hotair--2020-09-25--"I did it a bunch of times": Dianne Feinstein's husband caught in college admissions scandal

Senator Dianne Feinstein ’ s husband , Richard Blum , has been named in a college admissions scandal .
This scandal is different than the one that has dominated headlines for months .
Unlike the FBI ’ s Operation Varsity Blues , this isn ’ t a story of wealthy parents paying handsomely to get their unqualified children accepted into a college or university .
This is a story of connections and the arrogance of the privileged .
The state auditor ’ s office named Richard Blum , a University of California Regent , as one of the regents in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from wealthy , mostly white , well-connected families .
There is a prohibition on regents using their influence in admission matters .
Among those “ inappropriately admitted ” were a student whose family was friends with a member of the Board of Regents , the child of a major donor and an applicant who babysat for a colleague of a former admissions director , according to the report released Tuesday by the California State Auditor .
In one case , a regent unidentified in the audit sent an “ inappropriate letter of support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on behalf of a student with only a 26 % chance of winning a spot off the wait list , despite the policy prohibiting efforts by regents to influence admissions decisions by going around the regular process .
The applicant was admitted .
Margarita Fernandez , the auditor ’ s spokesperson , confirmed that the regent is Richard Blum .
When asked about this breach in conduct , Blum ’ s response was hey , no one told me it was wrong to do it .
He said he has done it lots @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a regent .
He claims innocence of any wrongdoing .
Blum told the San Francisco Chronicle on Thursday that he ’ s done nothing wrong and that he has used his clout to get friends and family into the elite public system for years .
“ I did it a bunch of times , ” Blum said , adding that he has never considered it a problem to write recommendation letters bypassing the traditional admissions process .
A policy prohibiting such influence has been in place throughout Blum ’ s 18-year tenure on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported .
Blum , a financier , told the Chronicle that “ no one ever told me it was wrong.
” He said he has sent letters of recommendation about friends and family to chancellors at multiple UC campuses since becoming a regent in 2002 .
“ Wherever they were applying .
Wherever they wanted to get in.
” He recalled sending letters specifically to the chancellors at UC Berkeley , UC Davis , and UC Irvine , but added : “ almost everywhere.
” This is about the wealthy and well-connected using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s college education at the expense of others who were qualified to fill the admissions slot .
Blum is 85 years old now and a very wealthy businessman , who sometimes finds himself in the news for shady doings available to him due to his wife ’ s political career .
In his world , it ’ s all about who you know , so naturally , he doesn ’ t see the error in his ways .
He thinks it is perfectly normal to just send off a letter instructing the admissions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using his position as regent as leverage .
The Operation Oxford Blues scandal led to an audit request last year by state Assemblywoman Tasha Boerner Horvath .
Four of the UC ’ s nine campuses — UCLA , UC Berkeley , UC San Diego , and UC Santa Barbara were included .
Admissions policies and practices were examined over six academic year periods , from 2013-14 to 2018-19 .
This is an example of why people are disgusted with professional politicians like Senator Feinstein .
Would her husband have found such financial rewards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wife ?
Would he be on the Board of Regents without her connection ?
Both are legitimate questions .
After so many years of living like this , Blum is oblivious to the appearance of his wrongdoing , if not the actual wrongdoing .
He sounds surprised that he was even questioned about his actions .
Blum was helping the children of other wealthy , well-connected men and women .
He wasn ’ t even giving a boost to a needy student .
There ’ s no philanthropic angle here .
UC Berkeley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , with 55 cases of inappropriate admissions .
Among them , 14 cases involved students who were denied admission through the regular process and were offered a spot on the waitlist .
Blum ’ s letter came in support of one of those waitlisted students , the audit said .
But that student , like the 13 others on the waitlist , had received “ uncompetitive scores from readers that gave them poor chances of being admitted , ” the audit said .
Blum wrote a letter of advocacy about the student @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was forwarded to the development office responsible for handling fundraising and relations with donors .
Blum has been a longtime supporter of Berkeley , donating $ 15 million in 2006 to launch the Blum Center for Developing Economies to address global poverty and subsequent contributions to expand that work .
The development office then forwarded the letter to the admissions office , the audit said .
The two offices conferred on who should be admitted from the waitlist .
Blum ’ s favored applicant had only a 26 % chance of acceptance based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ audit said , but won admission .
The Chairman of the Board of Regents released a statement .
Board of Regents Chairman John A. Pérez said UC officials have “ limited details ” about the case but are reviewing the information to determine whether the alleged conduct violates university policies and whether an additional UC review or investigation is warranted .
“ The UC Board of Regents takes these matters very seriously and any violations will be promptly and appropriately addressed , ” Pérez said in a statement .
“ Once the Board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case , we will comment on the outcome and will further review if any changes in policy are called for.
” The regents are allowed to submit letters of recommendation , when appropriate , but the case of the wait-listed student , in particular , shows Blum ’ s willingness to step outside the bounds of acceptable behavior .
Blum has donated millions of dollars to UC .
The 82-page state audit found that the four campuses involved in the audit had admitted at least 64 students “ using inappropriate factors to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donors , staff or alumni.
” We ’ ll see if Blum is even removed from the Board of Regents over his inappropriate actions .
He has been a regent since 2002 .

Senator Dianne Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum, has been named in a college admissions scandal. This scandal is different than the one that has dominated headlines for months. Unlike the FBI’s Operation Varsity Blues, this isn’t a story of wealthy parents paying handsomely to get their unqualified children accepted into a college or university. This is a story of connections and the arrogance of the privileged.
The state auditor’s office named Richard Blum, a University of California Regent, as one of the regents in an admissions scandal involving dozens of students from wealthy, mostly white, well-connected families. There is a prohibition on regents using their influence in admission matters.
Among those “inappropriately admitted” were a student whose family was friends with a member of the Board of Regents, the child of a major donor and an applicant who babysat for a colleague of a former admissions director, according to the report released Tuesday by the California State Auditor. In one case, a regent unidentified in the audit sent an “inappropriate letter of support” directly to the UC Berkeley chancellor on behalf of a student with only a 26% chance of winning a spot off the wait list, despite the policy prohibiting efforts by regents to influence admissions decisions by going around the regular process. The applicant was admitted.
Margarita Fernandez, the auditor’s spokesperson, confirmed that the regent is Richard Blum.
When asked about this breach in conduct, Blum’s response was hey, no one told me it was wrong to do it. He said he has done it lots of times during his 18 years as a regent. He claims innocence of any wrongdoing.
Blum told the San Francisco Chronicle on Thursday that he’s done nothing wrong and that he has used his clout to get friends and family into the elite public system for years. “I did it a bunch of times,” Blum said, adding that he has never considered it a problem to write recommendation letters bypassing the traditional admissions process. A policy prohibiting such influence has been in place throughout Blum’s 18-year tenure on the Board of Regents, the newspaper reported. Blum, a financier, told the Chronicle that “no one ever told me it was wrong.” He said he has sent letters of recommendation about friends and family to chancellors at multiple UC campuses since becoming a regent in 2002. “Wherever they were applying. Wherever they wanted to get in.” He recalled sending letters specifically to the chancellors at UC Berkeley, UC Davis, and UC Irvine, but added: “almost everywhere.”
This is about the wealthy and well-connected using their clout to secure their children’s college education at the expense of others who were qualified to fill the admissions slot. Blum is 85 years old now and a very wealthy businessman, who sometimes finds himself in the news for shady doings available to him due to his wife’s political career. In his world, it’s all about who you know, so naturally, he doesn’t see the error in his ways. He thinks it is perfectly normal to just send off a letter instructing the admissions office to let an applicant in while using his position as regent as leverage.
The Operation Oxford Blues scandal led to an audit request last year by state Assemblywoman Tasha Boerner Horvath. Four of the UC’s nine campuses — UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, and UC Santa Barbara were included. Admissions policies and practices were examined over six academic year periods, from 2013-14 to 2018-19.
This is an example of why people are disgusted with professional politicians like Senator Feinstein. Would her husband have found such financial rewards in his career without a powerful political wife? Would he be on the Board of Regents without her connection? Both are legitimate questions. After so many years of living like this, Blum is oblivious to the appearance of his wrongdoing, if not the actual wrongdoing. He sounds surprised that he was even questioned about his actions. Blum was helping the children of other wealthy, well-connected men and women. He wasn’t even giving a boost to a needy student. There’s no philanthropic angle here.
UC Berkeley was the worst offender, the audit said, with 55 cases of inappropriate admissions. Among them, 14 cases involved students who were denied admission through the regular process and were offered a spot on the waitlist. Blum’s letter came in support of one of those waitlisted students, the audit said. But that student, like the 13 others on the waitlist, had received “uncompetitive scores from readers that gave them poor chances of being admitted,” the audit said. Blum wrote a letter of advocacy about the student to the UC Berkeley chancellor, which was forwarded to the development office responsible for handling fundraising and relations with donors. Blum has been a longtime supporter of Berkeley, donating $15 million in 2006 to launch the Blum Center for Developing Economies to address global poverty and subsequent contributions to expand that work. The development office then forwarded the letter to the admissions office, the audit said. The two offices conferred on who should be admitted from the waitlist. Blum’s favored applicant had only a 26% chance of acceptance based on ratings by application readers, the audit said, but won admission.
The Chairman of the Board of Regents released a statement.
Board of Regents Chairman John A. Pérez said UC officials have “limited details” about the case but are reviewing the information to determine whether the alleged conduct violates university policies and whether an additional UC review or investigation is warranted. “The UC Board of Regents takes these matters very seriously and any violations will be promptly and appropriately addressed,” Pérez said in a statement. “Once the Board determines and carefully evaluates the facts of the case, we will comment on the outcome and will further review if any changes in policy are called for.”
The regents are allowed to submit letters of recommendation, when appropriate, but the case of the wait-listed student, in particular, shows Blum’s willingness to step outside the bounds of acceptable behavior.
Blum has donated millions of dollars to UC. The 82-page state audit found that the four campuses involved in the audit had admitted at least 64 students “using inappropriate factors to select them, such as connections to donors, staff or alumni.” We’ll see if Blum is even removed from the Board of Regents over his inappropriate actions. He has been a regent since 2002.


hotair--2020-09-25--DeSantis: We're reopening Florida for business, including restaurants, and we're not closing anythin

DeSantis: We're reopening Florida for business, including restaurants, and we're not closing anything going forward

I feel guilty that my first reaction to this decision was to start thinking through how it ’ ll affect the election , not how it ’ ll affect the population , but we ’ re 40 days out from E-Day and that ’ s just how it is .
Simply put : If it ’ s true that the pandemic is Trump ’ s biggest electoral liability ( and it is ) , then creating the conditions for maximum spread of the virus shortly before the election seems like exactly what you wouldn ’ t want to do .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ biggest available haul of electoral votes , whose population happens to include a famously large share of senior citizens .
How does it help Trump get reelected to have seniors in Florida suddenly panicked that this winter ’ s second wave might now be nastier than they feared ?
This reminds me of another inexplicably risky Republican decision , the Senate GOP ’ s insistence on going small in the next round of coronavirus stimulus .
That can only hurt Trump , potentially very badly , by undermining his strongest case for reelection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better than Biden on the economy .
Presumably DeSantis would say that that ’ s why he ’ s lifting restrictions in Florida today — to get the economy moving again .
That ’ s the worthiest of goals , but I don ’ t know how the economy can be expected to recover this winter if the second wave is as bad as experts fear and people start shutting themselves in their homes to stay safe .
By lifting so many restrictions , Florida risks making its second wave especially nasty .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that DeSantis is gambling with the highest stakes .
If the economy begins to turn around next month and cases remain low , he gets to declare victory and maybe delivers Florida to Trump in so doing .
If case counts are climbing by November 3 , it ’ ll be all too easy for Democrats to lay it at his feet .
And that might be the end of Trump ’ s chances at a second term .
Maybe there ’ s less here than meets the eye , though : There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : -It removes all remaining state-level restrictions on businesses , including on bars and restaurants , which were capped at 75 % capacity in Phase 3 of DeSantis ’ original reopening plan .
-It provides a general right to work and to operate a business .
Local governments can limit and regulate businesses , but won ’ t be able to close businesses because of coronavirus concerns .
-Local governments won ’ t be able to prevent restaurants from operating at below 50 % capacity .
Under previous orders , local governments could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counties in South Florida kept restaurants and bars closed after the state allowed them to reopen .
Also , cities and counties won ’ t be able to impose any restrictions without an economic and health justification .
-Cities and counties can ’ t collect on any outstanding fines they issued as part of their pandemic response .
The order , though , doesn ’ t compel local governments to refund anyone who has already paid a fine .
“ Much of the state will reopen at pre-pandemic levels , ” notes Politico @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Right , but per the boldfaced bits above , local governments can still impose social-distancing rules within limits .
Statewide restrictions are being lifted , that ’ s all .
That ’ s consistent with DeSantis ’ s approach from the start of the pandemic , which has been to go light wherever possible on statewide rules while allowing local authorities to take the lead on containment measures .
It may be that , for most businesses , the stage-three rules with which they ’ re forced to comply end up being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s just that those rules will be coming exclusively from city and county officials now instead of from DeSantis ’ s office .
The catch is that the state is going to demand that local officials justify their rules .
The degree of deference shown to them by DeSantis ’ s administration will determine whether Florida remains operating at the current status quo , more or less , or if DeSantis really is going to get crazy with the cheez whiz by insisting that most businesses be allowed to operate at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , post-pandemic — levels .
He pointed out in his presser today that schools are open , the state ’ s theme parks are open , more businesses are open and yet there ’ s been no apocalyptic rise in cases .
That ’ s true : More than 9,500 people were hospitalized with COVID in Florida on July 22 .
Today the number is 2,200 .
That ’ s all to the good , but it doesn ’ t mean conditions at the moment meet the experts ’ guidelines for a safe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The state with the highest number of COVID deaths yesterday ?
Florida , with 120 .
The state with the next-highest number was Illinois , with just 33 .
Florida is also surprisingly weak on testing , ranking 37th out of 50 states in tests per capita .
See why this is such a gamble politically for DeSantis ?
There ’ s plenty of ammo for critics to use in accusing him later of having been reckless in moving prematurely to stage three if things go badly .
But there ’ s also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk is worth taking ” given the downward trends in cases and hospitalizations since the summer .
Plus , DeSantis may be calculating that even if this backfires and a second wave results , we ’ re close enough to the election now that the data may be ambiguous on Nov. 3 , leading Floridians to conclude that there ’ s no “ wave ” after all .
If cases rise 10 percent between now and then , is that a crisis in the making or just the cost of doing business if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think the chief risk to him and Trump lies in how seniors react to today ’ s decision , entirely apart from what the data looks like on Election Day .
If they feel less safe , if they fear that DeSantis and Trump are prioritizing business concerns over the health of older Floridians , maybe that ’ s all it takes for a meaningful shift towards Biden .
The one move DeSantis made today that ’ s apt to cause him the most grief later is reopening bars for business .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Politico notes , but capped them at 50 percent capacity .
Today ’ s stage-three measures provide that “ bars , pubs and nightclubs that derive more than 50 percent of sales from alcohol should operate at full capacity with limited social distancing protocols , ” per a local news outlet .
As noted above , local officials can still impose their own restrictions , but they need DeSantis ’ s approval for that .
Given how much attention has been paid by public health experts over the past few months to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are down , people are crowded together , they ’ re shouting , they ’ re not wearing masks — DeSantis ’ s decision to lighten up on them will be the one that ’ s cited most often later by critics if things get bad in Florida again .

I feel guilty that my first reaction to this decision was to start thinking through how it’ll affect the election, not how it’ll affect the population, but we’re 40 days out from E-Day and that’s just how it is.
Simply put: If it’s true that the pandemic is Trump’s biggest electoral liability (and it is), then creating the conditions for maximum spread of the virus shortly before the election seems like exactly what you wouldn’t want to do. Especially in the swing state with the biggest available haul of electoral votes, whose population happens to include a famously large share of senior citizens. How does it help Trump get reelected to have seniors in Florida suddenly panicked that this winter’s second wave might now be nastier than they feared?
This reminds me of another inexplicably risky Republican decision, the Senate GOP’s insistence on going small in the next round of coronavirus stimulus. That can only hurt Trump, potentially very badly, by undermining his strongest case for reelection, the idea that he’s better than Biden on the economy. Presumably DeSantis would say that that’s why he’s lifting restrictions in Florida today — to get the economy moving again. That’s the worthiest of goals, but I don’t know how the economy can be expected to recover this winter if the second wave is as bad as experts fear and people start shutting themselves in their homes to stay safe. By lifting so many restrictions, Florida risks making its second wave especially nasty.
Which is a long way of saying that DeSantis is gambling with the highest stakes. If the economy begins to turn around next month and cases remain low, he gets to declare victory and maybe delivers Florida to Trump in so doing. If case counts are climbing by November 3, it’ll be all too easy for Democrats to lay it at his feet. And that might be the end of Trump’s chances at a second term.
Maybe there’s less here than meets the eye, though:
There are four major provisions of the order: -It removes all remaining state-level restrictions on businesses, including on bars and restaurants, which were capped at 75% capacity in Phase 3 of DeSantis’ original reopening plan. -It provides a general right to work and to operate a business. Local governments can limit and regulate businesses, but won’t be able to close businesses because of coronavirus concerns. -Local governments won’t be able to prevent restaurants from operating at below 50% capacity. Under previous orders, local governments could go further than state-level restrictions, and counties in South Florida kept restaurants and bars closed after the state allowed them to reopen. Also, cities and counties won’t be able to impose any restrictions without an economic and health justification. -Cities and counties can’t collect on any outstanding fines they issued as part of their pandemic response. The order, though, doesn’t compel local governments to refund anyone who has already paid a fine.
“Much of the state will reopen at pre-pandemic levels,” notes Politico, summing up the new stage-three regime. Right, but per the boldfaced bits above, local governments can still impose social-distancing rules within limits. Statewide restrictions are being lifted, that’s all. That’s consistent with DeSantis’s approach from the start of the pandemic, which has been to go light wherever possible on statewide rules while allowing local authorities to take the lead on containment measures. It may be that, for most businesses, the stage-three rules with which they’re forced to comply end up being little different from the stage-two rules. It’s just that those rules will be coming exclusively from city and county officials now instead of from DeSantis’s office.
The catch is that the state is going to demand that local officials justify their rules. The degree of deference shown to them by DeSantis’s administration will determine whether Florida remains operating at the current status quo, more or less, or if DeSantis really is going to get crazy with the cheez whiz by insisting that most businesses be allowed to operate at pre-pandemic — or, I should say, post-pandemic — levels.
He pointed out in his presser today that schools are open, the state’s theme parks are open, more businesses are open and yet there’s been no apocalyptic rise in cases. That’s true:
More than 9,500 people were hospitalized with COVID in Florida on July 22. Today the number is 2,200. That’s all to the good, but it doesn’t mean conditions at the moment meet the experts’ guidelines for a safe reopening. They don’t:
As of Thursday, Florida was testing 38 percent of a testing target developed by researchers at the Harvard Global Health Institute. The state had a positivity rate of 12 percent for the total number of tests processed over the two-week period ending Thursday, according to data analyzed by The Times. Positive rates should be at or below 5 percent for at least 14 days before a state or country can safely reopen, according to the World Health Organization.
The state with the highest number of COVID deaths yesterday? Florida, with 120. The state with the next-highest number was Illinois, with just 33. Florida is also surprisingly weak on testing, ranking 37th out of 50 states in tests per capita. See why this is such a gamble politically for DeSantis? There’s plenty of ammo for critics to use in accusing him later of having been reckless in moving prematurely to stage three if things go badly. But there’s also reason for him to say “this risk is worth taking” given the downward trends in cases and hospitalizations since the summer. Plus, DeSantis may be calculating that even if this backfires and a second wave results, we’re close enough to the election now that the data may be ambiguous on Nov. 3, leading Floridians to conclude that there’s no “wave” after all. If cases rise 10 percent between now and then, is that a crisis in the making or just the cost of doing business if you want a functioning economy?
I think the chief risk to him and Trump lies in how seniors react to today’s decision, entirely apart from what the data looks like on Election Day. If they feel less safe, if they fear that DeSantis and Trump are prioritizing business concerns over the health of older Floridians, maybe that’s all it takes for a meaningful shift towards Biden.
The one move DeSantis made today that’s apt to cause him the most grief later is reopening bars for business. He already did that earlier this month, Politico notes, but capped them at 50 percent capacity. Today’s stage-three measures provide that “bars, pubs and nightclubs that derive more than 50 percent of sales from alcohol should operate at full capacity with limited social distancing protocols,” per a local news outlet. As noted above, local officials can still impose their own restrictions, but they need DeSantis’s approval for that. Given how much attention has been paid by public health experts over the past few months to the special danger posed by bars — inhibitions are down, people are crowded together, they’re shouting, they’re not wearing masks — DeSantis’s decision to lighten up on them will be the one that’s cited most often later by critics if things get bad in Florida again.


hotair--2020-09-25--The many times Nikole Hannah-Jones argued 1619 was our 'true founding'

This story isn ’ t really that complicated except for the fact that the person at the center of it , 1619 Project author Nikole Hannah-Jones , has been doing her best to gaslight everyone else .
If you cut through that intentional fog of misdirection and deleted tweets what you ’ re left with is a clumsy effort to obfuscate what was the most oft-used summary of the entire project by the author herself : The idea that 1619 , not 1776 , should be considered America ’ s “ true founding.
” Those exact words were used in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was published by the NY Times ( see 2nd tweet below ) but at some point the Times quietly removed that language and Hannah-Jones has recently complained that right-wing critics have done a great job at framing those words as if they were a part of her project when , according to her , they never were .
I can ’ t show you the tweet Hannah-Jones wrote complaining about this because she deleted it the next day , but many outlets noted it : She continued this revisionist argument in other now-deleted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ description used in promotional material that we took down 9 or 10 months ago.
” Why does this matter ?
Well , it matters because what Hannah-Jones is claiming is simply not anywhere close to a fair account of how this claim featured in the roll out of the 1619 Project .
Simply put , the Pulitzer Prize winning author is lying when she says this appeared once in promotional materials and was never really part of her Project .
On the contrary , this same phrase actually appeared over and over from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Project in various interviews .
Yesterday , Atlantic author Conor Friedersdorf pointed those out , albeit somewhat reluctantly : Friedersdorf said earlier in the thread that he is not against teaching the 1619 Project in schools .
What clearly irritates him is that Hannah-Jones is responding to criticism by claiming that the critics are focusing on something she never said or meant .
She is basically claiming her critics are fabricating evidence against her instead of admitting this came directly ( and repeatedly ) from her .
She ’ s now claiming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symbolic meaning : This supposed distinction Hannah-Jones has introduced over whether she meant 1619 was the actual legal foundation of America or just the symbolic/spiritual founding is more misdirection .
Her critics never took her to mean that 1619 was the literal/legal founding .
This was always a debate over which date better represents America , the arrival of slaves in 1619 or the Declaration of Independence in 1776 .
In fact , I wrote about Conor Friedersdorf ’ s criticism of the 1619 Project and this is how I summed up his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as the true founding of the country does focus attention on America ’ s “ original sin ” of slavery but at the expense of downplaying the universal truths ( life , liberty , the pursuit of happiness ) to which all Americans aspire .
If 1619 is the real founding , what does that mean for people who became Americans yesterday or those who aren ’ t part of that legacy of slavery for other reasons ?
The 1619 Project seems to imply that some who legally adopt our creed may not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ story as others .
Is that really the message we want to send to the world ?
To our own children ?
…I think Friedersdorf is on to something .
The focus on 1619 is arbitrary and winds up diminishing the country not just because it puts a spotlight on its most glaring error but because it takes the spotlight off it ’ s highest ideals .
Again , no one was making a legal argument about the correct technical date of the founding .
That ’ s a dodge .
The argument @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adoption of different dates placed on history .
And the claim that 1619 was our “ true founding ” matters because it ’ s very much a claim that 1619 matters more than 1776 .
Again , not as a legal date but as the most important part of the nation ’ s history .
The fact that Hannah-Jones has made this exact claim multiple times demonstrates that , even if those words never appeared in her essay , she considered them a fair and useful way to sum up the gist of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , are the receipts : “ You don ’ t make certain arguments like , let ’ s consider 1619 our true founding and not 1776… ” She ’ s almost repeated herself verbatim , like this was a script : “ I mean one does not make the arguments that we were making—that we should consider 1619 our true founding… ” “ I think it was the evocative nature of the argument , an argument saying actually 1776 is not our true founding.
” The NY Times editor who worked with Hannah-Jones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the project ” and she didn ’ t disagree with that .
That last tweet is really the bottom line .
Everyone involved in this discussion has understood what Hannah-Jones was trying to do , The question is whether 1619 really does represent the “ true founding ” or not .
She doesn ’ t seem prepared to acknowledge or debate with critics , like Friedersdorf , who offer good reasons that maybe this isn ’ t the best or most accurate representation of America to perpetuate or pass on to children .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said : What relationship , I wonder , does an indigenous Hawaiian have to 1619 ?
How about Andrew Yang ?
And what about me ?
I was born in New Mexico , which entered the union in 1912 , and raised in California , whose 1850 constitution banned slave labor by consensus .
Circa 1860 , travelers still arrived more quickly from Manila than New York City or Washington , D.C. , and one in 10 California residents was Chinese .
Years before I set foot in any of the 13 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not far from my house , where the hierarchy of the Church in which I was raised subjugated indigenous people .
My ancestors were German farmers who settled in the Midwest in the middle of the 19th century and French Cajuns who were expelled from Canada by the British and harassed in Louisiana by Catholic-hating Klansmen .
I have no English ancestors I ’ m aware of .
If English Virginia circa 1619 was America ’ s true founding , I ’ m not sure what that means for me , let alone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a once-interned Japanese American .
But if America ’ s true founding was the moment in 1776 when universalist ideals were put forth with the aspiration of a nation that would realize them in the future––if those ideals resonated with people from Haiti to France to Russia , with people of all races and religions , benefiting wildly diverse groups as they were more widely realized––that moment is equally inclusive of everyone , past , present , and future , who shares those ideals .
These are good questions and ones Hannah-Jones should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s claiming , contra evidence , that “ true founding ” was never part of what she claimed about the Project or , alternatively , that she meant those words symbolically while critics are taking them literally .
This isn ’ t an argument in good faith , it ’ s a dodge , similar to when she ignored and downplayed criticisms of her take on the Revolutionary War until it came out that she ’ d been told her claims weren ’ t true prior to publication but ran with them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have any good answers to her critics now , just as she didn ’ t then .
Finally , while I don ’ t always agree with Conor Friedersdorf , he deserves a lot of credit in this case for sticking to his guns and not allowing himself to be bullied into submission .
I hope he can keep it up but the pressure to fall in line must be tremendous .

This story isn’t really that complicated except for the fact that the person at the center of it, 1619 Project author Nikole Hannah-Jones, has been doing her best to gaslight everyone else. If you cut through that intentional fog of misdirection and deleted tweets what you’re left with is a clumsy effort to obfuscate what was the most oft-used summary of the entire project by the author herself: The idea that 1619, not 1776, should be considered America’s “true founding.”
Those exact words were used in a preface to the project when it was published by the NY Times (see 2nd tweet below) but at some point the Times quietly removed that language and Hannah-Jones has recently complained that right-wing critics have done a great job at framing those words as if they were a part of her project when, according to her, they never were. I can’t show you the tweet Hannah-Jones wrote complaining about this because she deleted it the next day, but many outlets noted it:
“One thing in which the right has been tremendously successful is getting media to frame stories in their language and through their lens,” wrote Hannah-Jones in a subsequently deleted tweet. “The #1619Project does not argue that 1619 is our true founding. We know this nation marks its founding at 1776.”
She continued this revisionist argument in other now-deleted tweets: “It was one digital description used in promotional material that we took down 9 or 10 months ago.”
The deleted text was a passage on the header of the 1619 Project website from August of last year that claimed the year 1619, rather than 1776, was "our true founding." pic.twitter.com/PzY53jfpJU — Phil Magness (@PhilWMagness) September 21, 2020
Why does this matter? Well, it matters because what Hannah-Jones is claiming is simply not anywhere close to a fair account of how this claim featured in the roll out of the 1619 Project. Simply put, the Pulitzer Prize winning author is lying when she says this appeared once in promotional materials and was never really part of her Project. On the contrary, this same phrase actually appeared over and over from her own mouth when she was describing the Project in various interviews. Yesterday, Atlantic author Conor Friedersdorf pointed those out, albeit somewhat reluctantly:
Jones repeatedly cited that metaphorical claim about the most "true" founding year *as a specific reason* she knew that the Project would elicit disagreement and provoke criticism and debate. — Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) September 24, 2020
Friedersdorf said earlier in the thread that he is not against teaching the 1619 Project in schools. What clearly irritates him is that Hannah-Jones is responding to criticism by claiming that the critics are focusing on something she never said or meant. She is basically claiming her critics are fabricating evidence against her instead of admitting this came directly (and repeatedly) from her.
As noted, I'd planned to let the issue rest with a thread I posted earlier this week https://t.co/lKgjdZbnDh But NHJ deleted a Tweet of hers I quoted in that thread. Today, she blocked me and Tweeted additional wrongheaded characterizations. — Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) September 24, 2020
She’s now claiming this is a confusion over literal vs. symbolic meaning:
Accurate. But the debate is about the best symbolic founding! And everything I have argued is consistent not just with stray Tweets, but with multiple videotaped statements she has made in public appearances, & that the editor of the NYT Magazine, Jake Silverstein, made as well — Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) September 24, 2020
This supposed distinction Hannah-Jones has introduced over whether she meant 1619 was the actual legal foundation of America or just the symbolic/spiritual founding is more misdirection. Her critics never took her to mean that 1619 was the literal/legal founding. This was always a debate over which date better represents America, the arrival of slaves in 1619 or the Declaration of Independence in 1776. In fact, I wrote about Conor Friedersdorf’s criticism of the 1619 Project and this is how I summed up his criticism at the time:
Marking 1619 as the true founding of the country does focus attention on America’s “original sin” of slavery but at the expense of downplaying the universal truths (life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness) to which all Americans aspire. If 1619 is the real founding, what does that mean for people who became Americans yesterday or those who aren’t part of that legacy of slavery for other reasons? The 1619 Project seems to imply that some who legally adopt our creed may not be as fully a part of our story as others. Is that really the message we want to send to the world? To our own children? …I think Friedersdorf is on to something. The focus on 1619 is arbitrary and winds up diminishing the country not just because it puts a spotlight on its most glaring error but because it takes the spotlight off it’s highest ideals.
Again, no one was making a legal argument about the correct technical date of the founding. That’s a dodge. The argument was always understood as one about the adoption of different dates placed on history.
And the claim that 1619 was our “true founding” matters because it’s very much a claim that 1619 matters more than 1776. Again, not as a legal date but as the most important part of the nation’s history. The fact that Hannah-Jones has made this exact claim multiple times demonstrates that, even if those words never appeared in her essay, she considered them a fair and useful way to sum up the gist of her project. Here, via Friedersdorf, are the receipts:
“You don’t make certain arguments like, let’s consider 1619 our true founding and not 1776…”
She’s almost repeated herself verbatim, like this was a script: “I mean one does not make the arguments that we were making—that we should consider 1619 our true founding…”
“I think it was the evocative nature of the argument, an argument saying actually 1776 is not our true founding.”
The NY Times editor who worked with Hannah-Jones called it “a powerful simplification of the project” and she didn’t disagree with that.
"a powerful simplification of the project"! pic.twitter.com/7qCOdK0DN8 — Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) September 24, 2020
Those are the claims I & others NHJ has criticized have always been debating. What do I want? For the symbolic debate about whether 1776 or 1619 is the better symbolic founding date to be had on the merits rather than short-circuited by the canard we're arguing with a straw man — Conor Friedersdorf (@conor64) September 24, 2020
That last tweet is really the bottom line. Everyone involved in this discussion has understood what Hannah-Jones was trying to do, The question is whether 1619 really does represent the “true founding” or not. She doesn’t seem prepared to acknowledge or debate with critics, like Friedersdorf, who offer good reasons that maybe this isn’t the best or most accurate representation of America to perpetuate or pass on to children. Here’s a bit of what he said:
What relationship, I wonder, does an indigenous Hawaiian have to 1619? How about Andrew Yang? And what about me? I was born in New Mexico, which entered the union in 1912, and raised in California, whose 1850 constitution banned slave labor by consensus. Circa 1860, travelers still arrived more quickly from Manila than New York City or Washington, D.C., and one in 10 California residents was Chinese. Years before I set foot in any of the 13 original colonies, I visited Spanish missions not far from my house, where the hierarchy of the Church in which I was raised subjugated indigenous people. My ancestors were German farmers who settled in the Midwest in the middle of the 19th century and French Cajuns who were expelled from Canada by the British and harassed in Louisiana by Catholic-hating Klansmen. I have no English ancestors I’m aware of. If English Virginia circa 1619 was America’s true founding, I’m not sure what that means for me, let alone a member of the Chumash tribe or a once-interned Japanese American. But if America’s true founding was the moment in 1776 when universalist ideals were put forth with the aspiration of a nation that would realize them in the future––if those ideals resonated with people from Haiti to France to Russia, with people of all races and religions, benefiting wildly diverse groups as they were more widely realized––that moment is equally inclusive of everyone, past, present, and future, who shares those ideals.
These are good questions and ones Hannah-Jones should attempt to address. Instead, she’s claiming, contra evidence, that “true founding” was never part of what she claimed about the Project or, alternatively, that she meant those words symbolically while critics are taking them literally. This isn’t an argument in good faith, it’s a dodge, similar to when she ignored and downplayed criticisms of her take on the Revolutionary War until it came out that she’d been told her claims weren’t true prior to publication but ran with them anyway. She doesn’t seem to have any good answers to her critics now, just as she didn’t then.
Finally, while I don’t always agree with Conor Friedersdorf, he deserves a lot of credit in this case for sticking to his guns and not allowing himself to be bullied into submission. I hope he can keep it up but the pressure to fall in line must be tremendous.


hotair--2020-09-25--What happened yesterday with those nine missing military ballots in Pennsylvania?

There are two newsworthy parts to this story , one of which obviously is what happened to the ballots themselves .
That ’ s important — any instance of votes being “ discarded ” is cause for investigation — although we all realize that human error leads to some votes being deemed illegal or simply not being counted in every election .
Last night I wrote about the possibility that “ naked ballots ” in Pennsylvania could result in as many as 100,000 votes being invalidated ( most of which are highly likely to be for Biden ) , potentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nine votes aren ’ t counted somewhere , someone needs to find out why .
The more newsworthy part of this story is the way the investigation was hyped both by Trump ’ s campaign and Trump ’ s Justice Department , an outfit that ’ s not supposed to be working to get him reelected , needless to say .
They don ’ t work for him , they work for the entire population .
Or they ’ re supposed to .
Let ’ s back up .
Last week local authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out that a certain number of military ballots had been opened by county election officials .
That ’ s a big no-no .
Mail ballots are supposed to be placed in a room unopened until early on Election Day .
( Most Pennsylvanians haven ’ t gotten their mail-in ballots yet but the military is an exception .
They get write-in ballots which they can send in early . )
Those officials called in the FBI to investigate .
Yesterday local U.S. Attorney David Freed , a Trump appointee , published his letter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the investigation .
Key bits : The FBI has recovered a number of documents relating to military ballots that had been improperly opened by your elections staff , and had the ballots removed and discarded , or removed and placed separately from the envelope containing confidential voter information and attestation .
Specifically , a total of nine ( 9 ) military ballots were discovered to have been discarded .
Seven ( 7 ) of those ballots when discovered by investigators were outside of any envelope .
Those ballots were all cast for presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) of those seven ( 7 ) ballots was able to be identified to an envelope that was recovered , and thereby potentially tied to a specific voter .
Two ( 2 ) military ballots that had been discarded were previously recovered by elections staff , reinserted into what appeared to be their appropriate envelopes , and then resealed .
Therefore , the votes cast on those two ( 2 ) ballots are unknown .
Thus , is appears that three ( 3 ) of the nine ( 9 ) recovered ballots can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Six ( 6 ) of the ballots were simply removed and discarded , and can not be attributed to a specific voter at this time… It was explained to investigators the envelopes used for official overseas , military , absentee and mail-in ballot requests are so similar , that the staff believed that adhering to the protocol of preserving envelopes unopened would cause them to miss such ballot requests .
Our interviews further revealed that this issue was a problem in the primary election–therefore a known issue–and that the problem has not been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal potentially .
If I ’ m reading it correctly , election officials made a good-faith mistake : They opened the envelopes believing that *applications* for ballots were inside , only to find completed ballots instead .
Because those ballots can ’ t properly be counted until Election Day , they were therefore spoiled .
So the officials just … threw them away .
If that ’ s a chronic problem in Pennsylvania , with ballots being spoiled left and right because it ’ s too hard to tell them apart from ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s letter is ambiguous but it sounds like what he ’ s describing is a “ naked ballot ” snafu .
That is , instead of enclosing their ballot inside an inner “ secrecy ” envelope and then enclosing that in an outer envelope with identifying information , the nine troops involved may not have used the inner envelope .
They just stuck their ballots in the outer envelope and dropped them in the mail .
When election officials opened the outer envelope — oopsie .
Turns out they had actual ballots on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supposed to be revealed until Nov. 3 .
Bottom line : There ’ s a real problem here on the merits , even if the number of ballots involved was small in this case .
That ’ s the first newsworthy part of the story .
Which brings us to the second part .
Why did Freed make a point of noting which candidate was selected on the spoiled ballots ?
He was so eager to note that they had been cast for Trump , in fact , that his office initially put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then had to retract it .
That statement claimed that all nine ballots had been for Trump ; the truth , as noted in the excerpt above , is that seven were .
Needless to say , it ’ s completely besides the point whom the votes were for .
All nine ballots could have been write-in votes for the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man and we ’ d still have a troubling case here of elected officials accidentally invalidating votes because they didn ’ t follow proper procedure .
It makes no sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But it makes lots of sense politically , knowing that his ultimate boss is out on the trail every day insisting that Democrats are going to use mail-in voters to cheat him out of the presidency .
This sure feels like the act of a political hack who ’ s working to help Trump undermine faith in the election , presumably because he thinks there might be a promotion in it for him if the president wins a second term .
( An eminently reasonable presumption . )
He may have wanted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a story about ballot shenanigans and recognized that emphasizing that the shenanigans in Luzerne County came at Trump ’ s expense would give him a better chance .
So that ’ s what he did .
And it worked like a charm : Politico notes that Kayleigh McEnany somehow got wind of the investigation and was talking to reporters about it yesterday even before Freed ’ s office put out its first press release .
Trump himself alluded to it in a segment with Fox Radio .
White House comms director Alyssa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : And of course so did Trump campaign spokesman Matt Wolking , who had to delete his tweet after it became clear that his “ 100 % ” figure couldn ’ t be verified : Wolking , being a campaign apparatchik , was free to overtly state what Freed could only suggest with subtext by mentioning that the spoiled ballots had been cast for Trump , namely , that Democrats are supposedly trying to steal the election .
Never mind that Luzerne County went for Trump by 20 points or so four years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s own investigation , it sounds like the ballots were opened due to an honest mistake , not as part of a scheme to invalidate pro-Trump ballots exclusively .
Campaign aides are what they are but U.S .
Attorneys are supposed to be impartial .
Former DOJ officials are understandably disgusted with Freed : Freed seems to have done the opposite of what DOJ guidelines recommend .
He deliberately *did* try to make his investigation a factor in the election by taking care to note that Trump votes , specifically , were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to know how the White House came to know the results of his investigation before the public did considering that this was , after all , a case involving just nine ballots , not the sort of stuff you would expect the president or his press secretary would need a heads-up on .
If this wasn ’ t a case of Freed — and Bill Barr ?
— deliberately playing up the fact that Trump had lost votes via the mail process in order to bolster his “ if I lose it can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims , then what was it ?
What ’ s the non-corrupt explanation for Freed mentioning that the votes cast were for Trump given that the DOJ guidelines would seem to counsel doing exactly the opposite ?
And before you answer , bear in mind that Barr has been unusually willing for an AG to insert himself into the political debate surrounding mail-in votes this year , and unusually dishonest about it too .
Normally a sitting Attorney General would look to reassure the public that America ’ s democratic institutions work and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t , the DOJ will investigate impartially to make sure that they do .
Freed ’ s statement undercuts both parts of that .
There ’ s no evidence that he acted at Barr ’ s behest , but as I say , given Barr ’ s peculiar interest in discrediting mail-in voting and the highly irregular chicanery involved in reducing the sentences for Trump cronies Roger Stone and Mike Flynn , there ’ s no reason to think he ’ s above it .
Presumably the media is digging even now to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement came to be .
One more thing .
As others have noted on Twitter this morning , the reason the nine ballots ended up being spoiled is because Republicans , not Democrats , have fought in Pennsylvania to disqualify “ naked ballots.
” Everywhere you look on the national map this year , it ’ s Republicans who are working to make voting more complicated .
The charitable view of that is that they want to make sure that fraud is more difficult for malefactors to pull off .
The less charitable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guy who lost the popular vote by several million votes last time and will lose it by an even wider margin this time needs to close the gap in any way he can , up to and including disqualifying ballots whose intent is clear but which were sent without following proper procedure to a T. The “ naked ballot ” issue may in fact be the difference in him winning Pennsylvania .
But in this case , it appears , it cost him at least seven votes .
Maybe nine .
So strange @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case involving nine ballots in a single state all the way up to the Oval Office , and that the DOJ ’ s messaging about that case then dovetailed precisely with Trump ’ s own campaign message .
Now we wait for an answer to the obvious follow-up question : Did Barr force Freed to mention that most of the spoiled ballots were for Trump or did Freed take the initiative himself ?

There are two newsworthy parts to this story, one of which obviously is what happened to the ballots themselves. That’s important — any instance of votes being “discarded” is cause for investigation — although we all realize that human error leads to some votes being deemed illegal or simply not being counted in every election. Last night I wrote about the possibility that “naked ballots” in Pennsylvania could result in as many as 100,000 votes being invalidated (most of which are highly likely to be for Biden), potentially deciding who wins the presidency. When nine votes aren’t counted somewhere, someone needs to find out why.
The more newsworthy part of this story is the way the investigation was hyped both by Trump’s campaign and Trump’s Justice Department, an outfit that’s not supposed to be working to get him reelected, needless to say. They don’t work for him, they work for the entire population. Or they’re supposed to.
Let’s back up. Last week local authorities in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, found out that a certain number of military ballots had been opened by county election officials. That’s a big no-no. Mail ballots are supposed to be placed in a room unopened until early on Election Day. (Most Pennsylvanians haven’t gotten their mail-in ballots yet but the military is an exception. They get write-in ballots which they can send in early.) Those officials called in the FBI to investigate. Yesterday local U.S. Attorney David Freed, a Trump appointee, published his letter to county authorities about the result of the investigation. Key bits:
The FBI has recovered a number of documents relating to military ballots that had been improperly opened by your elections staff, and had the ballots removed and discarded, or removed and placed separately from the envelope containing confidential voter information and attestation. Specifically, a total of nine (9) military ballots were discovered to have been discarded. Seven (7) of those ballots when discovered by investigators were outside of any envelope. Those ballots were all cast for presidential candidate Donald Trump. One (1) of those seven (7) ballots was able to be identified to an envelope that was recovered, and thereby potentially tied to a specific voter. Two (2) military ballots that had been discarded were previously recovered by elections staff, reinserted into what appeared to be their appropriate envelopes, and then resealed. Therefore, the votes cast on those two (2) ballots are unknown. Thus, is appears that three (3) of the nine (9) recovered ballots can be potentially attributed to specific voters. Six (6) of the ballots were simply removed and discarded, and cannot be attributed to a specific voter at this time… It was explained to investigators the envelopes used for official overseas, military, absentee and mail-in ballot requests are so similar, that the staff believed that adhering to the protocol of preserving envelopes unopened would cause them to miss such ballot requests. Our interviews further revealed that this issue was a problem in the primary election–therefore a known issue–and that the problem has not been corrected.
That’s a big deal potentially. If I’m reading it correctly, election officials made a good-faith mistake: They opened the envelopes believing that *applications* for ballots were inside, only to find completed ballots instead. Because those ballots can’t properly be counted until Election Day, they were therefore spoiled. So the officials just … threw them away. If that’s a chronic problem in Pennsylvania, with ballots being spoiled left and right because it’s too hard to tell them apart from ballot applications, uh oh. Freed’s letter is ambiguous but it sounds like what he’s describing is a “naked ballot” snafu. That is, instead of enclosing their ballot inside an inner “secrecy” envelope and then enclosing that in an outer envelope with identifying information, the nine troops involved may not have used the inner envelope. They just stuck their ballots in the outer envelope and dropped them in the mail. When election officials opened the outer envelope — oopsie. Turns out they had actual ballots on their hands, which weren’t supposed to be revealed until Nov. 3.
Bottom line: There’s a real problem here on the merits, even if the number of ballots involved was small in this case. That’s the first newsworthy part of the story.
Which brings us to the second part. Why did Freed make a point of noting which candidate was selected on the spoiled ballots? He was so eager to note that they had been cast for Trump, in fact, that his office initially put out a press release with false information and then had to retract it. That statement claimed that all nine ballots had been for Trump; the truth, as noted in the excerpt above, is that seven were. Needless to say, it’s completely besides the point whom the votes were for. All nine ballots could have been write-in votes for the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man and we’d still have a troubling case here of elected officials accidentally invalidating votes because they didn’t follow proper procedure.
It makes no sense legally for Freed to care about that. But it makes lots of sense politically, knowing that his ultimate boss is out on the trail every day insisting that Democrats are going to use mail-in voters to cheat him out of the presidency. This sure feels like the act of a political hack who’s working to help Trump undermine faith in the election, presumably because he thinks there might be a promotion in it for him if the president wins a second term. (An eminently reasonable presumption.) He may have wanted to get the Trump’s attention with a story about ballot shenanigans and recognized that emphasizing that the shenanigans in Luzerne County came at Trump’s expense would give him a better chance. So that’s what he did. And it worked like a charm: Politico notes that Kayleigh McEnany somehow got wind of the investigation and was talking to reporters about it yesterday even before Freed’s office put out its first press release. Trump himself alluded to it in a segment with Fox Radio. White House comms director Alyssa Farah jumped on the story as well:
EVERY vote matters. 9 military votes MATTER. Call me old fashioned: but I believe those willing to serve our nation in uniform especially deserve to have their vote counted accurately. https://t.co/MHpT9rrHx8 — Alyssa Farah (@Alyssafarah) September 24, 2020
And of course so did Trump campaign spokesman Matt Wolking, who had to delete his tweet after it became clear that his “100%” figure couldn’t be verified:
8 hours later, the Trump spokesman’s instigating tweet—”Democrats are trying to steal the election”—is still posted, with 67,000 retweets/likes and counting. This sort of disinformation is going to get innocent people hurt. pic.twitter.com/xGOb8WICHT — Tim Alberta (@TimAlberta) September 25, 2020
Wolking, being a campaign apparatchik, was free to overtly state what Freed could only suggest with subtext by mentioning that the spoiled ballots had been cast for Trump, namely, that Democrats are supposedly trying to steal the election. Never mind that Luzerne County went for Trump by 20 points or so four years ago. And that, per Freed’s own investigation, it sounds like the ballots were opened due to an honest mistake, not as part of a scheme to invalidate pro-Trump ballots exclusively.
Campaign aides are what they are but U.S. Attorneys are supposed to be impartial. Former DOJ officials are understandably disgusted with Freed:
An investigation here may be reasonable. But there is NO legit reason for: 1) a DOJ press release on a pending investigation, that
2) announces a partial list of unconfirmed facts, including
3) the identity of one of the candidates on specific ballots.https://t.co/T92nz8tZpV — Justin Levitt (@_justinlevitt_) September 24, 2020
This is both bizarre and disturbing — US Attorney’s Offices don’t issue reports on pending investigations— and certainly not reports so blatantly contrived to provide political ballast for a sitting President’s campaign narrative https://t.co/2wZWpjjIDD — David Laufman (@DavidLaufmanLaw) September 24, 2020
Especially noteworthy:
From the DOJ's own guidelines, last revised in 2017, during _this_ Administration:https://t.co/b59f3cax3M pic.twitter.com/xHxpKhepzg — Justin Levitt (@_justinlevitt_) September 24, 2020
Freed seems to have done the opposite of what DOJ guidelines recommend. He deliberately *did* try to make his investigation a factor in the election by taking care to note that Trump votes, specifically, were lost. I’d be curious to know how the White House came to know the results of his investigation before the public did considering that this was, after all, a case involving just nine ballots, not the sort of stuff you would expect the president or his press secretary would need a heads-up on. If this wasn’t a case of Freed — and Bill Barr? — deliberately playing up the fact that Trump had lost votes via the mail process in order to bolster his “if I lose it can only be because I was cheated” claims, then what was it? What’s the non-corrupt explanation for Freed mentioning that the votes cast were for Trump given that the DOJ guidelines would seem to counsel doing exactly the opposite?
And before you answer, bear in mind that Barr has been unusually willing for an AG to insert himself into the political debate surrounding mail-in votes this year, and unusually dishonest about it too. Normally a sitting Attorney General would look to reassure the public that America’s democratic institutions work and, to the extent they don’t, the DOJ will investigate impartially to make sure that they do. Freed’s statement undercuts both parts of that. There’s no evidence that he acted at Barr’s behest, but as I say, given Barr’s peculiar interest in discrediting mail-in voting and the highly irregular chicanery involved in reducing the sentences for Trump cronies Roger Stone and Mike Flynn, there’s no reason to think he’s above it. Presumably the media is digging even now to find out exactly how Freed’s statement came to be.
One more thing. As others have noted on Twitter this morning, the reason the nine ballots ended up being spoiled is because Republicans, not Democrats, have fought in Pennsylvania to disqualify “naked ballots.”
From that story. Pennsylvania Republicans wanted those ballots thrown out. https://t.co/XW9HRV9Zit pic.twitter.com/PiazXZidKX — Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) September 25, 2020
Everywhere you look on the national map this year, it’s Republicans who are working to make voting more complicated. The charitable view of that is that they want to make sure that fraud is more difficult for malefactors to pull off. The less charitable view is that they know that a guy who lost the popular vote by several million votes last time and will lose it by an even wider margin this time needs to close the gap in any way he can, up to and including disqualifying ballots whose intent is clear but which were sent without following proper procedure to a T. The “naked ballot” issue may in fact be the difference in him winning Pennsylvania. But in this case, it appears, it cost him at least seven votes. Maybe nine.
Update: That didn’t take long.
A Justice Department official told ABC News Friday that Attorney General William Barr personally briefed President Donald Trump about the DOJ’s investigation into a small number of ballots in Pennsylvania that were found to be discarded, prior to the information being made public by a U.S. attorney’s office Thursday afternoon. President Trump went on to first reveal the investigation in an interview with Fox News Radio, where he, without evidence, argued that it bolsters his baseless claims of widespread fraud in mail-in voting.
So strange that our extremely political AG took a case involving nine ballots in a single state all the way up to the Oval Office, and that the DOJ’s messaging about that case then dovetailed precisely with Trump’s own campaign message. Now we wait for an answer to the obvious follow-up question: Did Barr force Freed to mention that most of the spoiled ballots were for Trump or did Freed take the initiative himself?


hotair--2020-09-25--Two would-be jihadists planned 'Netflix worthy' terror attacks on New York targets including Trump T

Two would-be jihadists planned 'Netflix worthy' terror attacks on New York targets including Trump Tower

Two men , one from South Carolina and another from Texas , were arrested Monday for planning terror attacks on New York landmarks including Trump Tower and the NY Stock Exchange .
The two men were reportedly hoping to fight for ISIS either in the U.S. or abroad : Jaylyn Christopher Molina , who also refers to himself as “ Abdur Rahim , ” was one of two people arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ( FBI ) .
Molina faces charges of conspiracy to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization , according to the criminal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Western District of Texas .
Kristopher Sean Matthews , who also refers to himself as “ Ali Jibreel , ” is also named in the complaint .
Matthews is from South Carolina… In a disturbing post , Molina identifies America as his enemy and was accompanied by an extremely graphic photo collage of an American citizen being murdered by ISIS members .
“ You are my enemy ( America ) and never will I wear your flag…but I will raise the black flag of Allah !
” Their plans were a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inflict enough casualties that the would become infamous , or as they put it “ Netflix worthy.
” “ We need to stick together , we need to defeat them , we need to take a lot of casualties , a lot of numbers , ” Molina allegedly wrote in a secretive chat group where FBI investigators said they pledged their loyalty to ISIS .
Matthews then suggested in late May that the pair target state and Social Security buildings , as well as the stock market or Trump Tower in New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it from the outside , court documents show… If they “ accomplished the mission , ” Matthews said the attacks would grant them “ rock star status baby , ” the document shows .
“ This could be Netflix worthy , ” Matthews allegedly wrote in the chat group , court papers show .
The pair are now facing up to 20 years in prison if convicted of providing support to ISIS .
They would also face a lifetime of supervised release .
COVID-19 , BLM protests/riots and the 2020 election are competing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right now , but terrorism remains a threat .
A few days ago I wrote about the threats that forced a Charlie Hebdo HR person out of her home .
And earlier today Ed wrote about a knife attack in the area near the Charlie Hebdo offices .
French authorities have opened a terrorism investigation into the attack .
Last month there were a series of crashes on the autobahn in Germany .
Authorities there suspect that the Iraqi citizen involved in three separate crashes with motorcycles may have been carrying out a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the authorities said was an Iraqi citizen born in Baghdad , appeared to cause three separate crashes by ramming his car into two motorcycles and one scooter on different sections of the A100 , an autobahn that runs through Berlin , during the Tuesday evening rush hour .
He later yelled “ God is great ” in Arabic and threatened to detonate a bomb… After the last crash , in which a motorcyclist was pinned against a passenger car , the suspected assailant got out of his vehicle , placed what looked like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a prayer mat on the road and started praying , according to Mr. Steltner .
He was arrested by officers despite threatening violence and saying that the box contained a bomb .
Also last month , authorities in New York revealed that a man who slashed the neck of an NYPD officers in June had a terrorist motivation : “ Dzenan Camovic , an illegal alien and Bosnian national , is alleged to have used the cover of chaos during recent civil unrest in New York City to launch a premeditated and cowardly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ City Police officers , brutally slashing one with a knife , stealing his weapon and opening fire , and injuring several responding officers , ” Attorney General William Barr in a statement .
The prosecutors say in their appeal to keep Camovic detained pending trial that he has a “ significant volume of materials that demonstrate his interest in and support for violent Islamic extremism.
” They say when Camovic ’ s bedroom was searched they found CDs and thumb drives containing audio and video files of lectures from Anwar Al-Awlaki as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year before the attack , Camovic started expressing interest in Islamic State and other Syrian-based terrorist groups and asked about the permissibility of killing civilians , federal prosecutors said , citing information provided by an unidentified person interviewed during the investigation .
Camovic did not hold extreme religious beliefs , the person said , according to federal prosecutors .
We may not have time to think about terrorists right now but that doesn ’ t mean the terrorists are done thinking about us .

Two men, one from South Carolina and another from Texas, were arrested Monday for planning terror attacks on New York landmarks including Trump Tower and the NY Stock Exchange. The two men were reportedly hoping to fight for ISIS either in the U.S. or abroad:
Jaylyn Christopher Molina, who also refers to himself as “Abdur Rahim,” was one of two people arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Molina faces charges of conspiracy to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization, according to the criminal complaint filed with the US District Court for the Western District of Texas. Kristopher Sean Matthews, who also refers to himself as “Ali Jibreel,” is also named in the complaint. Matthews is from South Carolina… In a disturbing post, Molina identifies America as his enemy and was accompanied by an extremely graphic photo collage of an American citizen being murdered by ISIS members. “You are my enemy (America) and never will I wear your flag…but I will raise the black flag of Allah!”
Their plans were a bit vague but they clearly hoped to inflict enough casualties that the would become infamous, or as they put it “Netflix worthy.”
“We need to stick together, we need to defeat them, we need to take a lot of casualties, a lot of numbers,” Molina allegedly wrote in a secretive chat group where FBI investigators said they pledged their loyalty to ISIS. Matthews then suggested in late May that the pair target state and Social Security buildings, as well as the stock market or Trump Tower in New York or as the White House by shooting it from the outside, court documents show… If they “accomplished the mission,” Matthews said the attacks would grant them “rock star status baby,” the document shows. “This could be Netflix worthy,” Matthews allegedly wrote in the chat group, court papers show.
The pair are now facing up to 20 years in prison if convicted of providing support to ISIS. They would also face a lifetime of supervised release.
COVID-19, BLM protests/riots and the 2020 election are competing for all the oxygen in the room right now, but terrorism remains a threat. A few days ago I wrote about the threats that forced a Charlie Hebdo HR person out of her home. And earlier today Ed wrote about a knife attack in the area near the Charlie Hebdo offices. French authorities have opened a terrorism investigation into the attack.
Last month there were a series of crashes on the autobahn in Germany. Authorities there suspect that the Iraqi citizen involved in three separate crashes with motorcycles may have been carrying out a terror attack:
The driver, who the authorities said was an Iraqi citizen born in Baghdad, appeared to cause three separate crashes by ramming his car into two motorcycles and one scooter on different sections of the A100, an autobahn that runs through Berlin, during the Tuesday evening rush hour. He later yelled “God is great” in Arabic and threatened to detonate a bomb… After the last crash, in which a motorcyclist was pinned against a passenger car, the suspected assailant got out of his vehicle, placed what looked like a munitions box on its roof and a prayer mat on the road and started praying, according to Mr. Steltner. He was arrested by officers despite threatening violence and saying that the box contained a bomb.
Also last month, authorities in New York revealed that a man who slashed the neck of an NYPD officers in June had a terrorist motivation:
“Dzenan Camovic, an illegal alien and Bosnian national, is alleged to have used the cover of chaos during recent civil unrest in New York City to launch a premeditated and cowardly attack from behind against two New York City Police officers, brutally slashing one with a knife, stealing his weapon and opening fire, and injuring several responding officers,” Attorney General William Barr in a statement. The prosecutors say in their appeal to keep Camovic detained pending trial that he has a “significant volume of materials that demonstrate his interest in and support for violent Islamic extremism.” They say when Camovic’s bedroom was searched they found CDs and thumb drives containing audio and video files of lectures from Anwar Al-Awlaki as well as ISIS related propaganda. About a year before the attack, Camovic started expressing interest in Islamic State and other Syrian-based terrorist groups and asked about the permissibility of killing civilians, federal prosecutors said, citing information provided by an unidentified person interviewed during the investigation. Camovic did not hold extreme religious beliefs, the person said, according to federal prosecutors.
We may not have time to think about terrorists right now but that doesn’t mean the terrorists are done thinking about us.


hotair--2020-09-25--Kentucky lawmaker arrested on rioting charge, accused of setting fire to public library

Kentucky State Representative Attica Scott was arrested Thursday night during a Black Lives Matter protest that turned into a riot .
Scott is the author of Breonna ’ s Law .
She was booked on three counts after failing to disperse when police ordered her to do so .
The three counts are one count of unlawful assembly , one count of failure to disperse , and one count of riot in the first degree .
The arrest report alleges she “ caused damage at multiple locations , including setting fire to the Louisville Public Library.
” She was one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refused to disperse .
The protesters were seeking sanctuary at First Unitarian Church .
Scott ’ s daughter was also arrested .
When asked about the church offering sanctuary to protesters , Peggy Muller , President of the Board of Directors told a reporter , “ Because it is what we do .
The Unitarian Church is a believer in social justice and equality and we work hard .
We work , it ’ s just part of our mission , our principles , to help people who need help .
And , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve been doing it for 70 years .
Either they ’ ve been supporting the justice programs here , how could we not do it now just because of COVID ?
” The protesters had to be inside the church by the 9:00 p.m. curfew to avoid arrest .
They were not , they were walking there , according to the news reporter .
Interesting that the church lady admits concerns about COVID-19 won ’ t stop protests , right ?
COVID-19 shutdowns are for everyone else , apparently .
The curfew was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jury ’ s announcement .
As I was watching some of the news coverage last night , though , it sure looked like the curfew wasn ’ t being enforced .
There were lots of people in the streets , along with a strong police presence .
The streets around the Unitarian Church were blocked off so police could investigate the library fire .
Police said at least 24 people were arrested on the three counts Scott was arrested on .
More than 100 people took to the streets Thursday night , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The group that was arrested is accused of causing damage at multiple locations , not just the fire at the public library .
It ’ s just further proof that the narrative pushed by most of the press that these protests are peaceful is just wrong .
They regularly turn into a riot .
When violence and destruction begins , the event turns into a riot .
People are not arrested for peacefully protesting .
They are arrested for breaking the law , for acting like criminals .
Scott ’ s legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police reform .
No-knock warrants were banned in June by the City of Louisville .
As it turns out , the reports that the police used a no-knock warrant at Breonna ’ s apartment were wrong , according to the Kentucky Attorney General .
Attica Scott is the only black female legislator in the Kentucky Capitol .
While some headlines are making hay about the color of her skin , she certainly appears to have been arrested for breaking the law .
Something that is apparent , to me anyway , is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one that sets out to persuade people but to intimidate people .
Setting buildings on fire and other acts of violence don ’ t persuade people to believe what a movement is peddling .
It repels people .
Violence for violence ’ s sake is not effective to change minds .
Scott ’ s colleagues released statements in support of her .
Scott ’ s colleagues condemned her arrest on Twitter .
“ If you arrest the loudest voices fighting racial injustice in Louisville , we have to believe you want to silence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeted State Representative Josie Raymond .
“ The words escape me right now , ” said State Representative Charles Booker .
This is happening in Louisville as we speak .
My Shero , riding partner , and colleague in the State House , the sponsor of Breonna ’ s Law , was one of the people arrested .
Absolutely and deeply unbelievable.
” No one was “ silencing the fight against racial injustice ” but the police were responding to acts of violence .
Also arrested was Shameka Parrish-Wright , a leader for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which has helped protesters post bond and get out of jail over the past four months of demonstrations .

Kentucky State Representative Attica Scott was arrested Thursday night during a Black Lives Matter protest that turned into a riot. Scott is the author of Breonna’s Law. She was booked on three counts after failing to disperse when police ordered her to do so.
The three counts are one count of unlawful assembly, one count of failure to disperse, and one count of riot in the first degree. The arrest report alleges she “caused damage at multiple locations, including setting fire to the Louisville Public Library.” She was one of a large group of protesters who refused to disperse. The protesters were seeking sanctuary at First Unitarian Church. Scott’s daughter was also arrested.
When asked about the church offering sanctuary to protesters, Peggy Muller, President of the Board of Directors told a reporter, “Because it is what we do. The Unitarian Church is a believer in social justice and equality and we work hard. We work, it’s just part of our mission, our principles, to help people who need help. And, here at First U., they’ve been doing it for 70 years. Either they’ve been supporting the justice programs here, how could we not do it now just because of COVID?” The protesters had to be inside the church by the 9:00 p.m. curfew to avoid arrest. They were not, they were walking there, according to the news reporter.
Interesting that the church lady admits concerns about COVID-19 won’t stop protests, right? COVID-19 shutdowns are for everyone else, apparently.
The curfew was declared Wednesday in anticipation of the Grand Jury’s announcement. As I was watching some of the news coverage last night, though, it sure looked like the curfew wasn’t being enforced. There were lots of people in the streets, along with a strong police presence. The streets around the Unitarian Church were blocked off so police could investigate the library fire. Police said at least 24 people were arrested on the three counts Scott was arrested on.
Lmpd have arrested Rep. Attica Scott, author of Breonna’s law pic.twitter.com/Gla14x8Es6 — Ryan Van Velzer (@RyanVanVelzer) September 25, 2020
More than 100 people took to the streets Thursday night, including Breonna’s mother, Tamika Palmer. The group that was arrested is accused of causing damage at multiple locations, not just the fire at the public library. It’s just further proof that the narrative pushed by most of the press that these protests are peaceful is just wrong. They regularly turn into a riot. When violence and destruction begins, the event turns into a riot. People are not arrested for peacefully protesting. They are arrested for breaking the law, for acting like criminals.
Scott’s legislation, Breonna’s Law, addresses police reform. No-knock warrants were banned in June by the City of Louisville. As it turns out, the reports that the police used a no-knock warrant at Breonna’s apartment were wrong, according to the Kentucky Attorney General.
Dubbed Breonna’s Law, the legislation also requires police to wear body cameras while executing search warrants. Scott’s legislation similarly calls for police to wear body cameras and also requires police to undergo alcohol and drug screenings following deadly incidents. If enacted, it would apply to the entire state of Kentucky.
Attica Scott is the only black female legislator in the Kentucky Capitol. While some headlines are making hay about the color of her skin, she certainly appears to have been arrested for breaking the law. Something that is apparent, to me anyway, is that the Black Lives Matter movement is not one that sets out to persuade people but to intimidate people. Setting buildings on fire and other acts of violence don’t persuade people to believe what a movement is peddling. It repels people. Violence for violence’s sake is not effective to change minds.
Scott’s colleagues released statements in support of her.
Scott’s colleagues condemned her arrest on Twitter. “If you arrest the loudest voices fighting racial injustice in Louisville, we have to believe you want to silence the fight against racial injustice,” tweeted State Representative Josie Raymond. “The words escape me right now,” said State Representative Charles Booker. This is happening in Louisville as we speak. My Shero, riding partner, and colleague in the State House, the sponsor of Breonna’s Law, was one of the people arrested. Absolutely and deeply unbelievable.”
No one was “silencing the fight against racial injustice” but the police were responding to acts of violence. Also arrested was Shameka Parrish-Wright, a leader for the Louisville chapter of the Bail Project, which has helped protesters post bond and get out of jail over the past four months of demonstrations.