hotair--2020-10-11--Dress for success: Sunday reflection

Dress for success: Sunday reflection

Jesus again in reply spoke to the chief priests and elders of the people in parables , saying , “ The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son .
He dispatched his servants to summon the invited guests to the feast , but they refused to come .
A second time he sent other servants , saying , ‘ Tell those invited : “ Behold , I have prepared my banquet , my calves and fattened cattle are killed , and everything is ready ; come to the feast.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away , one to his farm , another to his business .
The rest laid hold of his servants , mistreated them , and killed them .
The king was enraged and sent his troops , destroyed those murderers , and burned their city .
Then he said to his servants , ‘ The feast is ready , but those who were invited were not worthy to come .
Go out , therefore , into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.
’ The servants went out into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad and good alike , and the hall was filled with guests .
But when the king came in to meet the guests , he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment .
The king said to him , ‘ My friend , how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment ?
’ But he was reduced to silence .
Then the king said to his attendants , ‘ Bind his hands and feet , and cast him into the darkness outside , where there will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Many are invited , but few are chosen.
” How many people even recall the book Dress for Success ?
In this era of casual workplaces and home officing , it might be tough to recall the phenomenon of this 1975 book when it hit the market .
It didn ’ t invent power dressing , but it explained the concept to a much wider market and revamped the way people saw wardrobes in business and life .
The main advice to workplace applicants and aspirants — dress like you already have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day , even if the styles have changed dramatically since then .
In today ’ s Gospel from Matthew , one could even say that the apostle got a 2,000-year head start on John T. Malloy .
Wardrobe isn ’ t quite the point of Jesus ’ parable , but it symbolizes the same things as wardrobe did for Molloy — preparation , intentionality , and a knowledge of place and function .
The first part of the parable to the temple leadership echoes those we have read over the last two weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priests and elders and how they have misled the people and mistreated the prophets .
Again , Jesus warns of retribution for these sins in the form of sweeping away the previous hierarchy and offering salvation directly to the people .
This time , however , Jesus has a warning for the people as well .
To grasp this , one has to remember that salvation comes in the form of a marriage — the marriage of Christ to the body of the Church .
The Mass is itself a celebration of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a re-presentation of both Christ ’ s sacrifice and His marriage to us .
( This is well documented in the Catechism , and in books such as Coming Soon , which I highly recommend . )
Jesus is explaining in almost non-parable terms what salvation actually means —the King holding the wedding feast for His Son .
It is the marriage of humanity to His Word , embodied in Christ and chosen by us through free will , which allows us to enter into the Trinitarian life as sons and daughters of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about dress in particular ?
Some older and more traditional Christians might argue that it is , at least in part , and the nature of the Mass or other Christian services as a wedding celebration would tend to bolster that .
That clearer understanding ( after having read Coming Home ) is one reason that I started dressing more nicely for Mass , although another reason is that I got drafted at the last moment once for a ministry while wearing an old flannel shirt and some jeans .
Dress for success @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond the state of dress , and the wardrobe really isn ’ t the point .
In this telling , the wardrobe is just a symbolic indicator of a lack of preparation and intentionality .
This unfortunate fellow just showed up , even though he knew he ’ d been invited to a kingly feast , without any indication he cared about it .
The king even gives the man an opportunity to explain himself .
Had he pled poverty or showed some repentance for his error , the king may well have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the man a bigger welcome .
Instead , the man had nothing to say for himself ; he could not plead remorse or explain how he grasped the importance of the event .
It doesn ’ t take long to realize that this is itself a model of judgment .
“ Many are invited , ” Jesus warns , “ but few are chosen.
” We will all come to the feast , or at least close to it , at some point .
None of us will be worthy of it ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with stained garments , dirt under our nails , and the aroma of sin in some way .
We will all hear those words in some form : “ My friend , how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment ?
” How do we prepare ourselves for that moment ?
We do so through formation in the Word and in repentance for our sins .
If we wish to attend and participate in salvation , we must do so with intentionality , with preparation , and an understanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t simply “ come as you are , ” so to speak .
The only way in which we can truly dress for success in salvation is to put on Christ .
That is the only wardrobe that matters in salvation .
The front-page image is a detail from “ Guest Without Wedding Attire ” by Vincent Adriaenssen , 17th century .
“ Sunday Reflection ” is a regular feature , looking at the specific readings used in today ’ s Mass in Catholic parishes around the world .
The reflection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , intended to help prepare myself for the Lord ’ s day and perhaps spark a meaningful discussion .
Previous Sunday Reflections from the main page can be found here .

This morning’s Gospel reading is Matthew 22:1–14:
Jesus again in reply spoke to the chief priests and elders of the people in parables, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. He dispatched his servants to summon the invited guests to the feast, but they refused to come. A second time he sent other servants, saying, ‘Tell those invited: “Behold, I have prepared my banquet, my calves and fattened cattle are killed, and everything is ready; come to the feast.”’ Some ignored the invitation and went away, one to his farm, another to his business. The rest laid hold of his servants, mistreated them, and killed them. The king was enraged and sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. Then he said to his servants, ‘The feast is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy to come. Go out, therefore, into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.’ The servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good alike, and the hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to meet the guests, he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. The king said to him, ‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence. Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’ Many are invited, but few are chosen.”
How many people even recall the book Dress for Success? In this era of casual workplaces and home officing, it might be tough to recall the phenomenon of this 1975 book when it hit the market. It didn’t invent power dressing, but it explained the concept to a much wider market and revamped the way people saw wardrobes in business and life. The main advice to workplace applicants and aspirants — dress like you already have the job — is still sterling to this day, even if the styles have changed dramatically since then.
In today’s Gospel from Matthew, one could even say that the apostle got a 2,000-year head start on John T. Malloy. Wardrobe isn’t quite the point of Jesus’ parable, but it symbolizes the same things as wardrobe did for Molloy — preparation, intentionality, and a knowledge of place and function.
The first part of the parable to the temple leadership echoes those we have read over the last two weeks. It is another indictment of the priests and elders and how they have misled the people and mistreated the prophets. Again, Jesus warns of retribution for these sins in the form of sweeping away the previous hierarchy and offering salvation directly to the people. This time, however, Jesus has a warning for the people as well.
To grasp this, one has to remember that salvation comes in the form of a marriage — the marriage of Christ to the body of the Church. The Mass is itself a celebration of this wedding in present time and space, a re-presentation of both Christ’s sacrifice and His marriage to us. (This is well documented in the Catechism, and in books such as Coming Soon, which I highly recommend.) Jesus is explaining in almost non-parable terms what salvation actually means —the King holding the wedding feast for His Son. It is the marriage of humanity to His Word, embodied in Christ and chosen by us through free will, which allows us to enter into the Trinitarian life as sons and daughters of the Lord.
So is this warning about dress in particular? Some older and more traditional Christians might argue that it is, at least in part, and the nature of the Mass or other Christian services as a wedding celebration would tend to bolster that. That clearer understanding (after having read Coming Home) is one reason that I started dressing more nicely for Mass, although another reason is that I got drafted at the last moment once for a ministry while wearing an old flannel shirt and some jeans. Dress for success, indeed.
This parable goes well beyond the state of dress, and the wardrobe really isn’t the point. In this telling, the wardrobe is just a symbolic indicator of a lack of preparation and intentionality. This unfortunate fellow just showed up, even though he knew he’d been invited to a kingly feast, without any indication he cared about it. The king even gives the man an opportunity to explain himself. Had he pled poverty or showed some repentance for his error, the king may well have allowed him to stay or even given the man a bigger welcome. Instead, the man had nothing to say for himself; he could not plead remorse or explain how he grasped the importance of the event.
It doesn’t take long to realize that this is itself a model of judgment. “Many are invited,” Jesus warns, “but few are chosen.” We will all come to the feast, or at least close to it, at some point. None of us will be worthy of it; all of us come to the Lord with stained garments, dirt under our nails, and the aroma of sin in some way. We will all hear those words in some form: “My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?”
How do we prepare ourselves for that moment? We do so through formation in the Word and in repentance for our sins. If we wish to attend and participate in salvation, we must do so with intentionality, with preparation, and an understanding of the place and event. We can’t simply “come as you are,” so to speak. The only way in which we can truly dress for success in salvation is to put on Christ. That is the only wardrobe that matters in salvation.
The front-page image is a detail from “Guest Without Wedding Attire” by Vincent Adriaenssen, 17th century.
“Sunday Reflection” is a regular feature, looking at the specific readings used in today’s Mass in Catholic parishes around the world. The reflection represents only my own point of view, intended to help prepare myself for the Lord’s day and perhaps spark a meaningful discussion. Previous Sunday Reflections from the main page can be found here.


hotair--2020-10-11--Trump supporter shot, killed in Denver (video)

Things turned deadly in downtown Denver yesterday when a Patriot Rally held by supporters of the police and the President ran into a Black Lives Matter and Antifa group who declared they were there to “ drown out the hate.
” The Denver PD managed to keep things mostly under control until the activities were coming to an end , but then gunshots were heard .
One of the Patriot Rally supporters was dead and the suspect was under arrest .
Who the shooter was and whether they were affiliated with either group was initially in dispute .
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indicate that he wasn ’ t a member of either group .
( WaPo ) A private security guard is in custody after a fatal shooting amid dueling demonstrations in downtown Denver , police said Saturday , in the latest deadly violence to unfold at the scene of tense protests .
Right-wing demonstrators had gathered at the city ’ s civic center for a “ Patriot Rally , ” as did left-wing activists affiliating themselves with Black Lives Matter and antifa , who said they wanted to “ drown out their hate.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not affiliated with antifa , as some claimed online ; local television station 9NEWS identified the person as a guard it hired to accompany an employee covering the events .
The Denver Post reported that the shooting victim was a participant of the “ Patriot Rally ” who sprayed mace at another man who then opened fire with a weapon .
A Denver Post photo captures a man spraying a substance at a masked person with a gun , identified by the newspaper as the shooter .
Neither the shooter nor the victim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigating .
But the guy with the gun was allegedly a private security guard from Pinkerton hired by a local television station to protect their reporters who were covering the demonstrations .
He didn ’ t go out of his way to look like a security detail member , however , since he appeared to be dressed in cargo pants and a t-shirt .
We know this because of the remarkable picture captured by an Associated Press photographer that appears to show the conflict barely a second before the fatal shots were fired @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen unloading a can of mace in the direction of the shooter who has his handgun leveled at him .
Whatever media people the security guard was allegedly protecting are not shown in the image .
It ’ s unclear who the rally participant was attempting to mace at the moment and we don ’ t know why they came into conflict to begin with .
Video has already emerged however that shows the victim engaged in a dispute with a very loud and aggressive BLM supporter only moments before the shooting .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ language and violence warning ) you will see the Trump supporter walk away from the confrontation and out of frame .
Only nine seconds later you hear the gunshot and then see him fall to the ground .
So there clearly wasn ’ t much time for the situation to escalate to the point where mace and bullets would be expected .
The video clearly shows there was obvious tension between the groups .
What it unfortunately doesn ’ t reveal is what happened between the security guard and the shooting victim .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ around on Twitter claiming that the shooter is a known leftist and Antifa supporter , suggesting that the police are lying about what he was doing at the rally .
( Click through to read the thread . )
Frankly , that seems to be a huge stretch since the cops could easily be debunked if the tv station denied hiring him .
Also , the ideas of the shooter being a leftist Antifa-supporter and also a part-time security guard are not mutually incompatible .
Both could be true .
Perhaps one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that the news station felt that the situation was so dangerous that they needed to hire armed security for their reporters .
They didn ’ t hire a very good one because gunfire shouldn ’ t be your first response to a non-lethal attack involving mace , yet here we are .
But who did the news station think they needed protection from ?
That part should be fairly obvious .
Wherever we ’ ve seen conservatives rallying to support the police or law and order , the situation never devolves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacks if they were the only people demonstrating in the area .
By contrast , violence seems to break out wherever Antifa goes and that pattern has increasingly shown up in BLM rallies as the two groups seem to have merged together in many cases .
That was made obvious in Denver by the fact that the “ counterprotesters ” blatantly stated that they were only coming to try to shut down or shout down the Patriot Rally .
The Denver media has no doubt been covering these activities long enough to realize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not a probability .
But the specific incident involving the shooting is far less clear .
We would need to know why the rally participant was breaking out the mace and what led up to that decision .
But the security guard ’ s actions are already being described as a homicide by the Denver PD .
Hopefully we ’ ll have more answers as the investigation moves forward .

Things turned deadly in downtown Denver yesterday when a Patriot Rally held by supporters of the police and the President ran into a Black Lives Matter and Antifa group who declared they were there to “drown out the hate.” The Denver PD managed to keep things mostly under control until the activities were coming to an end, but then gunshots were heard. One of the Patriot Rally supporters was dead and the suspect was under arrest. Who the shooter was and whether they were affiliated with either group was initially in dispute. But the initial investigation by the police seems to indicate that he wasn’t a member of either group. (WaPo)
A private security guard is in custody after a fatal shooting amid dueling demonstrations in downtown Denver, police said Saturday, in the latest deadly violence to unfold at the scene of tense protests. Right-wing demonstrators had gathered at the city’s civic center for a “Patriot Rally,” as did left-wing activists affiliating themselves with Black Lives Matter and antifa, who said they wanted to “drown out their hate.” Police said Saturday that the suspect is not affiliated with antifa, as some claimed online; local television station 9NEWS identified the person as a guard it hired to accompany an employee covering the events. The Denver Post reported that the shooting victim was a participant of the “Patriot Rally” who sprayed mace at another man who then opened fire with a weapon. A Denver Post photo captures a man spraying a substance at a masked person with a gun, identified by the newspaper as the shooter.
Neither the shooter nor the victim was identified by authorities who are still investigating. But the guy with the gun was allegedly a private security guard from Pinkerton hired by a local television station to protect their reporters who were covering the demonstrations. He didn’t go out of his way to look like a security detail member, however, since he appeared to be dressed in cargo pants and a t-shirt. We know this because of the remarkable picture captured by an Associated Press photographer that appears to show the conflict barely a second before the fatal shots were fired.
The Patriot Rally participant can be seen unloading a can of mace in the direction of the shooter who has his handgun leveled at him. Whatever media people the security guard was allegedly protecting are not shown in the image. It’s unclear who the rally participant was attempting to mace at the moment and we don’t know why they came into conflict to begin with. Video has already emerged however that shows the victim engaged in a dispute with a very loud and aggressive BLM supporter only moments before the shooting. If you watch the following clip (language and violence warning) you will see the Trump supporter walk away from the confrontation and out of frame. Only nine seconds later you hear the gunshot and then see him fall to the ground. So there clearly wasn’t much time for the situation to escalate to the point where mace and bullets would be expected.
https://twitter.com/dailydigger19/status/1315087522414854147
The video clearly shows there was obvious tension between the groups. What it unfortunately doesn’t reveal is what happened between the security guard and the shooting victim.
There’s an alternate theory going around on Twitter claiming that the shooter is a known leftist and Antifa supporter, suggesting that the police are lying about what he was doing at the rally. (Click through to read the thread.) Frankly, that seems to be a huge stretch since the cops could easily be debunked if the tv station denied hiring him. Also, the ideas of the shooter being a leftist Antifa-supporter and also a part-time security guard are not mutually incompatible. Both could be true.
Perhaps one of the chief takeaways from this incident is the fact that the news station felt that the situation was so dangerous that they needed to hire armed security for their reporters. They didn’t hire a very good one because gunfire shouldn’t be your first response to a non-lethal attack involving mace, yet here we are. But who did the news station think they needed protection from?
That part should be fairly obvious. Wherever we’ve seen conservatives rallying to support the police or law and order, the situation never devolves into a riot, destruction or physical attacks if they were the only people demonstrating in the area. By contrast, violence seems to break out wherever Antifa goes and that pattern has increasingly shown up in BLM rallies as the two groups seem to have merged together in many cases. That was made obvious in Denver by the fact that the “counterprotesters” blatantly stated that they were only coming to try to shut down or shout down the Patriot Rally. The Denver media has no doubt been covering these activities long enough to realize that violence was a possibility, if not a probability.
But the specific incident involving the shooting is far less clear. We would need to know why the rally participant was breaking out the mace and what led up to that decision. But the security guard’s actions are already being described as a homicide by the Denver PD. Hopefully we’ll have more answers as the investigation moves forward.


hotair--2020-10-11--So the President is no longer contagious?

As soon as the White House announced that President Trump had recovered from COVID-19 and would be returning to the campaign trail , his detractors commenced wailing about how he was putting everyone at risk because he could still be contagious .
For those of us who aren ’ t medical experts ( and apparently for at least some who claim to be ) that probably sounded like a valid concern .
After all , even if Trump is out of the woods in terms of his own health , you wouldn ’ t want him spurring any new infections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to know if and when he is no longer a potential carrier of the virus .
Trump ’ s physician , Sean Conley , sought to put the question to rest yesterday .
In a memo released by the White House on Saturday , Conley stated that the President “ is no longer considered a transmission risk to others.
” That sounds like more great news , but as has been the pattern all too often with Conley , he frustratingly left out several details that could have made the situation clearer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) President Trump is no longer contagious , according to his doctor .
“ This evening I am happy to report that in addition to the President meeting the CDC criteria for the safe discontinuation of isolation , this morning ’ s COVID PCR sample demonstrates , by currently recognized standards , he is no longer considered a transmission risk to others , ” his physician , Sean Conley , wrote in a memo released by the White House Saturday night .
The memo comes 10 days after Trump first experienced symptoms of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ readies to return to the campaign trail .
If the President is satisfied with the medical care he receives from Conley , that ’ s fine .
There ’ s been no indication that the doctor ’ s medical competence is in question .
But Trump should seriously consider getting Conley a professional spokesperson or at least a speechwriter before he addresses the public on Trump ’ s behalf .
Has the President had a negative COVID test yet ?
On what did the doctor base this conclusion ?
We don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t say .
The only specific factor mentioned was that there is “ no longer evidence of actively replicating virus.
” This has again opened the door for armchair doctors in the media to suggest that he ’ s hiding something from the public .
So when do COVID patients actually stop being contagious ?
Conley seems to be going with the CDC ’ s guidance on the subject .
Their most recent guidelines say that a recovering patient can safely be around other people “ 10 days since symptoms first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without the use of fever-reducing medications.
” That ’ s significantly different than the rules offered by the Harvard Medical Center ’ s doctors .
They say that patients “ will no longer be contagious by 10 days after symptoms resolve.
” ( Emphasis added ) For yet another opinion , the World Health Organization previously told us that the quarantine “ should continue for at least two weeks after symptoms disappear.
” So who are we supposed to believe ?
Even if we go by the CDC guidelines , we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exhibiting symptoms .
He was symptomatic and tested positive on Thursday , October 1st .
But in retrospect , his medical team suspected that his tiredness on the flight back from the debate on Tuesday , September 29th may have been the actual onset of symptoms .
If the latter is the case then ten days would have been up on Friday .
If you use the October 1st date , ten days wouldn ’ t be up until today .
If you ’ re going with either the Harvard or WHO guidelines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a week until the President could be said to be no longer contagious since he was still displaying symptoms ( fever and slight cough ) on Friday .
It would also be helpful if Conley would say whether or not the President has produced a negative COVID test yet .
Filling everyone in on this information would put the public far more at ease and disarm his liberal media critics who continue to treat the President like he ’ s Typhoid Mary at every opportunity .

As soon as the White House announced that President Trump had recovered from COVID-19 and would be returning to the campaign trail, his detractors commenced wailing about how he was putting everyone at risk because he could still be contagious. For those of us who aren’t medical experts (and apparently for at least some who claim to be) that probably sounded like a valid concern. After all, even if Trump is out of the woods in terms of his own health, you wouldn’t want him spurring any new infections, right? But we would first need to know if and when he is no longer a potential carrier of the virus.
Trump’s physician, Sean Conley, sought to put the question to rest yesterday. In a memo released by the White House on Saturday, Conley stated that the President “is no longer considered a transmission risk to others.” That sounds like more great news, but as has been the pattern all too often with Conley, he frustratingly left out several details that could have made the situation clearer for the public. (NY Post)
President Trump is no longer contagious, according to his doctor. “This evening I am happy to report that in addition to the President meeting the CDC criteria for the safe discontinuation of isolation, this morning’s COVID PCR sample demonstrates, by currently recognized standards, he is no longer considered a transmission risk to others,” his physician, Sean Conley, wrote in a memo released by the White House Saturday night. The memo comes 10 days after Trump first experienced symptoms of his COVID-19 diagnosis and as the president readies to return to the campaign trail.
If the President is satisfied with the medical care he receives from Conley, that’s fine. There’s been no indication that the doctor’s medical competence is in question. But Trump should seriously consider getting Conley a professional spokesperson or at least a speechwriter before he addresses the public on Trump’s behalf. Has the President had a negative COVID test yet? On what did the doctor base this conclusion? We don’t know because, yet again, Conley didn’t say. The only specific factor mentioned was that there is “no longer evidence of actively replicating virus.” This has again opened the door for armchair doctors in the media to suggest that he’s hiding something from the public.
So when do COVID patients actually stop being contagious? Conley seems to be going with the CDC’s guidance on the subject. Their most recent guidelines say that a recovering patient can safely be around other people “10 days since symptoms first appeared and 24 hours with no fever without the use of fever-reducing medications.”
That’s significantly different than the rules offered by the Harvard Medical Center’s doctors. They say that patients “will no longer be contagious by 10 days after symptoms resolve.” (Emphasis added)
For yet another opinion, the World Health Organization previously told us that the quarantine “should continue for at least two weeks after symptoms disappear.” So who are we supposed to believe?
Even if we go by the CDC guidelines, we’re not entirely sure when Trump first began exhibiting symptoms. He was symptomatic and tested positive on Thursday, October 1st. But in retrospect, his medical team suspected that his tiredness on the flight back from the debate on Tuesday, September 29th may have been the actual onset of symptoms. If the latter is the case then ten days would have been up on Friday. If you use the October 1st date, ten days wouldn’t be up until today. If you’re going with either the Harvard or WHO guidelines, it’s still more than a week until the President could be said to be no longer contagious since he was still displaying symptoms (fever and slight cough) on Friday.
It would also be helpful if Conley would say whether or not the President has produced a negative COVID test yet. Filling everyone in on this information would put the public far more at ease and disarm his liberal media critics who continue to treat the President like he’s Typhoid Mary at every opportunity.


hotair--2020-10-12--Patriot Rally shooting suspect, victim identified

When we discussed the killing of a Trump supporter at a Patriot Rally in Denver on Saturday , many questions remained .
Law enforcement was being tight-lipped about the details , including the identity of both the shooter and the victim as the investigation moved forward .
By the end of the weekend , a few of those questions had been answered .
The victim has been identified as Lee Keltner , a 49-year-old military veteran , father , and grandfather .
Making an already horrible situation even worse , Keltner was shot dead right in front of his son @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Matthew Robert Dolloff , age 30 , a Pinkerton security guard .
( His identity had been leaked on social media on Saturday , but we withheld it until the authorities cleared the official release of the information so as not to potentially impede an ongoing investigation . )
Dolloff has quite a history of left-wing activism , including ties to Antifa , which may have played into his motivation to kill .
But despite rumors to the contrary , it does appear that he had been hired by local news station 9News-TV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rally as they had done in the past .
Questions remain as to whether Dolloff actually had a license to work as a security guard , however .
Pinkerton didn ’ t immediately respond to requests for comment on that aspect of the story .
( NY Post ) The hired Pinkerton security guard accused of shooting a protester dead during a Denver rally Saturday has been identified as Matthew Robert Dolloff , according to police .
Dolloff , 30 , is being held in a first-degree murder investigation in the shooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Police Department said on Twitter .
Police said Dolloff has not been charged but is being questioned in connection with Keltner ’ s caught-on-video shooting death in the courtyard of the Denver Art Museum during a “ Patriot Rally ” that included clashes with Black Lives Matter demonstrators .
As you would imagine , Keltner ’ s son tells reporters that he is not doing well after witnessing the murder of his father .
His aunt spoke to the press about how they are doing .
“ He was there , ” Suzan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Asked if her nephew was doing okay , she said , “ No , no he ’ s not.
” Lee Keltner , a hat-maker , and military vet , was part of a “ Patriot Rally ” outside the Denver Art Museum when he was shot and killed by a Pinkerton guard hired by a local TV station .
“ He was my brother , my only sibling , ” Suzan Keltner said .
“ He also served our country.
” While we still don ’ t know exactly what set off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ series of photos published by the Denver Post provides some clues .
As I noted on Saturday , the video that a participant published on social media reveals that Keltner was engaged in a shouting match with a man in a BLM shirt before walking out of frame to the right .
Only nine seconds passed from that moment to the firing of the first gunshot .
The pictures show Keltner slapping Dolloff in the face .
He ’ s then seen discharging a can of mace toward Dolloff just as the shooter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t seem like there would have been much time for a dispute to arise in that nine-second span .
If the photos are depicting the events accurately , Keltner instigated the physical violence .
But since he was only armed with his bare hands and a non-lethal weapon ( mace ) , Dolloff may have a very difficult time in court convincing a jury that the level of lethal force he employed in response was appropriate or that he was legitimately in fear for his life .
But no matter which way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t appear to be a case of Dolloff simply walking up and randomly shooting a Trump supporter in cold blood without provocation as some had originally speculated .
Still , the Keltner family is left without their father and grandfather and with many questions as they work through the grieving process .

When we discussed the killing of a Trump supporter at a Patriot Rally in Denver on Saturday, many questions remained. Law enforcement was being tight-lipped about the details, including the identity of both the shooter and the victim as the investigation moved forward. By the end of the weekend, a few of those questions had been answered. The victim has been identified as Lee Keltner, a 49-year-old military veteran, father, and grandfather. Making an already horrible situation even worse, Keltner was shot dead right in front of his son.
The shooter has been identified as Matthew Robert Dolloff, age 30, a Pinkerton security guard. (His identity had been leaked on social media on Saturday, but we withheld it until the authorities cleared the official release of the information so as not to potentially impede an ongoing investigation.) Dolloff has quite a history of left-wing activism, including ties to Antifa, which may have played into his motivation to kill. But despite rumors to the contrary, it does appear that he had been hired by local news station 9News-TV to provide security for their reporters during the rally as they had done in the past. Questions remain as to whether Dolloff actually had a license to work as a security guard, however. Pinkerton didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on that aspect of the story. (NY Post)
The hired Pinkerton security guard accused of shooting a protester dead during a Denver rally Saturday has been identified as Matthew Robert Dolloff, according to police. Dolloff, 30, is being held in a first-degree murder investigation in the shooting death of Lee Keltner, the Denver Police Department said on Twitter. Police said Dolloff has not been charged but is being questioned in connection with Keltner’s caught-on-video shooting death in the courtyard of the Denver Art Museum during a “Patriot Rally” that included clashes with Black Lives Matter demonstrators.
As you would imagine, Keltner’s son tells reporters that he is not doing well after witnessing the murder of his father. His aunt spoke to the press about how they are doing.
“He was there,” Suzan Keltner said in a telephone interview. Asked if her nephew was doing okay, she said, “No, no he’s not.” Lee Keltner, a hat-maker, and military vet, was part of a “Patriot Rally” outside the Denver Art Museum when he was shot and killed by a Pinkerton guard hired by a local TV station. “He was my brother, my only sibling,” Suzan Keltner said. “He also served our country.”
While we still don’t know exactly what set off the lethal chain of events, a series of photos published by the Denver Post provides some clues. As I noted on Saturday, the video that a participant published on social media reveals that Keltner was engaged in a shouting match with a man in a BLM shirt before walking out of frame to the right. Only nine seconds passed from that moment to the firing of the first gunshot. The pictures show Keltner slapping Dolloff in the face. He’s then seen discharging a can of mace toward Dolloff just as the shooter prepares to open fire. It doesn’t seem like there would have been much time for a dispute to arise in that nine-second span.
If the photos are depicting the events accurately, Keltner instigated the physical violence. But since he was only armed with his bare hands and a non-lethal weapon (mace), Dolloff may have a very difficult time in court convincing a jury that the level of lethal force he employed in response was appropriate or that he was legitimately in fear for his life. But no matter which way the verdict goes, this doesn’t appear to be a case of Dolloff simply walking up and randomly shooting a Trump supporter in cold blood without provocation as some had originally speculated. Still, the Keltner family is left without their father and grandfather and with many questions as they work through the grieving process.


hotair--2020-10-12--Trump aide: "He's going to kill himself" with daily campaign events

President Trump is feeling better and ready to hit the road .
He is so committed to actively campaigning for his re-election that he has notified his staff that he wants to be on the road every single day from now up until Election Day .
That ’ s a pretty big ask for any candidate , certainly a 74-year-old man recovering from the coronavirus .
I suppose the president ’ s desire to remain on the road for a little over 20 days is just a form of the let-Trump-be-Trump motto adhered to in 2016 .
Back then he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t recovering from the plague .
The first thing that went through my mind was to question if he is up to that kind of physical stress .
He looks normal now , he sounds ok , and he travels in a protected manner so maybe he thinks it is worth a try to get back to his normal campaigning style .
Remember in the final days of the 2016 election when he did 4 or 5 events every day ?
No one expects that this year but one event a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctor released a memo on Saturday stating that the president is no longer considered a risk to transmit the coronavirus .
“ This evening I am happy to report that in addition to the President meeting the CDC criteria for the safe discontinuation of isolation , this morning ’ s COVID PCR sample demonstrates , by currently recognized standards , he is no longer considered a transmission risk to others , ” physician Sean Conley wrote in a memo released by the White House .
Conley wrote that Trump has been “ fever-free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symptoms improved ” which raises additional questions about when Trump last had a fever .
Previous memos from the doctor earlier in the week had indicated Trump was fever-free for several consecutive days .
The physician wrote that diagnostic tests showed “ there is no longer evidence of actively replicating virus.
” “ Moving forward , I will continue to monitor him clinically as he returns to an active schedule , ” Conley continued .
So , he ’ s gotten a doctor ’ s note , so to speak , and he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the scenes , some aides are expressing their concern for his health , anonymously of course because that is how it is done in the Trump era .
One aide went for a dramatic quote , as reported by Axios .
The decline in support for Trump by senior citizens , if the polls are to be believed ( a big if ) is a concern so he is headed to Florida Monday for what I assume will be the beginning day of his extended road trip .
He will do an airport @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , another anonymous person – a Trump adviser , allegedly – notes the campaign ’ s awareness of declining support from a very important GOP voting demographic .
Airport rallies are perfect for Trump .
The campaign plans them to be held in a large hangar where fresh air can circulate .
He has the benefit of a live audience while using social distancing and other safety precautions for the supporters who attend .
Trump thrives on a large , enthusiastic audience .
He entertains while delivering his message and they love him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large crowds and he certainly can not compete with the enthusiasm of Trump voters .
Trump is scheduled to go to Pennsylvania on Tuesday and Iowa on Wednesday .
The Mayor of Des Moines , Frank Cownie , a Democrat , is afraid that the Trump rally this week will be a super spreader event .
I saw no such concern expressed by the mayor when hundreds of protesters gathered to march and riot during the Summer of Love .
Protests are celebrated .
Trump ’ s campaign rallies are super spreader events @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science , you know .
Democrats love to fall back on science when they think it fits their narrative .
Asked by the Des Moines Register whether he is concerned that the event could accelerate the spread of COVID-19 in Des Moines , Mayor Frank Cownie ( D ) said he “ absolutely ” was .
“ Absolutely I ’ m worried about the spread .
We don ’ t want a super-spread event here in Des Moines , ” Cownie told the newspaper .
“ We urge everyone who would attend this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distance as best they can , and to stay safe and healthy.
” “ We all have to do everything we can do to keep our numbers down , ” he continued .
“ It ’ s proven , it ’ s scientific facts.
” The Trump campaign is prepared to observe safety guidelines before and during the event .
The Trump campaign stressed in a statement to The Hill that attendees would be given temperature checks before being allowed in to the event .
“ The event is at an open door @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their First Amendment rights and hearing from the President of the United States .
We will have safety protocols in place .
All attendees will be given a temperature check , masks which they are instructed to wear , and access to hand sanitizer , ” Tim Murtaugh told The Hill .
The hangar events are a good compromise for Trump .
He gets his live rallies and feeds off the support of the attendees .
The attendees get to see Trump and have the rally experience .
he did these kinds of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign , too .
He ’ s comfortable doing them .
Let ’ s hope he stays healthy and takes care of his own health .

President Trump is feeling better and ready to hit the road. He is so committed to actively campaigning for his re-election that he has notified his staff that he wants to be on the road every single day from now up until Election Day. That’s a pretty big ask for any candidate, certainly a 74-year-old man recovering from the coronavirus.
I suppose the president’s desire to remain on the road for a little over 20 days is just a form of the let-Trump-be-Trump motto adhered to in 2016. Back then he was a few years younger and he wasn’t recovering from the plague. The first thing that went through my mind was to question if he is up to that kind of physical stress. He looks normal now, he sounds ok, and he travels in a protected manner so maybe he thinks it is worth a try to get back to his normal campaigning style. Remember in the final days of the 2016 election when he did 4 or 5 events every day? No one expects that this year but one event a day is doable.
Trump’s doctor released a memo on Saturday stating that the president is no longer considered a risk to transmit the coronavirus.
“This evening I am happy to report that in addition to the President meeting the CDC criteria for the safe discontinuation of isolation, this morning’s COVID PCR sample demonstrates, by currently recognized standards, he is no longer considered a transmission risk to others,” physician Sean Conley wrote in a memo released by the White House. Conley wrote that Trump has been “fever-free for well over 24 hours and all symptoms improved” which raises additional questions about when Trump last had a fever. Previous memos from the doctor earlier in the week had indicated Trump was fever-free for several consecutive days. The physician wrote that diagnostic tests showed “there is no longer evidence of actively replicating virus.” “Moving forward, I will continue to monitor him clinically as he returns to an active schedule,” Conley continued.
So, he’s gotten a doctor’s note, so to speak, and he’s ready to go. Behind the scenes, some aides are expressing their concern for his health, anonymously of course because that is how it is done in the Trump era. One aide went for a dramatic quote, as reported by Axios.
His team is in the process of scheduling events to make that happen, two sources familiar with the discussions tell Axios. But not everyone thinks this is a good idea. One adviser said, “He’s going to kill himself.”
The decline in support for Trump by senior citizens, if the polls are to be believed (a big if) is a concern so he is headed to Florida Monday for what I assume will be the beginning day of his extended road trip. He will do an airport rally in Sanford, Florida. Again, another anonymous person – a Trump adviser, allegedly – notes the campaign’s awareness of declining support from a very important GOP voting demographic.
“He really f—-d up with seniors when he said not to worry about the virus and not to let it control your life,” one Trump adviser told Axios. “There are so many grandparents who’ve gone almost a year without being able to see grandchildren.”
Airport rallies are perfect for Trump. The campaign plans them to be held in a large hangar where fresh air can circulate. He has the benefit of a live audience while using social distancing and other safety precautions for the supporters who attend. Trump thrives on a large, enthusiastic audience. He entertains while delivering his message and they love him. Joe Biden is unable to attract large crowds and he certainly cannot compete with the enthusiasm of Trump voters.
Trump is scheduled to go to Pennsylvania on Tuesday and Iowa on Wednesday. The Mayor of Des Moines, Frank Cownie, a Democrat, is afraid that the Trump rally this week will be a super spreader event. I saw no such concern expressed by the mayor when hundreds of protesters gathered to march and riot during the Summer of Love. Protests are celebrated. Trump’s campaign rallies are super spreader events. Got it. It’s science, you know. Democrats love to fall back on science when they think it fits their narrative.
Asked by the Des Moines Register whether he is concerned that the event could accelerate the spread of COVID-19 in Des Moines, Mayor Frank Cownie (D) said he “absolutely” was. “Absolutely I’m worried about the spread. We don’t want a super-spread event here in Des Moines,” Cownie told the newspaper. “We urge everyone who would attend this event to wear a mask and social distance as best they can, and to stay safe and healthy.” “We all have to do everything we can do to keep our numbers down,” he continued. “It’s proven, it’s scientific facts.”
The Trump campaign is prepared to observe safety guidelines before and during the event.
The Trump campaign stressed in a statement to The Hill that attendees would be given temperature checks before being allowed in to the event. “The event is at an open door airplane hangar where people will be expressing their First Amendment rights and hearing from the President of the United States. We will have safety protocols in place. All attendees will be given a temperature check, masks which they are instructed to wear, and access to hand sanitizer,” Tim Murtaugh told The Hill.
The hangar events are a good compromise for Trump. He gets his live rallies and feeds off the support of the attendees. The attendees get to see Trump and have the rally experience. he did these kinds of rallies at the end of the 2016 campaign, too. He’s comfortable doing them. Let’s hope he stays healthy and takes care of his own health.


hotair--2020-10-12--Leahy: Half the Senate "had to break their word" to hold this confirmation hearing, you know

Spare us the sanctimony , please .
Did “ literally half the Senate ” contradict themselves on holding off election-year Supreme Court confirmations to let voters decide ?
Fact check : Mostly true .
Also true : The other half of the Senate had to “ break their word ” on the necessity of a nine-justice Supreme Court and the Senate fulfilling constitutional duties , too .
Senator Pat Leahy is every bit a part of the same hypocrisy that he abhors in his statement during Amy Coney Barrett ’ s confirmation hearing : For an additional good measure of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Durbin accusing the GOP of a “ shameless , self-serving , venal reversal.
” Durbin , one will recall , was one of the authors of Harry Reid ’ s nuclear option in 2013 , using brute majoritarian power to eliminate the filibuster on judicial confirmations .
That itself was a shameless and self-serving venal reversal of Democratic opposition to the same rule change in 2005 when Republicans threatened to use it against the blockade erected by Reid and Chuck Schumer against George W. Bush ’ s appellate-circuit nominees .
So among the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the number of those who can speak to hypocrisy and “ shameless , self-serving , venal reversal ( s ) ” equal those who can hit a curve ball in the major leagues .
That hasn ’ t stopped anyone today from their sanctimonious posing , but at least Lindsey Graham gave a sideways acknowledgment to the true fundamental dishonesty of this Senate confirmation hearing .
It applies to every such hearing in recent memory for Supreme Court justices , especially those from Republican presidents .
We all know how the vote will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remains is how much damage everyone will do to Barrett , each other , and themselves along the way .
It ’ s “ gon na be a long , contentious week , ” indeed .

Spare us the sanctimony, please. Did “literally half the Senate” contradict themselves on holding off election-year Supreme Court confirmations to let voters decide? Fact check: Mostly true. Also true: The other half of the Senate had to “break their word” on the necessity of a nine-justice Supreme Court and the Senate fulfilling constitutional duties, too.
Senator Pat Leahy is every bit a part of the same hypocrisy that he abhors in his statement during Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing:
Sen. Patrick Leahy says "literally half of the Senate" — his Republican colleagues — "had to break their word, contradicting every argument they made four years ago about the American people needing a voice during election year vacancies" https://t.co/uScvfX9o80 pic.twitter.com/qn719XfcZX — CBS News (@CBSNews) October 12, 2020
For an additional good measure of hypocritical sanctimony, here’s Dick Durbin accusing the GOP of a “shameless, self-serving, venal reversal.”
Sen. Dick Durbin says Republican senator backtracking on the view that a Supreme Court nominee should not be confirmed during an election year is “a shameless, self-serving, venal reversal.” https://t.co/287bRvyVxi pic.twitter.com/3DyHNdSFpl — ABC News (@ABC) October 12, 2020
Durbin, one will recall, was one of the authors of Harry Reid’s nuclear option in 2013, using brute majoritarian power to eliminate the filibuster on judicial confirmations. That itself was a shameless and self-serving venal reversal of Democratic opposition to the same rule change in 2005 when Republicans threatened to use it against the blockade erected by Reid and Chuck Schumer against George W. Bush’s appellate-circuit nominees.
So among the 100 members in the upper chamber, the number of those who can speak to hypocrisy and “shameless, self-serving, venal reversal(s)” equal those who can hit a curve ball in the major leagues.
That hasn’t stopped anyone today from their sanctimonious posing, but at least Lindsey Graham gave a sideways acknowledgment to the true fundamental dishonesty of this Senate confirmation hearing. It applies to every such hearing in recent memory for Supreme Court justices, especially those from Republican presidents. We all know how the vote will turn out. The only mystery that remains is how much damage everyone will do to Barrett, each other, and themselves along the way. It’s “gonna be a long, contentious week,” indeed.


hotair--2020-10-12--Report: Trump considered ripping open shirt upon leaving Walter Reed to reveal Superman t-shirt unde

Report: Trump considered ripping open shirt upon leaving Walter Reed to reveal Superman t-shirt underneath

I ’ ve waited my whole life to write that headline .
Just another gift from 2020 , the year when anything can happen .
The claim here is so laughably absurd that it can only be true .
Except for one thing — the only shirts Trump ever allows himself to be seen in are dress shirts with a tie and golf shirts when he hits the links on weekends .
Would he really have broken that rule for a stunt as goofy as this ?
Probable answer : If he was blasted out of his mind on dexamethasone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last weekend from the presidential suite at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , Mr. Trump shared an idea he was considering : When he left the hospital , he wanted to appear frail at first when people saw him , according to people with knowledge of the conversations .
But underneath his button-down dress shirt , he would wear a Superman T-shirt , which he would reveal as a symbol of strength when he ripped open the top layer .
He ultimately did not go ahead with the stunt .
I wonder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m genuinely interested to know how he was talked out of doing it .
He reached the “ YOLO ” phase of his presidency long ago , and his campaign instincts are always and forever to do what he thinks will make his base happiest regardless of what the other 70 percent of the country thinks .
MAGA fans would have fudged their undies with delight if he had emerged from his bout with COVID to prank the media self-styled as the Man of Steel .
A million memes would have bloomed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couldn ’ t find a Superman tee in his size , maybe ?
Otherwise I can ’ t figure how a guy whose fondness for over-the-top pageantry involving tough-guy bravado ultimately landed him in the WWE Hall of Fame could be dissuaded from doing it .
Imagine one of his aides telling him “ Decorum , sir.
” Decorum ?
Who needs decorum when you can make a real-life Carpe Donktum video ?
On a more serious , semi-related note , this new data from Gallup about a COVID vaccine has been on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m not sure how else to read that except as a commentary on the two parties ’ starkly different views of Trump ’ s credibility .
What ’ s fascinating is that those views have been consistent for a long time , yet Democrats ’ and Republicans ’ willingness to be vaccinated has begun to shift only very recently .
Why ?
Why did Dems nosedive suddenly in September but not in the months before ?
If you ’ re leery of trusting a guy in a Superman t-shirt on whether a rushed-through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should have been leery in August and July and June , etc , not just within the past few weeks .
Maybe the shift is due to Trump himself devoting more time lately to hyping how soon the vaccine will be ready in his public comments .
As we get closer to Election Day and he keeps promising that it ’ s imminent , partisanship may be driving Republicans to become more accepting of it and Democrats to be more resistant .
There may be substantive reasons for that — for instance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine is being rushed and corners are being cut in testing in order to hand Trump a political win before the vote , the less willing they may be to submit to the shot .
But if that ’ s what ’ s happening , you ’ d expect Republicans to be more resistant lately too .
What I think we ’ re seeing here is “ logic ” on the order of righties thinking “ I ’ ll tell a pollster that I ’ m willing to get the vaccine because it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so ” and lefties thinking “ I ’ ll tell a pollster that I won ’ t get the vaccine because it ’ ll hurt Trump if I do so.
” That is , maybe the Gallup data isn ’ t so much a commentary on the trustworthiness of President Superman himself as a grim example of the two sides growing so intensely partisan as the election nears that even their views of a life-saving medication are being shaped by it .

I’ve waited my whole life to write that headline. Just another gift from 2020, the year when anything can happen.
The claim here is so laughably absurd that it can only be true. Except for one thing — the only shirts Trump ever allows himself to be seen in are dress shirts with a tie and golf shirts when he hits the links on weekends. Would he really have broken that rule for a stunt as goofy as this?
Probable answer: If he was blasted out of his mind on dexamethasone, sure.
In several phone calls last weekend from the presidential suite at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Mr. Trump shared an idea he was considering: When he left the hospital, he wanted to appear frail at first when people saw him, according to people with knowledge of the conversations. But underneath his button-down dress shirt, he would wear a Superman T-shirt, which he would reveal as a symbol of strength when he ripped open the top layer. He ultimately did not go ahead with the stunt.
I wonder where he got the inspiration:
I’m genuinely interested to know how he was talked out of doing it. He reached the “YOLO” phase of his presidency long ago, and his campaign instincts are always and forever to do what he thinks will make his base happiest regardless of what the other 70 percent of the country thinks. MAGA fans would have fudged their undies with delight if he had emerged from his bout with COVID to prank the media self-styled as the Man of Steel. A million memes would have bloomed.
Did his staff tell him they couldn’t find a Superman tee in his size, maybe? Otherwise I can’t figure how a guy whose fondness for over-the-top pageantry involving tough-guy bravado ultimately landed him in the WWE Hall of Fame could be dissuaded from doing it.
Imagine one of his aides telling him “Decorum, sir.” Decorum?
Who needs decorum when you can make a real-life Carpe Donktum video?
On a more serious, semi-related note, this new data from Gallup about a COVID vaccine has been on my mind all day:
I’m not sure how else to read that except as a commentary on the two parties’ starkly different views of Trump’s credibility. What’s fascinating is that those views have been consistent for a long time, yet Democrats’ and Republicans’ willingness to be vaccinated has begun to shift only very recently. Why? Why did Dems nosedive suddenly in September but not in the months before? If you’re leery of trusting a guy in a Superman t-shirt on whether a rushed-through vaccine is safe or not, you should have been leery in August and July and June, etc, not just within the past few weeks.
Maybe the shift is due to Trump himself devoting more time lately to hyping how soon the vaccine will be ready in his public comments. As we get closer to Election Day and he keeps promising that it’s imminent, partisanship may be driving Republicans to become more accepting of it and Democrats to be more resistant. There may be substantive reasons for that — for instance, the more Dems are convinced that the vaccine is being rushed and corners are being cut in testing in order to hand Trump a political win before the vote, the less willing they may be to submit to the shot. But if that’s what’s happening, you’d expect Republicans to be more resistant lately too. What I think we’re seeing here is “logic” on the order of righties thinking “I’ll tell a pollster that I’m willing to get the vaccine because it’ll help Trump if I do so” and lefties thinking “I’ll tell a pollster that I won’t get the vaccine because it’ll hurt Trump if I do so.” That is, maybe the Gallup data isn’t so much a commentary on the trustworthiness of President Superman himself as a grim example of the two sides growing so intensely partisan as the election nears that even their views of a life-saving medication are being shaped by it.


hotair--2020-10-12--Chicago on track to have highest murder total in more than two decades

Chicago ’ s murder rate is currently about 50 % above what it was at this time last year according to data released by the Chicago Police Department .
Chicago has seen a rise in murder cases , not just compared to the previous year but compared to the previous four years , according to figures released by the Chicago Police Department .
The CPD regularly posts statistics about crime in the city , both week to week and year to year .
A look at recent stats shows that murder has risen in the city , doubling in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week with 15 murders , and the city is on track to hit around double the number of murders compared to 2019… Police , researchers , mayors and community leaders see a confluence of factors , specifically the lockdowns in various states .
Lockdowns and recession mean tensions are running high and streets have been emptied of eyes and ears on their communities .
Some attribute the rise to an increase in gang violence .
The graph above is taken from this Chicago Tribune report .
It shows that as of Oct. 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than this point in any recent year .
Prior to 2020 , Chicago ’ s last biggest surge in murders happened in 2016 .
At the time , 2016 was the highest number of murders the city had seen in 19 years .
There were 795 murders in 2016 but as of October 4th , the police report the city is running about 5 percent ahead of those numbers this year .
So if Chicago does exceed the murder toll in 2016 , 2020 will have the highest number of murders since at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But hey , at least the mayor is safe in “ Fort Lori.
” Just this weekend , five more people were killed and another 47 were wounded : Chicago police say five people have been killed and at least 47 others wounded in shootings across the city over the weekend so far .
The city ’ s most recent deadly shooting occurred at approximately 9:55 p.m. Sunday when a 25-year-old man was a passenger in a vehicle in the 8600 block of South State .
A blue sedan approached and began shooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on State .
The man was taken to the University of Chicago Hospital in critical condition , where he was later pronounced dead .
Just this weekend four minors were shot including two 17-year-olds and two 15-year-olds .
As of today , no one has been arrested in connection with any of the murders .
Finally , it ’ s worth noting that there hasn ’ t been a comparable spike in other crimes in Chicago .
In fact , other serious crimes including sexual assault , burlary and robbery are all down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The spike in the murder rate isn ’ t just a local issue but a national one .
As Jazz noted last week , New York City has already surpassed the number of murders that took place in the city last year .

Chicago’s murder rate is currently about 50% above what it was at this time last year according to data released by the Chicago Police Department.
Chicago has seen a rise in murder cases, not just compared to the previous year but compared to the previous four years, according to figures released by the Chicago Police Department. The CPD regularly posts statistics about crime in the city, both week to week and year to year. A look at recent stats shows that murder has risen in the city, doubling in the first week of October from the previous week with 15 murders, and the city is on track to hit around double the number of murders compared to 2019… Police, researchers, mayors and community leaders see a confluence of factors, specifically the lockdowns in various states. Lockdowns and recession mean tensions are running high and streets have been emptied of eyes and ears on their communities. Some attribute the rise to an increase in gang violence.
The graph above is taken from this Chicago Tribune report. It shows that as of Oct. 10 Chicago has seen 605 murders, more than this point in any recent year. Prior to 2020, Chicago’s last biggest surge in murders happened in 2016. At the time, 2016 was the highest number of murders the city had seen in 19 years.
There were 795 murders in 2016 but as of October 4th, the police report the city is running about 5 percent ahead of those numbers this year. So if Chicago does exceed the murder toll in 2016, 2020 will have the highest number of murders since at least 1997 or perhaps even earlier. But hey, at least the mayor is safe in “Fort Lori.”
Just this weekend, five more people were killed and another 47 were wounded:
Chicago police say five people have been killed and at least 47 others wounded in shootings across the city over the weekend so far. The city’s most recent deadly shooting occurred at approximately 9:55 p.m. Sunday when a 25-year-old man was a passenger in a vehicle in the 8600 block of South State. A blue sedan approached and began shooting into the vehicle, then drove northbound on State. The man was taken to the University of Chicago Hospital in critical condition, where he was later pronounced dead.
Just this weekend four minors were shot including two 17-year-olds and two 15-year-olds. As of today, no one has been arrested in connection with any of the murders.
Finally, it’s worth noting that there hasn’t been a comparable spike in other crimes in Chicago. In fact, other serious crimes including sexual assault, burlary and robbery are all down this year compared to previous years. The spike in the murder rate isn’t just a local issue but a national one. As Jazz noted last week, New York City has already surpassed the number of murders that took place in the city last year.


hotair--2020-10-12--Hmmm: Michigan poll shows John James within one point of Dem incumbent in Senate race

I think Gary Peters will end up holding on here , just like I think Lindsey Graham will end up holding on in South Carolina despite his opponent setting mind-bending fundraising records .
But before we get to the reasons , let ’ s pause a moment to savor the first poll in a looong time showing a Republican at any level overperforming .
John James overperformed a bit in 2018 too when he challenged Debbie Stabenow for Senate .
There ’ s every reason to believe he ’ s made a real race of it this year in Michigan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against him .
A new NYT poll of the state has him within one thin point of Peters .
In Michigan , Senator Gary Peters , a Democrat , faces a surprisingly strong challenge from John James , a graduate of West Point who is considered one of the Republicans ’ top recruits of the cycle .
Mr. Peters leads by just one percentage point , 43 percent to 42 percent , among likely voters , a significant narrowing of the race since a Times/Siena survey in June that found Mr. Peters leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of undecided voters reflects the relatively low profile of the two candidates .
Around 20 percent of voters do not have an opinion on either of them .
Mr. James ’ s favorability ratings have increased to 45 percent favorable versus 35 percent unfavorable , up from 36 percent favorable and 29 percent unfavorable in the June survey .
Part of Mr. Peters ’ s weakness is that he has thus far failed to match Mr. Biden ’ s tallies among nonwhite voters , who disproportionately remain undecided .
It remains to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black , will ultimately make significant inroads among these voters .
At a moment when Democrats are clobbering Republicans in fundraising , James brought in the same amount last quarter as Peters did — $ 14 million , an impressive sum .
Thanks to their big money advantage , Democrats are playing offense across nearly every battleground right now , with even some red states like South Carolina being pushed into the “ toss-up ” column .
The one exception where they ’ re playing defense : Michigan , thanks to John James @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race , the super PAC aligned with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is pumping $ 5.4 million into ad spending in Michigan this week alone to help bolster Peters , the memo authored by James ’ campaign also revealed… Spending in the Michigan Senate race is expected to top $ 100 million and become the most expensive contest in Michigan ’ s history , according to the Michigan Campaign Finance Network .
About 40 outside groups have already spent $ 50 million in ads in Michigan .
The leading pro-Peters outside group is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 13 million .
And the biggest pro-James outside spender is the Senate Leadership Fund , the Senate GOP ’ s counterpart , that has spent $ 9 million so far .
If Schumer dumping truckloads of money into Michigan to keep Peters afloat doesn ’ t convince you that James is for real , note that the last poll of this race before today had James down just three points .
All summer long , Peters led comfortably in eight- or nine-point range .
Then , near the end of August , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leads by an average of 4.9 , although as I say , the two most recent polls are even tighter than that .
So why do I think Peters will pull it out , apart from my general propensity towards eeyorism ?
Three reasons .
1 .
James ’ s polling is pretty anemic .
The reason the race has tightened isn ’ t because he ’ s gaining ground , it ’ s because some voters are moving from the Peters column to undecided .
*Maybe* they ’ re en route to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great .
But the Republican has actually lost a bit of ground himself since Peters ’ s slide began , dipping from 44.3 percent in the RCP average in late August to 43.0 today .
With one exception , James hasn ’ t been above 44 percent in any survey since early September .
( The one exception , which had him at 47 percent , came a few weeks ago from Trafalgar .
Trafalgar famously called Michigan correctly for Trump four years ago but they ’ ve had a much stronger lean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this year than the rest of the industry has had . )
Peters , by contrast , has topped 50 percent multiple times .
Normally when candidate A ’ s ceiling is five or six points higher than candidate B ’ s , candidate A is going to win .
2 .
Look closely in the excerpt up top at who the undecideds in the Peters/James race are .
They ’ re nonwhite voters , a group that leans strongly Democratic .
Check the crosstabs and you ’ ll find that another very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also includes a large share of undecideds ( 21 percent ) .
Is it possible that those groups will tilt towards James ?
Sure .
Is it likely given that they ’ re predisposed to voting Democratic ?
No .
Chances are they ’ ll come home to Peters in the end .
3 .
Like Lindsey Graham in South Carolina , Peters is lucky enough to have a presidential candidate at the top of the ballot who ’ s likely to win his state and drag him over the finish line in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by eight points , 48/40 .
How ’ s he doing it ?
By flipping a small but meaningful number of Michigan voters who were pro-Trump — or anti-Clinton , we should probably say — in 2016 .
Biden ’ s winning back the Obama/Trump crossovers and third-party voters who combined to hand the state to POTUS four years ago , and he ’ s also likely to turn out enough people who sat out the 2016 election that he ’ ll net a few more votes that way .
Add all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comfortable-ish margin for him in Michigan , where he ’ s led by eight points or better in five of the last six polls .
( In the sixth poll , he led by six . )
His support isn ’ t a pure anti-Trump vote either : Peters has a well-liked , likely-to-win candidate on his side of the ballot to mobilize Democratic turnout .
Meanwhile , Trump ’ s campaign has cut ad spending lately in Michigan , a sign that they might be giving up on the state as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Arizona .
If Trump throws in the towel in MI , some Republicans who might otherwise have turned out to vote for him — and James — won ’ t bother .
Where does James make up those votes ?
Will McConnell go all-in there on outside spending in hopes of boosting the Republican ?
There ’ s a nonzero chance next month that we end up with a Biden presidency and the Senate leaning 50/49 GOP , with the James/Peters race to decide whether Democrats control the entirety of government or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s agenda for the next two years .
I ’ ll leave you with this thought from Nate Silver about what today ’ s NYT data says about the likelihood of another big miss by pollsters on Trump ’ s chances .

I think Gary Peters will end up holding on here, just like I think Lindsey Graham will end up holding on in South Carolina despite his opponent setting mind-bending fundraising records.
But before we get to the reasons, let’s pause a moment to savor the first poll in a looong time showing a Republican at any level overperforming. John James overperformed a bit in 2018 too when he challenged Debbie Stabenow for Senate. There’s every reason to believe he’s made a real race of it this year in Michigan despite everything in the political world working against him.
A new NYT poll of the state has him within one thin point of Peters.
In Michigan, Senator Gary Peters, a Democrat, faces a surprisingly strong challenge from John James, a graduate of West Point who is considered one of the Republicans’ top recruits of the cycle. Mr. Peters leads by just one percentage point, 43 percent to 42 percent, among likely voters, a significant narrowing of the race since a Times/Siena survey in June that found Mr. Peters leading, 41-31. The relatively high number of undecided voters reflects the relatively low profile of the two candidates. Around 20 percent of voters do not have an opinion on either of them. Mr. James’s favorability ratings have increased to 45 percent favorable versus 35 percent unfavorable, up from 36 percent favorable and 29 percent unfavorable in the June survey. Part of Mr. Peters’s weakness is that he has thus far failed to match Mr. Biden’s tallies among nonwhite voters, who disproportionately remain undecided. It remains to be seen whether Mr. James, who is Black, will ultimately make significant inroads among these voters.
At a moment when Democrats are clobbering Republicans in fundraising, James brought in the same amount last quarter as Peters did — $14 million, an impressive sum. Thanks to their big money advantage, Democrats are playing offense across nearly every battleground right now, with even some red states like South Carolina being pushed into the “toss-up” column. The one exception where they’re playing defense: Michigan, thanks to John James.
In a sign of the competitive race, the super PAC aligned with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is pumping $5.4 million into ad spending in Michigan this week alone to help bolster Peters, the memo authored by James’ campaign also revealed… Spending in the Michigan Senate race is expected to top $100 million and become the most expensive contest in Michigan’s history, according to the Michigan Campaign Finance Network. About 40 outside groups have already spent $50 million in ads in Michigan. The leading pro-Peters outside group is the Schumer-backed Senate Majority PAC at $13 million. And the biggest pro-James outside spender is the Senate Leadership Fund, the Senate GOP’s counterpart, that has spent $9 million so far.
If Schumer dumping truckloads of money into Michigan to keep Peters afloat doesn’t convince you that James is for real, note that the last poll of this race before today had James down just three points. All summer long, Peters led comfortably in eight- or nine-point range. Then, near the end of August, his polling started to slip. Today he leads by an average of 4.9, although as I say, the two most recent polls are even tighter than that.
So why do I think Peters will pull it out, apart from my general propensity towards eeyorism? Three reasons.
1. James’s polling is pretty anemic. The reason the race has tightened isn’t because he’s gaining ground, it’s because some voters are moving from the Peters column to undecided. *Maybe* they’re en route to switching to James, which would be great. But the Republican has actually lost a bit of ground himself since Peters’s slide began, dipping from 44.3 percent in the RCP average in late August to 43.0 today. With one exception, James hasn’t been above 44 percent in any survey since early September. (The one exception, which had him at 47 percent, came a few weeks ago from Trafalgar. Trafalgar famously called Michigan correctly for Trump four years ago but they’ve had a much stronger lean towards Republicans in all of their polling this year than the rest of the industry has had.) Peters, by contrast, has topped 50 percent multiple times. Normally when candidate A’s ceiling is five or six points higher than candidate B’s, candidate A is going to win.
2. Look closely in the excerpt up top at who the undecideds in the Peters/James race are. They’re nonwhite voters, a group that leans strongly Democratic. Check the crosstabs and you’ll find that another very liberal group, adults aged 18-29, also includes a large share of undecideds (21 percent). Is it possible that those groups will tilt towards James? Sure. Is it likely given that they’re predisposed to voting Democratic? No. Chances are they’ll come home to Peters in the end.
3. Like Lindsey Graham in South Carolina, Peters is lucky enough to have a presidential candidate at the top of the ballot who’s likely to win his state and drag him over the finish line in so doing. Biden leads Trump here by eight points, 48/40. How’s he doing it? By flipping a small but meaningful number of Michigan voters who were pro-Trump — or anti-Clinton, we should probably say — in 2016.
Biden’s winning back the Obama/Trump crossovers and third-party voters who combined to hand the state to POTUS four years ago, and he’s also likely to turn out enough people who sat out the 2016 election that he’ll net a few more votes that way. Add all of that up and it’s another comfortable-ish margin for him in Michigan, where he’s led by eight points or better in five of the last six polls. (In the sixth poll, he led by six.) His support isn’t a pure anti-Trump vote either:
Biden's favorable/unfavorable ratings in NYT polls… Michigan: 54/42… Wisconsin: 55/42…. This isn't a lesser of two evils vote. Voters actually like Biden. HUGE difference with 2016. https://t.co/i5T7qOczWN — (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) October 12, 2020
Peters has a well-liked, likely-to-win candidate on his side of the ballot to mobilize Democratic turnout. Meanwhile, Trump’s campaign has cut ad spending lately in Michigan, a sign that they might be giving up on the state as a bad bet relative to battlegrounds like Pennsylvania and Arizona. If Trump throws in the towel in MI, some Republicans who might otherwise have turned out to vote for him — and James — won’t bother. Where does James make up those votes?
Will McConnell go all-in there on outside spending in hopes of boosting the Republican? There’s a nonzero chance next month that we end up with a Biden presidency and the Senate leaning 50/49 GOP, with the James/Peters race to decide whether Democrats control the entirety of government or whether Republicans get to roadblock the left’s agenda for the next two years.
I’ll leave you with this thought from Nate Silver about what today’s NYT data says about the likelihood of another big miss by pollsters on Trump’s chances.


hotair--2020-10-12--Noam Chomsky to frustrated Marxists: Vote for Biden

One of the guys from Chapo Trap House , Virgil , co-hosts a podcast with Bernie Sanders ’ former press secretary Briahna Joy .
Today they published their latest interview with Noam Chomsky and it ’ s a good reminder of where the left is these days .
Chomsky ’ s position in this debate is that Trump must not be allowed to win the 2020 election because that would lead to the end of civilization and also the destruction of the world from runaway climate change .
And because he sees the situation as that stark he is encouraging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a moderate who many on the far left see as little different from a Republican .
The alternative view presented by the co-hosts is that it makes no sense to support Biden when the real threat to the earth and the driver of climate change is capitalism .
And so we get this lovely discussion in which both sides want to see the end of capitalism but they disagree over how quickly they can achieve that goal .
Virgil : If these capitalist institutions result in recurring ecological crises and existential ones , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t the real fight against those institutions instead of a reform that maybe gets us over the hump in 30 years if it were possible to lobby those in power through activism , some kind of brokering , those who are beholden to the profit motive even if it destroys the environment ?
Chomsky : We have maybe a decade or two to deal with the environmental crisis .
Is there the remotest chance that within a decade or two we ’ ll overthrow capitalism ?
It ’ s not even a dream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re raising is basically irrelevant .
Of course let ’ s try to overthrow capitalism .
It ’ s not going to happen like that .
There ’ s a lot of work involved .
Meanwhile we have an imminent question .
Are we going to preserve the possibility for organized human society to survive ?
Are we going to preserve the possibility for us to overthrow capitalist institutions ?
So the argument here is whether the left should try to work through the existing system by doing things like voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win while continuing to attack capitalism ( Chomsky ’ s view ) or declare war on the capitalist system itself to try to move things along a bit faster ( Virgil ’ s view ) .
Here ’ s a bit more of the same argument between Chomsky and co-host Briahna Joy .
Chomsky is arguing that existential questions should take precedence over other issues .
Joy seems to be arguing that if the world ends she ’ ll want it noted for the record that the homeless were hardest hit .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s pretty much the same argument : Chomsky is right about one thing .
Capitalism isn ’ t going away , not in 10 years , not in 30 .
So good luck with all of that .
What can happen , unfortunately , is you get enough snake oil salesman pushing this nonsense that eventually these people are given real power or get in a position to seize it .
And that ’ s when regular people learn the hard way that you can ’ t feed people on talking points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this fail disastrously in the 20th century with a death toll in the tens of millions .
Nothing has changed .
Maxism won ’ t work any better the next time it ’ s tried .
We need to push back against this kind of extremism .
In closing , even some on the left are put off by this .
If you want to move the country to the left , having these podcasters at the forefront is just bad PR .
Vox ’ s Matt Yglesias is also skeptical though he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through :

One of the guys from Chapo Trap House, Virgil, co-hosts a podcast with Bernie Sanders’ former press secretary Briahna Joy. Today they published their latest interview with Noam Chomsky and it’s a good reminder of where the left is these days.
Chomsky’s position in this debate is that Trump must not be allowed to win the 2020 election because that would lead to the end of civilization and also the destruction of the world from runaway climate change. And because he sees the situation as that stark he is encouraging people to vote for Joe Biden, a moderate who many on the far left see as little different from a Republican.
The alternative view presented by the co-hosts is that it makes no sense to support Biden when the real threat to the earth and the driver of climate change is capitalism. And so we get this lovely discussion in which both sides want to see the end of capitalism but they disagree over how quickly they can achieve that goal.
Virgil: If these capitalist institutions result in recurring ecological crises and existential ones, as they do, then isn’t the real fight against those institutions instead of a reform that maybe gets us over the hump in 30 years if it were possible to lobby those in power through activism, some kind of brokering, those who are beholden to the profit motive even if it destroys the environment? Chomsky: We have maybe a decade or two to deal with the environmental crisis. Is there the remotest chance that within a decade or two we’ll overthrow capitalism? It’s not even a dream, okay? So the point that you’re raising is basically irrelevant. Of course let’s try to overthrow capitalism. It’s not going to happen like that. There’s a lot of work involved. Meanwhile we have an imminent question. Are we going to preserve the possibility for organized human society to survive? Are we going to preserve the possibility for us to overthrow capitalist institutions?
Here’s the exchange:
Find out whether capitalism will end in the next decade in this clip from today’s @BadFaithPod interview with Noam Chomsky, available here: https://t.co/o6xDVWHy5F pic.twitter.com/KyMeS5ymSS — Virgil Texas (@virgiltexas) October 12, 2020
So the argument here is whether the left should try to work through the existing system by doing things like voting for the best available candidate who can win while continuing to attack capitalism (Chomsky’s view) or declare war on the capitalist system itself to try to move things along a bit faster (Virgil’s view).
Here’s a bit more of the same argument between Chomsky and co-host Briahna Joy. Chomsky is arguing that existential questions should take precedence over other issues. Joy seems to be arguing that if the world ends she’ll want it noted for the record that the homeless were hardest hit.
Me and @briebriejoy argued with Noam Chomsky for an hour on the latest episode of @BadFaithPod. We won the argument. Listen here: https://t.co/ATPFCi0TyS pic.twitter.com/T34a5hkp3R — Virgil Texas (@virgiltexas) October 12, 2020
There’s one more clip and it’s pretty much the same argument:
‼NEW EPISODE @BadFaithPod‼ We debate Noam Chomsky about the limits of "vote blue no matter who," whether he'd vote for Bloomberg, Biden's attacks on the left, & how Black ppl & other historically marginalized groups are hurt by lesser of two evilism. https://t.co/R6AhyCbZyq pic.twitter.com/gcrIYZIciB — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) October 12, 2020
Chomsky is right about one thing. Capitalism isn’t going away, not in 10 years, not in 30. So good luck with all of that.
What can happen, unfortunately, is you get enough snake oil salesman pushing this nonsense that eventually these people are given real power or get in a position to seize it. And that’s when regular people learn the hard way that you can’t feed people on talking points and propaganda. We’ve seen this fail disastrously in the 20th century with a death toll in the tens of millions. Nothing has changed. Maxism won’t work any better the next time it’s tried. We need to push back against this kind of extremism.
In closing, even some on the left are put off by this. If you want to move the country to the left, having these podcasters at the forefront is just bad PR.
The reason that I hate this shit so much is because 1) "lead in such a way that others want to follow" but 2) I don't want this asshole dirtbag bullshit being the face of M4A/GND progressives. It's actively harmful. — 🕷Dante Atkins🕷 (@DanteAtkins) October 12, 2020
Vox’s Matt Yglesias is also skeptical though he doesn’t seem to be getting through:


hotair--2020-10-12--Why has immigration disappeared from the presidential debates?

We still don ’ t know if there will be another debate between President Trump and Joe Biden or where or when it will happen if so .
Of the two debates that have taken place between the tickets thus far , did you notice anything missing ?
A recent editorial at the Free Beacon brings up what should be a relevant topic for election observers .
What happened to the subject of immigration ?
In the entirety of both the first presidential debate and the only vice presidential debate , they note that not one single question on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four candidates thought to inject it into the conversation on their own .
Considering that not very long ago it was almost the only issue making any headlines , this represents a rather stark change .
Why the omission ?
It is tempting to say that immigration did not come up because the elites who manage the presidential debates are uncomfortable with the topic , are worried that the issue favors Republican border hawks , and are more interested in subjects relevant to their cultural coterie .
But it is also true that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events and pressing challenges , and that immigration just does not seem as great a concern today as the coronavirus , the economy , race relations and civil unrest , and California brushfires .
The apparent irrelevance of immigration and border security to the election might also be attributed to the achievements of the Trump administration .
But these achievements are partial , tenuous , and dependent on events and relationships and court decisions .
And they are easily reversed .
What should worry the president is that the somnolence on the border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ propelled his rise to power , and that drove the populist revolt against the Washington establishment whose offshoots included the Ron Paul candidacies , the Tea Party , and Republican victories in 2014 and 2016 .
There are a couple of moving parts to this topic , but some of the primary drivers of this shift in the public discussion seem rather obvious .
As the editorial above correctly notes , not having immigration front and center in the debates is not good news for President Trump .
The subject of immigration – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bread and butter .
It drove his base to the polls in droves in 2016 and , while the nation remains relatively divided on the topic , the numbers generally leaned in his favor among the public .
With that as the backdrop , I would venture to say that the absence of any immigration questions during the debates is by design , not happenstance .
In a nutshell , it ’ s essentially the same reason that gun control has disappeared .
Democrats know their agenda is not popular on either front @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a winning topic for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris , the collection of Democrats and NeverTrumpers on the Commission on Presidential Debates aren ’ t exactly going to make it a priority .
This is perhaps even more true when it comes to gun control than immigration .
You ’ re not hearing a peep about it and the Democrats have fallen silent .
Thanks to the pandemic and the resultant riots and unrest , people are lining up to attempt to buy guns in numbers never seen before .
And many of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finish the application process or they ’ re getting tripped up in delays lasting for months because of all the hoops the Democrats who passed these laws are making them jump through .
Nobody who is cheering for a Biden victory and a Democratic takeover of the Senate want ’ s to hear a peep about new gun control laws until after the election .
Yet another factor to consider is that the President has become something of a victim of his own success here .
Immigration isn ’ t as much of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over in 2016 have abated to a considerable degree .
The caravans of illegals that previously washed up on our border have largely disappeared .
The last one to leave Honduras was almost entirely dismantled and sent packing before they reached Mexico ’ s southern border .
This is largely due to the President ’ s policies and the agreements he ’ s forged with our southern neighbors , but also because of fears that these large , unwashed masses could make the spread of the novel coronavirus worse in their own countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet there ’ s also some truth to the other fact addressed by the Free Beacon ’ s editors .
Yes , there are other factors that have dominated the national conversation throughout the madness of 2020 and that ’ s made it more convenient to allow immigration to drift off the front page .
The pandemic is sucking all of the oxygen out of the debate hall , leaving little room for much else .
We ’ re not only fighting the disease itself , but arguing over relief bills , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and ways to renormalize society in an era that ’ s anything but normal .
This is an area where Democrats sense a vulnerability they can exploit .
The plague happened on Trump ’ s watch so the responsibility for how it ’ s handled lands in his lap .
( As is proper . )
And if people are unhappy and feeling pain because of the pandemic , at least some of them will fix the blame on Donald Trump .
But sooner or later , this wave will pass .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ topic will be back in the news and these issues will need to be dealt with .
Just don ’ t ask Joe Biden what solutions he will offer if he ’ s in charge .
You don ’ t deserve to know .

We still don’t know if there will be another debate between President Trump and Joe Biden or where or when it will happen if so. Of the two debates that have taken place between the tickets thus far, did you notice anything missing? A recent editorial at the Free Beacon brings up what should be a relevant topic for election observers. What happened to the subject of immigration? In the entirety of both the first presidential debate and the only vice presidential debate, they note that not one single question on the subject was asked and none of the four candidates thought to inject it into the conversation on their own. Considering that not very long ago it was almost the only issue making any headlines, this represents a rather stark change.
Why the omission? It is tempting to say that immigration did not come up because the elites who manage the presidential debates are uncomfortable with the topic, are worried that the issue favors Republican border hawks, and are more interested in subjects relevant to their cultural coterie. But it is also true that presidential debates tend to focus on current events and pressing challenges, and that immigration just does not seem as great a concern today as the coronavirus, the economy, race relations and civil unrest, and California brushfires. The apparent irrelevance of immigration and border security to the election might also be attributed to the achievements of the Trump administration. But these achievements are partial, tenuous, and dependent on events and relationships and court decisions. And they are easily reversed. What should worry the president is that the somnolence on the border deprives him of the very issue that propelled his rise to power, and that drove the populist revolt against the Washington establishment whose offshoots included the Ron Paul candidacies, the Tea Party, and Republican victories in 2014 and 2016.
There are a couple of moving parts to this topic, but some of the primary drivers of this shift in the public discussion seem rather obvious. As the editorial above correctly notes, not having immigration front and center in the debates is not good news for President Trump. The subject of immigration – and particularly illegal immigration – is his bread and butter. It drove his base to the polls in droves in 2016 and, while the nation remains relatively divided on the topic, the numbers generally leaned in his favor among the public. With that as the backdrop, I would venture to say that the absence of any immigration questions during the debates is by design, not happenstance.
In a nutshell, it’s essentially the same reason that gun control has disappeared. Democrats know their agenda is not popular on either front. And if something isn’t a winning topic for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the collection of Democrats and NeverTrumpers on the Commission on Presidential Debates aren’t exactly going to make it a priority. This is perhaps even more true when it comes to gun control than immigration. You’re not hearing a peep about it and the Democrats have fallen silent. Thanks to the pandemic and the resultant riots and unrest, people are lining up to attempt to buy guns in numbers never seen before. And many of them either can’t apply and finish the application process or they’re getting tripped up in delays lasting for months because of all the hoops the Democrats who passed these laws are making them jump through. Nobody who is cheering for a Biden victory and a Democratic takeover of the Senate want’s to hear a peep about new gun control laws until after the election.
Yet another factor to consider is that the President has become something of a victim of his own success here. Immigration isn’t as much of an issue because the problems we fought over in 2016 have abated to a considerable degree. The caravans of illegals that previously washed up on our border have largely disappeared. The last one to leave Honduras was almost entirely dismantled and sent packing before they reached Mexico’s southern border. This is largely due to the President’s policies and the agreements he’s forged with our southern neighbors, but also because of fears that these large, unwashed masses could make the spread of the novel coronavirus worse in their own countries as much as our own.
And yet there’s also some truth to the other fact addressed by the Free Beacon’s editors. Yes, there are other factors that have dominated the national conversation throughout the madness of 2020 and that’s made it more convenient to allow immigration to drift off the front page. The pandemic is sucking all of the oxygen out of the debate hall, leaving little room for much else. We’re not only fighting the disease itself, but arguing over relief bills, the efficacy of various measures taken against it, and ways to renormalize society in an era that’s anything but normal. This is an area where Democrats sense a vulnerability they can exploit. The plague happened on Trump’s watch so the responsibility for how it’s handled lands in his lap. (As is proper.) And if people are unhappy and feeling pain because of the pandemic, at least some of them will fix the blame on Donald Trump.
But sooner or later, this wave will pass. And when it does, the immigration topic will be back in the news and these issues will need to be dealt with. Just don’t ask Joe Biden what solutions he will offer if he’s in charge. You don’t deserve to know.