hotair--2020-06-04--Is Baltimore really returning their disgraced mayor to office?

On Tuesday , residents of Baltimore went to the polls to pick the Democratic candidate for Mayor in the November elections .
Or at least some of them did .
Because of the novel coronavirus , massive numbers of mail-in ballots were sent out , so a lot of people voted by mail .
Still , the limited number of open polling places and the social distancing requirements in place for those waiting to vote produced long lines .
Some of the polling places were kept open until nearly midnight to accommodate everyone who was in line by 8 pm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it will take to count all of the mail-in ballots , we still don ’ t know the final results , but the numbers we ’ re seeing at this stage are disturbing .
( Fox News Baltimore ) On Wednesday , the Baltimore City Election results were updated after the Maryland Board of Elections discovered a proofing error in some of the results .
Sheila Dixon is leading the race for the Democratic nomination for Baltimore mayor… Based the nearly 76,000 votes that were counted , Former Mayor Sheila Dixon was leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scott and former U.S. Treasury Department Undersecretary for Domestic Finance Mary Miller .
These numbers could still change as the counting continues , but thus far they appear to be quite close to the last round of polling reported by the Baltimore Sun .
Sheila Dixon is up by a solid six percent over her nearest competitor ( City Council President Brandon Scott ) , a margin of roughly 4,500 votes .
You can see the up-to-date vote totals here , broken down by mailed-in ballots versus in-person voting .
Turnout on Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did better among in-person voters , He drew 1,168 votes , only slightly behind Dixon ’ s 1,356 .
But all of the remaining votes to be counted were mailed in , and among the mail-in ballots counted so far , Dixon has been doing considerably better .
While not impossible , that represents a pretty steep hill for Brandon Scott to make up .
And since the ratio of Democrats to Republicans in Baltimore is literally around ten to one , whoever wins this primary is pretty much the default Mayor next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I was warning people about when I wrote that this election shows why things will never get better in Charm City .
Baltimore ’ s voters appear to be on the verge of putting former Mayor Dixon back in her old office .
As you may recall , Dixon was driven from office in 2010 following her conviction for embezzling funds intended to help the poor .
Her successor , Stephanie Rawlings-Blake , didn ’ t even bother running for a second full term after her disastrous mishandling of the Freddie Gray riots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was forced to resign so she could head off to prison over fraud and tax evasion convictions .
So here we are in 2020 and what are Baltimore ’ s voters apparently saying ?
Hey… let ’ s go back and try the embezzlement mayor again !
I suppose I can understand why the current Mayor , Jack Young , wasn ’ t generating much excitement among voters .
When he took over from Pugh as interim Mayor he initially said he wasn ’ t going to run for a full term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ walked that promise back .
Also , he ’ s made virtually no progress in driving down the city ’ s murder rate so far and that ’ s the issue that has consistently polled as the most important factor for residents .
But couldn ’ t the voters at least consider putting a fresh face into the office and giving them a chance ?
You know… somebody with fewer corruption convictions ?
Citizen groups and religious leaders in Baltimore constantly say that they are demanding change .
The violence in the streets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about official corruption in the local papers must be shut down .
But if you ’ re just going to keep sending the same parade of proven failures back to office , why would things be any different next year ?

On Tuesday, residents of Baltimore went to the polls to pick the Democratic candidate for Mayor in the November elections. Or at least some of them did. Because of the novel coronavirus, massive numbers of mail-in ballots were sent out, so a lot of people voted by mail. Still, the limited number of open polling places and the social distancing requirements in place for those waiting to vote produced long lines. Some of the polling places were kept open until nearly midnight to accommodate everyone who was in line by 8 pm. Between those delays and the time it will take to count all of the mail-in ballots, we still don’t know the final results, but the numbers we’re seeing at this stage are disturbing. (Fox News Baltimore)
On Wednesday, the Baltimore City Election results were updated after the Maryland Board of Elections discovered a proofing error in some of the results. Sheila Dixon is leading the race for the Democratic nomination for Baltimore mayor… Based the nearly 76,000 votes that were counted, Former Mayor Sheila Dixon was leading, followed by City Council President Brandon Scott and former U.S. Treasury Department Undersecretary for Domestic Finance Mary Miller.
These numbers could still change as the counting continues, but thus far they appear to be quite close to the last round of polling reported by the Baltimore Sun. Sheila Dixon is up by a solid six percent over her nearest competitor (City Council President Brandon Scott), a margin of roughly 4,500 votes.
You can see the up-to-date vote totals here, broken down by mailed-in ballots versus in-person voting. Turnout on Tuesday was quite light, but Scott actually did better among in-person voters, He drew 1,168 votes, only slightly behind Dixon’s 1,356. But all of the remaining votes to be counted were mailed in, and among the mail-in ballots counted so far, Dixon has been doing considerably better. While not impossible, that represents a pretty steep hill for Brandon Scott to make up. And since the ratio of Democrats to Republicans in Baltimore is literally around ten to one, whoever wins this primary is pretty much the default Mayor next year.
This is precisely the scenario I was warning people about when I wrote that this election shows why things will never get better in Charm City. Baltimore’s voters appear to be on the verge of putting former Mayor Dixon back in her old office. As you may recall, Dixon was driven from office in 2010 following her conviction for embezzling funds intended to help the poor. Her successor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, didn’t even bother running for a second full term after her disastrous mishandling of the Freddie Gray riots. The last Mayor, Catherine Pugh, was forced to resign so she could head off to prison over fraud and tax evasion convictions.
So here we are in 2020 and what are Baltimore’s voters apparently saying? Hey… let’s go back and try the embezzlement mayor again!
I suppose I can understand why the current Mayor, Jack Young, wasn’t generating much excitement among voters. When he took over from Pugh as interim Mayor he initially said he wasn’t going to run for a full term of his own, but he later walked that promise back. Also, he’s made virtually no progress in driving down the city’s murder rate so far and that’s the issue that has consistently polled as the most important factor for residents. But couldn’t the voters at least consider putting a fresh face into the office and giving them a chance? You know… somebody with fewer corruption convictions?
Citizen groups and religious leaders in Baltimore constantly say that they are demanding change. The violence in the streets has to end and the embarrassing stories about official corruption in the local papers must be shut down. But if you’re just going to keep sending the same parade of proven failures back to office, why would things be any different next year?


hotair--2020-06-04--The Rock: Where is our compassionate leader at this difficult moment?

Does he mean Trump , or is he referring to some hypothetical social leader in the MLK mold ?
He can ’ t possibly mean Trump .
Somewhere right now Trump ’ s asking Bill Barr to show him where Antifa headquarters is on a map so that he can drop a MOAB on it .
He doesn ’ t do “ compassion , ” he does “ strength.
” Or at least he talks about it a lot .
His advisors should be nudging him to highlight this story at every opportunity .
If he can ’ t bring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reconciliation , especially if it means demanding that America ’ s police behave better , he should at least focus on the very real harm being done by the degenerates who are looting businesses .
The first one hit about 4 a.m. on Sunday , when four people smashed the glass door of a clothing store in this predominantly black neighborhood and made off with armfuls of merchandise .
About 12 hours later , looters emptied out a corner pharmacy and set fire to the uniform shop next door .
Several more businesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Monday morning , including a jewelry store where thieves broke into glass cases and stole about $ 200,000 of goods .
By the time the roughly 24-hour spree was over , dozens of businesses in this half-mile stretch of 52nd Street in West Philadelphia were damaged , including a day care , a tax-preparation store and a seller of hijabs .
Buildings were boarded up .
Decades of work was destroyed .
Some owners were wiped out , unsure if they could make next month ’ s rent .
Businesses that had been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of forced closure due to the coronavirus , were facing the prospect of months before they could open their doors , if ever .
Just 11 percent of small businesses in mostly black neighborhoods operate on profit margins of greater than 15 percent , notes the Journal .
Many small businesses aren ’ t insured against rioting .
When they ’ re looted and forced to close , they may stay closed .
One business owner in the Philly neighborhood told the paper that he and his family worked seven-day weeks for 20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The business was raided and partially burned a few nights ago .
“ I built it up , ” he said .
“ And it ’ s gone .
My life is gone.
” The neighborhood ’ s economy will deteriorate , of course .
Black residents will suffer .
No one should weep if a few looters get shot in the act tonight .
But that ’ s different from saying that the U.S. military should be doing the shooting , of course .
“ Cotton ’ s eagerness to use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his own horrible judgment and his knee-jerk , hard-line approach to every security problem , ” said Daniel Larison of Cotton ’ s — and Trump ’ s — interest in invoking the Insurrection Act .
Which is ironic , as Trump distinguished himself as a candidate in the 2016 primary by harshly criticizing the Iraq war , another problem that ultimately couldn ’ t be solved by an application of an American military force .
You would think he might apply that same lesson to civil unrest here .
Although , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s probably no contradiction : For Trump , any failure can be explained in terms of “ weakness.
” That ’ s probably how he views Iraq too — once we were there , we just weren ’ t tough enough .
He once famously scolded the Soviet Union for failing to show the same ruthlessness towards internal dissent in its waning days as the Chinese did in Tiananmen Square , 31 years ago today .
Go figure that American military leaders are nervous about what he might have in mind by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confront a mix of rioters , looters , and law-abiding demonstrators .
His latest tweet as I write this features an excited link to an open letter from former Trump lawyer John Dowd to James Mattis , in which Dowd refers to the peaceful protesters who were cleared out of Lafayette Park on Monday as “ terrorists.
” That ’ s the mentality The Rock is engaging with here when he calls for compassion .
As for the clip .
sneer at it if you like but this dude is obviously a figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 185 million — no typo — Instagram followers .
This clip has been viewed 10.5 million times as I write this and counting .

Does he mean Trump, or is he referring to some hypothetical social leader in the MLK mold? He can’t possibly mean Trump.
Somewhere right now Trump’s asking Bill Barr to show him where Antifa headquarters is on a map so that he can drop a MOAB on it. He doesn’t do “compassion,” he does “strength.”
Or at least he talks about it a lot.
His advisors should be nudging him to highlight this story at every opportunity. If he can’t bring himself to be a force for social reconciliation, especially if it means demanding that America’s police behave better, he should at least focus on the very real harm being done by the degenerates who are looting businesses.
The first one hit about 4 a.m. on Sunday, when four people smashed the glass door of a clothing store in this predominantly black neighborhood and made off with armfuls of merchandise. About 12 hours later, looters emptied out a corner pharmacy and set fire to the uniform shop next door. Several more businesses were victimized in the wee hours of Monday morning, including a jewelry store where thieves broke into glass cases and stole about $200,000 of goods. By the time the roughly 24-hour spree was over, dozens of businesses in this half-mile stretch of 52nd Street in West Philadelphia were damaged, including a day care, a tax-preparation store and a seller of hijabs. Buildings were boarded up. Decades of work was destroyed. Some owners were wiped out, unsure if they could make next month’s rent. Businesses that had been gearing up for revival, after weeks of forced closure due to the coronavirus, were facing the prospect of months before they could open their doors, if ever.
Just 11 percent of small businesses in mostly black neighborhoods operate on profit margins of greater than 15 percent, notes the Journal. Many small businesses aren’t insured against rioting. When they’re looted and forced to close, they may stay closed. One business owner in the Philly neighborhood told the paper that he and his family worked seven-day weeks for 20 years to make their clothing store viable. The business was raided and partially burned a few nights ago. “I built it up,” he said. “And it’s gone. My life is gone.”
The neighborhood’s economy will deteriorate, of course. Black residents will suffer. No one should weep if a few looters get shot in the act tonight.
But that’s different from saying that the U.S. military should be doing the shooting, of course.
Tom Cotton thinks the problem in America right now is armed agents of the state haven't used force enough, and that the forces trained to keep the peace need to be joined by the forces trained to kill. — Nicholas Grossman (@NGrossman81) June 4, 2020
“Cotton’s eagerness to use the military in this way reflects both his own horrible judgment and his knee-jerk, hard-line approach to every security problem,” said Daniel Larison of Cotton’s — and Trump’s — interest in invoking the Insurrection Act. Which is ironic, as Trump distinguished himself as a candidate in the 2016 primary by harshly criticizing the Iraq war, another problem that ultimately couldn’t be solved by an application of an American military force. You would think he might apply that same lesson to civil unrest here. Although, as I think more about it, there’s probably no contradiction: For Trump, any failure can be explained in terms of “weakness.” That’s probably how he views Iraq too — once we were there, we just weren’t tough enough. He once famously scolded the Soviet Union for failing to show the same ruthlessness towards internal dissent in its waning days as the Chinese did in Tiananmen Square, 31 years ago today. Go figure that American military leaders are nervous about what he might have in mind by sending American soldiers into the streets to confront a mix of rioters, looters, and law-abiding demonstrators.
His latest tweet as I write this features an excited link to an open letter from former Trump lawyer John Dowd to James Mattis, in which Dowd refers to the peaceful protesters who were cleared out of Lafayette Park on Monday as “terrorists.” That’s the mentality The Rock is engaging with here when he calls for compassion. As for the clip. sneer at it if you like but this dude is obviously a figure of some cultural influence. He has 185 million — no typo — Instagram followers. This clip has been viewed 10.5 million times as I write this and counting.


hotair--2020-06-04--Who's up for a virtual convention? Texas Democrat Party goes first

The Texas Democrat Party is holding a virtual convention this week , the first such large event held by any of the Democrat Party ’ s state conventions .
Is it the wave of the future or will this go by the wayside once the coronavirus is no longer such a pressing concern ?
Time will tell but the Texas Democrats are breaking new ground this week .
It kicked off Monday and runs through Saturday .
Joe Biden will address the convention Saturday .
Democrats in Minnesota planned to hold a virtual convention this week , too , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has happened the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis .
A traditional convention in Texas was scrapped due to the coronavirus pandemic .
Texas Democrats think they have a shot at turning Texas blue in November and taking back power .
In 2018 , the party saw some strong gains , though not at statewide offices .
The Texas House of Representatives is a favored target by the likes of Beto O ’ Rourke and other Democrats hoping to flip it to Democrat control .
The 2018 election put the Democrats within nine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve written about the hopes of Texas Democrats winning statewide elections and taking back the State House and Senate since Battleground Texas was formed in 2013 .
Slowly the state party has made some progress and 2018 was proof that with a strong blue wave election , the party can take control of city and county government offices .
They just haven ’ t cracked statewide offices yet .
The question this cycle is will there be enough enthusiasm for Joe Biden to bring out Democrat voters like the candidacy of Beto O @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m not convinced of that .
There hasn ’ t been much coverage of the convention , given the events of the week .
Between the pandemic and the protest marches and riots of the past week , there isn ’ t much room in news coverage for something like a virtual state party convention .
It looks like the final day , Saturday will be the day if any news comes from it .
Besides Joe Biden ’ s scheduled speech , a debate is scheduled between Air Force veteran M.J. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They are the two Democrats in a July primary runoff to challenge Republican Sen. John Cornyn .
Today , on Day Four , according to the website , panel discussions will be aired beginning at noon .
The panel discussions include Young Voters and the Future of Democratic Politics , People with Disabilities and the Fight for Equal Access , A Conversation with the 2020 Statewide Democratic Judicial Slate , Saving Texas : The Movement to End Gun Violence , and our Featured Session : Texas Democrats and Our Growing Movement .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
I ’ ll note that the website page is paid for by ActBlue – an independent fundraising arm of the national party .
Biden , O ’ Rourke , and Julian Castro will speak to the convention on Saturday .
On Friday , vice-presidential hopefuls Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren , plus Nancy Pelosi will speak .
The state party thinks this is their time , their moment in November to flip Texas to a battleground state .
“ We know this is our moment , ” Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans are scared .
We are on the cusp of victory it is within our reach .
Texas is the biggest battleground state in America.
” A Democratic presidential candidate has not carried Texas since 1976 when Jimmy Carter won the state over Gerald Ford .
But Democrats point out that Hillary Clinton came within 9 points of President Donald Trump in 2016 — the closest a Democrat has come to winning Texas in over 20 years .
They also point to 2018 , when O ’ Rourke came within 3 percentage points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State Republicans have been slow to take Democrats seriously over the last few years .
Complacency has set in after the victories of 1994 ushered in George W. Bush as governor and Republican success in taking statewide races , as well as state senate seats .
No Democrat has won a statewide election since 1998 .
Frankly , the 2018 election cycle ended a lot of that complacency .
Do I think Texas is ready to move to be a blue state ?
No , not this year .
I can tell you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since 1998 ( plus two years in Dallas in the 1980s ) and the political landscape has changed over time .
Texas has been a beacon for job creation and economic entrepreneurship that has drawn new residents from high tax , lower opportunity states like California .
Texas is still a red state in presidential elections but Democrats run the big cities .
Democrats even took control of Harris County ( Houston ) in 2018 , which was a political earthquake .
The national Democrat Party is ready to lay the blame of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feet of President Trump – not China where it belongs .
And the state party is grooming some local officeholders for elections .
This includes Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo , the authoritarian socialist in charge of the state ’ s largest county .
You know , the one who wanted to slap a fine of $ 1,000 on people for not wearing a face mask in public until the police department said , um , no , they weren ’ t going to enforce that toothless order .
“ Now more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get our country back on the right track.
” Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez told Texas party members via a pre-recorded video .
“ This pandemic has laid bare the utter incompetence , inexperience , ineffectiveness , lack of empathy and compassion of Donald Trump .
This failure to prepare for this crisis and listen to health experts has cost people their jobs , their savings and even their lives.
” During a conference call with other county leaders from Dallas , Austin and Brownsville , Hidalgo said she ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as possible even as some have tried to go after her politically .
As she has stated before , Hidalgo said she has no problem debating Republicans or whomever to defend her policy decisions , but now is not the time as the county continues to see more COVID-19 cases .
She said when it comes time for the next elections , she ’ ll be more than willing to defend her decisions .
“ This is not a political game right now , ” Hidalgo said .
“ We can play that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for office.
” She may not call it a game but the politics of the pandemic have been clear from the beginning .
Democrats were quick to make every death Trump ’ s fault and continue to divide the country as they spout Communist talking points coming from China .
The Republican Party of Texas plans to hold its convention in mid-July in Houston .

The Texas Democrat Party is holding a virtual convention this week, the first such large event held by any of the Democrat Party’s state conventions. Is it the wave of the future or will this go by the wayside once the coronavirus is no longer such a pressing concern?
Time will tell but the Texas Democrats are breaking new ground this week. It kicked off Monday and runs through Saturday. Joe Biden will address the convention Saturday. Democrats in Minnesota planned to hold a virtual convention this week, too, but it has been postponed because of what has happened the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. A traditional convention in Texas was scrapped due to the coronavirus pandemic.
Texas Democrats think they have a shot at turning Texas blue in November and taking back power. In 2018, the party saw some strong gains, though not at statewide offices. The Texas House of Representatives is a favored target by the likes of Beto O’Rourke and other Democrats hoping to flip it to Democrat control. The 2018 election put the Democrats within nine seats of flipping it. I’ve written about the hopes of Texas Democrats winning statewide elections and taking back the State House and Senate since Battleground Texas was formed in 2013. Slowly the state party has made some progress and 2018 was proof that with a strong blue wave election, the party can take control of city and county government offices. They just haven’t cracked statewide offices yet. The question this cycle is will there be enough enthusiasm for Joe Biden to bring out Democrat voters like the candidacy of Beto O’Rourke did in 2018? I’m not convinced of that.
There hasn’t been much coverage of the convention, given the events of the week. Between the pandemic and the protest marches and riots of the past week, there isn’t much room in news coverage for something like a virtual state party convention. It looks like the final day, Saturday will be the day if any news comes from it. Besides Joe Biden’s scheduled speech, a debate is scheduled between Air Force veteran M.J. Hegar and state Sen. Royce West. They are the two Democrats in a July primary runoff to challenge Republican Sen. John Cornyn.
Today, on Day Four, according to the website, panel discussions will be aired beginning at noon. The panel discussions include Young Voters and the Future of Democratic Politics, People with Disabilities and the Fight for Equal Access, A Conversation with the 2020 Statewide Democratic Judicial Slate, Saving Texas: The Movement to End Gun Violence, and our Featured Session: Texas Democrats and Our Growing Movement. It looks like boilerplate Democrat topics, right? I’ll note that the website page is paid for by ActBlue – an independent fundraising arm of the national party.
Biden, O’Rourke, and Julian Castro will speak to the convention on Saturday. On Friday, vice-presidential hopefuls Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren, plus Nancy Pelosi will speak. The state party thinks this is their time, their moment in November to flip Texas to a battleground state.
“We know this is our moment,” Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa said to start the convention. “Republicans are scared. We are on the cusp of victory it is within our reach. Texas is the biggest battleground state in America.” A Democratic presidential candidate has not carried Texas since 1976 when Jimmy Carter won the state over Gerald Ford. But Democrats point out that Hillary Clinton came within 9 points of President Donald Trump in 2016 — the closest a Democrat has come to winning Texas in over 20 years. They also point to 2018, when O’Rourke came within 3 percentage points of upsetting U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.
State Republicans have been slow to take Democrats seriously over the last few years. Complacency has set in after the victories of 1994 ushered in George W. Bush as governor and Republican success in taking statewide races, as well as state senate seats. No Democrat has won a statewide election since 1998. Frankly, the 2018 election cycle ended a lot of that complacency. Do I think Texas is ready to move to be a blue state? No, not this year. I can tell you that I’ve lived in Houston since 1998 (plus two years in Dallas in the 1980s) and the political landscape has changed over time. Texas has been a beacon for job creation and economic entrepreneurship that has drawn new residents from high tax, lower opportunity states like California. Texas is still a red state in presidential elections but Democrats run the big cities. Democrats even took control of Harris County (Houston) in 2018, which was a political earthquake.
The national Democrat Party is ready to lay the blame of the pandemic and massive unemployment at the feet of President Trump – not China where it belongs. And the state party is grooming some local officeholders for elections. This includes Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo, the authoritarian socialist in charge of the state’s largest county. You know, the one who wanted to slap a fine of $1,000 on people for not wearing a face mask in public until the police department said, um, no, they weren’t going to enforce that toothless order.
“Now more than ever we need a change in leadership to get our country back on the right track.” Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez told Texas party members via a pre-recorded video. “This pandemic has laid bare the utter incompetence, inexperience, ineffectiveness, lack of empathy and compassion of Donald Trump. This failure to prepare for this crisis and listen to health experts has cost people their jobs, their savings and even their lives.” During a conference call with other county leaders from Dallas, Austin and Brownsville, Hidalgo said she’s moved quickly to protect as many lives as possible even as some have tried to go after her politically. As she has stated before, Hidalgo said she has no problem debating Republicans or whomever to defend her policy decisions, but now is not the time as the county continues to see more COVID-19 cases. She said when it comes time for the next elections, she’ll be more than willing to defend her decisions. “This is not a political game right now,” Hidalgo said. “We can play that game when it comes time to run for office.”
She may not call it a game but the politics of the pandemic have been clear from the beginning. Democrats were quick to make every death Trump’s fault and continue to divide the country as they spout Communist talking points coming from China.
The Republican Party of Texas plans to hold its convention in mid-July in Houston.


hotair--2020-06-05--Hostage released from Iran, thanks Trump for "making America great again"

How about we end the week with a good news story ?
Well , another good news story .
The first one this morning was huge – the May jobs report was a stunner , in the best way .
A Navy veteran held hostage in Iran was released Thursday after being held for almost two years .
Michael White traveled to Iran to visit his Iranian girlfriend in July 2018 and was imprisoned .
In March 2019 he was sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges that he had insulted Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and posted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Because of the coronavirus pandemic , he was recently placed on medical furlough but required to stay in the country .
He was released to the Swiss embassy .
Mr. White , a 48-year-old cancer patient , specifically thanked President Trump for his release and for “ making America great again.
” “ I do want to extend my personal thanks to President Trump for his efforts both diplomatically and otherwise to making America great again .
And I look forward to what ’ s going to happen here in the future , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ condition has improved since being released , though noting he contracted COVID-19 while in Iran prior to being placed on furlough .
“ Getting a lot better as a result of Swiss Embassy and all the efforts of the Trump administration , ” he said .
The New York Times is calling the release of Michael R. White a prisoner exchange .
The Times reports the release of White is proof that despite the tension between the United States and Iran , the two countries have a line of communication open .
An @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States and the return of an Iranian scientist held by the American authorities to Iran is connected to the release of White .
Mr. White was flown out of Iran as federal prosecutors in Atlanta completed arrangements releasing an Iranian-American doctor who had been convicted in a 2018 exports violation case .
The doctor , Matteo Taerri , also known as Majid Taheri , who has lived in both Florida and the Atlanta area for many years , will be permitted to visit Iran , said Steven P. Berne , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the exchange of Dr. Taerri for Mr. White had been proceeding quietly for months .
“ It ’ s a happy ending for all , ” he said by telephone .
Mr. White ’ s release also came a day after an Iranian scientist , Sirous Asgari , who had been held by United States immigration authorities for months , arrived in Tehran .
Both men had been infected with the coronavirus while in custody , and Iranian officials had indicated they would release Mr. White after the scientist had returned home .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her son ’ s release .
In a statement on Thursday , Joanne White , his mother , thanked the State Department and Swiss diplomats representing U.S. interests in Iran for helping to secure her son ’ s return home , saying she owes them “ a debt I can never repay.
” “ For the past 683 days my son , Michael , has been held hostage in Iran by the IRGC and I have been living a nightmare , ” Joanne White said .
“ I am blessed to announce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my son is safely on his way home.
” U.S. Special Representative for Iran , Brian Hook , is credited for negotiating White ’ s release .
Bill Richardson , former New Mexico governor and former U.S .
Ambassador to the United Nations played a role in raising White ’ s with the Iranians .
“ We are bringing another American home .
Michael White , a U.S. Navy veteran who has been wrongfully jailed in Iran for nearly two years , has been released , ” Pompeo said in a statement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ back to the United States , where we look forward to reuniting him with his family .
I commend U.S. Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook for negotiating Mr. White ’ s release with the Iranians .
I thank the Swiss government and the work of our diplomats for facilitating this successful diplomacy.
” President Trump has had a notable amount of success in the release of U.S. citizens held hostage around the world .
He tweeted about White ’ s return .
Iran ’ s foreign minister , Mohammad Javad Zarif , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He claims a number of Iranians are being illegally held in the United States .
Prisoner releases are part of the Trump administration ’ s 12 demands made to Iran in order to ease sanctions and re-establish diplomatic and commercial ties in 2019 .
White ’ s mother says her son will tell his story when he is ready .

How about we end the week with a good news story? Well, another good news story. The first one this morning was huge – the May jobs report was a stunner, in the best way. A Navy veteran held hostage in Iran was released Thursday after being held for almost two years.
Michael White traveled to Iran to visit his Iranian girlfriend in July 2018 and was imprisoned. In March 2019 he was sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges that he had insulted Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and posted a private photo on social media. Because of the coronavirus pandemic, he was recently placed on medical furlough but required to stay in the country. He was released to the Swiss embassy.
Mr. White, a 48-year-old cancer patient, specifically thanked President Trump for his release and for “making America great again.”
“I do want to extend my personal thanks to President Trump for his efforts both diplomatically and otherwise to making America great again. And I look forward to what’s going to happen here in the future,” White said. White said his condition has improved since being released, though noting he contracted COVID-19 while in Iran prior to being placed on furlough. “Getting a lot better as a result of Swiss Embassy and all the efforts of the Trump administration,” he said.
The New York Times is calling the release of Michael R. White a prisoner exchange. The Times reports the release of White is proof that despite the tension between the United States and Iran, the two countries have a line of communication open. An Iranian-American doctor convicted of export violations in the United States and the return of an Iranian scientist held by the American authorities to Iran is connected to the release of White.
Mr. White was flown out of Iran as federal prosecutors in Atlanta completed arrangements releasing an Iranian-American doctor who had been convicted in a 2018 exports violation case. The doctor, Matteo Taerri, also known as Majid Taheri, who has lived in both Florida and the Atlanta area for many years, will be permitted to visit Iran, said Steven P. Berne, his lawyer. Mr. Berne said negotiations involving the exchange of Dr. Taerri for Mr. White had been proceeding quietly for months. “It’s a happy ending for all,” he said by telephone. Mr. White’s release also came a day after an Iranian scientist, Sirous Asgari, who had been held by United States immigration authorities for months, arrived in Tehran. Both men had been infected with the coronavirus while in custody, and Iranian officials had indicated they would release Mr. White after the scientist had returned home.
White’s mother broke the news of her son’s release.
In a statement on Thursday, Joanne White, his mother, thanked the State Department and Swiss diplomats representing U.S. interests in Iran for helping to secure her son’s return home, saying she owes them “a debt I can never repay.” “For the past 683 days my son, Michael, has been held hostage in Iran by the IRGC and I have been living a nightmare,” Joanne White said. “I am blessed to announce that the nightmare is over, and my son is safely on his way home.”
U.S. Special Representative for Iran, Brian Hook, is credited for negotiating White’s release. Bill Richardson, former New Mexico governor and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations played a role in raising White’s with the Iranians.
Secretary of State Pompeo released a statement and acknowledged Hook.
“We are bringing another American home. Michael White, a U.S. Navy veteran who has been wrongfully jailed in Iran for nearly two years, has been released,” Pompeo said in a statement. “He is now on his way back to the United States, where we look forward to reuniting him with his family. I commend U.S. Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook for negotiating Mr. White’s release with the Iranians. I thank the Swiss government and the work of our diplomats for facilitating this successful diplomacy.”
President Trump has had a notable amount of success in the release of U.S. citizens held hostage around the world. He tweeted about White’s return.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1268670884501426182
Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, suggests more such exchanges are possible. He claims a number of Iranians are being illegally held in the United States.
Pleased that Dr. Majid Taheri and Mr. White will soon be joining their families. Prof. Sirous Asgari was happily reunited with his family on Weds. This can happen for all prisoners. No need for cherry picking. Iranian hostages held in—and on behalf of—the US should come home. — Javad Zarif (@JZarif) June 4, 2020
Prisoner releases are part of the Trump administration’s 12 demands made to Iran in order to ease sanctions and re-establish diplomatic and commercial ties in 2019.
White’s mother says her son will tell his story when he is ready.


hotair--2020-06-05--57 Buffalo cops resign from unit following incident that sent old man to the hospital

They resigned in protest .
Not in protest of shoving an old man for no discernible reason , leading him to crack his head on the pavement .
They resigned to protest the discipline for the cop who shoved him .
Who , by the way , hasn ’ t even been fired .
He ’ s been suspended .
You can understand their dilemma , though .
How can they do their jobs effectively if they can ’ t make senior citizens bleed from the ears without provocation ?
All 57 of the members of the Buffalo Police Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the unit which responds to riots and other crowd control situations , the president of the union that represents Buffalo police officers told The Buffalo News… “ Our position is these officers were simply following orders from Deputy Police Commissioner Joseph Gramaglia to clear the square , ” said Buffalo Police Benevolent Association President John Evans .
“ It doesn ’ t specify clear the square of men , 50 and under or 15 to 40 .
They were simply doing their job .
I don ’ t know how much contact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my estimation .
He fell backwards.
” “ These guys did nothing but do what they were ordered to do .
This is disgusting !
!
!
” the local police union posted on its homepage .
Bear in mind , the clip that I posted this morning of the old man toppling over after he was shoved has been viewed 70 million times since last night .
A large chunk of the entire country has seen it by now .
Do these people have any idea what message they ’ re sending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knows full well what happened to this grandpa , that they were “ doing their job ” by treating him that way and “ simply following orders ” ?
They ’ re telling them that anything goes when you approach a cop who ’ s not in the mood to be approached , no matter how unthreatening you are .
The 57 cops who resigned today didn ’ t resign from the force , they resigned from the specific tactical unit to which they were assigned .
The local county executive was asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonable conclusion from the resignations , which is that none of these people see a problem with what happened to the old man : “ When you find a bad cop , it means that he can ’ t be trusted , ” said Jonathan Last of the clip of the old man being shoved .
“ When you see a gaggle of cops covering for a bad cop , it means the culture is corrupt.
” That ’ s the real lesson from the clip , which I emphasized in this morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one thing ; the collective indifference from surrounding officers to the welfare of a 75-year-old lying unconscious and bleeding from his head is something else entirely .
If there was any shred of doubt that the culture in Buffalo PD is rotten , this afternoon ’ s resignations should remove it .
An ethical officer wouldn ’ t object to discipline in this case .
An officer who ’ s been trained by his union to think of himself as part of a gang and to use collective action to protect his most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mayor , I ’ d see the resignations as a good start .
Invite them to resign from the force altogether .
Invite anyone else who thinks it ’ s okay to get rough with the elderly and then not render aid immediately to join them .
If that thins the ranks of the force temporarily , that ’ s the price of removing the proverbial “ few ” bad apples from the bunch .
A city of 250,000 people should be able to produce a few thousand willing to maintain order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way at brutality inflicted by others .
It reminds me of what some people say when you raise the prospect of ending the doctrine of qualified immunity for cops : “ But then the police would be liable for their misconduct !
No one would want to join the force !
” No one who ’ s unwilling to answer for his misconduct would want to join , that ’ s true .
That ’ s the point .
It ’ s not a bug of ending qualified immunity .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here ’ s a clip from Philadelphia to carry us into the weekend .
The fat cop you see here swinging for the fences with his nightstick apparently showed “ similarly aggressive behavior over several days toward people protesting against oppressive policing.
” He may soon face charges of aggravated assault .
He makes $ 125,000 per year .

They resigned in protest. Not in protest of shoving an old man for no discernible reason, leading him to crack his head on the pavement.
They resigned to protest the discipline for the cop who shoved him.
Who, by the way, hasn’t even been fired. He’s been suspended.
You can understand their dilemma, though. How can they do their jobs effectively if they can’t make senior citizens bleed from the ears without provocation?
All 57 of the members of the Buffalo Police Department’s Emergency Response Team resigned Friday from the unit which responds to riots and other crowd control situations, the president of the union that represents Buffalo police officers told The Buffalo News… “Our position is these officers were simply following orders from Deputy Police Commissioner Joseph Gramaglia to clear the square,” said Buffalo Police Benevolent Association President John Evans. “It doesn’t specify clear the square of men, 50 and under or 15 to 40. They were simply doing their job. I don’t know how much contact was made. He did slip in my estimation. He fell backwards.”
“These guys did nothing but do what they were ordered to do. This is disgusting!!!” the local police union posted on its homepage. Bear in mind, the clip that I posted this morning of the old man toppling over after he was shoved has been viewed 70 million times since last night. A large chunk of the entire country has seen it by now. Do these people have any idea what message they’re sending when they tell the public, which knows full well what happened to this grandpa, that they were “doing their job” by treating him that way and “simply following orders”?
They’re telling them that anything goes when you approach a cop who’s not in the mood to be approached, no matter how unthreatening you are.
The 57 cops who resigned today didn’t resign from the force, they resigned from the specific tactical unit to which they were assigned. The local county executive was asked about it today and drew the only reasonable conclusion from the resignations, which is that none of these people see a problem with what happened to the old man:
"If they resigned, I'm exceptionally disappointed by it because it indicates to me that they did not see anything wrong with the actions last night," Poloncarz said after being asked about the ERT Team resigning. pic.twitter.com/gbQ4Z7vKr5 — News 4 Buffalo (@news4buffalo) June 5, 2020
“When you find a bad cop, it means that he can’t be trusted,” said Jonathan Last of the clip of the old man being shoved. “When you see a gaggle of cops covering for a bad cop, it means the culture is corrupt.” That’s the real lesson from the clip, which I emphasized in this morning’s post. The shove is one thing; the collective indifference from surrounding officers to the welfare of a 75-year-old lying unconscious and bleeding from his head is something else entirely. If there was any shred of doubt that the culture in Buffalo PD is rotten, this afternoon’s resignations should remove it. An ethical officer wouldn’t object to discipline in this case. An officer who’s been trained by his union to think of himself as part of a gang and to use collective action to protect his most abusive colleagues would.
If I were the mayor, I’d see the resignations as a good start. Invite them to resign from the force altogether. Invite anyone else who thinks it’s okay to get rough with the elderly and then not render aid immediately to join them. If that thins the ranks of the force temporarily, that’s the price of removing the proverbial “few” bad apples from the bunch. A city of 250,000 people should be able to produce a few thousand willing to maintain order without brutalizing people or looking the other way at brutality inflicted by others. It reminds me of what some people say when you raise the prospect of ending the doctrine of qualified immunity for cops: “But then the police would be liable for their misconduct! No one would want to join the force!”
No one who’s unwilling to answer for his misconduct would want to join, that’s true. That’s the point. It’s not a bug of ending qualified immunity. It’s a feature.
On that note, here’s a clip from Philadelphia to carry us into the weekend. The fat cop you see here swinging for the fences with his nightstick apparently showed “similarly aggressive behavior over several days toward people protesting against oppressive policing.” He may soon face charges of aggravated assault. He makes $125,000 per year.


hotair--2020-06-05--MSNBC and NBC News hire Lisa Page as a legal analyst

Today , MSNBC announced it had hired Lisa Page as a legal analyst .
Here ’ s the on-air announcement from MSNBC ’ s PR feed : Given the contents of Page ’ s texts and emails with Peter Strzok , MSNBC is obviously a perfect fit for her .
CNN might have worked as well but with the hiring of Andrew McCabe they had already achieved their quota of disgraced former officials .
GOP spokesperson Elizabeth Harrington is already mocking this .
The full clip of her first appearance isn ’ t on YouTube yet but you can watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In this segment she was asked how she feels about Republicans failing to stand up to Trump and replied , “ We hear over and over again about how , in quiet whispers , how appalled they are by this administration ’ s behavior .
Now is the time .
I am hopeful that courage begets courage.
” That ’ s typical MSNBC content but there ’ s nothing there that really requires legal or national security expertise .
She ’ s being asked to call Republican Senators cowards on TV and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t swing a dead cat on Twitter without hitting 100 randos who could do this .
The real reason MSNBC wants her is that she ’ s such an outstanding commentator , it ’ s that she ’ s such an outspoken partisan .
Here ’ s a recent sample from her Twitter feed : She appeared on Rachel Maddow ’ s show last December .
I wonder how long after that the discussions about hiring her began .
The appearance on Maddow came a few weeks after a profile by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which she vowed not to be silent anymore .
So now she has a platform to hit back at Trump and that ’ s what makes her valuable to MSNBC .
Speaking of which , it ’ s pretty much guaranteed that Trump will tweet something about this , right ?
Nothing from the president so far but Don Jr. has tweeted about it .

Today, MSNBC announced it had hired Lisa Page as a legal analyst. Here’s the on-air announcement from MSNBC’s PR feed:
JUST ANNOUNCED: @MSNBC welcomes Former FBI Lawyer @NatSecLisa as an NBC News & MSNBC National Security & Legal Analyst. pic.twitter.com/cubW4jCQFm — MSNBC Public Relations (@MSNBCPR) June 5, 2020
Page tweeted the clip saying she’s stated “something new.”
I started something new today! 😳 https://t.co/ZfzGK5FhST — Lisa Page (@NatSecLisa) June 5, 2020
Given the contents of Page’s texts and emails with Peter Strzok, MSNBC is obviously a perfect fit for her. CNN might have worked as well but with the hiring of Andrew McCabe they had already achieved their quota of disgraced former officials. GOP spokesperson Elizabeth Harrington is already mocking this.
"POTUS [Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing." – @NatSecLisa — Liz Harrington (@realLizUSA) June 5, 2020
The full clip of her first appearance isn’t on YouTube yet but you can watch at least a portion of it here. In this segment she was asked how she feels about Republicans failing to stand up to Trump and replied, “We hear over and over again about how, in quiet whispers, how appalled they are by this administration’s behavior. Now is the time. I am hopeful that courage begets courage.”
That’s typical MSNBC content but there’s nothing there that really requires legal or national security expertise. She’s being asked to call Republican Senators cowards on TV and she’s doing so. You can’t swing a dead cat on Twitter without hitting 100 randos who could do this. The real reason MSNBC wants her is that she’s such an outstanding commentator, it’s that she’s such an outspoken partisan. Here’s a recent sample from her Twitter feed:
Yesterday, our monstrous, despicable president assaulted Americans engaged in peaceful protest for a photo op. He could be reelected. I wrote a few mean texts four years ago and have been rained down with insults and attacks ever since. But I'm the fucking coup plotter. Got it. — Lisa Page (@NatSecLisa) June 2, 2020
She appeared on Rachel Maddow’s show last December. I wonder how long after that the discussions about hiring her began.
Going on the Rachel Maddow Show tonight. It's time to talk about the release of my text messages, the two years of lies shouted across the media about me, and what it's like when the President of the United States tries to ruin your life. — Lisa Page (@NatSecLisa) December 17, 2019
The appearance on Maddow came a few weeks after a profile by Molly Jong-Fast at the Daily Beast in which she vowed not to be silent anymore.
So now she has a platform to hit back at Trump and that’s what makes her valuable to MSNBC. Speaking of which, it’s pretty much guaranteed that Trump will tweet something about this, right? Nothing from the president so far but Don Jr. has tweeted about it.


hotair--2020-06-05--Fauci: These protests are a "perfect set-up" for further spread of coronavirus; <span color='red'>Up

Fauci: These protests are a "perfect set-up" for further spread of coronavirus; Update: Doctors "boxed in"?

Via Business Insider , it turns out there is one scientific expert who didn ’ t suddenly lose interest in containing a once-in-a-century pandemic the day after George Floyd was murdered .
And I do mean one .
The only thing we can do as public health officials to prevent spread among demonstrators is keep warning people to wear the masks , says a worried Fauci at the end of the short interview below .
But that ’ s not true .
Another thing public health officials can do is … not actively encourage people to hold mass gatherings .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ today signed by no fewer than 1,200 public health officials defending the need for these protests — and only these protests — notwithstanding the heightened risk they ’ re creating of a second wave of COVID .
Just as the Times couldn ’ t admit that it changed its mind on Tom Cotton ’ s op-ed for nakedly political reasons , neither can these people flatly say that they ’ re subordinating public health to social justice .
Social justice is itself a public health concern , they scold , never mind that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ few months that the risk from COVID-19 is so dire that we might see hundreds of thousands of deaths before the end of the year .
Staying at home , social distancing , and public masking are effective at minimizing the spread of COVID-19 .
To the extent possible , we support the application of these public health best practices during demonstrations that call attention to the pervasive lethal force of white supremacy .
However , as public health advocates , we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States .
We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators ’ ability to gather and demand change .
This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings , particularly protests against stay-home orders .
Those actions not only oppose public health interventions , but are also rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives .
Protests against systemic racism , which fosters the disproportionate burden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perpetuates police violence , must be supported .
It *is* a good cause .
But keeping business open in order to avert an economic collapse , with all the human wreckage that might entail , was a good cause .
Consoling family members in the hospital as they died of COVID was a good cause .
Practicing one ’ s faith with a community of believers was a good cause .
None of those causes was deemed sufficiently good to justify ignoring social distancing rules in March , April , and May .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue .
It ’ s ideological .
The signatories of the letter believe ardently in the cause of racial justice so they ’ ve chosen to serve it via dereliction of their duties to protect public health .
Fauci hasn ’ t .
Simple as that .
The White House has already internalized the new message that it ’ s okay to ignore social distancing if you really , really want to do what it ’ s stopping you from doing , and has acted accordingly : You would think supporters of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more fact-specific defense of their position .
For the first time in nearly three months , New York City had no deaths from COVID-19 yesterday .
We ’ re now under 1,000 deaths nationally on weekdays , administering more than 450,000 tests daily , and have reached a solid positivity rate of four percent .
The warmer summer weather may be helping to limit transmission and Americans have quickly adopted mask-wearing as SOP .
They *could* argue , not unpersuasively , that mass gatherings are somewhat safer now than they used to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that logic has a problem — it would encourage people to start holding mass gatherings for purely sociable reasons as well .
And our public health experts continue to oppose those .
They ’ re not advising that restrictions be lifted .
They just want them lifted for one specific cause near and dear to their hearts .
The credibility they ’ ve lost here will never return .
From now on , to the extent it wasn ’ t already , people ’ s behavior will be guided almost exclusively by their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the latest data .
Maybe they ’ ll still listen to Fauci , assuming anyone will put him on cable news anymore while he delivers this message .
Update : The Politico reporter who wrote yesterday ’ s story about scientists trading social distancing for social justice offers this chilling follow-up : If another 100,000 of us have to die so that scientists can remain safely politically correct , that ’ s a sacrifice they ’ re willing to make .

Via Business Insider, it turns out there is one scientific expert who didn’t suddenly lose interest in containing a once-in-a-century pandemic the day after George Floyd was murdered.
And I do mean one.
The only thing we can do as public health officials to prevent spread among demonstrators is keep warning people to wear the masks, says a worried Fauci at the end of the short interview below. But that’s not true. Another thing public health officials can do is … not actively encourage people to hold mass gatherings.
This is completely, completely inexusable. COMPLETELY. This has to stop — who are the responsible public health official with the guts to at least give people a more nuanced understanding of the risks and benefits? pic.twitter.com/tMJISpjEto — Jesse Singal (@jessesingal) June 5, 2020
Do you understand what it does to public trust in institutions when this sort of tale-wagging-the-dog logic prevails? “Um, ‘male’ and ‘female’ don’t really mean anything — it’s SCIENCE.” “Um, of course the risks of protesting are outweighed by the benefits — it’s SCIENCE.” — Jesse Singal (@jessesingal) June 5, 2020
There’s a letter going around today signed by no fewer than 1,200 public health officials defending the need for these protests — and only these protests — notwithstanding the heightened risk they’re creating of a second wave of COVID. Just as the Times couldn’t admit that it changed its mind on Tom Cotton’s op-ed for nakedly political reasons, neither can these people flatly say that they’re subordinating public health to social justice. Social justice is itself a public health concern, they scold, never mind that we were warned just within the past few months that the risk from COVID-19 is so dire that we might see hundreds of thousands of deaths before the end of the year.
Staying at home, social distancing, and public masking are effective at minimizing the spread of COVID-19. To the extent possible, we support the application of these public health best practices during demonstrations that call attention to the pervasive lethal force of white supremacy. However, as public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support them as vital to the national public health and to the threatened health specifically of Black people in the United States. We can show that support by facilitating safest protesting practices without detracting from demonstrators’ ability to gather and demand change. This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions, but are also rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives. Protests against systemic racism, which fosters the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 on Black communities and also perpetuates police violence, must be supported.
It *is* a good cause. But keeping business open in order to avert an economic collapse, with all the human wreckage that might entail, was a good cause. Consoling family members in the hospital as they died of COVID was a good cause. Practicing one’s faith with a community of believers was a good cause. None of those causes was deemed sufficiently good to justify ignoring social distancing rules in March, April, and May.
This isn’t a public health issue. It’s ideological. The signatories of the letter believe ardently in the cause of racial justice so they’ve chosen to serve it via dereliction of their duties to protect public health. Fauci hasn’t. Simple as that.
The White House has already internalized the new message that it’s okay to ignore social distancing if you really, really want to do what it’s stopping you from doing, and has acted accordingly:
The news conference was initially set up for social distancing. Then the WH rearranged the chairs. Before and after pics from our @abdallahcnn pic.twitter.com/jxKAneAZsy — Jim Acosta (@Acosta) June 5, 2020
You would think supporters of the demonstrators would at least reach for a more fact-specific defense of their position. For the first time in nearly three months, New York City had no deaths from COVID-19 yesterday. We’re now under 1,000 deaths nationally on weekdays, administering more than 450,000 tests daily, and have reached a solid positivity rate of four percent. The warmer summer weather may be helping to limit transmission and Americans have quickly adopted mask-wearing as SOP. They *could* argue, not unpersuasively, that mass gatherings are somewhat safer now than they used to be, thus justifying the protests. But that logic has a problem — it would encourage people to start holding mass gatherings for purely sociable reasons as well. And our public health experts continue to oppose those. They’re not advising that restrictions be lifted. They just want them lifted for one specific cause near and dear to their hearts.
The credibility they’ve lost here will never return. From now on, to the extent it wasn’t already, people’s behavior will be guided almost exclusively by their personal assessment of local risk based on the latest data. Maybe they’ll still listen to Fauci, assuming anyone will put him on cable news anymore while he delivers this message.
Update: The Politico reporter who wrote yesterday’s story about scientists trading social distancing for social justice offers this chilling follow-up:
4. One other note on the response: I've heard, post-publication, from some doctors and Covid experts who say they feel boxed in: that they want to warn about public health risks of the new protests, but are worried they'll be perceived as attacking the movement or worse. — Dan Diamond (@ddiamond) June 5, 2020
If another 100,000 of us have to die so that scientists can remain safely politically correct, that’s a sacrifice they’re willing to make.


hotair--2020-06-05--PBS reporter Yamiche Alcindor's selective interest in unemployment rates

PBS reporter Yamiche Alcindor has become a progressive media darling for her resistance journalism at the White House .
Today she interrupted a bill signing to shout a question at the president about the unemployment rate .
Here ’ s the clip : Alcindor put out two tweets about this , one of which has more than 50k likes : How is this a victory ?
Well , let ’ s let prominent journalist Yamiche Alcindor explain that .
Here are some of her previous tweets about the unemployment rate ( in reverse chronological order ) : So , unemployment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expressing concern about that for months .
She ’ s clearly aware there was concern the rate could go as high as 20 percent .
In fact , many people thought that ’ s what would happen today .
The Washington Post had some egg on its face earlier because someone scheduled a tweet in advance about the likelihood of reaching the “ grim milestone ” of 20 % unemployment today .
The tweet went out even after the good news about the unexpected drop .
Oops !
The Post has since tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alcindor ’ s question , today ’ s numbers are a victory because instead of reaching a grim milestone , unemployment went down sharply .
As for black unemployment specifically , that also could have spiked today by several percent and , thankfully , it barely budged .
That ’ s good news .
All of this should be self-explanatory to any national reporter , especially one given an assignment at the White House .
But the problem here isn ’ t that Yamiche Alcindor doesn ’ t know this .
The problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looking to create a gotcha moment .
She ’ s doing this for all the people who don ’ t know or don ’ t care why this was a silly and misleading question .
And it worked because PBS is promoting the clip and she got a lot of likes and retweets .
As you can see above , Alcindor has devoted a bunch of tweets to the unemployment rate going up .
Where was she when it was going down ?
Here ’ s what I found .
Back in 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Alcindor tweeted about it once .
She included a caveat : She also tweeted about Trump talking about it earlier this year .
But if you go way back to the Obama years , she tweeted about drops in unemployment several times without any caveats .
Back then it was just good news : I ’ m using Twitter search to find these .
I ’ m not including all of them and maybe I ’ m not seeing some tweets at all , but it looks to me like there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been trumpeting the bad news about the unemployment rate for weeks but had a pretty tepid reaction ( at best ) to the good news between 2018 and the pandemic .
Her question today was nonsensical because today ’ s outcome was good news given prior expectations .
None of this will matter in the least of Alcindor ’ s fans because , as we all know , there ’ s a big market out there for resistance journalism .
And the rest of the media , like this CBS News reporter , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

PBS reporter Yamiche Alcindor has become a progressive media darling for her resistance journalism at the White House. Today she interrupted a bill signing to shout a question at the president about the unemployment rate. Here’s the clip:
.@Yamiche: "Black unemployment went up by 0.1%, Asian American unemployment went up by 0.5% how is that a victory?" President Trump: "You are something else." pic.twitter.com/1B5IqBNzWz — PBS NewsHour (@NewsHour) June 5, 2020
Alcindor put out two tweets about this, one of which has more than 50k likes:
President Trump calls today's jobs news "a tremendous tribute to equality." The unemployment rate fell from 1 percent. Black unemployment rate went up by .1%. Asian American unemployment rate went up by .5%. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) June 5, 2020
My Q to President Trump just now: Overall, U.S. unemployment rate fell by 1 %. Black unemployment rate went up .1%. Asian American rate went up by .5%. How is that a victory? His response to me: “You are something.” Note: It’s a crucial question. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) June 5, 2020
How is this a victory? Well, let’s let prominent journalist Yamiche Alcindor explain that. Here are some of her previous tweets about the unemployment rate (in reverse chronological order):
"The stock market is booming," says President Trump. Context: Since mid-March, some 39 million Americans have filed for unemployment. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) June 3, 2020
President Trump on 20.5 million jobs lost in April and the unemployment rate jumping to 14.7%: “It’s fully expected. There’s no surprise. Everyone knows that..What I can do is bring it back…Thise jobs will be back.” — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) May 8, 2020
As President Trump talks on Fox News … U.S. unemployment hits 14.7%, highest rate since the Depression, as U.S. shed 20 million jobs in April from the coronavirus outbreak. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) May 8, 2020
More than 3.8 million people filed for unemployment benefits last week, according to the Labor Department. Roughly 30 million Americans have filed for unemployment benefits in six weeks. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) April 30, 2020
The Labor Department reported more than 5 million new unemployment claims Thursday, hours before President Donald Trump will speak to the U.S. governors on guidelines for reopening the nation's crippled economy. https://t.co/oLx3HFvWB7 — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) April 16, 2020
“My goodness.”
My goodness. A record 6.6 million Americans applied for unemployment last week, a stunning sign of an economic collapse triggered by coronavirus. https://t.co/nq0UaF58Ms — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) April 2, 2020
President Trumps says he doesn't believe the unemployment rate will hit 20%. He also isn't giving details on how much checks to Americans might be though WH officials have said they like the idea of $1,000 checks. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) March 18, 2020
Bloomberg News is reporting Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin told GOP senators that the U.S. could see an unemployment rate of 20%. 20%. https://t.co/ggfZdxED8j — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) March 17, 2020
So, unemployment has been spiking and Alcindor has been expressing concern about that for months. She’s clearly aware there was concern the rate could go as high as 20 percent. In fact, many people thought that’s what would happen today. The Washington Post had some egg on its face earlier because someone scheduled a tweet in advance about the likelihood of reaching the “grim milestone” of 20% unemployment today. The tweet went out even after the good news about the unexpected drop.
Legitimate lol at the Washington Post tweeting this out over an hour after the jobs report was released showing an unexpected *drop* in the unemployment rate. pic.twitter.com/svSGAybsWt — Josh Jordan (@NumbersMuncher) June 5, 2020
Oops! The Post has since tried to recover:
Economists predicted 20 percent employment in May. How did they get it so wrong? https://t.co/0t8eN1BTU0 — The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) June 5, 2020
So, to answer Alcindor’s question, today’s numbers are a victory because instead of reaching a grim milestone, unemployment went down sharply. As for black unemployment specifically, that also could have spiked today by several percent and, thankfully, it barely budged. That’s good news.
All of this should be self-explanatory to any national reporter, especially one given an assignment at the White House. But the problem here isn’t that Yamiche Alcindor doesn’t know this. The problem is that she’s a partisan looking to create a gotcha moment. She’s doing this for all the people who don’t know or don’t care why this was a silly and misleading question. And it worked because PBS is promoting the clip and she got a lot of likes and retweets.
As you can see above, Alcindor has devoted a bunch of tweets to the unemployment rate going up. Where was she when it was going down? Here’s what I found. Back in 2018 when black unemployment rates hit record lows, Alcindor tweeted about it once. She included a caveat:
"African-American unemployment stands at the lowest rate ever recorded, and Hispanic American unemployment has also reached the lowest levels in history," Pres Trump says. Fact: Unemployment rates among both groups are still significantly higher than whites unemployment rates. — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) January 31, 2018
She also tweeted about Trump talking about it earlier this year.
Meanwhile in Milwaukee, President Trump is telling a majority white rally crowd that Republicans "love" black people and that black voters are joining the Republican Party bc of the low African American unemployment rate. https://t.co/J43LjPwFqY — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) January 15, 2020
But if you go way back to the Obama years, she tweeted about drops in unemployment several times without any caveats. Back then it was just good news:
Unemployment claims drop to 5-year low http://t.co/JvNkFFib via @USATODAY — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) January 24, 2013
Headline @USATODAY: Claims for unemployment benefits plunge 30,000 http://t.co/GM2BsLr6 — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) October 11, 2012
Headline @USATODAY: September unemployment rate falls to 7.8% http://t.co/HP1NBGox — Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) October 5, 2012
I’m using Twitter search to find these. I’m not including all of them and maybe I’m not seeing some tweets at all, but it looks to me like there’s a pattern here. Alcindor has been trumpeting the bad news about the unemployment rate for weeks but had a pretty tepid reaction (at best) to the good news between 2018 and the pandemic. Her question today was nonsensical because today’s outcome was good news given prior expectations.
None of this will matter in the least of Alcindor’s fans because, as we all know, there’s a big market out there for resistance journalism. And the rest of the media, like this CBS News reporter, will just play along with the game.


hotair--2020-06-05--NYT op-ed editor apologizes for Tom Cotton "Send in the Troops" piece online, says it won't run in p

NYT op-ed editor apologizes for Tom Cotton "Send in the Troops" piece online, says it won't run in print

Not only was this predictable , it was predicted .
“ The editor of the op-ed page , James Bennet , defended the decision to publish it — although given the way these things normally go , both he and Dean Baquet will probably be delivering groveling apologies to the newsroom before the day is out , ” I wrote yesterday morning of the controversy over Cotton ’ s op-ed .
It took a day longer than I thought .
But we had a fun adventure en route to our destination .
Last night Bennet published an op-ed of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Cotton is a figure with influence over policy , therefore it ’ s in the public interest to know what he thinks about deploying troops against rioters , he said .
Having him write an op-ed exposes his argument to more criticism than he ’ d get by expressing his view in a glib tweet , he added .
This is textbook classical liberal marketplace-of-ideas reasoning : “ Cotton and others in power are advocating the use of the military , and I believe the public would be better equipped to push @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had the chance to respond to the reasoning .
Readers who might be inclined to oppose Cotton ’ s position need to be fully aware of it , and reckon with it , if they hope to defeat it .
To me , debating influential ideas openly , rather than letting them go unchallenged , is far more likely to help society reach the right answers.
” Then , last night , a curious exculpatory news story about the controversy appeared in the Times .
Apparently Bennet told staffers in a meeting that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before it ran .
A Times spokeswoman claimed that “ a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards.
” Blame fell to junior editor Adam Rubenstein , formerly of the conservative Weekly Standard , who had handled the editing .
Suddenly it seemed as if poor James Bennet had been blindsided by poor judgment exhibited by a rare right-wing deputy in the ranks .
If anything , his public defense of the piece was just him covering for his staff ’ s misguided decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued fire from Times writers about the “ danger ” Cotton ’ s op-ed posed , he tried a third explanation .
We screwed up , he told the staff in a meeting .
You were right , I was wrong .
Mea culpa , mea culpa , mea maxima culpa .
One by one during Friday ’ s staff meeting , the paper ’ s top leaders apologized for the opinion piece .
At one point , the paper admitted that it did “ invite ” Cotton to write the column .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ editor James Bennet issued a mea culpa , claiming he let his section be “ stampeded by the news cycle , ” and confessed that the backlash had inspired him to rethink the op-ed section entirely .
“ I just want to begin by saying I ’ m very sorry , I ’ m sorry for the pain that this particular piece has caused , ” he said , adding : “ I do think this is a moment for me and for us to interrogate everything we do in opinion.
” During @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meeting , Bennet took several confrontational questions from irate staff .
When asked why he did not personally read Cotton ’ s column before publishing it , Bennet said it was “ another part of the process that broke down.
” He further added : “ I should have been involved in signing off on the piece…I should have read it and signed off.
” The idea of a “ rushed ” process in which Cotton ’ s op-ed somehow mysteriously found itself being published by the paper without top editors knowing was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of how the op-ed came to be .
He and his staff offered it to the Times a few days ago , Rich Lowry reported this morning , and found the paper receptive : “ The original pitch to the paper on Monday was to package together the argument on the Insurrection Act with another proposal , but the editors were interested in a piece focused solely on the Insurrection Act.
” Cotton agreed and went through no fewer than three rounds of editing for the piece , the last of which involved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to think the process was “ rushed ” or that it “ broke down.
” To all appearances , that ’ s a straight-up lie concocted by Times leadership to disguise a truth they ’ re ashamed to admit to their staff , namely that they weren ’ t woke enough to realize that Cotton ’ s op-ed was “ problematic ” until woker junior staffers pointed it out .
Better to admit that the paper ’ s editing process is defective than to cop to a wokeness deficiency .
Arthur Sulzberger , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stooped to this logic in order to find a fig leaf for the true reason they were now denouncing Cotton ’ s op-ed : I doubt the Times has ever published an editorial that wasn ’ t openly contemptuous of the subject of its criticism .
If you edited Paul Krugman to remove the contemptuous passages in his columns , they ’ d be six words long .
Apparently Bennet also appeased the crowd at today ’ s meeting by throwing columnist Bari Weiss to the wolves , per this now-deleted tweet by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ included Weiss ’ s tweets in his post about this last night .
She simply noted the tension between traditional marketplace-of-ideas liberals like Bennet and ( typically younger ) leftists who are more willing to deny platforms to speakers who threaten their “ safety.
” Weiss saw it as a flashpoint in a cultural civil war on the left not unlike the battle on college campuses over whether certain types of mainstream right-wing speech should be invited and debated or simply excluded .
The Cotton piece was a test of strength between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Guess who won .
I like the way John framed the irony of this debate last night : “ [ T ] he Times has now decided it would have been better not to facilitate a public conversation about the content of Sen. Cotton ’ s op-ed even though that ’ s exactly the conversation Times staffers are having in private.
” Remember , the argument against Cotton ’ s piece that circulated among Times staffers on social media wasn ’ t primarily that it offended the paper ’ s institutional values , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to publish an op-ed , but that the mere fact of its publication placed black journalists in danger .
Times staffers could themselves be trusted to read it , digest it , and responsibly engage with it , of course — for more than two days now , with much media fanfare — but not the great unwashed .
I ’ m curious : Would Times staffers support publishing a piece like this one that recently ran at Slate , defending the burning of a police precinct as a reasonable response to George @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a more generic defense of rioting as “ the language of the unheard , ” the only way to communicate to the rest of the population how frustrated African-Americans are by how cheaply the police seem to value their lives ?
Because rioting also places people in danger , quite literally .
Could the great unwashed be trusted with a little pro-riot advocacy across from the latest tedious Maureen Dowd column ?
One other thought .
What if Cotton had said “ to hell with it ” and decided to read the op-ed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the Senate floor instead of having them publish it ?
Should the Times news section cover that speech ?
If the logic for not running Cotton ’ s op-ed is that it offends the paper ’ s institutional values then I ’ d say sure , there ’ s no contradiction .
The Times isn ’ t obliged to lend its platform to amplify views it finds abhorrent , but it is obliged to note for the record the fact that those abhorrent views are being advanced by influential public officials .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s op-ed is that his views place people in danger , though , then it ’ s a harder question .
Why should the Times ’ s news section be coopted by authoritarians to endanger black journalists just because the op-ed section refuses to be ?
If the paper has a duty to ensure “ safety ” then it ’ s weird that that duty would be confined to opinion .
This is what Weiss is ultimately worried about , I think : The more “ safety ” is the guiding ethos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the more it has to censor for the sake of that safety .
And not just on the op-ed page .

Not only was this predictable, it was predicted. “The editor of the op-ed page, James Bennet, defended the decision to publish it — although given the way these things normally go, both he and Dean Baquet will probably be delivering groveling apologies to the newsroom before the day is out,” I wrote yesterday morning of the controversy over Cotton’s op-ed.
It took a day longer than I thought.
But we had a fun adventure en route to our destination. Last night Bennet published an op-ed of his own explaining why he ran the piece. Cotton is a figure with influence over policy, therefore it’s in the public interest to know what he thinks about deploying troops against rioters, he said. Having him write an op-ed exposes his argument to more criticism than he’d get by expressing his view in a glib tweet, he added. This is textbook classical liberal marketplace-of-ideas reasoning: “Cotton and others in power are advocating the use of the military, and I believe the public would be better equipped to push back if it heard the argument and had the chance to respond to the reasoning. Readers who might be inclined to oppose Cotton’s position need to be fully aware of it, and reckon with it, if they hope to defeat it. To me, debating influential ideas openly, rather than letting them go unchallenged, is far more likely to help society reach the right answers.”
Then, last night, a curious exculpatory news story about the controversy appeared in the Times. Apparently Bennet told staffers in a meeting that he hadn’t read the piece before it ran. A Times spokeswoman claimed that “a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards.” Blame fell to junior editor Adam Rubenstein, formerly of the conservative Weekly Standard, who had handled the editing. Suddenly it seemed as if poor James Bennet had been blindsided by poor judgment exhibited by a rare right-wing deputy in the ranks. If anything, his public defense of the piece was just him covering for his staff’s misguided decision to run it.
Today, under continued fire from Times writers about the “danger” Cotton’s op-ed posed, he tried a third explanation. We screwed up, he told the staff in a meeting. You were right, I was wrong. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
One by one during Friday’s staff meeting, the paper’s top leaders apologized for the opinion piece. At one point, the paper admitted that it did “invite” Cotton to write the column. The paper’s controversial top opinion editor James Bennet issued a mea culpa, claiming he let his section be “stampeded by the news cycle,” and confessed that the backlash had inspired him to rethink the op-ed section entirely. “I just want to begin by saying I’m very sorry, I’m sorry for the pain that this particular piece has caused,” he said, adding: “I do think this is a moment for me and for us to interrogate everything we do in opinion.” During the Q&A portion of the meeting, Bennet took several confrontational questions from irate staff. When asked why he did not personally read Cotton’s column before publishing it, Bennet said it was “another part of the process that broke down.” He further added: “I should have been involved in signing off on the piece…I should have read it and signed off.”
The idea of a “rushed” process in which Cotton’s op-ed somehow mysteriously found itself being published by the paper without top editors knowing was contradicted by Cotton’s own account of how the op-ed came to be. He and his staff offered it to the Times a few days ago, Rich Lowry reported this morning, and found the paper receptive: “The original pitch to the paper on Monday was to package together the argument on the Insurrection Act with another proposal, but the editors were interested in a piece focused solely on the Insurrection Act.” Cotton agreed and went through no fewer than three rounds of editing for the piece, the last of which involved fact-checking. There’s no reason to think the process was “rushed” or that it “broke down.” To all appearances, that’s a straight-up lie concocted by Times leadership to disguise a truth they’re ashamed to admit to their staff, namely that they weren’t woke enough to realize that Cotton’s op-ed was “problematic” until woker junior staffers pointed it out.
Better to admit that the paper’s editing process is defective than to cop to a wokeness deficiency.
Arthur Sulzberger, the Times’s publisher, actually stooped to this logic in order to find a fig leaf for the true reason they were now denouncing Cotton’s op-ed:
A.G. Sulzberger, NYT publisher, tells the staff the Cotton Op-Ed was 'contemptuous' in tone and should not have been published. In future, fact-checkers will be added to Op-Ed staff & fewer will be published. — Trip Gabriel (@tripgabriel) June 5, 2020
I doubt the Times has ever published an editorial that wasn’t openly contemptuous of the subject of its criticism. If you edited Paul Krugman to remove the contemptuous passages in his columns, they’d be six words long.
Apparently Bennet also appeased the crowd at today’s meeting by throwing columnist Bari Weiss to the wolves, per this now-deleted tweet by a Times staffer who attended:
John included Weiss’s tweets in his post about this last night. She simply noted the tension between traditional marketplace-of-ideas liberals like Bennet and (typically younger) leftists who are more willing to deny platforms to speakers who threaten their “safety.” Weiss saw it as a flashpoint in a cultural civil war on the left not unlike the battle on college campuses over whether certain types of mainstream right-wing speech should be invited and debated or simply excluded. The Cotton piece was a test of strength between the two sides in-house at the Times. Guess who won.
I like the way John framed the irony of this debate last night: “[T]he Times has now decided it would have been better not to facilitate a public conversation about the content of Sen. Cotton’s op-ed even though that’s exactly the conversation Times staffers are having in private.” Remember, the argument against Cotton’s piece that circulated among Times staffers on social media wasn’t primarily that it offended the paper’s institutional values, which is always a fair reason not to publish an op-ed, but that the mere fact of its publication placed black journalists in danger. Times staffers could themselves be trusted to read it, digest it, and responsibly engage with it, of course — for more than two days now, with much media fanfare — but not the great unwashed. I’m curious: Would Times staffers support publishing a piece like this one that recently ran at Slate, defending the burning of a police precinct as a reasonable response to George Floyd’s murder? What about a more generic defense of rioting as “the language of the unheard,” the only way to communicate to the rest of the population how frustrated African-Americans are by how cheaply the police seem to value their lives?
Because rioting also places people in danger, quite literally. Could the great unwashed be trusted with a little pro-riot advocacy across from the latest tedious Maureen Dowd column?
One other thought. What if Cotton had said “to hell with it” and decided to read the op-ed he’d drafted for the Times on the Senate floor instead of having them publish it? Should the Times news section cover that speech? If the logic for not running Cotton’s op-ed is that it offends the paper’s institutional values then I’d say sure, there’s no contradiction. The Times isn’t obliged to lend its platform to amplify views it finds abhorrent, but it is obliged to note for the record the fact that those abhorrent views are being advanced by influential public officials. If the logic for not running Cotton’s op-ed is that his views place people in danger, though, then it’s a harder question. Why should the Times’s news section be coopted by authoritarians to endanger black journalists just because the op-ed section refuses to be? If the paper has a duty to ensure “safety” then it’s weird that that duty would be confined to opinion. This is what Weiss is ultimately worried about, I think: The more “safety” is the guiding ethos for a publication ostensibly devoted to truth, the more it has to censor for the sake of that safety. And not just on the op-ed page.


hotair--2020-06-05--Andy Ngo sues Rose City Antifa for $900,000

Journalist Andy Ngo was beaten up by a group of Antifa thugs last June while he was covering a protest in Portland .
As a result of that beating , Ngo ended up in the hospital and was diagnosed with a brain hemorrhage .
Since then attempts at intimidation of Ngo and his family have continued .
Yesterday , Ngo announced he had filed a lawsuit against Rose City Antifa and five specific members of the group : The suit , filed Thursday by attorney Harmeet Dhillon of the Center for American Liberty , includes claims of assault , battery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Oregon ’ s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization ( RICO ) Act .
“ Defendants and their fellow Antifa members or supporters and ‘ allies ’ have physically accosted and viciously assaulted Ngo at protests that he was covering , stolen his photographic equipment , publicized the addresses of his family home and mother ’ s business , tried to force entry into his house , and stalked him in his personal life , including by attacking and stealing his phone while at a gym , ” the suit says .
Five individual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” were identified and named in the suit : Corbyn ( Katherine ) Belyea , Benjamin Bolen , Joseph Christian Evans , John Hacker and Madison Lee Allen , in addition to Luis Marquez , who is named as “ one of the leaders ” of the Antifa group , according to the paperwork… “ For more than a year , Antifa extremists have subjected my family and I to a campaign of intimidation and terror from my reporting and documentation of their violent extremism as a journalist , ” Ngo said during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on to say , “ Despite giving leads to the Portland police , not a single arrest has happened.
” That ’ s probably the strangest thing about this story .
Anyone who has been following Antifa ’ s antics in Portland can ’ t be surprised the group got violent , but given that this assault was caught on video why hasn ’ t anyone been arrested ?
You ’ ve probably seen this video before but maybe it ’ s been a while .
If Ngo and his legal team were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , why weren ’ t the Portland police ?
I ’ d be curious to know what the police have actually done to pursue it in the past 11 months .
Maybe we ’ ll find out as part of this lawsuit .
It sounds like the first hurdle is going to be serving the people named in the lawsuit .
The timing of this is certainly good , coming the same day as that Project Veritas report on the group ’ s inner workings .
Ngo ’ s attorney Harmeet Dhillon said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawsuit earlier but that she has been busy with COVID-19 lawsuits for several weeks .
The Oregonian reports that Ngo is suing the group for $ 900,000 .
Here ’ s the virtual press conference with Ngo and his attorney that took place yesterday :

Journalist Andy Ngo was beaten up by a group of Antifa thugs last June while he was covering a protest in Portland. As a result of that beating, Ngo ended up in the hospital and was diagnosed with a brain hemorrhage. Since then attempts at intimidation of Ngo and his family have continued. Yesterday, Ngo announced he had filed a lawsuit against Rose City Antifa and five specific members of the group:
The suit, filed Thursday by attorney Harmeet Dhillon of the Center for American Liberty, includes claims of assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress and Oregon’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) Act. “Defendants and their fellow Antifa members or supporters and ‘allies’ have physically accosted and viciously assaulted Ngo at protests that he was covering, stolen his photographic equipment, publicized the addresses of his family home and mother’s business, tried to force entry into his house, and stalked him in his personal life, including by attacking and stealing his phone while at a gym,” the suit says. Five individual members of Antifa and its “allies” were identified and named in the suit: Corbyn (Katherine) Belyea, Benjamin Bolen, Joseph Christian Evans, John Hacker and Madison Lee Allen, in addition to Luis Marquez, who is named as “one of the leaders” of the Antifa group, according to the paperwork… “For more than a year, Antifa extremists have subjected my family and I to a campaign of intimidation and terror from my reporting and documentation of their violent extremism as a journalist,” Ngo said during a virtual news conference.
Ngo went on to say, “Despite giving leads to the Portland police, not a single arrest has happened.” That’s probably the strangest thing about this story. Anyone who has been following Antifa’s antics in Portland can’t be surprised the group got violent, but given that this assault was caught on video why hasn’t anyone been arrested? You’ve probably seen this video before but maybe it’s been a while.
First skirmish I’ve seen. Didn’t see how this started, but @MrAndyNgo got roughed up. pic.twitter.com/hDkfQchRhG — Jim Ryan (@Jimryan015) June 29, 2019
If Ngo and his legal team were able to identify some of these people, why weren’t the Portland police? I’d be curious to know what the police have actually done to pursue it in the past 11 months. Maybe we’ll find out as part of this lawsuit. It sounds like the first hurdle is going to be serving the people named in the lawsuit.
The timing of this is certainly good, coming the same day as that Project Veritas report on the group’s inner workings. Ngo’s attorney Harmeet Dhillon said she intended to move forward with the lawsuit earlier but that she has been busy with COVID-19 lawsuits for several weeks.
The Oregonian reports that Ngo is suing the group for $900,000. Here’s the virtual press conference with Ngo and his attorney that took place yesterday: