hotair--2020-10-16--Biden campaign: Twitter's response to the NY Post story proves it was false (but Twitter never said

Biden campaign: Twitter's response to the NY Post story proves it was false (but Twitter never said that)

Yesterday the Biden campaign ’ s National Press Secretary , Jamal Brown , gave an interview to online news site Cheddar .
Toward the end of the interview he was asked about the NY Post story .
“ What is your campaign response to this article and do you think Twitter is doing the right thing here ?
” the host asked .
“ Well , look , I think Twitter ’ s response to the actual article itself makes clear that these purported allegations are false and they ’ re not true and glad to see social media companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Brown replied .
The first thing to say about this is that it isn ’ t true .
Twitter never claimed that it was blocking the story because it was false .
As Jazz pointed out yesterday , Twitter ’ s response to this yesterday was an ever-evolving mess .
At first , Twitter claimed the story had been identified as “ potentially harmful.
” Who identified it as harmful and on what basis ?
That wasn ’ t at all clear and the director of the International Fact Checking Network @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also had questions about how Twitter had quickly reached a decision about the story : Later in the day , when Jack Dorsey admitted the response had been a mess , he directed readers to two different explanations for Twitter ’ s decision : Notice the presumption here is not that the story is false .
On the contrary , Twitter is claiming the image of the email that appear in the story contained “ private information , ” i.e .
Hunter Biden ’ s email address .
Twitter also offered another explanation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the story violates their rules because it was hacked .
They ’ re not trying to stop distribution of the Post story because it ’ s fake , they ’ re trying to stop distribution of it because it appears to be real , albeit possibly acquired in an illegal manner .
It ’ s worth noting that the Post offered an explanation for how it got the information , one which did not involve hacking .
Allegedly someone , maybe Hunter Biden , left three laptops at a shop in Delaware and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a certain point , those laptops would be considered abandoned and become the property of the shop owner .
Is it possible this material was actually hacked and then planted on these machines by some nefarious individual ?
Anything is possible , but at this point there ’ s no proof that ’ s the case .
Twitter jumped to a conclusion that isn ’ t supported by facts and used that to block transmission of the article .
Getting back to the Biden campaign ’ s response , I hope Twitter is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be too shocked about a campaign spokesman lying , but after the mess Twitter made here Jack Dorsey could at least correct the Biden campaign for misstating his stated position on his own platform .
Will he do that ?
Or are they going to just let this ride ?
As of last night , Twitter has revised its policy about hacked materials : Twitter changed its policy on hacked materials Thursday night after widespread criticism over its handling of the New York Post ’ s controversial story about Hunter Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ materials will only be immediately locked if directly posted by the hackers or by individuals working with them .
Labels with context will be added to tweets containing hacked materials .
Twitter said the link to the Post article , which includes unredacted emails purporting to be between Biden and a Ukrainian businessman , will still be blocked from being shared in tweets or direct messages under a separate policy prohibiting sharing personal information .
This isn ’ t very satisfactory .
Twitter still hasn ’ t explained why they claimed this material @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And if they believe it was hacked what good is allowing anyone but the hacker to post it ?
All the hacker has to do is hand the material to Wikileaks or the NY Times and now it ’ s fair game .
Or do those groups now count as individuals working with the hacker ?
I guess not since they seem to now be allowing that the NY Post story wasn ’ t posted by hackers .
What a mess .
When you cut through all of Twitter ’ s BS , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : They clamped down on this story because an image used in it didn ’ t conceal Hunter Biden ’ s email address .
That ’ s a pretty thin excuse for completely preventing a story from being shared on the platform .

Yesterday the Biden campaign’s National Press Secretary, Jamal Brown, gave an interview to online news site Cheddar. Toward the end of the interview he was asked about the NY Post story. “What is your campaign response to this article and do you think Twitter is doing the right thing here?” the host asked.
“Well, look, I think Twitter’s response to the actual article itself makes clear that these purported allegations are false and they’re not true and glad to see social media companies like Twitter taking responsibility to limit misinformation,” Brown replied.
Biden campaign National Press Secretary @JTOBrown responds to Twitter’s decision to block a New York Post story about Hunter Biden. “Twitter’s response to the actual article itself makes clear that these purported allegations are false.” #CheddarLive pic.twitter.com/PdPEkMZ85p — Cheddar🧀 (@cheddar) October 15, 2020
The first thing to say about this is that it isn’t true. Twitter never claimed that it was blocking the story because it was false. As Jazz pointed out yesterday, Twitter’s response to this yesterday was an ever-evolving mess. At first, Twitter claimed the story had been identified as “potentially harmful.”
BREAKING: Twitter has blocked the NY Post article about Hunter Biden. If you attempt to share the story, you will see this message: "We can't complete this request because this link has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially harmful." pic.twitter.com/TWaTKzvtQP — Scott Gustin (@ScottGustin) October 14, 2020
Who identified it as harmful and on what basis? That wasn’t at all clear and the director of the International Fact Checking Network (IFCN) took notice:
“… by Twitter or our partners” Not so transparent and supported by any methodology https://t.co/pbzoPM0LUb — Baybars Örsek (@baybarsorsek) October 14, 2020
Politifact also had questions about how Twitter had quickly reached a decision about the story:
Who are these partners they speak of? Has Twitter partnered with fact-checkers without telling anyone? It would be news to me. https://t.co/xqprI5dnIC — Angie Drobnic Holan (@AngieHolan) October 14, 2020
Later in the day, when Jack Dorsey admitted the response had been a mess, he directed readers to two different explanations for Twitter’s decision:
The images contained in the articles include personal and private information — like email addresses and phone numbers — which violate our rules.https://t.co/plPa5SZ3we — Twitter Safety (@TwitterSafety) October 14, 2020
Notice the presumption here is not that the story is false. On the contrary, Twitter is claiming the image of the email that appear in the story contained “private information,” i.e. Hunter Biden’s email address. Twitter also offered another explanation:
Commentary on or discussion about hacked materials, such as articles that cover them but do not include or link to the materials themselves, aren’t a violation of this policy. Our policy only covers links to or images of hacked material themselves. — Twitter Safety (@TwitterSafety) October 14, 2020
Twitter is claiming the information in the story violates their rules because it was hacked. They’re not trying to stop distribution of the Post story because it’s fake, they’re trying to stop distribution of it because it appears to be real, albeit possibly acquired in an illegal manner.
It’s worth noting that the Post offered an explanation for how it got the information, one which did not involve hacking. Allegedly someone, maybe Hunter Biden, left three laptops at a shop in Delaware and never came back for them. After a certain point, those laptops would be considered abandoned and become the property of the shop owner.
Is it possible this material was actually hacked and then planted on these machines by some nefarious individual? Anything is possible, but at this point there’s no proof that’s the case. Twitter jumped to a conclusion that isn’t supported by facts and used that to block transmission of the article.
Getting back to the Biden campaign’s response, I hope Twitter is paying attention. I guess you can’t be too shocked about a campaign spokesman lying, but after the mess Twitter made here Jack Dorsey could at least correct the Biden campaign for misstating his stated position on his own platform. Will he do that? Or are they going to just let this ride?
As of last night, Twitter has revised its policy about hacked materials:
Twitter changed its policy on hacked materials Thursday night after widespread criticism over its handling of the New York Post’s controversial story about Hunter Biden. Going forward, posts with hacked materials will only be immediately locked if directly posted by the hackers or by individuals working with them. Labels with context will be added to tweets containing hacked materials. Twitter said the link to the Post article, which includes unredacted emails purporting to be between Biden and a Ukrainian businessman, will still be blocked from being shared in tweets or direct messages under a separate policy prohibiting sharing personal information.
This isn’t very satisfactory. Twitter still hasn’t explained why they claimed this material was hacked in the first place. And if they believe it was hacked what good is allowing anyone but the hacker to post it? All the hacker has to do is hand the material to Wikileaks or the NY Times and now it’s fair game. Or do those groups now count as individuals working with the hacker? I guess not since they seem to now be allowing that the NY Post story wasn’t posted by hackers. What a mess.
When you cut through all of Twitter’s BS, here’s what your left with: They clamped down on this story because an image used in it didn’t conceal Hunter Biden’s email address. That’s a pretty thin excuse for completely preventing a story from being shared on the platform.


hotair--2020-10-16--Move over, fly. There's a new break-out star from the Trump town hall

There was a very enthusiastic Trump supporter sitting behind the president last night during his town hall event on NBC .
It was impossible not to notice her because every time President Trump spoke , she nodded her head in agreement .
Every time .
Her placement behind the president soon became fodder for Never Trumpers looking for a conspiracy .
She is being called the nodding lady .
Her name is Mayra Joli and she could be seen just behind President Trump ’ s left shoulder .
She is receiving her fifteen minutes of fame now , in part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trumpers that their willing cohorts in the press expose her .
Mayra is pretty good at self-promotion , too .
She posted a Facebook Live video after the debate as she interacted with Trump , along with other audience members .
The winner of the contest to identify the nodding woman is Alex Daugherty , a reporter for the Miami Herald .
Mayra is a 55-year-old immigration lawyer and former congressional candidate .
The usual angry reactions from the perpetually outraged were on display on social media .
How could she be allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which was touted as an event for undecided voters ?
Some questioned the vetting process for the audience members .
The audience members were a mix of Trump supporters , Biden supporters , and allegedly Independent voters who are still undecided .
Spare me the outrage for this Trump supporter ’ s presence .
Mayra is a former Democrat who ran as an Independent candidate and now is a Trump Republican .
According to her Facebook page , Joli is a native of Santa Domingo in the Dominican Republic .
Joli says that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Florida , five miles west of Miami , where the NBC town hall took place .
On Joli ’ s official congressional Facebook page , she uses a quote in her about section that reads , “ Be the light from which the world is lit.
” At the time of writing , Joli ’ s congressional website has been disabled .
Joli describes her political beliefs on her Twitter page as being Republican-affiliated and “ always conservative.
” Joli says that she is a “ former Democrat.
” In 2018 , Joli @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Miami congressional seat .
Joli ran as an independent and won 2.5 percent of the vote .
The election was eventually won by Democrat Donna Shalala .
She specializes in immigration law , specifically “ in detention and removal proceedings.
” She also has participated in beauty pageants , including a win in the Mrs. Coral Gables beauty pageant in 2015 .
She aligns herself with President Trump , including the fact that like Trump , she doesn ’ t drink .
When Trump asked her where she was from , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s an American now .
Trump brought up baseball legend Sammy Sosa and she told him that Sosa endorsed her congressional campaign in 2018 .
“ Hey , Sammy Sosa ?
” Trump said , referring to the Dominican-born former Chicago Cubs baseball player while mimicking a baseball swing .
Never Trumpers were hot to expose the Trump supporter .
Tom Nichols tweeted out : ‘ Journalists , if you don ’ t find out who that woman is nodding behind Trump at an ‘ undecided ’ voter town hall , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re getting paid for ’ .
I ’ d show you the tweet but he blocked me a long time ago .
A self-described comedian and writer who claims to be blocked by Trump sees a conspiracy at play .
She re-tweets The Lincoln Project ’ s tweets .
What was to stop the woman from nodding ?
She wasn ’ t in a court of law with an order to not show an emotional reaction to a verdict .
She was participating in a town hall , though that is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t a true town hall .
Savannah Guthrie is not an impartial observer of the election .
Here ’ s a little information – her husband was traveling chief of staff for Al Gore , back in the day .
She inserted herself over and over again , aggressively turning herself into Trump ’ s debating opponent , not a moderator .
Joe Biden didn ’ t show up to debate Trump , Savannah Guthrie did .
Mayra wasn ’ t making noise , she was just visible due to her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cooper really think NBC wants voters to see enthusiastic Trump supporters ?
The networks are working overtime to assure a Biden victory in November .
President Trump did well during the town hall .
He battled Savannah Guthrie without losing his temper or raising his voice .
He got in some zingers by telling her he knew she would behave as she was doing and that NBC is part of the fake news .
That was pretty darn tame compared to Guthrie ’ s hostility on display .
She dwelled on demanding Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ denounce Q-Anon .
She used most of the first quarter of the event to blame him for the coronavirus and the number of deaths from the pandemic because he doesn ’ t wear a mask as much as she ’ d like him to do .
There was a lot of overwrought emotion from her during the first quarter and then she toned it done a smidge .
Democrats and Never Trumpers think they are being clever by trashing Mayra Joli for her support of Trump .
Instead of making her support into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like they did during the vice-presidential debate , they exposed a very interesting woman with a truly American story .
She ’ s an immigrant with a successful career , even running for office herself .
She ’ s living the dream .
While Joe Biden was treated with kid gloves by George Stephanopoulos on ABC , Trump withstood another round in enemy territory .
Let ’ s face it , no one ’ s vote was changed last night .
There really are no undecided voters at this point .
Trump successfully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote for him .
The question is whether or not he will hold their support this time .

There was a very enthusiastic Trump supporter sitting behind the president last night during his town hall event on NBC. It was impossible not to notice her because every time President Trump spoke, she nodded her head in agreement. Every time. Her placement behind the president soon became fodder for Never Trumpers looking for a conspiracy.
She is being called the nodding lady. Her name is Mayra Joli and she could be seen just behind President Trump’s left shoulder. She is receiving her fifteen minutes of fame now, in part, thanks to demands from some Never Trumpers that their willing cohorts in the press expose her. Mayra is pretty good at self-promotion, too. She posted a Facebook Live video after the debate as she interacted with Trump, along with other audience members.
The winner of the contest to identify the nodding woman is Alex Daugherty, a reporter for the Miami Herald. Mayra is a 55-year-old immigration lawyer and former congressional candidate.
The woman who was nodding behind @realDonaldTrump was @MayraJoli, a Trump supporter who ran as independent for Congress in Miami in 2018. — Alex Daugherty (@alextdaugherty) October 16, 2020
Here's the story. She posted a video with Trump after the event. No comment yet from NBC on how attendees were vetted https://t.co/1buoNrmHym — Alex Daugherty (@alextdaugherty) October 16, 2020
The usual angry reactions from the perpetually outraged were on display on social media. How could she be allowed to participate in the town hall, which was touted as an event for undecided voters? Some questioned the vetting process for the audience members. The audience members were a mix of Trump supporters, Biden supporters, and allegedly Independent voters who are still undecided. Spare me the outrage for this Trump supporter’s presence. Mayra is a former Democrat who ran as an Independent candidate and now is a Trump Republican.
According to her Facebook page, Joli is a native of Santa Domingo in the Dominican Republic. Joli says that she now lives in Coral Gables, Florida, five miles west of Miami, where the NBC town hall took place. On Joli’s official congressional Facebook page, she uses a quote in her about section that reads, “Be the light from which the world is lit.” At the time of writing, Joli’s congressional website has been disabled. Joli describes her political beliefs on her Twitter page as being Republican-affiliated and “always conservative.” Joli says that she is a “former Democrat.” In 2018, Joli ran for the retiring Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen’s Miami congressional seat. Joli ran as an independent and won 2.5 percent of the vote. The election was eventually won by Democrat Donna Shalala.
She specializes in immigration law, specifically “in detention and removal proceedings.” She also has participated in beauty pageants, including a win in the Mrs. Coral Gables beauty pageant in 2015. She aligns herself with President Trump, including the fact that like Trump, she doesn’t drink.
When Trump asked her where she was from, Mayra said the Dominican Republic and she’s an American now. Trump brought up baseball legend Sammy Sosa and she told him that Sosa endorsed her congressional campaign in 2018. “Hey, Sammy Sosa?” Trump said, referring to the Dominican-born former Chicago Cubs baseball player while mimicking a baseball swing.
Never Trumpers were hot to expose the Trump supporter. Tom Nichols tweeted out: ‘Journalists, if you don’t find out who that woman is nodding behind Trump at an ‘undecided’ voter town hall, then I don’t know what you’re getting paid for’. I’d show you the tweet but he blocked me a long time ago. A self-described comedian and writer who claims to be blocked by Trump sees a conspiracy at play. She re-tweets The Lincoln Project’s tweets.
‘This woman is nodding at things before he’s even finished his thought. It’s a psychological trick and I cannot believe no producer, no camera person, NO ONE is stopping it’ Sarah Cooper, a writer and comedian, wondered ‘how much can I get paid to sit behind Trump and nod at everything he says.’ ‘This woman is nodding at things before he’s even finished his thought. It’s a psychological trick and I cannot believe no producer, no camera person, NO ONE is stopping it.’
What was to stop the woman from nodding? She wasn’t in a court of law with an order to not show an emotional reaction to a verdict. She was participating in a town hall, though that is a loose description of the event. It wasn’t a true town hall. Savannah Guthrie is not an impartial observer of the election. Here’s a little information – her husband was traveling chief of staff for Al Gore, back in the day. She inserted herself over and over again, aggressively turning herself into Trump’s debating opponent, not a moderator. Joe Biden didn’t show up to debate Trump, Savannah Guthrie did. Mayra wasn’t making noise, she was just visible due to her position in the audience. Does Sarah Cooper really think NBC wants voters to see enthusiastic Trump supporters? The networks are working overtime to assure a Biden victory in November.
President Trump did well during the town hall. He battled Savannah Guthrie without losing his temper or raising his voice. He got in some zingers by telling her he knew she would behave as she was doing and that NBC is part of the fake news. That was pretty darn tame compared to Guthrie’s hostility on display. She dwelled on demanding Trump denounce white supremacy again and that he denounce Q-Anon. She used most of the first quarter of the event to blame him for the coronavirus and the number of deaths from the pandemic because he doesn’t wear a mask as much as she’d like him to do. There was a lot of overwrought emotion from her during the first quarter and then she toned it done a smidge.
Democrats and Never Trumpers think they are being clever by trashing Mayra Joli for her support of Trump. Instead of making her support into a nonsensical story about a fly, like they did during the vice-presidential debate, they exposed a very interesting woman with a truly American story. She’s an immigrant with a successful career, even running for office herself. She’s living the dream.
While Joe Biden was treated with kid gloves by George Stephanopoulos on ABC, Trump withstood another round in enemy territory. Let’s face it, no one’s vote was changed last night. There really are no undecided voters at this point. Trump successfully brought in moderate Democrats in 2016 to vote for him. The question is whether or not he will hold their support this time.


hotair--2020-10-16--Romney: Can't wait to vote for Barrett's confirmation

Done deal .
Mitch McConnell can afford to lose only three members of his caucus on the final confirmation vote for Amy Coney Barrett , and only two if Mike Pence isn ’ t standing by .
Susan Collins has already announced her intention to vote no , which Allahpundit covered in the previous post .
Lisa Murkowski ’ s position is still , er , murky .
The only other Republican in the Senate which might be contrarian enough to put Pence on alert is Mitt Romney .
And now he ’ s an aye : Utah Republican Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court , after being the lone Republican to vote to convict President Trump during the impeachment hearings .
“ After meeting with Judge Barrett and carefully reviewing her record and her testimony , I intend to vote in favor of her confirmation to the Supreme Court , ” Romney said in a statement released Thursday .
“ She is impressive , and her distinguished legal and academic credentials make it clear that she is exceptionally well qualified to serve as our next Supreme Court justice.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ confident that she will faithfully apply the law and our Constitution , impartially and regardless of policy preferences.
” “ She ’ ll come out of committee next Thursday … and we ’ ll go to the floor with her on Friday the 23rd and stay on it until we finish , ” McConnell told reporters in Kentucky .
“ We have the votes , ” he added , when asked if Republicans would be able to confirm Barrett .
McConnell ’ s remarks are the latest signal that Barrett ’ s nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ginsburg is on a glide path after she avoided landmines during her three-day appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week .
Romney was likely an aye on this from the start , but chose to play his cards carefully .
It seems doubtful that he was worried about Barrett as a candidate , or concerned that a poor hearing performance would leave him twisting in the wind after a too-early declaration of support .
Most likely , Romney wanted to model deliberative behavior in which one waits for the proper point in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That would certainly go along with his call for greater comity in public life , a not-so-subtle jab at you know who .
That takes some pressure off of Murkowski , who can now vote either way without being the potential dealmaker/dealbreaker on the confirmation .
Assuming everyone can show up for the vote , McConnell has at least 51 votes .
Can he get more ?
Thus far Democrats are standing on the same objection as Collins , a process argument that Trump and Republicans should have let the seat remain open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however , isn ’ t actually getting any traction among voters , according to a Morning Consult poll this week .
Barrett ’ s hearing is likely to increase support for her confirmation , which might make some red-state Democrats think twice about casting a nay , even those who might not be up for re-election this year .
That ’ s especially true for Joe Manchin and maybe Doug Jones , who is up this year but likely doomed either way .
If he wants to run for another office in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become a long-term impediment .
Perhaps Jones and Manchin both would be better advised to be unavailable when the floor vote takes place .
Or maybe , just maybe , some Senate Democrats will cross over to demonstrate some of the comity Romney encouraged this week after satisfying themselves with opposition on the procedural votes .
But I doubt it .

Done deal. Mitch McConnell can afford to lose only three members of his caucus on the final confirmation vote for Amy Coney Barrett, and only two if Mike Pence isn’t standing by. Susan Collins has already announced her intention to vote no, which Allahpundit covered in the previous post. Lisa Murkowski’s position is still, er, murky. The only other Republican in the Senate which might be contrarian enough to put Pence on alert is Mitt Romney.
And now he’s an aye:
Utah Republican Sen. Mitt Romney said he will vote to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, after being the lone Republican to vote to convict President Trump during the impeachment hearings. “After meeting with Judge Barrett and carefully reviewing her record and her testimony, I intend to vote in favor of her confirmation to the Supreme Court,” Romney said in a statement released Thursday. “She is impressive, and her distinguished legal and academic credentials make it clear that she is exceptionally well qualified to serve as our next Supreme Court justice.” He added: “I am confident that she will faithfully apply the law and our Constitution, impartially and regardless of policy preferences.”
The Hill reported yesterday morning that McConnell sounded confident:
“She’ll come out of committee next Thursday … and we’ll go to the floor with her on Friday the 23rd and stay on it until we finish,” McConnell told reporters in Kentucky. “We have the votes,” he added, when asked if Republicans would be able to confirm Barrett. McConnell’s remarks are the latest signal that Barrett’s nomination to succeed the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is on a glide path after she avoided landmines during her three-day appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week.
Romney was likely an aye on this from the start, but chose to play his cards carefully. It seems doubtful that he was worried about Barrett as a candidate, or concerned that a poor hearing performance would leave him twisting in the wind after a too-early declaration of support. Most likely, Romney wanted to model deliberative behavior in which one waits for the proper point in a process to declare a decision. That would certainly go along with his call for greater comity in public life, a not-so-subtle jab at you know who.
That takes some pressure off of Murkowski, who can now vote either way without being the potential dealmaker/dealbreaker on the confirmation. Assuming everyone can show up for the vote, McConnell has at least 51 votes. Can he get more? Thus far Democrats are standing on the same objection as Collins, a process argument that Trump and Republicans should have let the seat remain open until after the election. That argument, however, isn’t actually getting any traction among voters, according to a Morning Consult poll this week. Barrett’s hearing is likely to increase support for her confirmation, which might make some red-state Democrats think twice about casting a nay, even those who might not be up for re-election this year.
That’s especially true for Joe Manchin and maybe Doug Jones, who is up this year but likely doomed either way. If he wants to run for another office in Alabama, a vote against Barrett might become a long-term impediment. Perhaps Jones and Manchin both would be better advised to be unavailable when the floor vote takes place. Or maybe, just maybe, some Senate Democrats will cross over to demonstrate some of the comity Romney encouraged this week after satisfying themselves with opposition on the procedural votes. But I doubt it.


hotair--2020-10-16--Eight-dimensional chess: Trump rips ... Susan Collins for not supporting Barrett

I ’ m trying to talk to myself into believing this is strategy on the president ’ s part , mindful of the fact that he ’ s doesn ’ t really do “ strategy ” when he ’ s attacking people .
He has impulses , and sometimes those impulses align with what strategy would call for under the circumstances .
And sometimes they do not .
In this case , I suspect he took an earnest swing at Collins and ended up hitting her Democratic opponent instead : It ’ s not a “ rumor ” that Collins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it a few days ago , saying , “ It ’ s not a comment on her .
It is a comment on the process of rushing through a nomination in such a short time before a presidential election.
” Collins is scrambling to try to atone to Maine ’ s centrist voters for the two biggest votes she cast during Trump ’ s presidency , one to confirm Brett Kavanaugh and the other to acquit Trump at his impeachment trial .
She had no choice but to vote the way she did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ base considered each an acid test of partisan loyalty .
But now she has “ Trump stink ” on her , to borrow a term that ’ s in the news elsewhere today , and she ’ s on the ballot next month in a bluish state that doesn ’ t care for that fragrance .
Declining to vote for Barrett on process grounds is her belatedly throwing a bone to the centrist Dems who ’ ve supported her in the past .
So here ’ s the president tweeting this morning at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe she failed the acid test after all , even though he doesn ’ t need Collins ’ s vote to get Barrett confirmed .
McConnell has 51 lined up .
Trump doesn ’ t need to pressure her to vote yes .
He lashed out anyway because that ’ s what he does when he spies “ disloyalty , ” no matter how much loyalty you ’ ve shown him in the past .
Just ask Bill Barr .
But maybe this works out for Collins anyway .
If the goal is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her and refashion herself at the eleventh hour as a true independent , having the president loudly remind Mainers of how she ’ s crossed him on several issues isn ’ t necessarily a bad outcome .
It depends on whether you think any Republicans in Maine will withhold their votes from her because Trump is suddenly annoyed at her .
My guess is that they won ’ t .
They ’ ll remember Kavanaugh and impeachment , and they ’ ll look at the polls in Maine and nationally and realize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it can muster to have leverage over policy next year .
If I ’ m right about that , and if Trump ’ s tweet succeeds in convincing some centrists up there that Collins isn ’ t the loyal toady that Democrats have portrayed her as ( a big if ) , then conceivably this tweet will do her more harm than good .
Jeff Greenfield had the same thought I did : If you think this was all eight-dimensional chess on Trump ’ s part , though , rather than another case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibly hitting her opponent instead , explain the last line of his tweet .
“ Not worth the work ” sounds like he ’ s saying it ’ s not worth the effort for Maine Republicans to try to reelect her .
That ’ s not what you ’ d say if you were playing a game here aimed at making centrists like her more .
It ’ s what you ’ d say if you were sincerely angry at her for letting you down on the Barrett vote and lashing out without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damn well he was a snake before you brought him in , Susan .
An interesting point here on Collins ’ s possibly too-clever-by-half position on Barrett : All of that ’ s fine , but Collins would never have been forgiven if she had opposed Kavanaugh .
That was about far more than a SCOTUS seat by the time it was over .
Remember , despite its blue tilt , Maine is the state that elected proto-Trump Paul LePage governor ( twice ! )
.
Collins quite reasonably feared that if she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of the base would have held a grudge forever , even if she cast a meaningless vote for Barrett now .
In spite of everything , the polls in Maine are still close , although the last one published had Democrat Sara Gideon up seven .
The good news is that there are still a lot of undecideds there ; the bad news is that Collins seems to be stuck at around 42 percent in most polls , and undecideds tend to break for challengers in the end .
More ominously , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a Senate candidate in U.S. history , bringing in $ 39.4 million between July and September .
For perspective , Collins raised just $ 8.3 million — and that was Collins ’ s biggest fundraising quarter ever .
Gideon even outraised Beto O ’ Rourke at the peak of Betomania two years ago ; the only candidate to ever take in more in a quarter is Lindsey Graham ’ s opponent Jaime Harrison , who pulled in a Biblical $ 57 million this past summer .
Democrats really , really , really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an obnoxious Trump sycophant , but they really , really want to oust Collins too for her shtick of being forever “ concerned ” about things Trump does and then always voting the way he wants in a big spot anyway .
We ’ ll see if it works out for them .

I’m trying to talk to myself into believing this is strategy on the president’s part, mindful of the fact that he’s doesn’t really do “strategy” when he’s attacking people. He has impulses, and sometimes those impulses align with what strategy would call for under the circumstances.
And sometimes they do not.
In this case, I suspect he took an earnest swing at Collins and ended up hitting her Democratic opponent instead:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1317081982166323200
It’s not a “rumor” that Collins is voting against Barrett. She confirmed it a few days ago, saying, “It’s not a comment on her. It is a comment on the process of rushing through a nomination in such a short time before a presidential election.” Collins is scrambling to try to atone to Maine’s centrist voters for the two biggest votes she cast during Trump’s presidency, one to confirm Brett Kavanaugh and the other to acquit Trump at his impeachment trial. She had no choice but to vote the way she did in both cases, as the Republican base considered each an acid test of partisan loyalty.
But now she has “Trump stink” on her, to borrow a term that’s in the news elsewhere today, and she’s on the ballot next month in a bluish state that doesn’t care for that fragrance. Declining to vote for Barrett on process grounds is her belatedly throwing a bone to the centrist Dems who’ve supported her in the past.
So here’s the president tweeting this morning at his base up in Maine that … maybe she failed the acid test after all, even though he doesn’t need Collins’s vote to get Barrett confirmed. McConnell has 51 lined up. Trump doesn’t need to pressure her to vote yes. He lashed out anyway because that’s what he does when he spies “disloyalty,” no matter how much loyalty you’ve shown him in the past. Just ask Bill Barr.
But maybe this works out for Collins anyway. If the goal is to get “Trump stink” off of her and refashion herself at the eleventh hour as a true independent, having the president loudly remind Mainers of how she’s crossed him on several issues isn’t necessarily a bad outcome. It depends on whether you think any Republicans in Maine will withhold their votes from her because Trump is suddenly annoyed at her. My guess is that they won’t. They’ll remember Kavanaugh and impeachment, and they’ll look at the polls in Maine and nationally and realize that the GOP needs every Senate seat it can muster to have leverage over policy next year. If I’m right about that, and if Trump’s tweet succeeds in convincing some centrists up there that Collins isn’t the loyal toady that Democrats have portrayed her as (a big if), then conceivably this tweet will do her more harm than good.
Jeff Greenfield had the same thought I did:
One of few senators who polls stronger than he does in her state, a fact he is aware of and it may not sit well. https://t.co/thMzFxN0Gn — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) October 16, 2020
I'm not saying this is tactical, but in 1970 VP Agnew attacked liberal GOP Senator Goodell; it drove just enough liberal voters to him to get Conservative Jim Buckley elected over Democrat Ottinger. Might Trump's hit on Collins drive some voters TO her? https://t.co/PUryIRM6uW — Jeff Greenfield (@greenfield64) October 16, 2020
If you think this was all eight-dimensional chess on Trump’s part, though, rather than another case of him firing blindly at Collins and possibly hitting her opponent instead, explain the last line of his tweet. “Not worth the work” sounds like he’s saying it’s not worth the effort for Maine Republicans to try to reelect her. That’s not what you’d say if you were playing a game here aimed at making centrists like her more. It’s what you’d say if you were sincerely angry at her for letting you down on the Barrett vote and lashing out without thinking.
Oh well. You knew damn well he was a snake before you brought him in, Susan.
An interesting point here on Collins’s possibly too-clever-by-half position on Barrett:
Morning Consult polling PRE-HEARING on ACB: 48-31 confirm even before the scandal, Kavanaugh's pre-hearing numbers topped out at 37-29. And went well below afterwards. — Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) October 16, 2020
Remember: the most notable losers in 2016 were the R senators who tried to have it both ways on Trump. (Ayotte and Heck). Once you go Trump, there's no halfway measure back. — Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) October 16, 2020
All of that’s fine, but Collins would never have been forgiven if she had opposed Kavanaugh. That was about far more than a SCOTUS seat by the time it was over. Remember, despite its blue tilt, Maine is the state that elected proto-Trump Paul LePage governor (twice!). Collins quite reasonably feared that if she had balked on Kavanaugh, the Trump/LePage part of the base would have held a grudge forever, even if she cast a meaningless vote for Barrett now.
In spite of everything, the polls in Maine are still close, although the last one published had Democrat Sara Gideon up seven. The good news is that there are still a lot of undecideds there; the bad news is that Collins seems to be stuck at around 42 percent in most polls, and undecideds tend to break for challengers in the end. More ominously, Gideon just had the second-biggest fundraising quarter for a Senate candidate in U.S. history, bringing in $39.4 million between July and September. For perspective, Collins raised just $8.3 million — and that was Collins’s biggest fundraising quarter ever. Gideon even outraised Beto O’Rourke at the peak of Betomania two years ago; the only candidate to ever take in more in a quarter is Lindsey Graham’s opponent Jaime Harrison, who pulled in a Biblical $57 million this past summer. Democrats really, really, really want to beat Graham for being such an obnoxious Trump sycophant, but they really, really want to oust Collins too for her shtick of being forever “concerned” about things Trump does and then always voting the way he wants in a big spot anyway. We’ll see if it works out for them.


hotair--2020-10-16--Latest NY Post revelation from Hunter Biden's hard drive: He had a "wild life, pained soul"

Tell us something we didn ’ t know .
Unfortunately , the New York Post takes that advice in its latest reporting on Hunter Biden ’ s alleged hard drive .
Rather than delve into business or political revelations , the NY Post chooses today to report on personal e-mails , photos , and the pain and partying they reveal .
In a way , it ’ s a more human side of Hunter than we ’ ve so far seen , but that could be tactical , too : Hunter Biden ’ s emails and texts show not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for lucrative overseas business deals — they also reveal a concerned father , a fun-loving friend and a man tortured by the deaths that have devastated his family .
In a text-message exchange from 2018 , eldest daughter Naomi — named after Biden ’ s late sister , who was killed with their mother , Neilia , in a 1972 car crash — pleaded with her dad for emergency cash .
… Naomi didn ’ t return a request for comment , but neither Hunter Biden ’ s lawyer nor Joe Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the trove of data that The Post obtained after being extracted from a MacBook Pro laptop .
The owner of a Delaware computer repair shop said the device was dropped off in April 2019 but never retrieved .
A computer camera roll of nearly 25,000 images is loaded with sexually explicit selfies and porn ( which The Post is not publishing ) , but also has snapshots from Biden ’ s childhood and vacations .
And while some of the more than 11,550 emails involve Biden ’ s former job on the board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his dealings with the now-bankrupt CEFC China Energy Co. , most of his messages are innocuous and personal in nature .
I suppose the Post can argue that they are trying to paint a more balanced portrait of Hunter , but I somehow doubt that he or his family will appreciate that nuance .
There is something very creepy about publishing the personal e-mails of a public-figure-once-removed like Hunter , and especially those of his daughter in a time of financial crisis .
Even if one makes an argument that Hunter is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his daughter isn ’ t .
And on top of that , none of what ’ s revealed in this report has anything to do with public policy .
It ’ s private conversations and private behavior with no connection to anything to voters ’ lives or choices .
It ’ s an unwarranted intrusion of privacy with no real purpose other than to offer a prurient look into Hunter ’ s “ wild life [ and ] pained soul , ” when Hunter ’ s not running for anything .
Imagine the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this to Tiffany Trump .
Well , perhaps it has one other purpose .
This looks like an attempt to validate their previous reporting through the publication of Hunter ’ s private communications , which isn ’ t exactly an authentication .
The Post also reports that the Biden camp hasn ’ t “ disputed the validity of the trove of data ” that the Post claims is entirely Hunter ’ s , but that ’ s because they don ’ t have access to the source machine or data .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hunter ’ s , but it ’ s also very possible that some of it isn ’ t : Combine this with the very strange and shifting explanations about the laptop , the data , and the timing involved in this provenance , and the potential for dirty tricks looks rather large .
Until this data gets fully authenticated by an outside agency — hopefully the FBI , which reportedly has the laptop — the earlier reporting isn ’ t reliable , and this manipulative story doesn ’ t do much to boost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The best we can assume is that this story signals that the Post doesn ’ t have much more to wring out of this October surprise .

Tell us something we didn’t know. Unfortunately, the New York Post takes that advice in its latest reporting on Hunter Biden’s alleged hard drive. Rather than delve into business or political revelations, the NY Post chooses today to report on personal e-mails, photos, and the pain and partying they reveal.
In a way, it’s a more human side of Hunter than we’ve so far seen, but that could be tactical, too:
Hunter Biden’s emails and texts show not just a politician’s troubled son angling for lucrative overseas business deals — they also reveal a concerned father, a fun-loving friend and a man tortured by the deaths that have devastated his family. In a text-message exchange from 2018, eldest daughter Naomi — named after Biden’s late sister, who was killed with their mother, Neilia, in a 1972 car crash — pleaded with her dad for emergency cash. … Naomi didn’t return a request for comment, but neither Hunter Biden’s lawyer nor Joe Biden’s campaign have disputed the validity of the trove of data that The Post obtained after being extracted from a MacBook Pro laptop. The owner of a Delaware computer repair shop said the device was dropped off in April 2019 but never retrieved. A computer camera roll of nearly 25,000 images is loaded with sexually explicit selfies and porn (which The Post is not publishing), but also has snapshots from Biden’s childhood and vacations. And while some of the more than 11,550 emails involve Biden’s former job on the board of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma and his dealings with the now-bankrupt CEFC China Energy Co., most of his messages are innocuous and personal in nature.
I suppose the Post can argue that they are trying to paint a more balanced portrait of Hunter, but I somehow doubt that he or his family will appreciate that nuance. There is something very creepy about publishing the personal e-mails of a public-figure-once-removed like Hunter, and especially those of his daughter in a time of financial crisis. Even if one makes an argument that Hunter is a public figure in his own right, his daughter isn’t.
And on top of that, none of what’s revealed in this report has anything to do with public policy. It’s private conversations and private behavior with no connection to anything to voters’ lives or choices. It’s an unwarranted intrusion of privacy with no real purpose other than to offer a prurient look into Hunter’s “wild life [and] pained soul,” when Hunter’s not running for anything. Imagine the outcry that would arise if NBC did this to Tiffany Trump.
Well, perhaps it has one other purpose. This looks like an attempt to validate their previous reporting through the publication of Hunter’s private communications, which isn’t exactly an authentication. The Post also reports that the Biden camp hasn’t “disputed the validity of the trove of data” that the Post claims is entirely Hunter’s, but that’s because they don’t have access to the source machine or data. It’s possible that it’s all Hunter’s, but it’s also very possible that some of it isn’t:
Why be cautious about Hunter Biden emails? B/c a foreign power could salt a mine of data with some stolen genuine materials (photos) and then fabricate entire email chains. I’ve been warning about this for 16 years: https://t.co/ERbG3M9IYt But censorship of materials isn’t answer — Hugh Hewitt (@hughhewitt) October 15, 2020
Combine this with the very strange and shifting explanations about the laptop, the data, and the timing involved in this provenance, and the potential for dirty tricks looks rather large. Until this data gets fully authenticated by an outside agency — hopefully the FBI, which reportedly has the laptop — the earlier reporting isn’t reliable, and this manipulative story doesn’t do much to boost the Post’s credibility either. The best we can assume is that this story signals that the Post doesn’t have much more to wring out of this October surprise.


hotair--2020-10-16--Mortgages, conspiracy theories, and smiles: Did Trump reset expectations in NBC's "town hall"?

It started off well , ran off the rails a bit , but Donald Trump overall rebounded from the first presidential debate in last night ’ s NBC News town-hall forum .
At least to the extent that it was a town hall .
The first third of the event turned out to be an interview with “ moderator ” Savannah Guthrie , who turned into every question into an argument rather than a debate .
However , that energy appeared to work for Trump , and the two of them kept it much more substantive than the first debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ together a few highlights , and a couple of lowlights : Having watched the full debate , the QAnon answer was probably Trump ’ s weakest .
He clearly prepared better for this debate , but Trump was unprepared for the QAnon question .
It ’ s a lame question , and Trump ’ s retort about making Biden answer for Antifa is well taken , but his team should have been prepared for it .
It ’ s a little tough to believe that Trump has never been told about QAnon and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but still knew enough to know they oppose “ pedophilia.
” Guthrie ’ s weakest moment was in the questions about Trump ’ s debt .
Trump ’ s outstanding financial liabilities get reported every year in financial disclosures that are publicly available for review .
Every bank and lender is explicitly listed in Trump ’ s disclosures , and none of them are Russian ; most of his debt is handled by Deutsche Bank .
Two days before Guthrie raised this issue and kept pressing it , the New York Times debunked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a mystery .
Nor is having over $ 400 million in debt a big issue when you own multiple billions of dollars ’ worth in real estate , as Trump tried to point out .
They ’ re called mortgages , and the numbers attest that Trump is indeed “ underlevered , ” as he put it .
Otherwise , however , this event went pretty smoothly for Trump .
He turned on the charm during the audience Q & A , to the extent that the questions actually came from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was described as a lean-Biden Republican told Trump he had a “ great smile , ” and then delivered a well-composed question on immigration and Dreamers .
Trump delivered a substantive response to that question and others , including a challenge from a Biden supporter about filling the Supreme Court seat ( paraphrasing — “ I was elected for four years , not for three ” ) .
As for Guthrie ’ s performance , it got widely panned among Trump supporters .
Trump himself will complain loudly if asked , I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questions about her argumentative style and some of the questions she asked .
However , that all fits Trump ’ s style , and even the argumentation tends to bolster his standing as an outsider anti-establishmentarian .
A combative Trump fighting back against the media elites is an almost perfect image for his campaign to project , at least thematically .
And in this case , the one-hour event allowed Trump to be much more charming as well as much more substantive than in last week ’ s debate with Biden .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential , two qualities that might matter with the voters who are still on the fence .
Speaking of whom , I ’ d have to bet that the ratings contest will easily go to Trump .
Matt Lewis ’ description of the ABC event with Joe Biden sounds downright soporific , which is one reason I chose to watch the Trump event instead .
I suspect many , many Americans made a similar choice last night .

It started off well, ran off the rails a bit, but Donald Trump overall rebounded from the first presidential debate in last night’s NBC News town-hall forum. At least to the extent that it was a town hall. The first third of the event turned out to be an interview with “moderator” Savannah Guthrie, who turned into every question into an argument rather than a debate. However, that energy appeared to work for Trump, and the two of them kept it much more substantive than the first debate with Joe Biden.
Sky News put together a few highlights, and a couple of lowlights:
Having watched the full debate, the QAnon answer was probably Trump’s weakest. He clearly prepared better for this debate, but Trump was unprepared for the QAnon question. It’s a lame question, and Trump’s retort about making Biden answer for Antifa is well taken, but his team should have been prepared for it. It’s a little tough to believe that Trump has never been told about QAnon and its “deep state” fantasies, but still knew enough to know they oppose “pedophilia.”
Guthrie’s weakest moment was in the questions about Trump’s debt. Trump’s outstanding financial liabilities get reported every year in financial disclosures that are publicly available for review. Every bank and lender is explicitly listed in Trump’s disclosures, and none of them are Russian; most of his debt is handled by Deutsche Bank. Two days before Guthrie raised this issue and kept pressing it, the New York Times debunked the idea that Trump’s debt is a mystery. Nor is having over $400 million in debt a big issue when you own multiple billions of dollars’ worth in real estate, as Trump tried to point out. They’re called mortgages, and the numbers attest that Trump is indeed “underlevered,” as he put it.
Otherwise, however, this event went pretty smoothly for Trump. He turned on the charm during the audience Q&A, to the extent that the questions actually came from the audience members themselves. One woman who was described as a lean-Biden Republican told Trump he had a “great smile,” and then delivered a well-composed question on immigration and Dreamers. Trump delivered a substantive response to that question and others, including a challenge from a Biden supporter about filling the Supreme Court seat (paraphrasing — “I was elected for four years, not for three”).
As for Guthrie’s performance, it got widely panned among Trump supporters. Trump himself will complain loudly if asked, I’m sure, and there are legitimate questions about her argumentative style and some of the questions she asked. However, that all fits Trump’s style, and even the argumentation tends to bolster his standing as an outsider anti-establishmentarian. A combative Trump fighting back against the media elites is an almost perfect image for his campaign to project, at least thematically. And in this case, the one-hour event allowed Trump to be much more charming as well as much more substantive than in last week’s debate with Biden. Trump made himself look more normal and more presidential, two qualities that might matter with the voters who are still on the fence.
Speaking of whom, I’d have to bet that the ratings contest will easily go to Trump. Matt Lewis’ description of the ABC event with Joe Biden sounds downright soporific, which is one reason I chose to watch the Trump event instead. I suspect many, many Americans made a similar choice last night.


hotair--2020-10-16--Biden: "De-escalation" means teaching cops to shoot dangerous criminals in the leg

Not the first time Joe Biden has offered this prescription for police reform , but it ’ s the first time I ’ ve ever heard it described as “ de-escalation.
” In last night ’ s ABC News town-hall forum , Biden responded to George Stephanopoulos ’ question about how to solve our “ systemic problem ” in policing , and Biden first suggested federal oversight of local police departments to root out systemic problems .
Next , though , Biden discussed his ideas of de-escalation , which somehow includes firing bullets at people : BIDEN : There ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve learned and it takes time , but we can do this .
You can ban chokeholds , you can — but — but beyond that , you have to teach people how to de-escalate circumstances , de-escalate .
So , instead of anybody coming at you and the first thing you do is shoot to kill , you shoot them in the leg .
There ’ s ways — you have to do more background checks in terms of whether or not the person coming in passes certain psychological tests .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s dangerous nonsense .
Police shouldn ’ t fire weapons at all unless they are facing a imminent lethal threat to themselves or others , but when they do use firearms , they have to do so in the safest and most effective manner possible .
Police ( and everyone else who takes firearms courses ) are trained to aim at center mass for a number of reasons , primarily because it has the best percentage of not missing .
Aiming at moving limbs ( and heads ) is difficult even under calm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of lethal threats .
When bullets miss , they keep going for a long way and can kill other people , even on ricochets .
Instead of killing an actual lethal threat , this policy would increase the potential for killing or wounding bystanders .
Not only that , but hitting a leg is not necessarily going to end the threat , especially in a close-in situation with either a gun or a knife .
If someone with a knife closes within 20 feet , taking out a leg won ’ t stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from making an attack .
And for that matter , a leg shot can be almost instantly lethal if it hits the femoral artery , even if you do manage to hit it at all .
This is an answer straight out of a bad Hollywood cop movie or Western , and it ’ s just as realistic .
That ’ s not the only ignorant part of this answer , either : BIDEN : And the last thing I ’ ll say , and I ’ m sorry , but it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , really important , is you have to be in a position where you are able to identify — identify the things that have to change and one of the things that has to change is , so many cops get called into circumstances where somebody is mentally off .
Like what happened not long ago , that guy with the knife .
Biden wants a sociologist or a psychologist to be brought into situations of lethal threats ?
A guy with a knife is a lethal threat , and the more people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requisite training for defending themselves and others will quickly become one more liability , one more potential civilian police have to protect .
Police can be trained in de-escalation techniques , and often are , and that ’ s much more sensible than creating a larger pool of potential victims .
At least Biden did get one thing right : True enough , but telling cops to aim at legs is most definitely not one of those things .
Neither is getting de-escalation lessons from cop shows .

Not the first time Joe Biden has offered this prescription for police reform, but it’s the first time I’ve ever heard it described as “de-escalation.” In last night’s ABC News town-hall forum, Biden responded to George Stephanopoulos’ question about how to solve our “systemic problem” in policing, and Biden first suggested federal oversight of local police departments to root out systemic problems. Next, though, Biden discussed his ideas of de-escalation, which somehow includes firing bullets at people:
.@JoeBiden says police should try shooting dangerous criminals “in the leg" pic.twitter.com/u3phk3MHSq — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) October 16, 2020
BIDEN: There’s a lot of things we’ve learned and it takes time, but we can do this. You can ban chokeholds, you can — but — but beyond that, you have to teach people how to de-escalate circumstances, de-escalate. So, instead of anybody coming at you and the first thing you do is shoot to kill, you shoot them in the leg. There’s ways — you have to do more background checks in terms of whether or not the person coming in passes certain psychological tests.
This is not just nonsense, it’s dangerous nonsense. Police shouldn’t fire weapons at all unless they are facing a imminent lethal threat to themselves or others, but when they do use firearms, they have to do so in the safest and most effective manner possible. Police (and everyone else who takes firearms courses) are trained to aim at center mass for a number of reasons, primarily because it has the best percentage of not missing. Aiming at moving limbs (and heads) is difficult even under calm circumstances, let alone the high-adrenaline situations of lethal threats. When bullets miss, they keep going for a long way and can kill other people, even on ricochets. Instead of killing an actual lethal threat, this policy would increase the potential for killing or wounding bystanders.
Not only that, but hitting a leg is not necessarily going to end the threat, especially in a close-in situation with either a gun or a knife. If someone with a knife closes within 20 feet, taking out a leg won’t stop the momentum enough to prevent the criminal from making an attack. And for that matter, a leg shot can be almost instantly lethal if it hits the femoral artery, even if you do manage to hit it at all. This is an answer straight out of a bad Hollywood cop movie or Western, and it’s just as realistic.
That’s not the only ignorant part of this answer, either:
BIDEN: And the last thing I’ll say, and I’m sorry, but it’s really, I think, really, really important, is you have to be in a position where you are able to identify — identify the things that have to change and one of the things that has to change is, so many cops get called into circumstances where somebody is mentally off. Like what happened not long ago, that guy with the knife.
That’s why we have to provide — within police departments, psychologists and social workers, to go out with the cops on those calls, those — some of those 911 calls, to de-escalate the circumstance, to deal with talking them down.
Biden wants a sociologist or a psychologist to be brought into situations of lethal threats? A guy with a knife is a lethal threat, and the more people that enter a lethal situation without the requisite training for defending themselves and others will quickly become one more liability, one more potential civilian police have to protect. Police can be trained in de-escalation techniques, and often are, and that’s much more sensible than creating a larger pool of potential victims.
At least Biden did get one thing right:
We shouldn’t be defunding cops, we should be mandating the things that we should be doing within police departments and make sure there’s total transparency.
True enough, but telling cops to aim at legs is most definitely not one of those things. Neither is getting de-escalation lessons from cop shows.


hotair--2020-10-17--Can a Pennsylvania bakery predict the presidential election outcome?

A Pennsylvania bakery is putting a sweet spin on election news .
Lochel ’ s Bakery ’ s candidate cookies have accurately predicted the last 3 presidential elections .
Located in Montgomery County just north of Philadelphia , the cookies are so popular that a limit has been put in place for how many can be purchased per customer .
The family-owned and operated bakery in Hatboro , Pennsylvania is continuing a tradition of selling cookies with the names of the presidential candidates in the icing .
This year there is a Trump 2020 cookie with a design in red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ design in blue .
This year the bakery says the response from customers is unlike anything it has ever seen in previous election years .
The election-themed cookies are flying off the shelf .
That sounds right for 2020 .
The response is so over-the-top this year that besides a limit to the number of cookies a walk-in customer can purchase , there is a number of cookies that an advance order must satisfy .
When they are gone , the shop closes for the day .
“ People are going crazy for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lochel in a statement to Fox News , adding that the shop usually only sells a few hundred each election .
Since debuting this year ’ s cookies , however , Lochel ’ s has already sold thousands of the treats — and demand doesn ’ t seem to be dwindling anytime soon .
On Friday morning , Lochel ’ s announced on Facebook that the bakery sold out of its supply the previous day , forcing the shop to close early to “ bake , recoup and stock.
” “ We will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ I don ’ t know ] because we could sell out like yesterday , ” reads a message from the shop .
“ If we sell out we close early.
” Lochel ’ s is now instituting a six-cookie limit for all walk-in customers .
The bakery has further announced that it would only accept advance orders of 100 cookies or more .
The bakery is shipping the cookies to states all over the country .
Bakery owner Kathleen Lochel says “ People are going crazy for them.
’ She is tallying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the candidate that is winning the cookie poll .
So , who is winning the cookie poll ?
The cookie purchases have been overwhelmingly in support of President Trump .
“ So far as of 10 a.m. Trump is in the lead 3 to 1 , ” she told Fox News on Friday morning .
Lochel is quick to say that this is not an endorsement of one candidate over another .
She ’ s using the marketing gimmick to sell iced sugar cookies and the increase in sales are keeping the small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s a win-win for the bakery during the coronavirus pandemic .
“ We are NOT favoring a candidate , we are NOT displaying personal feelings or commenting on who we want to win , ” Kathleen tells Fox News .
“ What we are doing is winning for the bakery , ” she added , explaining that the sales have more than made up for the initial losses the business suffered at the beginning of the pandemic .
In fact , Lochel ’ s Bakery has had to hire more workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kathleen says she ’ s proud to be providing work and paying her employees overtime wages “ through a rough time.
” “ We need to keep going to provide for staff , community and most importantly give people a sense of normalcy , ” she said .
Despite the fact that the bakery ’ s cookie poll correctly predicted a Trump win in 2016 , Montgomery County voters went to the polls and 58.38 % of voters chose Hillary Clinton .
After hearing of the bakery ’ s cookie poll story , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the winning streak continues for the bakery in picking the next president or not , the bakery comes out a winner .

A Pennsylvania bakery is putting a sweet spin on election news. Lochel’s Bakery’s candidate cookies have accurately predicted the last 3 presidential elections. Located in Montgomery County just north of Philadelphia, the cookies are so popular that a limit has been put in place for how many can be purchased per customer.
The family-owned and operated bakery in Hatboro, Pennsylvania is continuing a tradition of selling cookies with the names of the presidential candidates in the icing. This year there is a Trump 2020 cookie with a design in red and a Biden 2020 cookie with a design in blue. This year the bakery says the response from customers is unlike anything it has ever seen in previous election years. The election-themed cookies are flying off the shelf. That sounds right for 2020.
https://www.facebook.com/lochelsbakery/photos/a.10152050790244323/10158544539539323/?type=3
The response is so over-the-top this year that besides a limit to the number of cookies a walk-in customer can purchase, there is a number of cookies that an advance order must satisfy. When they are gone, the shop closes for the day.
“People are going crazy for them,” said bakery owner Kathleen Lochel in a statement to Fox News, adding that the shop usually only sells a few hundred each election. Since debuting this year’s cookies, however, Lochel’s has already sold thousands of the treats — and demand doesn’t seem to be dwindling anytime soon. On Friday morning, Lochel’s announced on Facebook that the bakery sold out of its supply the previous day, forcing the shop to close early to “bake, recoup and stock.” “We will be open at 6 a.m. until when [I don’t know] because we could sell out like yesterday,” reads a message from the shop. “If we sell out we close early.” Lochel’s is now instituting a six-cookie limit for all walk-in customers. The bakery has further announced that it would only accept advance orders of 100 cookies or more.
The bakery is shipping the cookies to states all over the country. Bakery owner Kathleen Lochel says “People are going crazy for them.’ She is tallying up the sales to keep track of the candidate that is winning the cookie poll. So, who is winning the cookie poll? The cookie purchases have been overwhelmingly in support of President Trump. “So far as of 10 a.m. Trump is in the lead 3 to 1,” she told Fox News on Friday morning.
Lochel is quick to say that this is not an endorsement of one candidate over another. She’s using the marketing gimmick to sell iced sugar cookies and the increase in sales are keeping the small business operating while hiring more workers. It’s a win-win for the bakery during the coronavirus pandemic.
“We are NOT favoring a candidate, we are NOT displaying personal feelings or commenting on who we want to win,” Kathleen tells Fox News. “What we are doing is winning for the bakery,” she added, explaining that the sales have more than made up for the initial losses the business suffered at the beginning of the pandemic. In fact, Lochel’s Bakery has had to hire more workers to keep up with demand, and Kathleen says she’s proud to be providing work and paying her employees overtime wages “through a rough time.” “We need to keep going to provide for staff, community and most importantly give people a sense of normalcy,” she said.
Despite the fact that the bakery’s cookie poll correctly predicted a Trump win in 2016, Montgomery County voters went to the polls and 58.38% of voters chose Hillary Clinton.
After hearing of the bakery’s cookie poll story, Eric Trump paid a visit.
Pennsylvania Cookie Poll Update: I was in Philadelphia today and decided to stop by the incredible Lochel’s bakery in nearby Hatboro. Here is the latest tally: Cookies Sold:
Trump – 3,754
Biden – 1,602 Thank you to the wonderful owners and thank you PA!!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/oqD50mz35L — Eric Trump (@EricTrump) October 17, 2020
Whether the winning streak continues for the bakery in picking the next president or not, the bakery comes out a winner.


hotair--2020-10-17--Denver shooter of Trump supporter to be charged with 2nd degree murder

Despite the protestations from Denver shooter Matthew Dolloff that he acted in self-defense , it sounds like the law enforcement officials investigating the case aren ’ t buying it .
According to CBS Denver , The Denver District Attorney announced on Thursday that second-degree murder charges will be filed against Dolloff on Monday .
The killer already has an attorney and they initially claimed that Dolloff was going to dispute the charges , but the DA clearly feels she has a winning case .
It ’ s possible that some plea bargaining may be taking place in the background , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about that until after the weekend .
The security guard accused of shooting and killing a man at a protest in Denver last weekend will be charged with second-degree murder .
Matthew Dolloff , 30 , was hired by TV station 9News , through the security company Pinkerton .
Dolloff is accused of killing 49-year-old Lee Keltner .
Records show Dolloff did not have the license required to work as a security guard in Denver .
On Thursday , Denver District Attorney Beth McCann announced plans to charge Dolloff .
If convicted , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between 16 and 48 years .
Video released earlier this week shows the seconds before and after Saturday ’ s deadly shooting .
In the video , you can see a verbal altercation involving Keltner and another man , who are standing between the Denver Public Library and the Denver Art Museum .
Every since Keltner was killed , the details of what happened have been trickling out while we awaited some sort of official statement from the police .
The still pictures available of the fatal encounter and the moments leading up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the fact that the DA is going with a murder charge rather than some sort of homicide or reckless endangerment rap probably means that the prosecutors are pretty sure they can make the charge stick .
Dolloff was originally being held for “ investigation of first-degree murder , ” but the DA seems to feel more confident in second-degree .
A couple of things have changed since the initial reports emerged , making the case against Dolloff look stronger .
For one thing , the first police reports we talked about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the scene .
But the official court documents make no mention of a second firearm , so that may have been an error .
If Keltner had had a weapon on him and was drawing it , Dolloff ’ s claim of self-defense would have been a lot stronger .
That no longer appears to be the case .
The next item we ’ ve received is the cellphone video that was shot by the producer from the news team Dolloff was hired to protect .
While it doesn ’ t show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ includes a lot more of the interactions taking place prior to the shot being fired .
This is from the Colorado Sun .
Note that at approximately the 1:43 mark in the video , the producer stops recording and they switch to a video that was being live-streamed by another rally attendee for 12 seconds .
Then it cuts back to the producer ’ s video that began again as police arrived and took charge .
Unfortunately ( for purposes of the investigation ) , the bystander ’ s video seems to begin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and he ’ s still a considerable distance away .
The yellow puff from the mace can is floating in the air , but Keltner appears to already be on the ground .
But the news crew video has the audio of what was being said after Keltner leaves the original confrontation with the individual wearing the Black Guns Matter t-shirt .
( I previously incorrectly described it as a BLM shirt . )
An unidentified voice that may or may not be Keltner ’ s is heard yelling at the camera crew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of there and threatening to “ f*** them up.
” We already know that in the nine seconds between Keltner ’ s departure from the confrontation with the guy in the BGM shirt and the firing of the fatal shot , something happened .
Either Keltner or someone with him made verbal threats directed at the news crew .
Keltner slapped Dolloff in the face and deployed mace in the direction of the news crew .
Neither the available videos nor the still pictures show Keltner reaching into his pockets .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fire at him ?
In the last portion of the video above we hear the producer repeatedly defending Dolloff to the police , saying that his security guard “ saved my life ” and insisting that Keltner had maced him and was “ coming after ” them .
That testimony , along with the rest of the videos and pictures , is probably where the defense will hang their not-guilty plea .
Of course , the District Attorney may have more evidence being held in reserve to build an even stronger case that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But if not , this still doesn ’ t look like a slam dunk for them .
I ’ ll let all of you be the judge for now , at least until an actual judge gets involved .

Despite the protestations from Denver shooter Matthew Dolloff that he acted in self-defense, it sounds like the law enforcement officials investigating the case aren’t buying it. According to CBS Denver, The Denver District Attorney announced on Thursday that second-degree murder charges will be filed against Dolloff on Monday. The killer already has an attorney and they initially claimed that Dolloff was going to dispute the charges, but the DA clearly feels she has a winning case. It’s possible that some plea bargaining may be taking place in the background, but we probably won’t know about that until after the weekend.
The security guard accused of shooting and killing a man at a protest in Denver last weekend will be charged with second-degree murder. Matthew Dolloff, 30, was hired by TV station 9News, through the security company Pinkerton. Dolloff is accused of killing 49-year-old Lee Keltner. Records show Dolloff did not have the license required to work as a security guard in Denver. On Thursday, Denver District Attorney Beth McCann announced plans to charge Dolloff. If convicted, he faces a mandatory prison sentence of between 16 and 48 years. Video released earlier this week shows the seconds before and after Saturday’s deadly shooting. In the video, you can see a verbal altercation involving Keltner and another man, who are standing between the Denver Public Library and the Denver Art Museum.
Every since Keltner was killed, the details of what happened have been trickling out while we awaited some sort of official statement from the police. The still pictures available of the fatal encounter and the moments leading up to it certainly left room for questions, but the fact that the DA is going with a murder charge rather than some sort of homicide or reckless endangerment rap probably means that the prosecutors are pretty sure they can make the charge stick. Dolloff was originally being held for “investigation of first-degree murder,” but the DA seems to feel more confident in second-degree.
A couple of things have changed since the initial reports emerged, making the case against Dolloff look stronger. For one thing, the first police reports we talked about here said that two handguns were found at the scene. But the official court documents make no mention of a second firearm, so that may have been an error. If Keltner had had a weapon on him and was drawing it, Dolloff’s claim of self-defense would have been a lot stronger. That no longer appears to be the case.
The next item we’ve received is the cellphone video that was shot by the producer from the news team Dolloff was hired to protect. While it doesn’t show the actual moment of the shooting it includes a lot more of the interactions taking place prior to the shot being fired. This is from the Colorado Sun. Note that at approximately the 1:43 mark in the video, the producer stops recording and they switch to a video that was being live-streamed by another rally attendee for 12 seconds. Then it cuts back to the producer’s video that began again as police arrived and took charge.
Unfortunately (for purposes of the investigation), the bystander’s video seems to begin just at the moment of the shooting and he’s still a considerable distance away. The yellow puff from the mace can is floating in the air, but Keltner appears to already be on the ground. But the news crew video has the audio of what was being said after Keltner leaves the original confrontation with the individual wearing the Black Guns Matter t-shirt. (I previously incorrectly described it as a BLM shirt.) An unidentified voice that may or may not be Keltner’s is heard yelling at the camera crew, telling them to get the cameras out of there and threatening to “f*** them up.”
We already know that in the nine seconds between Keltner’s departure from the confrontation with the guy in the BGM shirt and the firing of the fatal shot, something happened. Either Keltner or someone with him made verbal threats directed at the news crew. Keltner slapped Dolloff in the face and deployed mace in the direction of the news crew. Neither the available videos nor the still pictures show Keltner reaching into his pockets. So was that sufficient provocation for Dolloff to fire at him?
In the last portion of the video above we hear the producer repeatedly defending Dolloff to the police, saying that his security guard “saved my life” and insisting that Keltner had maced him and was “coming after” them. That testimony, along with the rest of the videos and pictures, is probably where the defense will hang their not-guilty plea. Of course, the District Attorney may have more evidence being held in reserve to build an even stronger case that we haven’t seen yet. But if not, this still doesn’t look like a slam dunk for them. I’ll let all of you be the judge for now, at least until an actual judge gets involved.


hotair--2020-10-17--Saudi foreign minister: *Now* would be a very good time for serious negotiations on Palestine

How much more throat-clearing do the Saudis have to do before the message gets delivered in Ramallah ?
A little over a week ago , Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz appeared on Saudi state television outlet al-Arabiya to air a lot of the Palestinians ’ dirty laundry to a nation who ’ d been fed a steady diet of pro-PLO propaganda for decades .
Bandar laid out not just how the Palestinians had rejected multiple opportunities to get a state on their own terms , but had also stabbed the Saudis and other Arab nations in the back all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ haven ’ t committed one way or the other publicly yet to normalizing ties with Israel , the steps taken by their Arab allies clearly has had their tacit approval , at least .
That may be getting a lot less tacit , as remarks yesterday from Saudi Arabia ’ s foreign minister explicitly acknowledged a desire for normalizing relations with Israel , as long as the Palestinian question gets resolved : Saudi Arabia has always envisioned that normalization with Israel would happen , but the current focus should be on bringing Palestinians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said yesterday .
“ We have always envisioned that normalization [ with Israel ] would happen , but we also need to have a Palestinian state and a Palestinian-Israeli peace plan , ” the Saudi FM said during a webinar with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy .
“ In the end , the only thing that can deliver lasting peace and lasting stability is an agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis .
The process of peace is a strategic necessity to the region @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent peace deal signed between the UAE and Bahrain with Israel helped the process , Prince Faisal said it “ does help lay the groundwork ” to get the Palestinians and Israelis back to the negotiating table .
Faisal also explained why the Saudis aren ’ t nearly as concerned about the Palestinians as they once were .
Iran is now the security focus for the Gulf states , and Israel is an ally rather than an enemy in that conflict : “ Iran maintains a single-minded focus on undermining the health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporting terrorist groups , terrorist proxies , armed militias and terrorist regimes , interjecting itself wherever it can to create chaos and instability , as it has done is so many places like Lebanon , Iraq , Yemen and as far away as South America , ” Faisal said .
“ It seems wherever you find struggles in the region , you find Iran.
” He placed the blame for the humanitarian crisis in Yemen squarely on Iran and its “ terrorist proxy , ” the Houthi rebels , who have launched “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against cities , airports and civilian targets throughout Saudi Arabia .
Faisal warned of the “ threat of an Iran armed with nuclear weapons and the continued exports of its revolutionary agenda through hostile and terrorist behavior.
” “ Our partnership with the U.S. is critical in addressing Iran ’ s malignant behavior , ” he stressed .
“ We are committed to working with the U.S. so that Iran does not obtain a nuclear bomb – ever.
” Before Bandar ’ s blunt exposure of decades of double-dealing by the Palestinians , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faith ” would have been assumed to be aimed at Israel .
Now , however , it ’ s pretty clear that it ’ s at least aimed at both sides , and the footsie-playing by both Hamas and Fatah with Iran almost certainly is part of the betrayals the Saudis feel from the Palestinians .
( Bandar mentioned this explicitly in his interview . )
Aren ’ t the Saudis worried about a domestic backlash ?
Not as much as you ’ d think .
Bandar might have been preparing Saudi subjects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but a Zogby poll taken over the summer and just released this week shows they ’ re already prepared for it .
Fifty-eight percent of Saudis favor the Trump plan to achieve it as well ( KSA is Kingdom of Saudi Arabia ) : A stunning new poll conducted by an Arab-American pollster has found that the people of Saudi Arabia are increasingly receptive to “ normalization ” of relations with Israel .
It also found that a strong majority of Saudis view President Trump ’ s “ Deal of the Century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What ’ s more , ALL ARAB NEWS can also report that the poll found that more than 7-in-10 Arabs in Saudi Arabia , the United Arab Emirates , Egypt and Jordan believe that the Arab world is heading for “ normalization ” deals with Israel , even if Palestinian leaders continue to resist all international efforts to make peace .
Such findings would have seemed preposterous 5 or 10 years ago .
Faisal ’ s timing in ratcheting up pressure seems interesting , too .
Earlier this week , Palestinian leadership @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kick this can down the road past the US election .
They seem convinced they can get a better deal from Joe Biden : The Palestinian prime minister has said it will be disastrous for his people and the world at large if President Donald Trump wins reelection next month .
Speaking remotely to European lawmakers , Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh said the last four years of the Trump administration have greatly harmed the Palestinians .
“ If we are going to live another four years with President Trump , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world , Shtayyeh said Monday .
The comments were posted on his Facebook page .
The Saudis , remembering how Biden and Barack Obama went soft on Iran , clearly don ’ t share that point of view .
Faisal ’ s comments seem calibrated as a response to Shtayyeh that the calculations won ’ t change if Trump leaves office , except perhaps to get even harsher on the Palestinians .
If Trump loses the election , the Arab states will have to consolidate even more quickly against the threat from Tehran @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Palestinians under the bus entirely .
That would leave Shtayyeh with no leverage at all in further negotiations with Israel , as the Europeans aren ’ t going to stand in the way of a rapprochement between Arabs and Israel .
In other words , as Bandar made clear , time is running out on Ramallah .
If Palestinians don ’ t start negotiating a two-state solution in good faith , the Saudis will step over them to shake hands with Israel instead .
Tick tock , tick tock .

How much more throat-clearing do the Saudis have to do before the message gets delivered in Ramallah? A little over a week ago, Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz appeared on Saudi state television outlet al-Arabiya to air a lot of the Palestinians’ dirty laundry to a nation who’d been fed a steady diet of pro-PLO propaganda for decades. Bandar laid out not just how the Palestinians had rejected multiple opportunities to get a state on their own terms, but had also stabbed the Saudis and other Arab nations in the back all along the way.
While the Saudis haven’t committed one way or the other publicly yet to normalizing ties with Israel, the steps taken by their Arab allies clearly has had their tacit approval, at least. That may be getting a lot less tacit, as remarks yesterday from Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister explicitly acknowledged a desire for normalizing relations with Israel, as long as the Palestinian question gets resolved:
Saudi Arabia has always envisioned that normalization with Israel would happen, but the current focus should be on bringing Palestinians and Israelis back to the negotiating table, Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said yesterday. “We have always envisioned that normalization [with Israel] would happen, but we also need to have a Palestinian state and a Palestinian-Israeli peace plan,” the Saudi FM said during a webinar with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “In the end, the only thing that can deliver lasting peace and lasting stability is an agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis. The process of peace is a strategic necessity to the region, he added. Asked if the recent peace deal signed between the UAE and Bahrain with Israel helped the process, Prince Faisal said it “does help lay the groundwork” to get the Palestinians and Israelis back to the negotiating table.
Faisal also explained why the Saudis aren’t nearly as concerned about the Palestinians as they once were. Iran is now the security focus for the Gulf states, and Israel is an ally rather than an enemy in that conflict:
“Iran maintains a single-minded focus on undermining the health and safety of nations and communities, openly supporting terrorist groups, terrorist proxies, armed militias and terrorist regimes, interjecting itself wherever it can to create chaos and instability, as it has done is so many places like Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and as far away as South America,” Faisal said. “It seems wherever you find struggles in the region, you find Iran.” He placed the blame for the humanitarian crisis in Yemen squarely on Iran and its “terrorist proxy,” the Houthi rebels, who have launched “more than 300 ballistic missile attacks” against cities, airports and civilian targets throughout Saudi Arabia. Faisal warned of the “threat of an Iran armed with nuclear weapons and the continued exports of its revolutionary agenda through hostile and terrorist behavior.” “Our partnership with the U.S. is critical in addressing Iran’s malignant behavior,” he stressed. “We are committed to working with the U.S. so that Iran does not obtain a nuclear bomb – ever.”
Before Bandar’s blunt exposure of decades of double-dealing by the Palestinians, Faisal’s comment about “good faith” would have been assumed to be aimed at Israel. Now, however, it’s pretty clear that it’s at least aimed at both sides, and the footsie-playing by both Hamas and Fatah with Iran almost certainly is part of the betrayals the Saudis feel from the Palestinians. (Bandar mentioned this explicitly in his interview.)
Aren’t the Saudis worried about a domestic backlash? Not as much as you’d think. Bandar might have been preparing Saudi subjects for a sea change in foreign policy, but a Zogby poll taken over the summer and just released this week shows they’re already prepared for it. Fifty-eight percent of Saudis favor the Trump plan to achieve it as well (KSA is Kingdom of Saudi Arabia):
A stunning new poll conducted by an Arab-American pollster has found that the people of Saudi Arabia are increasingly receptive to “normalization” of relations with Israel. It also found that a strong majority of Saudis view President Trump’s “Deal of the Century” plan for Middle East Peace favorably. What’s more, ALL ARAB NEWS can also report that the poll found that more than 7-in-10 Arabs in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Jordan believe that the Arab world is heading for “normalization” deals with Israel, even if Palestinian leaders continue to resist all international efforts to make peace. Such findings would have seemed preposterous 5 or 10 years ago.
Faisal’s timing in ratcheting up pressure seems interesting, too. Earlier this week, Palestinian leadership seemed to indicate that they wanted to kick this can down the road past the US election. They seem convinced they can get a better deal from Joe Biden:
The Palestinian prime minister has said it will be disastrous for his people and the world at large if President Donald Trump wins reelection next month. Speaking remotely to European lawmakers, Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh said the last four years of the Trump administration have greatly harmed the Palestinians. “If we are going to live another four years with President Trump,” he said, God help us and the whole world, Shtayyeh said Monday. The comments were posted on his Facebook page.
The Saudis, remembering how Biden and Barack Obama went soft on Iran, clearly don’t share that point of view. Faisal’s comments seem calibrated as a response to Shtayyeh that the calculations won’t change if Trump leaves office, except perhaps to get even harsher on the Palestinians. If Trump loses the election, the Arab states will have to consolidate even more quickly against the threat from Tehran, at which point they might throw the Palestinians under the bus entirely. That would leave Shtayyeh with no leverage at all in further negotiations with Israel, as the Europeans aren’t going to stand in the way of a rapprochement between Arabs and Israel.
In other words, as Bandar made clear, time is running out on Ramallah. If Palestinians don’t start negotiating a two-state solution in good faith, the Saudis will step over them to shake hands with Israel instead. Tick tock, tick tock.