be a lot more to it than the few snippets we ’ ve seen .
And at least according to former AATIP director Luis Elizondo , there ’ s more .
There ’ s a lot more .
( Newsweek ) The Pentagon has “ a lot more ” highly classified videos of so-called unidentified aerial phenomena ( UAP ) , the ex-head of a secretive government program has said… “ Am I surprised that the government acknowledged the validity and the veracity of those videos ?
Not at all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government programs at TTSA , told Newsweek .
“ It was a matter of time , they didn ’ t have a choice because ultimately , the paper trail goes back to the authenticity of these videos .
And anybody who does a little bit of research will recognize that they are real.
” “ I knew they were genuine and there ’ s also a lot more the Pentagon currently has , unfortunately remain highly classified , ” he said .
“ It is truly a historical moment when you have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the organization coming forward and saying that the videos are not only real , but they are truly unidentified aerial phenomena.
” While everyone ( including yours truly ) seems to be locking in on that one quote from Elizondo ’ s interview with Newsweek , they haven ’ t provided a video of the discussion so I ’ m not 100 % sure he ’ s saying what we think he ’ s saying .
Note in the transcript that he says “ I knew [ the videos ] were genuine and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Pentagon currently has… ” Granted , perhaps he did mean that the Pentagon has a lot more videos .
But he doesn ’ t explicitly say that .
He just says “ there ’ s a lot more the Pentagon has.
” That could also mean documents , reports , photographs , pilot testimony or anything else .
Also worth noting was that the last time Susan Gough addressed this specific question she told us in no uncertain terms that there were no other videos .
But we later learned from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that there is one more video , but it ’ s classified as SECRET and could not be released at that time .
They claim that a request to see if the video could be declassified was sent to Naval Air Systems Command “ to make a determination on releasability.
” That was over six months ago and we still haven ’ t had an update .
Does that mean Gough was lying ?
As I ’ ve said before , I ’ m no longer so sure about that .
The military-intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into “ chimneys ” of information that many of the actors involved in such things never know what anyone else is doing It remains a possibility that Susan Gough tried to find answers to our questions but never found anything out and potentially didn ’ t even know who to ask .
As to the idea that there are only four videos in total , I still call horse-hockey on that claim .
The Navy was running into these bizarre craft on a regular basis at least through 2014 , particularly around the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they never captured any additional film seems unlikely in the extreme .
Now , it may all be more highly classified as Elizondo suggests , but at some point they should be able to share “ cleaned up ” versions with the public if they are really angling for transparency and , ultimately , Disclosure .
For those who are interested , Luis Elizondo returns for season two of History ’ s “ Unidentified : Inside America ’ s UFO Investigation ” tonight .
I ’ ll certainly be watching .

We recently learned that the Senate’s Intelligence Authorization Act for 2021 includes a provision for our intelligence agencies to prepare a report on UFO/UAP activities in our airspace and publish it for the public within six months. We don’t know yet if that language will survive the legislative process and make it to the President’s desk intact, but it’s proving to be one of the more exciting developments in the ufology community in the past couple of years. But even if we assume that it’s going to happen, what might the public expect to get out of it?
For one thing, we might see some additional photos or videos of these enigmatic craft. Earlier this year, Pentagon Spokeswoman Susan Gough confirmed that three previously released videos were real and that the military can’t explain the craft being shown in them. But surely there’s got to be a lot more evidence than just those three, right? I mean, they’ve been studying this situation for decades and Navy pilots have reported periods where they were being buzzed on a daily basis. There must be a lot more to it than the few snippets we’ve seen. And at least according to former AATIP director Luis Elizondo, there’s more. There’s a lot more. (Newsweek)
The Pentagon has “a lot more” highly classified videos of so-called unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), the ex-head of a secretive government program has said… “Am I surprised that the government acknowledged the validity and the veracity of those videos? Not at all,” Elizondo, currently director of government programs at TTSA, told Newsweek. “It was a matter of time, they didn’t have a choice because ultimately, the paper trail goes back to the authenticity of these videos. And anybody who does a little bit of research will recognize that they are real.” “I knew they were genuine and there’s also a lot more the Pentagon currently has, unfortunately remain highly classified,” he said. “It is truly a historical moment when you have the United States government and multiple agencies in the organization coming forward and saying that the videos are not only real, but they are truly unidentified aerial phenomena.”
While everyone (including yours truly) seems to be locking in on that one quote from Elizondo’s interview with Newsweek, they haven’t provided a video of the discussion so I’m not 100% sure he’s saying what we think he’s saying. Note in the transcript that he says “I knew [the videos] were genuine and there’s also a lot more the Pentagon currently has…”
Granted, perhaps he did mean that the Pentagon has a lot more videos. But he doesn’t explicitly say that. He just says “there’s a lot more the Pentagon has.” That could also mean documents, reports, photographs, pilot testimony or anything else.
Also worth noting was that the last time Susan Gough addressed this specific question she told us in no uncertain terms that there were no other videos. But we later learned from the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) that there is one more video, but it’s classified as SECRET and could not be released at that time. They claim that a request to see if the video could be declassified was sent to Naval Air Systems Command “to make a determination on releasability.” That was over six months ago and we still haven’t had an update.
Does that mean Gough was lying? As I’ve said before, I’m no longer so sure about that. The military-intelligence apparatus is so incredibly complex and segmented into “chimneys” of information that many of the actors involved in such things never know what anyone else is doing It remains a possibility that Susan Gough tried to find answers to our questions but never found anything out and potentially didn’t even know who to ask.
As to the idea that there are only four videos in total, I still call horse-hockey on that claim. The Navy was running into these bizarre craft on a regular basis at least through 2014, particularly around the Roosevelt carrier battle group. To think that they never captured any additional film seems unlikely in the extreme. Now, it may all be more highly classified as Elizondo suggests, but at some point they should be able to share “cleaned up” versions with the public if they are really angling for transparency and, ultimately, Disclosure.
For those who are interested, Luis Elizondo returns for season two of History’s “Unidentified: Inside America’s UFO Investigation” tonight. I’ll certainly be watching.