hotair--2020-03-20--California dreaming? Trump now reportedly mulling over a national shutdown; <span class='red'>Update

California dreaming? Trump now reportedly mulling over a national shutdown; Update: Stafford Act authorizes?

If so , maybe we can call it the Spring Breakers Shutdown .
Washington Examiner columnist Paul Bedard hears from sources that the Trump administration has begun warning key figures that the social-distancing campaign may not be succeeding in flattening the coronavirus curve , thanks to people ignoring CDC warnings about gathering in large groups .
If the administration doesn ’ t see improvement in the next few days , Donald Trump may order a national shutdown , with Americans limited to essential activities only : The Trump administration , moving quickly to halt the spread of the coronavirus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traffic for up to 30 days , temporarily halting stock trading on Wall Street , and imposing a shelter-in-place rule , according to officials .
Key officials have begun alerting industry leaders , Capitol Hill , and agencies that the “ radical ” plan could come early next week if the warlike efforts to stop the spread of the virus fail .
… What ’ s more , so that stocks don ’ t tank further , the administration under the plan being discussed would stop trading on Wall Street when it grounds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration made similar moves after the 9/11 attacks .
Sources also said that the administration is seriously considering a shelter-in-place rule to keep the public from large gatherings .
Some have continued to ignore previous warnings against gathering in groups of 10 .
What would essential travel allow ?
Grocery stores , pharmacies , some limited business activities , and probably still take-out service from restaurants .
Other than that , everything else would shut down , and police would intervene for anything else they see in public .
Actually , we will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s new shelter-in-place order from Gavin Newsom , which is in place “ indefinitely.
” Newsom may have been the first governor to order a statewide shutdown , but he ’ s not the only one considering one .
Here in Minnesota , Tim Walz is also mulling it over : First there was the state of emergency declaration canceling large gatherings .
Then came public school closures , followed by bars , restaurants , movie theaters and other public spaces .
But there ’ s one tool Gov .
Tim Walz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus in Minnesota — at least not yet .
The DFL governor said it ’ s not time to issue a “ shelter in place ” order , a dramatic measure already being deployed across all of California and being considered in New York City .
It ’ s an extreme form of social distancing , slowing the virus by confining people to their homes except for essential business .
“ I think what I would say to Minnesotans is : That toolbox that I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ … that is one of them in there , ” Walz said .
“ Last Friday we didn ’ t think there would be any need to close schools .
Last Saturday we didn ’ t think there would be any need to close bars .
So that ’ s the speed of this.
” Having made a grocery run yesterday in the suburbs of St. Paul , I can report that not too many people are out and about now anyway here .
Most of the traffic that there was — way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or pharmacy stores , along with gas stations .
Perhaps the situation is different in the Twin Cities , which has a large college population , but out here it ’ s tough to see how it could get much quieter , with everything else closing around us .
In New York , of course , Andrew Cuomo has pushed back hard against calls to impose a shutdown .
Cuomo ’ s point — an excellent one — is that lockdowns will fuel “ fear and panic , ” and that those are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peace .
After Newsom ’ s decision and with Trump apparently wavering , how long does Cuomo stay firm on that position ?
And how strange will it be when Trump ends up siding with Bill de Blasio over Cuomo on a lockdown ?
Bedard reports that a decision on a national shutdown is “ not imminent , ” but that ’ s almost certainly not the case .
The longer Trump waits to order it , the less useful it becomes .
It doesn ’ t do a lot of good to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they develop a symptomatic case of the Wuhan Flu and then start to flood hospitals .
If Trump is inclined to issue this kind of order , it will have to come quickly , or not at all .
If it does , get ready for a political firestorm over the constitutionality of a president shutting down local movement , even in an emergency .
Governors likely have that authority , but on what basis would the executive branch of the federal government claim it ?
Update : My friend Rob O ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provide an authorization for federal enforcement , but there ’ s a catch to that : True enough , but that requires the state to take action first .
It does not provide any authorization for a president to act on his own to impose a shutdown or lockdown .
Once a governor gives that order , the Stafford Act allows the president to commit resources to its enforcement , but that ’ s it , I believe .
Trump would have to convince fifty governors to issue identical orders first .

If so, maybe we can call it the Spring Breakers Shutdown. Washington Examiner columnist Paul Bedard hears from sources that the Trump administration has begun warning key figures that the social-distancing campaign may not be succeeding in flattening the coronavirus curve, thanks to people ignoring CDC warnings about gathering in large groups. If the administration doesn’t see improvement in the next few days, Donald Trump may order a national shutdown, with Americans limited to essential activities only:
The Trump administration, moving quickly to halt the spread of the coronavirus, is seriously considering grounding all passenger air traffic for up to 30 days, temporarily halting stock trading on Wall Street, and imposing a shelter-in-place rule, according to officials. Key officials have begun alerting industry leaders, Capitol Hill, and agencies that the “radical” plan could come early next week if the warlike efforts to stop the spread of the virus fail. … What’s more, so that stocks don’t tank further, the administration under the plan being discussed would stop trading on Wall Street when it grounds the U.S. passenger fleet. The Bush administration made similar moves after the 9/11 attacks. Sources also said that the administration is seriously considering a shelter-in-place rule to keep the public from large gatherings. Some have continued to ignore previous warnings against gathering in groups of 10.
What would essential travel allow? Grocery stores, pharmacies, some limited business activities, and probably still take-out service from restaurants. Other than that, everything else would shut down, and police would intervene for anything else they see in public. Actually, we will get a preview of it from California’s new shelter-in-place order from Gavin Newsom, which is in place “indefinitely.”
Newsom may have been the first governor to order a statewide shutdown, but he’s not the only one considering one. Here in Minnesota, Tim Walz is also mulling it over:
First there was the state of emergency declaration canceling large gatherings. Then came public school closures, followed by bars, restaurants, movie theaters and other public spaces. But there’s one tool Gov. Tim Walz says he’s not ready to use to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus in Minnesota — at least not yet. The DFL governor said it’s not time to issue a “shelter in place” order, a dramatic measure already being deployed across all of California and being considered in New York City. It’s an extreme form of social distancing, slowing the virus by confining people to their homes except for essential business. “I think what I would say to Minnesotans is: That toolbox that I told you I would open last Friday … that is one of them in there,” Walz said. “Last Friday we didn’t think there would be any need to close schools. Last Saturday we didn’t think there would be any need to close bars. So that’s the speed of this.”
Having made a grocery run yesterday in the suburbs of St. Paul, I can report that not too many people are out and about now anyway here. Most of the traffic that there was — way below normal — appeared headed for grocery or pharmacy stores, along with gas stations. Perhaps the situation is different in the Twin Cities, which has a large college population, but out here it’s tough to see how it could get much quieter, with everything else closing around us.
In New York, of course, Andrew Cuomo has pushed back hard against calls to impose a shutdown. Cuomo’s point — an excellent one — is that lockdowns will fuel “fear and panic,” and that those are worse than the coronavirus spread for community peace. After Newsom’s decision and with Trump apparently wavering, how long does Cuomo stay firm on that position? And how strange will it be when Trump ends up siding with Bill de Blasio over Cuomo on a lockdown?
Bedard reports that a decision on a national shutdown is “not imminent,” but that’s almost certainly not the case. The longer Trump waits to order it, the less useful it becomes. It doesn’t do a lot of good to have people locked in at home while they develop a symptomatic case of the Wuhan Flu and then start to flood hospitals. If Trump is inclined to issue this kind of order, it will have to come quickly, or not at all. If it does, get ready for a political firestorm over the constitutionality of a president shutting down local movement, even in an emergency. Governors likely have that authority, but on what basis would the executive branch of the federal government claim it?
Update: My friend Rob O’Donnell notes that the Stafford Act might provide an authorization for federal enforcement, but there’s a catch to that:
In NYS the power is derived under Executive law article 2B. I believe under the Stafford Act the federal government can assist with the states executive laws.https://t.co/Xy3I24f60A — Rob O'Donnell (@odonnell_r) March 20, 2020
True enough, but that requires the state to take action first. It does not provide any authorization for a president to act on his own to impose a shutdown or lockdown. Once a governor gives that order, the Stafford Act allows the president to commit resources to its enforcement, but that’s it, I believe. Trump would have to convince fifty governors to issue identical orders first.


hotair--2020-03-20--Newsom: California is now on COVID-19 lockdown; <span class='red'>Update: LA mayor pledges to deputi

Newsom: California is now on COVID-19 lockdown; Update: LA mayor pledges to deputize bureaucrats to enforce it

Andrew Cuomo ’ s message over the past week has been all we have to fear is fear itself .
Gavin Newsom has opted for another old saying : better safe than sorry .
Last night , California ’ s governor issued the first statewide lockdown order in the US coronavirus pandemic , forcing tens of millions to stay home except for “ essential ” travel — indefinitely : Gov .
Gavin Newsom on Thursday ordered Californians to stay at home , marking the first mandatory restrictions placed on the lives of all 40 million residents in the state ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The governor ’ s action comes at a critical time in California , where 19 people have died and at least 1,000 have tested positive for the disease , and it appeared to be the most far-reaching directive of any issued by states battling the epidemic .
The mandatory order allows Californians to continue to visit gas stations , pharmacies , grocery stores , farmers markets , food banks , convenience stores , takeout and delivery restaurants , banks and laundromats .
People can leave their homes to care for a relative or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Newsom called on Californians to exhibit a community spirit that he clearly found deficient : Despite strong guidance to stay home — and enforceable orders in nearly two dozen counties — a small number of people in California are still playing basketball , hanging out together on beaches and congregating in parks .
“ We will have social pressure that will encourage people to do the right thing .
Just a nod , look , saying , ‘ Hey , maybe you should reconsider just being out there on the beach , being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he said .
… .
“ There ’ s a social contract here , ” Newsom said .
“ People , I think , recognize the need to do more and meet his moment.
” Ahem .
If everyone really “ recognize [ d ] the need to do more , ” Newsom wouldn ’ t be forcing everyone to do it instead .
Of course , it remains to be seen if a lockdown order is either truly necessary or effective .
Social pressure is almost certainly more attractive than a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and more effective behavioral modification .
Newsom is risking a backlash , not to mention lots and lots of legal action .
The Los Angeles Times lists what what stays open and what won ’ t in the lockdown .
The government stays open , obviously , as do grocery stores , pharmacies , banks , gas stations , and laundromats , although one has to wonder how long the latter will last .
If you ’ re trying to tamp down a highly contagious and lethal pathogen , doesn ’ t the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather large problem ?
Verboten are all “ entertainment venues , ” bars , public events and “ gatherings , ” and dine-in restaurants .
In truth , it ’ s about the same list as public officials have urged people to voluntarily adopt .
Once again , it ’ s pretty clear that Newsom feels that people don ’ t recognize the need to “ meet this moment.
” So how long will this lockdown last ?
Newsom won ’ t say , and his attempt to soothe fears of the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make them feel much better : What does that mean ?
Does Newsom plan to keep California locked down for , say , several months ?
A few months ?
Newsom had better plan on finding a better way than a mandate for anything longer than a couple of weeks .
After that , restlessness will create an unraveling of this order , and Newsom won ’ t have enough police on hand to make it stick .
That might be one lesson that other governors get to learn from afar if Newsom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Of course , California officials will offer the best spin possible in the meantime to stave off that kind of mutiny .
Don ’ t call it a lockdown , Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti tells Today ‘ s Hoda Kotb .
Instead , look at all the things government will allow you to do !
You can take a walk outside , and , er , take a walk outside , and , er … Update : Garcetti didn ’ t sound quite as relaxed about the whole thing last night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cuomo .
He pledged to “ deputize ” officials to enforce the lockdown order by roaming the streets looking for escapees : CUOMO : Now , we ’ re going to hold that thought about why they hoard for one more practical question .
Then I want to get to that more philosophical question .
How is this enforced ?
The mayor said they don ’ t need law enforcement to tell them that they ’ re better off at home .
But what if they don ’ t stay home ?
How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
GARCETTI : You know , one of the questions we had in our press conference a couple hours ago was — this — one of those if you see something , say something ?
And I said yes , absolutely .
But don ’ t call a cop .
Go and tell somebody they shouldn ’ t be doing that .
Then if there are cases where people are blatantly violating this order , yes , we ’ ll visit them .
When we said restaurants were closed to eating indoors , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ press found one restaurateur who said I ’ m not going to do this , it was in one neighborhood in L.A. , we visited them .
We brought a police officer , it was closed down immediately .
They got had a smile , it ’ s not open .
You know , people are getting guns .
They ’ re going crazy .
I ’ m saying crime is actually way down and generosity is way up .
This is different than a riot or a public safety emergency .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to remember that it ’ s on all of us to do this .
But we ’ re certainly going to deputize many city employees to walk those streets , to drive around .
If we see any folks that are still open , we ’ ll just pay them a visit and let them know that this is something they have to comply with .
And it ’ s for their own health .
In the very rare cases with someone who doesn ’ t comply , of course we can @ @ @

Andrew Cuomo’s message over the past week has been all we have to fear is fear itself. Gavin Newsom has opted for another old saying: better safe than sorry. Last night, California’s governor issued the first statewide lockdown order in the US coronavirus pandemic, forcing tens of millions to stay home except for “essential” travel — indefinitely:
California issued an unprecedented statewide ‘stay at home’ order for its 40 million residents https://t.co/nfHgMcoqkY pic.twitter.com/ZufXof2Wsd — Reuters (@Reuters) March 20, 2020
Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday ordered Californians to stay at home, marking the first mandatory restrictions placed on the lives of all 40 million residents in the state’s fight against the novel coronavirus. The governor’s action comes at a critical time in California, where 19 people have died and at least 1,000 have tested positive for the disease, and it appeared to be the most far-reaching directive of any issued by states battling the epidemic. The mandatory order allows Californians to continue to visit gas stations, pharmacies, grocery stores, farmers markets, food banks, convenience stores, takeout and delivery restaurants, banks and laundromats. People can leave their homes to care for a relative or a friend or seek healthcare services.
Newsom called on Californians to exhibit a community spirit that he clearly found deficient:
Despite strong guidance to stay home — and enforceable orders in nearly two dozen counties — a small number of people in California are still playing basketball, hanging out together on beaches and congregating in parks. “We will have social pressure that will encourage people to do the right thing. Just a nod, look, saying, ‘Hey, maybe you should reconsider just being out there on the beach, being 22 strong at a park,'” he said. …. “There’s a social contract here,” Newsom said. “People, I think, recognize the need to do more and meet his moment.”
Ahem. If everyone really “recognize[d] the need to do more,” Newsom wouldn’t be forcing everyone to do it instead. Of course, it remains to be seen if a lockdown order is either truly necessary or effective. Social pressure is almost certainly more attractive than a mandate, and arguably results in better and more effective behavioral modification. Newsom is risking a backlash, not to mention lots and lots of legal action.
The Los Angeles Times lists what what stays open and what won’t in the lockdown. The government stays open, obviously, as do grocery stores, pharmacies, banks, gas stations, and laundromats, although one has to wonder how long the latter will last. If you’re trying to tamp down a highly contagious and lethal pathogen, doesn’t the sharing of washers and dryers present a rather large problem? Verboten are all “entertainment venues,” bars, public events and “gatherings,” and dine-in restaurants. In truth, it’s about the same list as public officials have urged people to voluntarily adopt. Once again, it’s pretty clear that Newsom feels that people don’t recognize the need to “meet this moment.”
So how long will this lockdown last? Newsom won’t say, and his attempt to soothe fears of the state’s residents likely won’t make them feel much better:
Newsom said the order has to remain in effect indefinitely. He has repeatedly said the next eight weeks are crucial to bend the curve and stop the rapid contagion. He also said, however, that he does not expect the order to last “many, many months.”
What does that mean? Does Newsom plan to keep California locked down for, say, several months? A few months? Newsom had better plan on finding a better way than a mandate for anything longer than a couple of weeks. After that, restlessness will create an unraveling of this order, and Newsom won’t have enough police on hand to make it stick. That might be one lesson that other governors get to learn from afar if Newsom pushes this for even one full month.
Of course, California officials will offer the best spin possible in the meantime to stave off that kind of mutiny. Don’t call it a lockdown, Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti tells Today‘s Hoda Kotb. Instead, look at all the things government will allow you to do! You can take a walk outside, and, er, take a walk outside, and, er …
"The terms that were used, lockdown or shelter in place, are the wrong terms. … This is something in which there's a lot you can still do and are encouraged to do. Go out, keep 6 feet away but exercise," @MayorOfLA explains what you can still do during stay-at-home order pic.twitter.com/OsnaPY7w4t — TODAY (@TODAYshow) March 20, 2020
Update: Garcetti didn’t sound quite as relaxed about the whole thing last night when talking with CNN’s Chris Cuomo. He pledged to “deputize” officials to enforce the lockdown order by roaming the streets looking for escapees:
CUOMO: Now, we’re going to hold that thought about why they hoard for one more practical question. Then I want to get to that more philosophical question. How is this enforced? The mayor said they don’t need law enforcement to tell them that they’re better off at home. But what if they don’t stay home? How is it enforced? Is it enforced? GARCETTI: You know, one of the questions we had in our press conference a couple hours ago was — this — one of those if you see something, say something? And I said yes, absolutely. But don’t call a cop. Go and tell somebody they shouldn’t be doing that. Then if there are cases where people are blatantly violating this order, yes, we’ll visit them. When we said restaurants were closed to eating indoors, 99.9 percent of them closed. The press found one restaurateur who said I’m not going to do this, it was in one neighborhood in L.A., we visited them. We brought a police officer, it was closed down immediately. They got had a smile, it’s not open. You know, people are getting guns. They’re going crazy. I’m saying crime is actually way down and generosity is way up. This is different than a riot or a public safety emergency. This is a public health emergency and we have to remember that it’s on all of us to do this. But we’re certainly going to deputize many city employees to walk those streets, to drive around. If we see any folks that are still open, we’ll just pay them a visit and let them know that this is something they have to comply with. And it’s for their own health. In the very rare cases with someone who doesn’t comply, of course we can enforce that.
But it’s not a lockdown!


hotair--2020-03-20--WaPo: Biden wasn't "lying." He just "described his stance inaccurately."

Earlier this week , we discussed Joe Biden ’ s crazy , over-the-top promises regarding the oil and gas industry during the last Democratic debate .
He vowed that there would be “ no new fracking ” after he takes office .
He doubled down from there saying that there would be “ no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill , period .
Ends.
” That ’ s a pretty definitive statement , wouldn ’ t you say ?
Well , obviously somebody pulled Joe aside after the debate and let him know that he ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
His aides quickly got to work walking the statement back and when reporters began asking about it , they were informed that Uncle Joe ’ s position was unchanged .
He only opposed new fracking or drilling on public lands .
So was he lying during the debate to make his platform look closer to where the far-left base lives ?
Not according to the Washington Post ’ s fact checker .
He simply “ described his position inaccurately.
” ( Free Beacon ) A Washington Post fact-checker ruled Thursday that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said he supported a fracking ban during Sunday ’ s Democratic presidential debate .
Rather , Biden had simply “ described his fracking stance inaccurately.
” The Post gave Biden “ Zero Pinocchios ” for saying during the most recent Democratic debate that he opposed fracking entirely .
Instead , the paper pointed to the Biden campaign ’ s explanation that the candidate had “ misspoken ” and that “ his position was the same as ever , ” opposing fracking only on public lands .
Meanwhile , the Post criticized those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You can read the WaPo ’ s “ zero Pinocchio ” verdict from Salvador Rizzo here .
He accused Biden ’ s critics of “ pouncing.
” ( That never gets old , does it ? )
Rizzo then went on to cite “ clarifications ” from Biden ’ s staff after the debate and coverage in other outlets including the Wall Street Journal saying that his position remained the same as how it ’ s listed on the campaign website .
No new drilling permits on public lands or waters .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pinocchios awarded because Biden simply “ described his fracking stance inaccurately.
” Seeing the Washington Post rush in to save Joe Biden ’ s bacon probably won ’ t come as a surprise to many people .
But when they ’ re this obvious about it , things start to get a bit uncomfortable .
It ’ s always possible that someone might “ misstate ” somebody else ’ s position .
But if you can ’ t convey your own position correctly , you ’ re either lying or you lack the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been saying for the past year .
Further , this wasn ’ t a case of Biden mixing up his words once or forgetting which day it was or what state he was in .
He was engaging Bernie Sanders in a debate on a specific topic and he reiterated his rebuttal multiple times .
If he had only said “ no fracking ” once , you might be able to excuse him for leaving out the word “ new.
” Maybe .
But Biden went much further than that .
He said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As I pointed out above , he concluded by saying , “ no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill , period .
Ends.
” That wasn ’ t a mistake or a misstatement .
He was trying to make it look like he was just as aggressively anti-fracking as Sanders .
And if his campaign immediately walked it back after the debate , then what he said to the audience that night was a pants on fire case of lying .
And yet , the Washington Post is so desperate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get a second term that they came riding in to the rescue .
What ’ s that tag line that the New York Times uses in all of their television advertising these days ?
The truth is out there .
The truth is worth it .
But not , apparently , at the Washington Post when it comes to holding Joe Biden accountable .

Earlier this week, we discussed Joe Biden’s crazy, over-the-top promises regarding the oil and gas industry during the last Democratic debate. He vowed that there would be “no new fracking” after he takes office. He doubled down from there saying that there would be “no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period. Ends.” That’s a pretty definitive statement, wouldn’t you say?
Well, obviously somebody pulled Joe aside after the debate and let him know that he’d basically just given the election to Donald Trump. His aides quickly got to work walking the statement back and when reporters began asking about it, they were informed that Uncle Joe’s position was unchanged. He only opposed new fracking or drilling on public lands. So was he lying during the debate to make his platform look closer to where the far-left base lives? Not according to the Washington Post’s fact checker. He simply “described his position inaccurately.” (Free Beacon)
A Washington Post fact-checker ruled Thursday that Joe Biden hadn’t lied when he said he supported a fracking ban during Sunday’s Democratic presidential debate. Rather, Biden had simply “described his fracking stance inaccurately.” The Post gave Biden “Zero Pinocchios” for saying during the most recent Democratic debate that he opposed fracking entirely. Instead, the paper pointed to the Biden campaign’s explanation that the candidate had “misspoken” and that “his position was the same as ever,” opposing fracking only on public lands. Meanwhile, the Post criticized those who quoted Biden’s remarks verbatim.
You can read the WaPo’s “zero Pinocchio” verdict from Salvador Rizzo here. He accused Biden’s critics of “pouncing.” (That never gets old, does it?) Rizzo then went on to cite “clarifications” from Biden’s staff after the debate and coverage in other outlets including the Wall Street Journal saying that his position remained the same as how it’s listed on the campaign website. No new drilling permits on public lands or waters. As a result, there were no Pinocchios awarded because Biden simply “described his fracking stance inaccurately.”
Seeing the Washington Post rush in to save Joe Biden’s bacon probably won’t come as a surprise to many people. But when they’re this obvious about it, things start to get a bit uncomfortable. It’s always possible that someone might “misstate” somebody else’s position. But if you can’t convey your own position correctly, you’re either lying or you lack the mental faculties remember what you’ve been saying for the past year.
Further, this wasn’t a case of Biden mixing up his words once or forgetting which day it was or what state he was in. He was engaging Bernie Sanders in a debate on a specific topic and he reiterated his rebuttal multiple times. If he had only said “no fracking” once, you might be able to excuse him for leaving out the word “new.” Maybe. But Biden went much further than that. He said “no more drilling three times. As I pointed out above, he concluded by saying, “no ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period. Ends.”
That wasn’t a mistake or a misstatement. He was trying to make it look like he was just as aggressively anti-fracking as Sanders. And if his campaign immediately walked it back after the debate, then what he said to the audience that night was a pants on fire case of lying. And yet, the Washington Post is so desperate to make sure Trump doesn’t get a second term that they came riding in to the rescue.
What’s that tag line that the New York Times uses in all of their television advertising these days? The truth is out there. The truth is worth it. But not, apparently, at the Washington Post when it comes to holding Joe Biden accountable.


hotair--2020-03-20--DHS Secretary: Rumors of a national lockdown are "disinformation"

Just how prevalent were these rumors ?
Paul Bedard wrote about them last night at the Washington Examiner , but he apparently heard about contingency plans for a national lockdown from his sources on Capitol Hill .
Earlier today , Donald Trump replied “ I don ’ t think so ” when asked if a national lockdown was getting any consideration .
“ Essentially you ’ ve done that in California , you ’ ve done that in New York .
Those are really two hotbeds ” : A national lockdown would necessarily require the Department of Homeland Security to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says nothing of the sort is being planned at all .
In fact , Wolf called it “ disinformation ” in a tweet later in the day : Wolf ’ s allegation of an active disinformation campaign is new , but he ’ s not the only official complaining about the rumor mill .
Illinois governor J.B Pritzker and Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer complained about unfounded rumors of martial law being declared in their states , as John wrote earlier .
This sounds like a little more than just people spending too much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governors have no need to resort to martial law in order to issue these shelter-in-place orders .
They already have that authority under civil law , and plenty of resources to facilitate it .
The “ national lockdown ” idea always appeared a little fanciful .
As I wrote earlier today , the federal government has no authority to impose a national shelter-in-place order , not even under the Stafford Act .
All that does is allow the federal government to assist governors in enforcing state-level executive orders .
Trump could order a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ air travel falls under federal authority via the FAA , and he can close national borders and presumably federal highways , although that would be the opposite of what ’ s needed in this crisis , where distribution has already been disrupted .
What happens within states is the business of the state , although Trump could put considerable political pressure on governors to act .
Notably , though , Trump appeared uninterested in even doing that much .
He declined to outright endorse lockdown orders and left that to Gavin Newsom and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s staying out of the food fight in Pennsylvania between Gov .
Tom Wolf and the state ’ s Republicans , for instance , over Wolf ’ s less-than-detailed shutdown order to businesses in the commonwealth .
And wisely so ; Trump has enough problems on his hands without getting ensnared in partisan disputes on that level .
Whether these rumors of a national lockdown are part of a disinformation campaign or just evidence of speculation run amok , it ’ s a good reminder to take a deep breath and consider the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not easy to do , especially in a crisis that is producing unprecedented actions on nearly an hourly basis , but it ’ s the best way to remain calm and get through the day .

Just how prevalent were these rumors? Paul Bedard wrote about them last night at the Washington Examiner, but he apparently heard about contingency plans for a national lockdown from his sources on Capitol Hill. Earlier today, Donald Trump replied “I don’t think so” when asked if a national lockdown was getting any consideration. “Essentially you’ve done that in California, you’ve done that in New York. Those are really two hotbeds”:
A national lockdown would necessarily require the Department of Homeland Security to manage, and Acting Secretary Chad Wolf says nothing of the sort is being planned at all. In fact, Wolf called it “disinformation” in a tweet later in the day:
Hearing a lot about texts from "friends at DHS" or "friends with connections at DHS" that say DHS is planning a national lock down. THIS IS NOT TRUE. Do not believe the disinformation campaigns. Please do not pass it along. Use trusted local and federal government sources. — Acting Secretary Chad Wolf (@DHS_Wolf) March 20, 2020
Wolf’s allegation of an active disinformation campaign is new, but he’s not the only official complaining about the rumor mill. Illinois governor J.B Pritzker and Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer complained about unfounded rumors of martial law being declared in their states, as John wrote earlier. This sounds like a little more than just people spending too much time on social media, especially since governors have no need to resort to martial law in order to issue these shelter-in-place orders. They already have that authority under civil law, and plenty of resources to facilitate it.
The “national lockdown” idea always appeared a little fanciful. As I wrote earlier today, the federal government has no authority to impose a national shelter-in-place order, not even under the Stafford Act. All that does is allow the federal government to assist governors in enforcing state-level executive orders. Trump could order a national grounding of all aircraft, as air travel falls under federal authority via the FAA, and he can close national borders and presumably federal highways, although that would be the opposite of what’s needed in this crisis, where distribution has already been disrupted. What happens within states is the business of the state, although Trump could put considerable political pressure on governors to act.
Notably, though, Trump appeared uninterested in even doing that much. He declined to outright endorse lockdown orders and left that to Gavin Newsom and Andrew Cuomo to defend. He’s staying out of the food fight in Pennsylvania between Gov. Tom Wolf and the state’s Republicans, for instance, over Wolf’s less-than-detailed shutdown order to businesses in the commonwealth. And wisely so; Trump has enough problems on his hands without getting ensnared in partisan disputes on that level.
Whether these rumors of a national lockdown are part of a disinformation campaign or just evidence of speculation run amok, it’s a good reminder to take a deep breath and consider the source before reaching conclusions. It’s not easy to do, especially in a crisis that is producing unprecedented actions on nearly an hourly basis, but it’s the best way to remain calm and get through the day.


hotair--2020-03-21--Will the virus lockdown bring back "tradwives?"

I learned a new word ( or term ) this week , courtesy of Amber Athey at the Spectator .
Apparently , “ tradwives ” is a thing now and it ’ s short for “ traditional wives.
” These are defined as women who stay home to take care of their husbands , their children and their house .
Ms. Athey ( who is neither a mother nor a wife currently ) took advantage of being locked down by the coronavirus by using her time to launch into some culinary experimentation in the form of baking bread from scratch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your apron strings— it ’ s time to get to work , ladies .
The coronavirus threat has forced all of us into our homes as the CDC and the White House encourage strict measures of social distancing .
The disruption to American life and the economy is no joke , and it ’ s going to take some serious resilience and creativity to make it out the other side .
The good news ?
Now is the perfect time to adopt the much-derided tradwife lifestyle , and it seems many women are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home cooking is just one element of the tradwife lifestyle that ’ s been embraced by women since facing the threat of pandemic .
Other homemaking skills have proven essential to taking care of yourself and your family at a time when the home has become a sanctuary .
Women who are staying at home have rediscovered the value of developing routines , tidying the house , and keeping restlessness at bay by adopting self-improvement based hobbies like knitting , sewing , drawing , or exercise .
Starting off a column with instructions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up their apron strings and “ get to work ” sounds more like a thinly veiled suicide attempt to me , particularly in the highly charged feminist environment that ’ s characterized the Democratic primary thus far .
But Athey is talking about skills that truly do have value , even if feminists write them off .
The model of the working woman who succeeds professionally and shops out most of the home and childcare duties to others may be seen as the preferred order of things on the left , but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government is locking you in your house – is an important one .
The division of labor in our house is more evenly divided since both my wife and I work .
She does most of the cooking while I take care of the lion ’ s share of the house cleaning , washing dishes , etc .
She does the laundry , but I carry the clothes baskets up and down the stairs .
You get the idea .
And we have both baked bread from scratch , though we don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of the time involved .
While I was previously unaware of this entire “ tradwife ” meme , it ’ s apparently been around for a while and it draws the derision and scorn of plenty of younger women in particular .
The Guardian published an op-ed on the subject in January , where Hadley Freeman described the trend as being for “ submissive women ” and having a “ dark heart and history.
” Annie Kelly , writing at the New York Times in June of 2018 , somehow managed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s apparently some sort of war going on between the tradwives and feminists , with plenty of opinion pieces being published describing where the battle lines are drawn .
But having gone for a brief dive down this rabbit hole , I freely admit that I don ’ t see how this turned into a battle .
Not every family can afford to get by on one income and obviously , not every woman ( or man , for that matter ) would choose to stay home instead of working even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can manage it and find that lifestyle more rewarding , how is their decision impacting anyone else ?
Why would it be anyone else ’ s business ?
The entire thing seems kind of strange to me .
At any rate , if you ’ re interested in this debate , here ’ s a video from the BBC from January of this year titled , “ Submitting to my husband like it ’ s 1959.
” Enjoy .

I learned a new word (or term) this week, courtesy of Amber Athey at the Spectator. Apparently, “tradwives” is a thing now and it’s short for “traditional wives.” These are defined as women who stay home to take care of their husbands, their children and their house. Ms. Athey (who is neither a mother nor a wife currently) took advantage of being locked down by the coronavirus by using her time to launch into some culinary experimentation in the form of baking bread from scratch, among other things.
Tie up your apron strings— it’s time to get to work, ladies. The coronavirus threat has forced all of us into our homes as the CDC and the White House encourage strict measures of social distancing. The disruption to American life and the economy is no joke, and it’s going to take some serious resilience and creativity to make it out the other side. The good news? Now is the perfect time to adopt the much-derided tradwife lifestyle, and it seems many women are already on board… Baking from scratch and home cooking is just one element of the tradwife lifestyle that’s been embraced by women since facing the threat of pandemic. Other homemaking skills have proven essential to taking care of yourself and your family at a time when the home has become a sanctuary. Women who are staying at home have rediscovered the value of developing routines, tidying the house, and keeping restlessness at bay by adopting self-improvement based hobbies like knitting, sewing, drawing, or exercise.
Starting off a column with instructions for the “ladies” to tie up their apron strings and “get to work” sounds more like a thinly veiled suicide attempt to me, particularly in the highly charged feminist environment that’s characterized the Democratic primary thus far. But Athey is talking about skills that truly do have value, even if feminists write them off. The model of the working woman who succeeds professionally and shops out most of the home and childcare duties to others may be seen as the preferred order of things on the left, but the ability to be self-sufficient – particularly when the government is locking you in your house – is an important one.
The division of labor in our house is more evenly divided since both my wife and I work. She does most of the cooking while I take care of the lion’s share of the house cleaning, washing dishes, etc. She does the laundry, but I carry the clothes baskets up and down the stairs. You get the idea. And we have both baked bread from scratch, though we don’t do it all that often because of the time involved.
While I was previously unaware of this entire “tradwife” meme, it’s apparently been around for a while and it draws the derision and scorn of plenty of younger women in particular. The Guardian published an op-ed on the subject in January, where Hadley Freeman described the trend as being for “submissive women” and having a “dark heart and history.” Annie Kelly, writing at the New York Times in June of 2018, somehow managed to tie tradwives to white supremacy.
There’s apparently some sort of war going on between the tradwives and feminists, with plenty of opinion pieces being published describing where the battle lines are drawn. But having gone for a brief dive down this rabbit hole, I freely admit that I don’t see how this turned into a battle. Not every family can afford to get by on one income and obviously, not every woman (or man, for that matter) would choose to stay home instead of working even if they could. But for those who can manage it and find that lifestyle more rewarding, how is their decision impacting anyone else? Why would it be anyone else’s business?
The entire thing seems kind of strange to me. At any rate, if you’re interested in this debate, here’s a video from the BBC from January of this year titled, “Submitting to my husband like it’s 1959.” Enjoy.


hotair--2020-03-21--Lone Star response to COVID-19 strikes a balance: "Stay home if you can"

Here in Texas , the state has not been placed under lockdown .
There is a real struggle going on between those who prefer to leave questions of restrictions to local authorities and those who want the heavy hand of the centralized state government to rule .
Texas is America ’ s largest red state .
Governor Greg Abbott is known for being a calm leader during times of crisis in the state .
Abbott received mostly good grades for his handling of Hurricane Harvey , for example .
He sends the Texas National Guard to the southern border when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large numbers of migrants arriving who seek asylum or try to enter the state illegally .
In other words , he is not afraid to make big decisions but he acts with a cool head .
He ’ s doing the same during the coronavirus pandemic .
He has activated the Texas National Guard to help cope with the increase of COVID-19 cases that will come .
For now , local authorities are making decisions about how extensive lockdowns are in communities large and small .
Three of the 10 most populous cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
My city , Houston , is the nation ’ s fourth-largest city .
San Antonio is seventh and Dallas is ninth on the list .
Austin , the state capitol , is number 11 on the list .
You get the point .
There are several large metropolitan areas in the state .
The state isn ’ t on lockdown but cities are taking precautions against the spread of COVID-19 by shutting down restaurants and bars , clubs , gyms , shopping malls , and even churches are no longer holding services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Schools are shut down , some until the end of the school year .
A public service announcement ( PSA ) has been made to try and calm fears and encourage some common sense behavior .
Texas native and resident , actor Matthew McConaughey is the voice of the PSA .
The message is simple – medical professionals and first responders are true heroes .
As we honor them , we can help by staying home “ if we can ” .
The PSA is titled “ Let ’ s Stay Home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , of course , and we really don ’ t want essential services to be compromised .
The economic hit the state and the country is taking during this pandemic is unimaginable but tough decisions have to be made .
Somewhere between a complete state shutdown and allowing cities and communities to do what is most acceptable to its residents is a fine line that is being straddled by elected officials .
I admit that I criticized our mayor for not moving faster in shutting down dine-in service in restaurants and bars , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Houston is a huge restaurant town .
The governor helped where he could – he lifted restrictions on selling liquor with take-out meals and delivery orders , for example .
This will allow businesses to boost their bottom line while providing customers with creature comforts .
The city of Houston is not under lockdown .
The governor holds daily press conferences , as does the mayor .
We are in uncharted territory and frankly , it feels like we ’ re flying by the seat of our pants .
I ’ m not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ease up after the fifteen-day time frame is reached .
That is what fuels fears , the uneasiness we all feel whether we admit it or not .
My dentist sent out an email yesterday outlining her thoughts .
She has decided to shut down her practice for the next three weeks to patients but will remain open for staff .
This allows them time for training and preparations , as well as keeping the staff employed .
My doctor ’ s office is open .
I had an appointment for a regular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occurrence to monitor that current medications are working as prescribed – and I canceled it .
I don ’ t feel like it ’ s worth the increased risk of exposure to germs .
I can do it after everything becomes more clear .
At a televised town hall on Thursday , Governor Abbott outlined where the state is now .
He also revealed that he has been tested and his test results came back negative .
His executive order goes until April 3 .
It is not a shelter in place order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , pharmacies , banks , and other everyday errands as they are necessary .
Abbott also announced that state health commissioner John Hellerstedt declared a public health disaster earlier Thursday .
Abbott said it is his understanding that the last time such a declaration was made in Texas was 1901 .
Abbott ended the action-packed day with the hourlong town hall , which was hosted by Nexstar in Austin and broadcast live on 14 stations across the state as well as online .
In addition to making the estimate of likely tens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Abbott revealed at the town hall that he has been tested for the virus and that the results came back negative .
Detailing the executive order earlier Thursday , Abbott said that while dining in at restaurants is prohibited , takeout is “ highly encouraged.
” At the town hall , he added that those restaurants that violate the order could lose their licenses to operate , warning that “ literally their life as an ongoing business is on the line.
” As for whether takeout could ultimately be banned , Hellerstedt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state is keeping its options open , but the “ situation as we see it right now doesn ’ t call for that.
” Thousands of new cases are expected to be recorded in the next couple of weeks as more testing becomes available .
Critics grouse about what they describe as the governor ’ s slowness in responding to the pandemic .
A piece in Politico does the bidding of critics .
And the same article in Politico gives credibility to claims that because Texas didn ’ t go for the Medicaid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s presidency , the state is now ill-prepared to handle the pandemic .
Never waste a crisis , right , Democrats ?
Obamacare destroyed small-town and rural medical practices and shuttered hospitals while kicking people off insurance coverage due to increased premiums , but , hey , blame a conservative governor for abiding by a different approach .
The state has a healthy rainy day fund .
Let ’ s wait and see how the state ’ s response to the pandemic continues to play out before we launch into re-writing history .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ participation in spreading a calm voice and asking Texans to do what they can to help .
Stay home , if you can .
We ’ ll get through this .

Here in Texas, the state has not been placed under lockdown. There is a real struggle going on between those who prefer to leave questions of restrictions to local authorities and those who want the heavy hand of the centralized state government to rule.
Texas is America’s largest red state. Governor Greg Abbott is known for being a calm leader during times of crisis in the state. Abbott received mostly good grades for his handling of Hurricane Harvey, for example. He sends the Texas National Guard to the southern border when it is warranted to assist in handling large numbers of migrants arriving who seek asylum or try to enter the state illegally. In other words, he is not afraid to make big decisions but he acts with a cool head. He’s doing the same during the coronavirus pandemic. He has activated the Texas National Guard to help cope with the increase of COVID-19 cases that will come.
For now, local authorities are making decisions about how extensive lockdowns are in communities large and small. Three of the 10 most populous cities in the United States are in Texas. My city, Houston, is the nation’s fourth-largest city. San Antonio is seventh and Dallas is ninth on the list. Austin, the state capitol, is number 11 on the list. You get the point. There are several large metropolitan areas in the state.
The state isn’t on lockdown but cities are taking precautions against the spread of COVID-19 by shutting down restaurants and bars, clubs, gyms, shopping malls, and even churches are no longer holding services. All of that has happened here. Schools are shut down, some until the end of the school year.
A public service announcement (PSA) has been made to try and calm fears and encourage some common sense behavior. Texas native and resident, actor Matthew McConaughey is the voice of the PSA. The message is simple – medical professionals and first responders are true heroes. As we honor them, we can help by staying home “if we can”. The PSA is titled “Let’s Stay Home”.
Not everyone can do that, of course, and we really don’t want essential services to be compromised. The economic hit the state and the country is taking during this pandemic is unimaginable but tough decisions have to be made. Somewhere between a complete state shutdown and allowing cities and communities to do what is most acceptable to its residents is a fine line that is being straddled by elected officials. I admit that I criticized our mayor for not moving faster in shutting down dine-in service in restaurants and bars, especially as Spring Break began here. Houston is a huge restaurant town. The governor helped where he could – he lifted restrictions on selling liquor with take-out meals and delivery orders, for example. This will allow businesses to boost their bottom line while providing customers with creature comforts.
The city of Houston is not under lockdown. The governor holds daily press conferences, as does the mayor. We are in uncharted territory and frankly, it feels like we’re flying by the seat of our pants. I’m not sure if some of the closures will ease up after the fifteen-day time frame is reached. That is what fuels fears, the uneasiness we all feel whether we admit it or not. My dentist sent out an email yesterday outlining her thoughts. She has decided to shut down her practice for the next three weeks to patients but will remain open for staff. This allows them time for training and preparations, as well as keeping the staff employed. My doctor’s office is open. I had an appointment for a regular blood draw this morning – an annual occurrence to monitor that current medications are working as prescribed – and I canceled it. I don’t feel like it’s worth the increased risk of exposure to germs. I can do it after everything becomes more clear.
At a televised town hall on Thursday, Governor Abbott outlined where the state is now. He also revealed that he has been tested and his test results came back negative. His executive order goes until April 3. It is not a shelter in place order. People can go to grocery stores, pharmacies, banks, and other everyday errands as they are necessary.
Abbott also announced that state health commissioner John Hellerstedt declared a public health disaster earlier Thursday. Abbott said it is his understanding that the last time such a declaration was made in Texas was 1901. Abbott ended the action-packed day with the hourlong town hall, which was hosted by Nexstar in Austin and broadcast live on 14 stations across the state as well as online. In addition to making the estimate of likely tens of thousands of Texas cases in two weeks, Abbott revealed at the town hall that he has been tested for the virus and that the results came back negative. Detailing the executive order earlier Thursday, Abbott said that while dining in at restaurants is prohibited, takeout is “highly encouraged.” At the town hall, he added that those restaurants that violate the order could lose their licenses to operate, warning that “literally their life as an ongoing business is on the line.” As for whether takeout could ultimately be banned, Hellerstedt said at the town hall that the state is keeping its options open, but the “situation as we see it right now doesn’t call for that.”
Thousands of new cases are expected to be recorded in the next couple of weeks as more testing becomes available. Critics grouse about what they describe as the governor’s slowness in responding to the pandemic. A piece in Politico does the bidding of critics.
Texas’ Republican Gov. Greg Abbott issued a disaster declaration Friday — after dozens of states already had done so — and activated the National Guard on Tuesday, after more than a dozen states already had. State officials have yet to impose statewide limits on public gatherings, close schools or beaches or issue a special open enrollment period for health insurance, as California, New York and other big states have. And some health providers say Texas has been slow to boost coronavirus testing capacity and help them meet equipment needs.
And the same article in Politico gives credibility to claims that because Texas didn’t go for the Medicaid expansion offered to states during Obama’s presidency, the state is now ill-prepared to handle the pandemic. Never waste a crisis, right, Democrats?
But the swift-spreading coronavirus public health crisis is catching Texas unprepared. The state, which didn’t expand Medicaid, has the highest uninsured rate in the country meaning millions of people don’t have doctors to call if they show symptoms. And Abbott has opposed local paid sick leave ordinances, which could encourage sick people to stay home and keep from spreading the virus, saying they hamper business growth.
Obamacare destroyed small-town and rural medical practices and shuttered hospitals while kicking people off insurance coverage due to increased premiums, but, hey, blame a conservative governor for abiding by a different approach. The state has a healthy rainy day fund. Let’s wait and see how the state’s response to the pandemic continues to play out before we launch into re-writing history.
Meanwhile, I appreciate McConaughey’s participation in spreading a calm voice and asking Texans to do what they can to help. Stay home, if you can. We’ll get through this.


hotair--2020-03-21--NYC Mayor to start emptying jails over virus spread

Even as major crimes aside from murder and rape have been on the rise in New York City , the jail population is about to go down .
Probably by a lot .
Citing concerns over the spread of the coronavirus , Mayor Bill de Blasio announced this week that the city would begin releasing people from jail early in a number of different categories .
Because when you ’ ve got a major epidemic disrupting life in your town , what better time to have a bunch more criminals roaming the streets , right ?
( NY Post ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ vulnerable ” inmates from city jails to prevent the spread of the coronavirus pandemic into local lockups , he said Wednesday .
“ In the next 48 hours , we will identify any inmates who need to be brought out because of either their own health conditions — if they have any preexisting conditions , etc .
— or because the charges were minor and we think it ’ s appropriate to bring them out in this context , ” de Blasio said on WCBS radio Wednesday evening .
“ That said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system to function , ” he added .
So there are several categories of prisoners who will be receiving their Get Out of Jail Free cards this week .
One group are those over the age of fifty who are considered to have a “ low risk of reoffending.
” If that ’ s the case , why were they in jail in the first place ?
Prisoners serving terms of less than one year will also ( mostly ) be released .
That ’ s going to include a lot of street-level @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accused of assault or property crimes like retail theft , burglary , and similar offenses .
But don ’ t worry .
I ’ m sure that people who were willing to violate all of those types of laws will absolutely listen to the Governor ’ s shelter in place orders and not go around breaking into people ’ s apartments .
Maybe it ’ s just my faulty memory , but I thought all of the major jails and prisons in the region had medical facilities right on the premises .
Wouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ full of jail cells would be pretty well set up for isolating sick people ?
Particularly when some of those cells are specifically labeled as “ isolation ?
” It just seems as if you ’ re running more of a risk of spreading the disease by dumping them back out on the streets instead of keeping them where you know where they are and who they are coming in contact with .
Hizzoner has the city Board of Corrections on his side , however .
They ’ re saying that the prisoner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not that I don ’ t understand the concerns being expressed here .
If the virus gets loose inside of the jails and really spreads , it will not only endanger the guards and the rest of the staff , but it would probably overwhelm their medical facilities pretty quickly .
But at the same time , New York is already starting to look like a scene out of Mad Max in some places .
Is this really the best time to start emptying the jails and telling the law-abiding residents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for themselves ?

Even as major crimes aside from murder and rape have been on the rise in New York City, the jail population is about to go down. Probably by a lot. Citing concerns over the spread of the coronavirus, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced this week that the city would begin releasing people from jail early in a number of different categories. Because when you’ve got a major epidemic disrupting life in your town, what better time to have a bunch more criminals roaming the streets, right? (NY Post)
Mayor Bill de Blasio plans to release “vulnerable” inmates from city jails to prevent the spread of the coronavirus pandemic into local lockups, he said Wednesday. “In the next 48 hours, we will identify any inmates who need to be brought out because of either their own health conditions — if they have any preexisting conditions, etc. — or because the charges were minor and we think it’s appropriate to bring them out in this context,” de Blasio said on WCBS radio Wednesday evening. “That said, we still need our criminal justice system to function,” he added.
So there are several categories of prisoners who will be receiving their Get Out of Jail Free cards this week. One group are those over the age of fifty who are considered to have a “low risk of reoffending.” If that’s the case, why were they in jail in the first place?
Prisoners serving terms of less than one year will also (mostly) be released. That’s going to include a lot of street-level drug dealers, as well as those accused of assault or property crimes like retail theft, burglary, and similar offenses. But don’t worry. I’m sure that people who were willing to violate all of those types of laws will absolutely listen to the Governor’s shelter in place orders and not go around breaking into people’s apartments.
Maybe it’s just my faulty memory, but I thought all of the major jails and prisons in the region had medical facilities right on the premises. Wouldn’t you think that a facility full of jail cells would be pretty well set up for isolating sick people? Particularly when some of those cells are specifically labeled as “isolation?” It just seems as if you’re running more of a risk of spreading the disease by dumping them back out on the streets instead of keeping them where you know where they are and who they are coming in contact with.
Hizzoner has the city Board of Corrections on his side, however. They’re saying that the prisoner release needs to start immediately.
It’s not that I don’t understand the concerns being expressed here. If the virus gets loose inside of the jails and really spreads, it will not only endanger the guards and the rest of the staff, but it would probably overwhelm their medical facilities pretty quickly. But at the same time, New York is already starting to look like a scene out of Mad Max in some places. Is this really the best time to start emptying the jails and telling the law-abiding residents that they’ll need to fend for themselves?


hotair--2020-03-21--Doctors: Stop hyping chloroquine when there are patients who need it for other illnesses

It ’ s human nature during one of the bleakest moments in American history to lunge at promising news about drug treatments .
We ’ d probably be in the midst of a public uproar about chloroquine even if Trump had never mentioned it ; the encouraging anecdotal reports from China and France about its effect on coronavirus were destined to go viral among frightened people even if they weren ’ t mentioned by big fish like Tucker Carlson and small fish like me .
We need hope .
But we also need perspective .
The chloroquine hype comes at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cost will be terrible if the drug turns out not to be effective against COVID-19 after all .
Why is he lobbying his own FDA publicly to approve chloroquine as a treatment ?
Fauci was clear about this yesterday : Promising treatments need clinical trials .
Partly that ’ s to make sure they don ’ t end up doing more harm than good in patients .
It ’ s one thing to give chloroquine to people who are at death ’ s door and have nothing left to lose by trying it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its use in patients who might recover from COVID-19 on their own without needing it .
Beyond that , there ’ s a credibility issue .
You don ’ t want the FDA or the president indulging in chloroquine mania without evidence that the drug is effective .
It ’ ll piss people off and make them less willing to trust advice if they ’ re led to believe that this is the answer — and then it isn ’ t .
The potential human cost here lies in the fact that chloroquine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hydroxychloroquine ) is a key therapy for people suffering from rheumatological disorders like arthritis or lupus .
It ’ s not a one-time treatment for them ; they ’ re on it forever , with lupus patients risking early death if they can ’ t get it .
And so , guess what ?
Chloroquine mania vis-a-vis COVID-19 is already making the drug scarcer for them .
Mr. Trump ’ s boosterish attitude toward the drugs has deepened worries among doctors and patients with lupus and other diseases who rely on the drugs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ malaria drugs could work against the coronavirus has circulated widely in recent weeks and fueled shortages that have already left people rushing to fill their prescriptions .
“ Rheumatologists are furious about the hype going on over this drug , ” said Dr. Michael Lockshin , of the Hospital for Special Surgery in Manhattan .
“ There is a run on it and we ’ re getting calls every few minutes , literally , from patients who are trying to stay on the drug and finding it in short supply.
” … Hydroxychloroquine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which can be life-threatening , Dr. Lockshin said .
The drug can lower the risk of dying from lupus and prevent organ damage , and is considered the standard of care .
If patients stop taking it after using it regularly for a long time , they can gradually become quite ill .
He said it was particularly disturbing to think that people known to benefit from the drug could lose access to it because it is being diverted to a disease for which there is no solid evidence that it actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ways .
One doctor told the Times that some of his lupus patients have begun asking for 90-day instead of 30-day refills because they ’ re suddenly afraid that the drug will be hard to come by .
If chloroquine does turn out to be a magic bullet against coronavirus , then , well , rheumatological patients will just have to learn to share while supply ramps up .
But it ’ s foolish to put them at risk by triggering a run on the drug for COVID-19 before we even know it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hypothetical .
China reportedly slowed its roll on chloroquine once it realized that a high dose would be dangerous : That ’ s another reason to hold clinical trials , to try to gauge which dose is high enough to be effective without being so high as to kill you .
As I write this , there are reports on the wires about two people in Nigeria getting sick from chloroquine poisoning because they started dosing themselves after Trump hyped the drug .
No doubt we ’ ll see cases of that here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well-connected people obtaining prescriptions for the drug and selfishly hoarding it while lupus patients search in vain for their monthly supply .
The risks go on : Hydroxychloroquine is also known to interact with certain other drugs and isn ’ t recommended for use in people with heart arrhythmia or with impaired liver or kidney function .
How many people dosing themselves right now in a panic about coronavirus are aware of that ?
The more politicians hype it , the more intense these problems will be : And the punchline is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Doctors are obviously going to try the drug on patients in the ICU who are at death ’ s door .
They ’ re doing it already , in fact : We ’ ll have lots more front-line anecdotal evidence about its effectiveness soon , unfortunately , before the first clinical trial is done .
Some Trump critics are citing his tweets this morning as a sign that he ’ s setting up the FDA to be the fall guy as the death toll rises , not unlike the way he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the Fed .
( “ We wouldn ’ t be seeing these numbers if the FDA had approved chloroquine.
” ) He does crave scapegoats .
Others think his chloroquine mania is an act of desperation , pitching miracle cures to try to obscure the various catastrophic mistakes made by his administration in handling the epidemic , from the CDC ’ s testing fiasco to Trump himself allegedly not taking intel reports about the pandemic seriously enough back in January and February .
Part of the reason we ’ re all hyped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the feds seem utterly unequal to this task .
We need a magic bullet .
And so go figure that other politicians trying to manage the crisis have also begun name-checking chloroquine : Maybe Cuomo ’ s also talking up chloroquine to distract from his own poor management of the crisis , but that seems unlikely since no politician in America has been praised more for his state ’ s response ( with the possible exception of Mike DeWine ) .
More likely it ’ s that the sudden public interest in chloroquine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice but to mention it .
It ’ s of a piece with commandeering the Javits Center to house patients , a signal to residents that authorities are doing everything humanly possible to beat this back .
Use Madison Square Garden for hospital beds ?
Sure .
Let doctors use hydroxychloroquine as a potential miracle cure ?
Sure , fine .
It ’ s a war zone and we ’ ve been overrun .
All options are on the table , including nuclear weapons .
But the point is we ’ ve been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fearsome enemy matched with bad management of the initial response .
Go look at this latest model of the epidemic ’ s spread and you ’ ll see that we absolutely have hope of holding down deaths from the disease — provided we practice “ severe ” control measures like social distancing for the next several months .
How much sustained radiation can our economy endure in the name of treating this cancer before it effectively dies in agony from the treatment ?
This is why we ’ re already at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response despite calm-sounding assurances from Fauci and Scott Gottlieb that we can contain this eventually by ramping up testing , developing serological treatments , and so on .
There ’ s no reason to have any confidence in the feds ’ ability to facilitate that before fall ; there ’ s more reason to have confidence in the private sector , but lots of stuff — like getting doctors the equipment they need — needs to have happened yesterday in order to hold down the scope of the catastrophe .
If there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s able to be deployed soon to turn the tide , there ’ s every reason to think this is going to be excruciatingly bad for much longer than we think .
And I think people sense it , even if authorities won ’ t admit that to them right now .
Hence chloroquine mania .

It’s human nature during one of the bleakest moments in American history to lunge at promising news about drug treatments. We’d probably be in the midst of a public uproar about chloroquine even if Trump had never mentioned it; the encouraging anecdotal reports from China and France about its effect on coronavirus were destined to go viral among frightened people even if they weren’t mentioned by big fish like Tucker Carlson and small fish like me. We need hope.
But we also need perspective. The chloroquine hype comes at a cost, potentially. And that cost will be terrible if the drug turns out not to be effective against COVID-19 after all.
This isn’t perspective:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1241367245143642113
Why is he lobbying his own FDA publicly to approve chloroquine as a treatment? Fauci was clear about this yesterday: Promising treatments need clinical trials. Partly that’s to make sure they don’t end up doing more harm than good in patients. It’s one thing to give chloroquine to people who are at death’s door and have nothing left to lose by trying it, it’s another to encourage its use in patients who might recover from COVID-19 on their own without needing it. Beyond that, there’s a credibility issue. You don’t want the FDA or the president indulging in chloroquine mania without evidence that the drug is effective. It’ll piss people off and make them less willing to trust advice if they’re led to believe that this is the answer — and then it isn’t.
The potential human cost here lies in the fact that chloroquine (specifically its less toxic derivative, hydroxychloroquine) is a key therapy for people suffering from rheumatological disorders like arthritis or lupus. It’s not a one-time treatment for them; they’re on it forever, with lupus patients risking early death if they can’t get it. And so, guess what? Chloroquine mania vis-a-vis COVID-19 is already making the drug scarcer for them.
Mr. Trump’s boosterish attitude toward the drugs has deepened worries among doctors and patients with lupus and other diseases who rely on the drugs, because the idea that the old malaria drugs could work against the coronavirus has circulated widely in recent weeks and fueled shortages that have already left people rushing to fill their prescriptions. “Rheumatologists are furious about the hype going on over this drug,” said Dr. Michael Lockshin, of the Hospital for Special Surgery in Manhattan. “There is a run on it and we’re getting calls every few minutes, literally, from patients who are trying to stay on the drug and finding it in short supply.”… Hydroxychloroquine is especially important for people with lupus, which can be life-threatening, Dr. Lockshin said. The drug can lower the risk of dying from lupus and prevent organ damage, and is considered the standard of care. If patients stop taking it after using it regularly for a long time, they can gradually become quite ill. He said it was particularly disturbing to think that people known to benefit from the drug could lose access to it because it is being diverted to a disease for which there is no solid evidence that it actually works.
The shortage problem goes both ways. One doctor told the Times that some of his lupus patients have begun asking for 90-day instead of 30-day refills because they’re suddenly afraid that the drug will be hard to come by. If chloroquine does turn out to be a magic bullet against coronavirus, then, well, rheumatological patients will just have to learn to share while supply ramps up. But it’s foolish to put them at risk by triggering a run on the drug for COVID-19 before we even know it works.
None of the risks are hypothetical. China reportedly slowed its roll on chloroquine once it realized that a high dose would be dangerous:
China, where the deadly pathogen first emerged in December, recommended the decades-old malaria drug chloroquine to treat infected patients in guidelines issued in February after seeing encouraging results in clinical trials. But within days, it cautioned doctors and health officials about the drug’s lethal side effects and rolled back its usage. This came after local media reported that a Wuhan Institute of Virology study found that the drug can kill an adult just dosed at twice the daily amount recommended for treatment, which is one gram.
That’s another reason to hold clinical trials, to try to gauge which dose is high enough to be effective without being so high as to kill you. As I write this, there are reports on the wires about two people in Nigeria getting sick from chloroquine poisoning because they started dosing themselves after Trump hyped the drug. No doubt we’ll see cases of that here too, along with examples of panicked well-connected people obtaining prescriptions for the drug and selfishly hoarding it while lupus patients search in vain for their monthly supply. The risks go on: Hydroxychloroquine is also known to interact with certain other drugs and isn’t recommended for use in people with heart arrhythmia or with impaired liver or kidney function. How many people dosing themselves right now in a panic about coronavirus are aware of that?
The more politicians hype it, the more intense these problems will be:
Friends who use chloroquine to treat lupus have already started to get in touch with my staff to report that they can no longer get their prescriptions. Trump is jeopardizing the lives of people using a proven treatment. https://t.co/W7e4XdyWv7 — Brad Hoylman (@bradhoylman) March 21, 2020
And the punchline is, Trump doesn’t need to hype it. Doctors are obviously going to try the drug on patients in the ICU who are at death’s door. They’re doing it already, in fact:
Some hospitals in the United States have already begun using the drugs for coronavirus patients, apparently reasoning that they may help and are unlikely to do harm. They are cheap and relatively safe. Laboratory studies have found that they prevent the coronavirus from invading cells, suggesting that the drugs could help prevent or limit the infection.
We’ll have lots more front-line anecdotal evidence about its effectiveness soon, unfortunately, before the first clinical trial is done.
Some Trump critics are citing his tweets this morning as a sign that he’s setting up the FDA to be the fall guy as the death toll rises, not unlike the way he’s prone to blaming economic problems on the Fed. (“We wouldn’t be seeing these numbers if the FDA had approved chloroquine.”) He does crave scapegoats. Others think his chloroquine mania is an act of desperation, pitching miracle cures to try to obscure the various catastrophic mistakes made by his administration in handling the epidemic, from the CDC’s testing fiasco to Trump himself allegedly not taking intel reports about the pandemic seriously enough back in January and February. Part of the reason we’re all hyped up about chloroquine and remdesivir is because the feds seem utterly unequal to this task. We need a magic bullet.
And so go figure that other politicians trying to manage the crisis have also begun name-checking chloroquine:
[Andrew] Cuomo requested four field hospitals and temporary hospitals from the Army Corps of Engineers. Several sites would be set up at the cavernous Javits Convention Center in Manhattan, he said. The governor said he wanted to prioritize the use of drug therapies that might be useful for critically-ill New Yorkers, including a version of the anti-malaria drug chloroquine that Trump has touted. Cuomo said pharmaceutical and medical companies in New York were also working on other potentially useful therapies.
Maybe Cuomo’s also talking up chloroquine to distract from his own poor management of the crisis, but that seems unlikely since no politician in America has been praised more for his state’s response (with the possible exception of Mike DeWine). More likely it’s that the sudden public interest in chloroquine has left him feeling he has no choice but to mention it. It’s of a piece with commandeering the Javits Center to house patients, a signal to residents that authorities are doing everything humanly possible to beat this back. Use Madison Square Garden for hospital beds? Sure. Let doctors use hydroxychloroquine as a potential miracle cure? Sure, fine. It’s a war zone and we’ve been overrun. All options are on the table, including nuclear weapons.
But the point is we’ve been overrun, which is a result of a fearsome enemy matched with bad management of the initial response. Go look at this latest model of the epidemic’s spread and you’ll see that we absolutely have hope of holding down deaths from the disease — provided we practice “severe” control measures like social distancing for the next several months. How much sustained radiation can our economy endure in the name of treating this cancer before it effectively dies in agony from the treatment? This is why we’re already at the “magic bullet” phase of the response despite calm-sounding assurances from Fauci and Scott Gottlieb that we can contain this eventually by ramping up testing, developing serological treatments, and so on. There’s no reason to have any confidence in the feds’ ability to facilitate that before fall; there’s more reason to have confidence in the private sector, but lots of stuff — like getting doctors the equipment they need — needs to have happened yesterday in order to hold down the scope of the catastrophe. If there’s no med-tech nuclear weapon that’s able to be deployed soon to turn the tide, there’s every reason to think this is going to be excruciatingly bad for much longer than we think. And I think people sense it, even if authorities won’t admit that to them right now. Hence chloroquine mania.


hotair--2020-03-21--Maryland Democrats reject gun violence bill amid gun violence epidemic

There are still more people dying in Baltimore from gunshot wounds than the coronavirus pandemic , a trend that “ social distancing ” hasn ’ t slowed down very much .
It ’ s gotten so bad that the mayor felt compelled to beg the gangs to stop shooting people so they can save hospital beds for the COVID-19 patients .
That ’ s why it seemed vital for the state legislature to finally push through some tough new gun crime laws designed to get some of these shooters behind bars and keep them there .
Unfortunately for the residents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t see it that way .
The recent package of bills intended to reduce gun violence was once again rejected .
( Free Beacon ) Maryland Democrats rejected a bill aimed at combating gun violence as Baltimore mayor Jack Young publicly begged residents to stop shooting each other so hospitals could be used to treat coronavirus patients… [ Governor Larry ] Hogan ’ s Violent Firearms Offenders Act would make the theft of a firearm a felony and increase penalties for those who repeatedly carry illegal guns or use a gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state Senate on March 10 following a contentious back-and-forth between lawmakers .
Democrats successfully removed the legislation ’ s mandatory minimum sentencing increase , arguing it would punish violent criminals too severely .
The legislation was already watered down enough to make it less than useful .
Democrats in the state senate wouldn ’ t even discuss the proposal if it included new mandatory minimum sentences for felonies involving the use of a gun .
Of course , the lack of minimum sentences is what led Baltimore police to describe their current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members who commit gun crimes .
Even without the mandatory minimum sentencing rules , the Democrats in the House still rejected the bill anyway .
Some of their members on the Judicial Proceedings Committee put up one amendment after another , seeking to remove the new penalties for drug busts involving a gun and for the theft of a gun .
They picked the bill so clean that it would have left the new gun crime penalties as pretty much the equivalent of a strongly worded letter .
Also worth noting is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s gun crime bill was supported by 85 % of Baltimore residents and 84 % of African-Americans across the state .
And still , the legislature shot it down ( pardon the figure of speech ) in defiance of the will of the voters .
How much sympathy can we really have for the suffering citizens of Baltimore at this point ?
Yes , this collapse in the process was the fault of the legislators , but the people of Maryland – and Baltimore in particular – keep sending the same group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after year .
They really have no one to blame but themselves .
So the Baltimore PD won ’ t be rounding up any of the gang members doing most of the shooting for longer stretches behind bars any time soon .
But do you know who they will be preparing to arrest ?
People who don ’ t comply with shutdown orders due to the pandemic .
( CBS Baltimore ) Businesses and individuals who don ’ t comply with Gov .
Hogan ’ s order to shut down dine-in service could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spend a year in jail .
The governor announced an executive order Monday restricting public gatherings and business operations due to COVID-19 , and state police and local law enforcement agencies say they will be involved , when needed , to enforce the governor ’ s executive order in response to the COVID-19 pandemic .
Welcome to Baltimore .
It ’ s a city where you can literally shoot someone on the street corner and potentially be let off with a suspended sentence , but you ’ ll get a year in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a cheeseburger .
God bless America .

There are still more people dying in Baltimore from gunshot wounds than the coronavirus pandemic, a trend that “social distancing” hasn’t slowed down very much. It’s gotten so bad that the mayor felt compelled to beg the gangs to stop shooting people so they can save hospital beds for the COVID-19 patients. That’s why it seemed vital for the state legislature to finally push through some tough new gun crime laws designed to get some of these shooters behind bars and keep them there.
Unfortunately for the residents of Maryland, Democrats in the legislature didn’t see it that way. The recent package of bills intended to reduce gun violence was once again rejected. (Free Beacon)
Maryland Democrats rejected a bill aimed at combating gun violence as Baltimore mayor Jack Young publicly begged residents to stop shooting each other so hospitals could be used to treat coronavirus patients… [Governor Larry] Hogan’s Violent Firearms Offenders Act would make the theft of a firearm a felony and increase penalties for those who repeatedly carry illegal guns or use a gun while drug dealing. The bill passed the state Senate on March 10 following a contentious back-and-forth between lawmakers. Democrats successfully removed the legislation’s mandatory minimum sentencing increase, arguing it would punish violent criminals too severely.
The legislation was already watered down enough to make it less than useful. Democrats in the state senate wouldn’t even discuss the proposal if it included new mandatory minimum sentences for felonies involving the use of a gun. Of course, the lack of minimum sentences is what led Baltimore police to describe their current crisis as a revolving door for gang members who commit gun crimes.
Even without the mandatory minimum sentencing rules, the Democrats in the House still rejected the bill anyway. Some of their members on the Judicial Proceedings Committee put up one amendment after another, seeking to remove the new penalties for drug busts involving a gun and for the theft of a gun. They picked the bill so clean that it would have left the new gun crime penalties as pretty much the equivalent of a strongly worded letter. Also worth noting is the fact that one recent poll showed Hogan’s gun crime bill was supported by 85% of Baltimore residents and 84% of African-Americans across the state. And still, the legislature shot it down (pardon the figure of speech) in defiance of the will of the voters.
How much sympathy can we really have for the suffering citizens of Baltimore at this point? Yes, this collapse in the process was the fault of the legislators, but the people of Maryland – and Baltimore in particular – keep sending the same group of liberal Democrats back to office year after year. They really have no one to blame but themselves.
So the Baltimore PD won’t be rounding up any of the gang members doing most of the shooting for longer stretches behind bars any time soon. But do you know who they will be preparing to arrest? People who don’t comply with shutdown orders due to the pandemic. (CBS Baltimore)
Businesses and individuals who don’t comply with Gov. Hogan’s order to shut down dine-in service could be fined up to $5,000 or spend a year in jail. The governor announced an executive order Monday restricting public gatherings and business operations due to COVID-19, and state police and local law enforcement agencies say they will be involved, when needed, to enforce the governor’s executive order in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Welcome to Baltimore. It’s a city where you can literally shoot someone on the street corner and potentially be let off with a suspended sentence, but you’ll get a year in the slammer and a hefty fine for serving a cheeseburger. God bless America.