hotair--2020-09-18--<span class='red'>Breaking: RIP, Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Update: No vote before the election, Murkowski

The political shocks will come soon enough .
For now , though , it ’ s the time to mark an end of an era .
Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away today after 27 years on the court , and after a long and tough fight with pancreatic cancer : Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , the demure firebrand who in her 80s became a legal , cultural and feminist icon , died Friday .
The Supreme Court announced her death , saying the cause was complications from metastatic cancer of the pancreas .
The court , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at her home in Washington surrounded by family .
She was 87 .
“ Our nation has lost a justice of historic stature , ” Chief Justice John Roberts said .
“ We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague .
Today we mourn but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her , a tired and resolute champion of justice.
” Regardless of her ideology and approach , Ginsburg devoted her life to public service .
That kind of dedication to the law and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be , recalled with respect and gratitude .
We have had lots of reasons and occasions to disagree with her , but Ginsburg is now beyond those issues , and so should we be , too .
Our condolences , prayers , and best wishes go out to her family , friends , and admirers for their loss .
There will be plenty of retrospectives on her life and career , of course .
Some are already being published now , as media outlets had plenty of time to prepare for this moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; as Jazz wrote on Twitter , it almost seemed like she would live forever : However , her death creates a unique political issue at a critical time .
It ’ s not too soon to discuss that , as even Ginsburg herself recognized shortly before her death : That would depend greatly on who wins the election .
This seat won ’ t sit open for four years , after all , nor would Ginsburg have expected that .
Interestingly enough , Hugh Hewitt asked Donald Trump about what he planned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just a month ago : It ’ s possible that Trump could just pick a name off of his list in the next few days , but that ’ s as far as it will go .
Amy Coney Barrett seems to be the most likely candidate , under the circumstances , and she has been relatively recently vetted for the appellate court .
However , there ’ s almost no time left for a candidate to come up for a vote before the election .
There ’ s only six weeks to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those days will have senators around to conduct business .
Lindsey Graham probably can ’ t even arrange a confirmation hearing in the Judiciary Committee that fast , let alone pass a nominee to the full floor .
What ’ s more likely to happen will be that Trump ’ s selection will end up being a major issue in the election — perhaps the major issue now .
It will remind voters in both parties of the stakes involved in presidential elections , but will it change the turnout models ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ already pretty motivated , and Democrats for whom this is critical probably would be , too .
This probably isn ’ t that much of a game-changer in that sense , but it might convince some previous Trump voters who have been disillusioned to come back to the fold for this issue .
The big question will be whether the Senate will confirm a Trump appointee after the election if he loses to Biden .
Would Mitch McConnell escalate the judiciary wars with that kind of maneuver ?
I ’ d guess that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t expect all 53 Republican senators to go along .
Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski would absolutely balk , which means McConnell would have only one more vote to lose .
The meltdown that would follow would likely cow more than one other Republican to quail at the prospect , especially in the class that has to defend their seats in 2022 .
The most likely outcome is that either Trump wins or Biden gets to choose .
Update : Murkowski ’ s already out in front of this As I wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time on the legislative calendar for that .
The big question really is whether Republicans would confirm a SCOTUS appointment from a president who lost an election in a lame-duck session .
All the talk about precedents will get a big test over the next few weeks — unless voters moot it in the election .
Update : It didn ’ t take long for Collins to stake out the same position , and also add that she ’ s opposed to a lame-duck confirmation too : I ’ d guess we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McSally sometime soon , too .
They ’ re going to get asked — repeatedly .
Update : That ’ s probably an end to the before-the-election question : Again , none of this stops Trump from nominating a replacement .
But whoever it is should be prepared for a s***storm of personal attacks over the next few weeks .
That ’ s something Trump and his team should keep in mind while calculating their next moves .
Update ; More of an aside , actually , from friends on Twitter .
Does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pre-election vote ?
Naah .
McConnell doesn ’ t have a prayer of moving forward before Election Day .
Update : Let ’ s chalk this up to sunny optimism : We ’ ll see , but I wouldn ’ t count on it before Election Day .
However , this could be taken to apply to a lame-duck appointment , too .
Maybe she figures that the MAGA vote in Arizona is more important than the centrist-crossover vote .
She may be right , too .
Not sure the calculus will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gardner , though .
Update : Can Republicans sell the idea that the election will require a full bench in place ?
Eh , I ’ m not sure this makes sense .
Right now conservatives have a 5-3 majority with Ginsburg ’ s passing , at least nominally .
Adding another conservative would not improve matters for the liberal wing , so they won ’ t have any reason to buy into this argument .
And Roberts would probably try hard to avoid 4-4 splits now , so Republicans don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The election argument has another defect , too : In that case , the nomination of Merrick Garland threatened to create a 5-4 liberal tilt .
Republicans blocked that for obvious reasons , but it did leave a 4-4 ideological split that was more likely to deadlock if the court had to deal with any election challenges .
It didn ’ t bother Republicans at that time , or at least not publicly .

Breaking: RIP, Ruth Bader Ginsburg; Update: No vote before the election, Murkowski declares; Update: Collins a no, too; Update: Grassley a no? Update: McConnell says vote will take place; Update: An election-case argument?
The political shocks will come soon enough. For now, though, it’s the time to mark an end of an era. Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away today after 27 years on the court, and after a long and tough fight with pancreatic cancer:
BREAKING: Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died. @CBSNews pic.twitter.com/AXmbyQwaxl — Paula Reid (@PaulaReidCBS) September 18, 2020
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the demure firebrand who in her 80s became a legal, cultural and feminist icon, died Friday. The Supreme Court announced her death, saying the cause was complications from metastatic cancer of the pancreas. The court, in a statement, said Ginsburg died at her home in Washington surrounded by family. She was 87. “Our nation has lost a justice of historic stature,” Chief Justice John Roberts said. “We at the Supreme Court have lost a cherished colleague. Today we mourn but with confidence that future generations will remember Ruth Bader Ginsburg as we knew her, a tired and resolute champion of justice.”
Regardless of her ideology and approach, Ginsburg devoted her life to public service. That kind of dedication to the law and its application should be, and will be, recalled with respect and gratitude. We have had lots of reasons and occasions to disagree with her, but Ginsburg is now beyond those issues, and so should we be, too. Our condolences, prayers, and best wishes go out to her family, friends, and admirers for their loss.
There will be plenty of retrospectives on her life and career, of course. Some are already being published now, as media outlets had plenty of time to prepare for this moment. Ginsburg seemed rather indestructible, though; as Jazz wrote on Twitter, it almost seemed like she would live forever:
RIP Notorious RBG. Honestly shocked. Thought she would be going like the Energizer Bunny. Long career of service. — Jazz Shaw (@JazzShaw) September 18, 2020
However, her death creates a unique political issue at a critical time. It’s not too soon to discuss that, as even Ginsburg herself recognized shortly before her death:
Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” She knew what was to come. Ginsburg’s death will have profound consequences for the court and the country. Inside the court, not only is the leader of the liberal wing gone, but with the Court about to open a new term, Chief Justice John Roberts no longer holds the controlling vote in closely contested cases.
That would depend greatly on who wins the election. This seat won’t sit open for four years, after all, nor would Ginsburg have expected that. Interestingly enough, Hugh Hewitt asked Donald Trump about what he planned to do in case of a vacancy just a month ago:
It’s possible that Trump could just pick a name off of his list in the next few days, but that’s as far as it will go. Amy Coney Barrett seems to be the most likely candidate, under the circumstances, and she has been relatively recently vetted for the appellate court. However, there’s almost no time left for a candidate to come up for a vote before the election. There’s only six weeks to go before Election Day, and few of those days will have senators around to conduct business. Lindsey Graham probably can’t even arrange a confirmation hearing in the Judiciary Committee that fast, let alone pass a nominee to the full floor.
What’s more likely to happen will be that Trump’s selection will end up being a major issue in the election — perhaps the major issue now. It will remind voters in both parties of the stakes involved in presidential elections, but will it change the turnout models? I’d guess that Republicans are already pretty motivated, and Democrats for whom this is critical probably would be, too. This probably isn’t that much of a game-changer in that sense, but it might convince some previous Trump voters who have been disillusioned to come back to the fold for this issue.
The big question will be whether the Senate will confirm a Trump appointee after the election if he loses to Biden. Would Mitch McConnell escalate the judiciary wars with that kind of maneuver? I’d guess that he’d try, but don’t expect all 53 Republican senators to go along. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski would absolutely balk, which means McConnell would have only one more vote to lose. The meltdown that would follow would likely cow more than one other Republican to quail at the prospect, especially in the class that has to defend their seats in 2022. The most likely outcome is that either Trump wins or Biden gets to choose.
Update: Murkowski’s already out in front of this
https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1307106318839435270
As I wrote, there’s really not enough time on the legislative calendar for that. The big question really is whether Republicans would confirm a SCOTUS appointment from a president who lost an election in a lame-duck session. All the talk about precedents will get a big test over the next few weeks — unless voters moot it in the election.
Update: It didn’t take long for Collins to stake out the same position, and also add that she’s opposed to a lame-duck confirmation too:
News: @SenatorCollins told me earlier this month in Maine that she would not seat a Supreme Court justice in October. “I think that’s too close, I really do,” she said. She said she’d also oppose seating a justice in the lame duck if there’s a change in presidents. — Jonathan Martin (@jmartNYT) September 19, 2020
I’d guess we’ll hear from Cory Gardner and Martha McSally sometime soon, too. They’re going to get asked — repeatedly.
Update: That’s probably an end to the before-the-election question:
So far the following GOP Senators have pledged that they will not consider a Supreme Court appointment until after the next inauguration. Susan Collins
Chuck Grassley
Lisa Murkowski — Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) September 19, 2020
Again, none of this stops Trump from nominating a replacement. But whoever it is should be prepared for a s***storm of personal attacks over the next few weeks. That’s something Trump and his team should keep in mind while calculating their next moves.
Update; More of an aside, actually, from friends on Twitter. Does anyone expect Mitt Romney to go for a pre-election vote? Naah. McConnell doesn’t have a prayer of moving forward before Election Day.
Update: Let’s chalk this up to sunny optimism:
We’ll see, but I wouldn’t count on it before Election Day. However, this could be taken to apply to a lame-duck appointment, too.
Update: This one’s a bit of a surprise:
McSally indicates that the Senate should vote on Trump's SCOTUS nominee — Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) September 19, 2020
Maybe she figures that the MAGA vote in Arizona is more important than the centrist-crossover vote. She may be right, too. Not sure the calculus will be the same in bluer Colorado for Gardner, though.
Update: Can Republicans sell the idea that the election will require a full bench in place?
From my notebook/calls over the past hour: there are discussions within the Senate GOP about voting *before* the election, making the argument that 9 justices are needed in case of an election crisis. But Rs who want that aren't sure if Collins/Murkowski would fight it. — Robert Costa (@costareports) September 19, 2020
Eh, I’m not sure this makes sense. Right now conservatives have a 5-3 majority with Ginsburg’s passing, at least nominally. Adding another conservative would not improve matters for the liberal wing, so they won’t have any reason to buy into this argument. And Roberts would probably try hard to avoid 4-4 splits now, so Republicans don’t really need it anyway.
Update: The election argument has another defect, too:
Prepare to hear much concern voiced about the risks of an 8-justice Supreme Court existing during the 2020 presidential election that was not voiced during the 8-justice Supreme Court that existed during the 2016 presidential election. https://t.co/KJbq8L0dok — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) September 19, 2020
In that case, the nomination of Merrick Garland threatened to create a 5-4 liberal tilt. Republicans blocked that for obvious reasons, but it did leave a 4-4 ideological split that was more likely to deadlock if the court had to deal with any election challenges. It didn’t bother Republicans at that time, or at least not publicly.


hotair--2020-09-19--Kamala on Ginsburg's last wish: "We will honor that wish"

A full-on freak-out began as soon as the announcement of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ’ s death was made .
Democrats from the east coast to the west coast hit the publish button way too quickly on social media as they couldn ’ t contain themselves .
Inciting violence and doxing public officials is the order of the day .
2020 will not let up .
Kamala Harris tweeted out her agreement with Joe Biden that a replacement for Ginsburg should not be done until after the presidential election .
That ’ s no surprise .
As Ed so aptly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should just admit that the Supreme Court nomination process has devolved into a coarse grab for power .
So , let ’ s just be honest and say that this year is different than the last time we went through a SCOTUS nomination in an election year .
Will it change much in the approaching election ?
We don ’ t have that answer yet .
In 2016 , Obama and the Democrats had control of the White House while Republicans controlled the Senate .
So , Mitch McConnell was able to slow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Merrick Garland up for a vote .
In 2020 , though , Republicans have the White House and the Senate .
There is time for President Trump to make his third appointment to the Supreme Court .
He can and he should act immediately .
He owes that to all the Republican and Independent voters who put judicial appointments , including the Supreme Court , as a priority when casting their vote for him in 2016 .
As you may remember , Trump released his list of whom he would consider for SCOTUS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who were concerned about his conservative cred .
One thing Republicans have to be grateful for is that Mitch McConnell is running the Senate .
He is a master of process and is experienced in this kind of game .
He pledges that Trump ’ s nominee will get a vote in the Senate .
Those fearful of McConnell ’ s record of success in navigating the process in the Senate responded accordingly .
One leftist was happy to tweet out directions to McConnell ’ s house for protesters .
Fortunately , McConnell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put forth a list of names , as Trump did in 2016 and again just days ago .
Kamala and Biden are not the deciders here on how to move forward .
Even if Biden wins the election , Trump has time to nominate someone on his list , preferably one already vetted to save time now , and the Senate Judiciary Committee can get to work .
A vote can be taken after the election , in the lame-duck session , if necessary .
Does anyone think the Democrats would do anything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Schumer , now saying the nomination must wait , has a tweet from the past that acknowledges the ability of the president and the Senate to get the job done .
Ginsburg ’ s granddaughter released a statement with one of her grandmother ’ s last wishes – she didn ’ t want to be replaced until after the new president is in office .
She assumed that Biden will win .
This is a disappointing statement from a Supreme Court justice , but as I wrote in an earlier post , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her life and began to politicize the Supreme Court in her later years .
Democrats celebrate her for that .
Legal minds who know about policy and process say there is time for the job to get done .
Kamala sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and should recuse herself now .
Not only is she a vice-presidential candidate but the way she conducted herself during the Brett Kavanaugh hearing tells us how she will act now .
It ’ s unacceptable to allow that to happen .
This morning Kamala posted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ importance of the election , including the SCOTUS nomination .
Democrats are inciting violence on social media .
While ironic , some point to the fact that riots will break out if Trump and McConnell go forward .
Have they not seen the news lately and the riots already going on ?
Take , for example , a tweet from a former CNN host : Crazy leftist Cher says Trump is a cancerous growth that must be excised “ at all costs ” .
Barack Obama said her last wish must be respected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have “ left instructions ” but that doesn ’ t hold water with the other side of the aisle .
You remember how often Obama liked to say , “ Elections have consequences .
I won ” , right ?
The latest poll from Quinnipiac shows Mitch McConnell up over his opponent , Amy McGrath , by double digits .
Frantic fundraising efforts sprang up on Twitter for McGrath after McConnell announced he ’ d be doing his job , as the voters elected him to do .
Back in 2016 , Hillary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s seat to remain vacant until after the election were “ dishonoring our Constitution ” .
Now , of course , she feels differently .
President Trump released a nice statement after his initial reaction to her death , which was also well done .
Neither time did he touch on the politics of her death .
He was speaking at a campaign rally when her death was announced .
When he was told by reporters as he left he respectfully said he had not heard about her death .
( You hear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in the background .
It ’ s played at the end of all the Trump rallies according to reports . )
I ’ ll end with one observation – Trump respectfully kept politics out of his remarks .
Biden had to read his initial remarks to reporters and included politics .
Then he left without taking questions because he was tired after “ a long plane ride.
” Remember that next time Biden ’ s alleged capacity for empathy is used against Trump .

A full-on freak-out began as soon as the announcement of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death was made. Democrats from the east coast to the west coast hit the publish button way too quickly on social media as they couldn’t contain themselves. Inciting violence and doxing public officials is the order of the day. 2020 will not let up.
Kamala Harris tweeted out her agreement with Joe Biden that a replacement for Ginsburg should not be done until after the presidential election. That’s no surprise. As Ed so aptly said in his post today, everyone should just admit that the Supreme Court nomination process has devolved into a coarse grab for power. So, let’s just be honest and say that this year is different than the last time we went through a SCOTUS nomination in an election year. Will it change much in the approaching election? We don’t have that answer yet.
In 2016, Obama and the Democrats had control of the White House while Republicans controlled the Senate. So, Mitch McConnell was able to slow the process and didn’t bring Merrick Garland up for a vote. In 2020, though, Republicans have the White House and the Senate. There is time for President Trump to make his third appointment to the Supreme Court. He can and he should act immediately. He owes that to all the Republican and Independent voters who put judicial appointments, including the Supreme Court, as a priority when casting their vote for him in 2016. As you may remember, Trump released his list of whom he would consider for SCOTUS nominations before the election to soothe voters who were concerned about his conservative cred.
One thing Republicans have to be grateful for is that Mitch McConnell is running the Senate. He is a master of process and is experienced in this kind of game. He pledges that Trump’s nominee will get a vote in the Senate.
McConnell argued on Friday that the Republican-controlled Senate could confirm a Republican president’s nominee without facing charges of hypocrisy. “Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year,” McConnell said. “By contrast, Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary. Once again, we will keep our promise. President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”
The Senate and the nation mourn the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the conclusion of her extraordinary American life. My full statement: pic.twitter.com/NOwYLhDxIk — Leader McConnell (@LeaderMcConnell) September 19, 2020
Those fearful of McConnell’s record of success in navigating the process in the Senate responded accordingly. One leftist was happy to tweet out directions to McConnell’s house for protesters. Fortunately, McConnell was not home.
https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1307153283014955008
Biden has not put forth a list of names, as Trump did in 2016 and again just days ago. Kamala and Biden are not the deciders here on how to move forward. Even if Biden wins the election, Trump has time to nominate someone on his list, preferably one already vetted to save time now, and the Senate Judiciary Committee can get to work. A vote can be taken after the election, in the lame-duck session, if necessary. Does anyone think the Democrats would do anything different, given the chance? Chuck Schumer, now saying the nomination must wait, has a tweet from the past that acknowledges the ability of the president and the Senate to get the job done.
https://twitter.com/EWErickson/status/1307343720946298880
Ginsburg’s granddaughter released a statement with one of her grandmother’s last wishes – she didn’t want to be replaced until after the new president is in office. She assumed that Biden will win. This is a disappointing statement from a Supreme Court justice, but as I wrote in an earlier post, she was a political activist until the end of her life and began to politicize the Supreme Court in her later years. Democrats celebrate her for that.
Legal minds who know about policy and process say there is time for the job to get done.
Back in 1993, I was lead staffer for Senator Hatch, senior Republican on Senate Judiciary Committee, for confirmation of RBG. Only 42 days from submission of nomination to floor vote. PLENTY OF TIME. RBG had 14 years of D.C. Circuit opinions and prior ACLU litigation career. — Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) September 19, 2020
Kamala sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and should recuse herself now. Not only is she a vice-presidential candidate but the way she conducted herself during the Brett Kavanaugh hearing tells us how she will act now. It’s unacceptable to allow that to happen.
“Tonight we mourn, we honor, and we pray for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her family. But we also recommit to fight for her legacy,” Harris wrote on Friday night. “In some of her final moments with her family, she shared her fervent wish to ‘not be replaced until a new President is installed.’ We will honor that wish,” Harris said.
This morning Kamala posted a new tweet that speaks to the importance of the election, including the SCOTUS nomination.
Justice Ginsburg was a titan—a relentless defender of justice and a legal mind for the ages. The stakes of this election couldn’t be higher. Millions of Americans are counting on us to win and protect the Supreme Court—for their health, for their families, and for their rights. pic.twitter.com/RjlQ6ZwPET — Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) September 19, 2020
Democrats are inciting violence on social media. While ironic, some point to the fact that riots will break out if Trump and McConnell go forward. Have they not seen the news lately and the riots already going on? Take, for example, a tweet from a former CNN host:
If they even TRY to replace RBG we burn the entire fucking thing down. — Dr. Reza Aslan (@rezaaslan) September 19, 2020
Crazy leftist Cher says Trump is a cancerous growth that must be excised “at all costs”.
WE MUST FIGHT‼I HAVE
ASTHMA,& AM 74,BUT AM THINKING OF MARCHING ON WASHINGTON.I HOPE EVERY VOTER UNDERSTANDS THE SEVERITY OF HER DEATH..HER DEATH MAY BE MOST IMPORTANT DEATH OF MY LIFETIME.THE DEATH OF 🇺🇸FUTURE. DONALD TRUMP IS CANCEROUS TUMOR WHICH
MUST BE EXCISED AT ALL COSTS — Cher (@cher) September 19, 2020
Barack Obama said her last wish must be respected, as Kamala did. Ginsburg may have “left instructions” but that doesn’t hold water with the other side of the aisle. You remember how often Obama liked to say, “Elections have consequences. I won”, right?
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought to the end, through her cancer, with unwavering faith in our democracy and its ideals. That’s how we remember her. But she also left instructions for how she wanted her legacy to be honored. My statement: https://t.co/Wa6YcT5gDi — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) September 19, 2020
The latest poll from Quinnipiac shows Mitch McConnell up over his opponent, Amy McGrath, by double digits. Frantic fundraising efforts sprang up on Twitter for McGrath after McConnell announced he’d be doing his job, as the voters elected him to do.
Back in 2016, Hillary Clinton said Republicans calling on Scalia’s seat to remain vacant until after the election were “dishonoring our Constitution”. Now, of course, she feels differently.
Statement on the passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia: pic.twitter.com/xazj9dDd5c — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) February 14, 2016
President Trump released a nice statement after his initial reaction to her death, which was also well done. Neither time did he touch on the politics of her death. He was speaking at a campaign rally when her death was announced. When he was told by reporters as he left he respectfully said he had not heard about her death. (You hear Elton John’s “Tiny Dancer” in the background. It’s played at the end of all the Trump rallies according to reports.)
WATCH: Trump hears from a reporter that Justice Ginsburg has died. "She just died? Wow. I didn't know that, you're telling me now for the first time." "She led an amazing life. What else can you say? She was an amazing woman…I'm sad to hear that." pic.twitter.com/5Na3vHzP7f — Yahoo News (@YahooNews) September 19, 2020
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1307146028555014145
I’ll end with one observation – Trump respectfully kept politics out of his remarks. Biden had to read his initial remarks to reporters and included politics. Then he left without taking questions because he was tired after “a long plane ride.” Remember that next time Biden’s alleged capacity for empathy is used against Trump.


hotair--2020-09-19--A ricin attack on the President?

A ricin attack on the President?

On an otherwise calm Saturday afternoon , I almost wrote off the first Twitter notification I saw of this as more election season hysteria .
A “ breaking news ” site I follow claimed that a package containing the deadly toxin ricin was intercepted after having been sent to the White House , addressed to President Trump .
Only a short time later , the story had indeed popped up on CNN ’ s website and it appeared to have been substantiated .
Somebody had sent such a package ( actually an envelope ) to Donald Trump and labs had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inside .
A package containing the poison ricin and addressed to President Donald Trump was intercepted by law enforcement earlier this week , according to two law enforcement officials .
Two tests were done to confirm the presence of ricin .
All mail for the White House is sorted and screened at an offsite facility before reaching the White House .
The FBI and Secret Service are investigating the matter .
Ricin is a highly toxic compound extracted from castor beans that has been used in terror plots .
It can be used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acid form .
If ingested , it causes nausea , vomiting and internal bleeding of the stomach and intestines , followed by failure of the liver , spleen and kidneys , and death by collapse of the circulatory system .
Just to allay everyone ’ s fears , the package never got anywhere near the President .
Whoever the bonehead was that came up with this scheme apparently didn ’ t know that the Post Office doesn ’ t just take every letter , package or delivery addressed to the President of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Oval Office .
It all goes through a screening center ( unless it ’ s handed off by a member of the President ’ s own family ) where it is tested for a wide variety of threats .
That ’ s how they identified this package .
Another immediate thought that jumped to mind was that it was awfully coincidental how this story broke shortly after the news that Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had passed away and it was announced that Donald Trump would be nominating a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fans out there , but that ’ s not at the bottom of this scheme either .
As National Review quickly revealed , the package didn ’ t arrive today .
This took place earlier in the week , but the news was only released this afternoon .
An envelope containing ricin and addressed to President Trump was intercepted in White House mail earlier this week , according to reports .
Investigators believe the package was sent from Canada , according to the New York Times .
It is unclear when the envelope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in custody , officials said .
So most reports indicate that the package was intercepted at the facility where all of the President ’ s mail is processed in the past week or more .
The envelope never got near the White House .
But the time between when it must have been sent , when it was received and when the news was released means that this has nothing to do with the recent Supreme Court news .
So are we under attack by Canada ?
As amusing as that might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s hardly a certainty .
Anyone dumb enough to try something like this might have been willing to round up an accomplice in Canada or travel there to mail it themselves just to attempt to throw authorities off the scent .
Good luck with that .
I don ’ t expect a resolution to this puzzle within days or perhaps even weeks , but our folks are pretty good at ferreting out details far beyond fingerprints .
They have obviously already been looking at anything from fingerprints to DNA from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ address it and will be retracing the package ’ s steps .
Is it a certainty that it will be solved ?
Perhaps not , but I ’ d wager good money that they will .
When we find the answer , however , we may indeed see yet another sign of something that has long been obvious .
The hatred for Donald Trump among his ideological detractors has well and truly earned the descriptor of “ Trump Derangement Syndrome.
” With Joe Biden slipping in the polls and the race looking increasingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be fearing that the only way to prevent a second Trump term might be to eliminate the competition .
We ’ ll track this story as it moves forward , but I think it ’ s safe to say that this scheme wasn ’ t cooked up by any sort of genius and Trump remains free from such dangers… or at least as much as any president ever is .

On an otherwise calm Saturday afternoon, I almost wrote off the first Twitter notification I saw of this as more election season hysteria. A “breaking news” site I follow claimed that a package containing the deadly toxin ricin was intercepted after having been sent to the White House, addressed to President Trump.
https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1307385956153122816
Only a short time later, the story had indeed popped up on CNN’s website and it appeared to have been substantiated. Somebody had sent such a package (actually an envelope) to Donald Trump and labs had confirmed that the lethal substance was found inside.
A package containing the poison ricin and addressed to President Donald Trump was intercepted by law enforcement earlier this week, according to two law enforcement officials. Two tests were done to confirm the presence of ricin. All mail for the White House is sorted and screened at an offsite facility before reaching the White House.
The FBI and Secret Service are investigating the matter. Ricin is a highly toxic compound extracted from castor beans that has been used in terror plots. It can be used in powder, pellet, mist or acid form. If ingested, it causes nausea, vomiting and internal bleeding of the stomach and intestines, followed by failure of the liver, spleen and kidneys, and death by collapse of the circulatory system.
Just to allay everyone’s fears, the package never got anywhere near the President. Whoever the bonehead was that came up with this scheme apparently didn’t know that the Post Office doesn’t just take every letter, package or delivery addressed to the President of the United States and just drop it off in the Oval Office. It all goes through a screening center (unless it’s handed off by a member of the President’s own family) where it is tested for a wide variety of threats. That’s how they identified this package.
Another immediate thought that jumped to mind was that it was awfully coincidental how this story broke shortly after the news that Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had passed away and it was announced that Donald Trump would be nominating a replacement. Sorry to disappoint the conspiracy fans out there, but that’s not at the bottom of this scheme either. As National Review quickly revealed, the package didn’t arrive today. This took place earlier in the week, but the news was only released this afternoon.
An envelope containing ricin and addressed to President Trump was intercepted in White House mail earlier this week, according to reports. Investigators believe the package was sent from Canada, according to the New York Times. It is unclear when the envelope was intercepted and no suspects are yet in custody, officials said.
So most reports indicate that the package was intercepted at the facility where all of the President’s mail is processed in the past week or more. The envelope never got near the White House. But the time between when it must have been sent, when it was received and when the news was released means that this has nothing to do with the recent Supreme Court news.
So are we under attack by Canada? As amusing as that might be for the “Blame Canada” folks, it’s hardly a certainty. Anyone dumb enough to try something like this might have been willing to round up an accomplice in Canada or travel there to mail it themselves just to attempt to throw authorities off the scent. Good luck with that. I don’t expect a resolution to this puzzle within days or perhaps even weeks, but our folks are pretty good at ferreting out details far beyond fingerprints. They have obviously already been looking at anything from fingerprints to DNA from the envelope to the ink used to address it and will be retracing the package’s steps. Is it a certainty that it will be solved? Perhaps not, but I’d wager good money that they will.
When we find the answer, however, we may indeed see yet another sign of something that has long been obvious. The hatred for Donald Trump among his ideological detractors has well and truly earned the descriptor of “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” With Joe Biden slipping in the polls and the race looking increasingly close, the sicker among the woke may be fearing that the only way to prevent a second Trump term might be to eliminate the competition. We’ll track this story as it moves forward, but I think it’s safe to say that this scheme wasn’t cooked up by any sort of genius and Trump remains free from such dangers… or at least as much as any president ever is.


hotair--2020-09-19--Portland emergency 911 call goes unanswered for more than an hour and a half

Earlier today we looked at precisely how screwed the people of Minneapolis are in the wake of the riots and the Defund the Police movement .
But that ’ s not the only city experiencing such chaos by a long shot .
While you ’ ll rarely see this mentioned on CNN , things aren ’ t getting much better in Portland , Oregon either .
One recent incident illustrates precisely how desperate things are getting out there .
Portland resident Henry Kirim had stepped out of his apartment to retrieve something from his car .
As he did so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , locking the door behind him .
Kirim ’ s 12-year-old child was inside .
The intruder grabbed a large kitchen knife and was holding the boy inside .
Kirim managed to unlock the door , leading to the criminal fleeing as some neighbors gave chase .
During this time , more than half a dozen 911 calls pleading for the police to come were recorded .
The cops finally arrived… 90 minutes later .
( Oregon Live ) It took police more than 90 minutes to arrive .
Just before an officer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
More than a half-dozen calls had come into 911 over the course of the bizarre ordeal .
But that apparently didn ’ t speed the response .
The wait confounded and angered Kirim and his neighbors .
They wondered what it would take for police to respond if not an armed man placing a child in jeopardy .
“ Every neighbor here was expecting the police to come .
We called about a million times , and the police would not show up , ” Kirim said .
Police conceded the delay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve said to address previous criticism for holding back or recent slow response times : Their ranks are strapped by record retirements , covering months of social justice protests and other constraints .
This doesn ’ t appear to be a case of the police intentionally “ standing down ” and not responding as we recently saw in Aurora , Colorado .
Just as is the case in Minneapolis , the Portland Police Department has seen its ranks depleted through early retirements and resignations , along with having its budget slashed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The remaining police are working the streets as best they can for the most part , but the required resources simply aren ’ t there .
If this horror story from Portland sounds familiar to you , it might be because it ’ s very reminiscent of a campaign ad that Trump ’ s team has been running in markets around the country .
Here ’ s a short refresher for those who missed it .
When that ad was released , CNN ’ s “ fact-checkers ” described it as “ dishonest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re still holding that position to this day .
I wonder how the voters in Portland will feel about their “ facts first ” analysis when they find out that it ’ s coming true already in their own streets .
A man with a large knife had briefly captured a child inside of one resident ’ s home and it took the cops 90 minutes to arrive on the scene .
Even though a group of neighbors had briefly chased down the suspect and pinned him down , he eventually broke free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The homeowner and his neighbors may as well have been left on hold .
This is the reality of what is going on today and it ’ s being caused by spineless Democratic mayors and governors who cave in to the demands of the rioters and spurn every offer of federal assistance from the White House .
And the media is putting on blinders and pretending it ’ s not happening in a desperate effort to help Sleepy Joe Biden make it over the finish line in November .
This is a @ @ @ @ @ @

Earlier today we looked at precisely how screwed the people of Minneapolis are in the wake of the riots and the Defund the Police movement. But that’s not the only city experiencing such chaos by a long shot. While you’ll rarely see this mentioned on CNN, things aren’t getting much better in Portland, Oregon either. One recent incident illustrates precisely how desperate things are getting out there.
Portland resident Henry Kirim had stepped out of his apartment to retrieve something from his car. As he did so, a stranger rushed into the home, locking the door behind him. Kirim’s 12-year-old child was inside. The intruder grabbed a large kitchen knife and was holding the boy inside. Kirim managed to unlock the door, leading to the criminal fleeing as some neighbors gave chase. During this time, more than half a dozen 911 calls pleading for the police to come were recorded. The cops finally arrived… 90 minutes later. (Oregon Live)
It took police more than 90 minutes to arrive. Just before an officer finally appeared, the suspect ran off. More than a half-dozen calls had come into 911 over the course of the bizarre ordeal. But that apparently didn’t speed the response. The wait confounded and angered Kirim and his neighbors. They wondered what it would take for police to respond if not an armed man placing a child in jeopardy. “Every neighbor here was expecting the police to come. We called about a million times, and the police would not show up,” Kirim said. Police conceded the delay was unacceptable. They repeated what they’ve said to address previous criticism for holding back or recent slow response times: Their ranks are strapped by record retirements, covering months of social justice protests and other constraints.
This doesn’t appear to be a case of the police intentionally “standing down” and not responding as we recently saw in Aurora, Colorado. Just as is the case in Minneapolis, the Portland Police Department has seen its ranks depleted through early retirements and resignations, along with having its budget slashed by spineless politicians and COVID-related revenue losses. The remaining police are working the streets as best they can for the most part, but the required resources simply aren’t there.
If this horror story from Portland sounds familiar to you, it might be because it’s very reminiscent of a campaign ad that Trump’s team has been running in markets around the country. Here’s a short refresher for those who missed it.
When that ad was released, CNN’s “fact-checkers” described it as “dishonest” and “fear-mongering.” They’re still holding that position to this day. I wonder how the voters in Portland will feel about their “facts first” analysis when they find out that it’s coming true already in their own streets. A man with a large knife had briefly captured a child inside of one resident’s home and it took the cops 90 minutes to arrive on the scene. Even though a group of neighbors had briefly chased down the suspect and pinned him down, he eventually broke free and escaped before the authorities could arrive. The homeowner and his neighbors may as well have been left on hold.
This is the reality of what is going on today and it’s being caused by spineless Democratic mayors and governors who cave in to the demands of the rioters and spurn every offer of federal assistance from the White House. And the media is putting on blinders and pretending it’s not happening in a desperate effort to help Sleepy Joe Biden make it over the finish line in November. This is a disgrace, plain and simple.


hotair--2020-09-19--In Biden's own words: "There is no Biden Rule, It doesn't exist."

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away Friday , on Rosh Hashanah , the Jewish New Year .
She led a full and meaningful life .
As a conservative woman , I rarely agreed with her votes on the bench .
It is possible to acknowledge that she led a remarkable life and that we didn ’ t agree with her legal decisions .
Both things can be true .
Her death , just weeks before the presidential election , is a very 2020 kind of thing to happen .
As if the country was not divided enough , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not already happening , now the process of selecting another justice for the Supreme Court falls on President Trump .
The Democrats are still hot about Mitch McConnell holding off on bringing up the Merrick Garland nomination for a vote .
The Biden Rule – something that originated in 1992 when Biden said no Supreme Court nominations should be taken up in an election year – is being referenced a lot now .
What is missed , though , is that Biden had changed his mind by 2016 when he spoke at Georgetown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting on a SCOTUS nominee .
( Emphasis mine . )
“ Every time as the chairman or ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee , I was responsible for eight justices and nine total nominees of the Supreme Court .
More than , I hate to say this , anyone , alive.
” Then he made the sign of the cross and chuckled , “ I can ’ t be that old.
” Some I supported , a few I voted against .
But in all that time , every nominee was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got a committee hearing .
Every nominee got out of the committee even if they didn ’ t have sufficient votes to pass within the committee because I believe the Senate must advise and consent and every nominee including Justice Kennedy in an election year got an up or down vote , not much at the time , not most of the time , every single time .
Now I hear all this talk about the Biden Rule .
It ’ s frankly ridiculous .
There is no Biden Rule , it doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one rule I ever followed on the judiciary committee , that was the constitution ’ s clear rule of advice and consent .
“ Article Two of the constitution clearly states whenever there is a vacancy in one of the court ’ s created by the constitution itself the Supreme Court of the United States , the President shall , not may , the President shall appoint someone to fill the vacancy with the advice and consent of the United States Senate.
” Well , now .
There is no Biden Rule .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Biden has once again changed his mind and is saying that a nominee shouldn ’ t be put up until after the election .
Democrats , including Biden , assume that he will win the presidential election .
To be honest , many Republican think the same thing .
Last night he read a statement after Ginsburg ’ s death .
Of course , the problem with that tweet is that the voters have picked a president – we have President Trump right now – and he will pick a successor .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that would require Trump to hold off until after November 3 .
Even Slow Joe referenced Article Two in his remarks at Georgetown .
Democrats know that President Trump can get his nominee seated on the Supreme Court before the next inauguration , even if he loses the election .
Kamala Harris sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee .
Remember how aggressive she was against Brett Kavanaugh during his senate hearing ?
She even lied about having information on him that she did not .
She would be worse now if that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidate on Joe ’ s ticket .
She must recuse herself to avoid a conflict of interest .
She won ’ t but she should .
The Supreme Court nomination process was slowly being corrupted for many years .
It became more overtly political as time passed .
I ’ m old enough to remember the days of Robert Bork and the Clarence Thomas hearings .
The treatment of those two men by Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee , including Joe Biden , was a real eye-opener for my much younger self @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
The Kavanaugh nomination and the over-the-top actions that followed forever changed how many of us view the process .
That is why I now say that Trump must move quickly .
He can nominate someone – hopefully , a conservative woman to counter the two liberal women on the court – and the vote can be taken after the election , if necessary .
Lindsay Graham is in a tough race for his re-election so this is an important decision for him , as chairman of the committee .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters , but especially for those of the Never Trump variety .
Do they rally around President Trump and support his nominee or do the ones who proudly proclaim their opposition to a second term for Trump go ahead and vote for Biden knowing that this matter is pending ?
Does being pro-life outweigh their hatred of Trump ?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg possessed a brilliant legal mind , but not the legal opinions acceptable to conservatives .
That ’ s just the truth .
Do Never-Trumpers want Joe Biden and the far left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , began to politicize the court with her behavior late in life .
She publicly made statements against then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016 and broke what had been a long-held tradition of justices keeping their political opinions to themselves , especially during presidential elections .
She continued to make random remarks now and then during Trump ’ s presidency .
She was a proud liberal and sadly succumbed to letting her personal political opinions become part of the conversation .
She was richly rewarded by the left for her outspoken behavior during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Notorious RBG ” and movies were made about her and her life story .
She is a superhero on the left , having become a celebrity .
Ginsburg ’ s granddaughter released a statement Friday night that her grandmother didn ’ t want to be replaced before the election .
Sure , that ’ s understandable , if the quote is true , but it is not her call to make .
As one person on Twitter pointed out this morning , if she was so concerned about her replacement , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration and let him pick her successor .
It ’ s a harsh but fair observation .
Ginsburg was a political activist as well as a Supreme Court justice .
She knew what she was doing .
Act now , President Trump .
Conservative voters will judge you if you do not .

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away Friday, on Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. She led a full and meaningful life. As a conservative woman, I rarely agreed with her votes on the bench. It is possible to acknowledge that she led a remarkable life and that we didn’t agree with her legal decisions. Both things can be true.
Her death, just weeks before the presidential election, is a very 2020 kind of thing to happen. As if the country was not divided enough, as if rioting in the streets was not already happening, now the process of selecting another justice for the Supreme Court falls on President Trump.
The Democrats are still hot about Mitch McConnell holding off on bringing up the Merrick Garland nomination for a vote. The Biden Rule – something that originated in 1992 when Biden said no Supreme Court nominations should be taken up in an election year – is being referenced a lot now. What is missed, though, is that Biden had changed his mind by 2016 when he spoke at Georgetown Law School in favor of the Senate voting on a SCOTUS nominee. (Emphasis mine.)
“Every time as the chairman or ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I was responsible for eight justices and nine total nominees of the Supreme Court. More than, I hate to say this, anyone, alive.” Then he made the sign of the cross and chuckled, “I can’t be that old.” Some I supported, a few I voted against. But in all that time, every nominee was greeted by committee members. Every nominee got a committee hearing. Every nominee got out of the committee even if they didn’t have sufficient votes to pass within the committee because I believe the Senate must advise and consent and every nominee including Justice Kennedy in an election year got an up or down vote, not much at the time, not most of the time, every single time. Now I hear all this talk about the Biden Rule. It’s frankly ridiculous. There is no Biden Rule, it doesn’t exist. There is only one rule I ever followed on the judiciary committee, that was the constitution’s clear rule of advice and consent. “Article Two of the constitution clearly states whenever there is a vacancy in one of the court’s created by the constitution itself the Supreme Court of the United States, the President shall, not may, the President shall appoint someone to fill the vacancy with the advice and consent of the United States Senate.”
Well, now. There is no Biden Rule. Now, as a matter of fact, Biden has once again changed his mind and is saying that a nominee shouldn’t be put up until after the election. Democrats, including Biden, assume that he will win the presidential election. To be honest, many Republican think the same thing. Last night he read a statement after Ginsburg’s death.
Let me be clear: The voters should pick a President, and that President should select a successor to Justice Ginsburg. — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) September 19, 2020
Of course, the problem with that tweet is that the voters have picked a president – we have President Trump right now – and he will pick a successor. There is no provision in the constitution that would require Trump to hold off until after November 3. Even Slow Joe referenced Article Two in his remarks at Georgetown. Democrats know that President Trump can get his nominee seated on the Supreme Court before the next inauguration, even if he loses the election.
Kamala Harris sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Remember how aggressive she was against Brett Kavanaugh during his senate hearing? She even lied about having information on him that she did not. She would be worse now if that’s possible since she is the vice-presidential candidate on Joe’s ticket. She must recuse herself to avoid a conflict of interest. She won’t but she should.
The Supreme Court nomination process was slowly being corrupted for many years. It became more overtly political as time passed. I’m old enough to remember the days of Robert Bork and the Clarence Thomas hearings. The treatment of those two men by Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, including Joe Biden, was a real eye-opener for my much younger self and it has only gotten worse with time. The Kavanaugh nomination and the over-the-top actions that followed forever changed how many of us view the process. That is why I now say that Trump must move quickly. He can nominate someone – hopefully, a conservative woman to counter the two liberal women on the court – and the vote can be taken after the election, if necessary. Lindsay Graham is in a tough race for his re-election so this is an important decision for him, as chairman of the committee.
This is also a clarion call for all conservative voters, but especially for those of the Never Trump variety. Do they rally around President Trump and support his nominee or do the ones who proudly proclaim their opposition to a second term for Trump go ahead and vote for Biden knowing that this matter is pending? Does being pro-life outweigh their hatred of Trump?
Ruth Bader Ginsburg possessed a brilliant legal mind, but not the legal opinions acceptable to conservatives. That’s just the truth. Do Never-Trumpers want Joe Biden and the far left to replace Ginsburg? Ginsburg, sadly, began to politicize the court with her behavior late in life. She publicly made statements against then-candidate Donald Trump in 2016 and broke what had been a long-held tradition of justices keeping their political opinions to themselves, especially during presidential elections. She continued to make random remarks now and then during Trump’s presidency. She was a proud liberal and sadly succumbed to letting her personal political opinions become part of the conversation. She was richly rewarded by the left for her outspoken behavior during the past four years. She morphed into “Notorious RBG” and movies were made about her and her life story. She is a superhero on the left, having become a celebrity.
Ginsburg’s granddaughter released a statement Friday night that her grandmother didn’t want to be replaced before the election. Sure, that’s understandable, if the quote is true, but it is not her call to make. As one person on Twitter pointed out this morning, if she was so concerned about her replacement, she would have retired during Obama’s administration and let him pick her successor. It’s a harsh but fair observation. Ginsburg was a political activist as well as a Supreme Court justice. She knew what she was doing.
RBG had the opportunity to ensure she was replaced by a Democrat. She decided to stay in spite of her history of serious health issues & age. If we are now governed by the heckler’s veto let’s just proceed with an amicable divorce. That is not how this works. — Stacey (@ScotsFyre) September 19, 2020
Act now, President Trump. Conservative voters will judge you if you do not.


hotair--2020-09-19--C'mon: White House blew huge deal on lowering drug prices by insisting on "Trump cards"?

This is so inane that it lands right on the line between “ yeah , they ’ re venal and stupid enough to do that ” and “ nah , even they ’ re not venal and stupid enough to do that.
” If you ’ ve read anything on polling this fall you know one of Trump ’ s foremost liabilities right now is his weakening support among seniors .
In some polls he leads that group , in others Biden leads it , but it ’ s indisputable that Sleepy Joe is overperforming Hillary Clinton among older voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal ( in Florida especially ) since seniors , of course , are a group with famously high turnout rates on Election Day .
Anything Trump can do to get them back in his corner before November would improve his odds at reelection significantly .
And there is something he could do .
For months he ’ s been working on a deal with pharmaceutical companies to bring drug prices down , knowing full well which age group depends most heavily on medication .
The Times reports this afternoon that the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month , a political coup for Trump potentially in appealing to seniors .
There was just one tiny sticking point .
A snag , if you will .
The dumbest snag you ’ ve ever heard of .
According to the Times ’ s sources , the White House insisted that drug companies fund $ 100 prepaid cards to be mailed to seniors — before Election Day , of course — which they could use to pay for prescriptions .
It wasn ’ t enough for Team Trump that they were about to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would doubtless please seniors everywhere .
They wanted a de facto cash bribe paid to every American over 65 , six weeks out from the big vote .
Pharma wouldn ’ t do it , whether because it ’ s so tacky and corrupt that they choked on it for ethical reasons or because they suspect they ’ re likely to be facing a Democratic administration in a few months that would have looked unfavorably upon their attempt to bribe voters on Trump ’ s behalf .
So the deal fell through .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ potentially gamechanging drug-price agreement was allowed to go by the boards because they couldn ’ t convince Pharma to bribe seniors directly instead of just in the aggregate .
Again , I ’ m stuck believing that they couldn ’ t possibly be so foolish and thinking “ uh , sure they could.
” I ’ m willing to believe that this is a smear manufactured by Pharma sources to make the White House look as bad as possible , but ( a ) White House sources confirmed the idea of the prepaid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) there ’ s a Pharma official on the record confirming it too .
White House officials insist they didn ’ t plan to emblazon the president ’ s name on the cards , which they envisioned sending to tens of millions of Americans to use for prescriptions .
Mr. Trump , of course , has a long history of branding everything from skyscrapers to stimulus checks .
Regardless , one drug company executive said they worried about the optics of having the chief executives of the country ’ s leading pharmaceutical makers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Garden as he hoisted an oversized card and gloated about helping a crucial bloc of voters .
“ We could not agree to the administration ’ s plan to issue one-time savings cards right before a presidential election , ” said Priscilla VanderVeer , the vice-president of public affairs at PhRMA , the industry ’ s largest trade group .
“ One-time savings cards will neither provide lasting help , nor advance the fundamental reforms necessary to help seniors better afford their medicines.
” Mark Meadows takes the blame in the piece for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s hard to believe a guy as smart as him would have let a deal like this get away over something as petty as that .
The cards idea is obviously the brainchild of someone with no compunction about the appearance of overt bribery , who ’ s gone to unusual lengths before to make sure Americans credit him personally with payments they ’ ve received , who ’ s lately been telling federal employees that they should vote for him so that they don ’ t have to pay back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the dubious payroll-tax deferral he ordered .
( Which is a lie , by the way .
Unless Republicans take back the House in November , that deferred tax will likely be due in April . )
Only a narcissist who fancies himself the world ’ s greatest negotiator could strong-arm his way out of a deal that might have helped him tremendously at the polls because his negotiating partner wouldn ’ t give him the most lowbrow demand on his wishlist .
Maybe I ’ m giving Meadows too much credit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me laugh : He told them which lie he was going to use to explain why the deal blew up before he used it ?
Pharma ’ s version of what happened is the least charitable spin for Trump .
Here ’ s a more charitable possibility : Yes , the demand for the prepaid cards was made but it wasn ’ t a dealbreaker like the drug companies are claiming .
Maybe it was a small thing which the White House quickly yielded on in the interest of singing the larger deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there really is division in the ranks among drug companies over costs , but rather than admit that they ’ ve concocted this all-too-believable narrative that Trump ’ s ego made the cards a sticking point .
This bogus story is their revenge on him for signing an executive order last weekend to cap what Medicare is willing to pay for prescription drugs based on what prices are in Europe .
As for why Pharma would dare smear the president without fear of repercussions , that ’ s easy : They have leverage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine trials .
A vaccine announcement before Election Day might help Trump even more than an agreement on prescription-drug costs would .
How aggressive can he be with them on this when he needs their cooperation on that ?
There ’ s a middle-ground possibility too .
Yes , the White House demanded the cards , yes , it was a big deal to them , but now that they ’ ve been embarrassed by this story they ’ re going to quietly do the deal and drop the cards idea .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it done soon .
He ’ ll lift the executive order in the interest of making it happen .
And Pharma probably has a political interest as well , in that they ’ re better off with Trump in charge than a Biden administration that ’ s being leaned on by the left to push harder on Medicare for All .
I ’ m guessing an agreement will be reached , sans cards .
There ’ s just going to be some humiliation first over the president overtly politicizing yet another matter bearing @ @ @ @ @ @

This is so inane that it lands right on the line between “yeah, they’re venal and stupid enough to do that” and “nah, even they’re not venal and stupid enough to do that.”
If you’ve read anything on polling this fall you know one of Trump’s foremost liabilities right now is his weakening support among seniors. In some polls he leads that group, in others Biden leads it, but it’s indisputable that Sleepy Joe is overperforming Hillary Clinton among older voters. And that’s a big deal (in Florida especially) since seniors, of course, are a group with famously high turnout rates on Election Day. Anything Trump can do to get them back in his corner before November would improve his odds at reelection significantly.
And there is something he could do. For months he’s been working on a deal with pharmaceutical companies to bring drug prices down, knowing full well which age group depends most heavily on medication. The Times reports this afternoon that the White House got close to that deal late last month, a political coup for Trump potentially in appealing to seniors. There was just one tiny sticking point. A snag, if you will.
The dumbest snag you’ve ever heard of.
According to the Times’s sources, the White House insisted that drug companies fund $100 prepaid cards to be mailed to seniors — before Election Day, of course — which they could use to pay for prescriptions. It wasn’t enough for Team Trump that they were about to announce a $150 billion package that would doubtless please seniors everywhere. They wanted a de facto cash bribe paid to every American over 65, six weeks out from the big vote. Pharma wouldn’t do it, whether because it’s so tacky and corrupt that they choked on it for ethical reasons or because they suspect they’re likely to be facing a Democratic administration in a few months that would have looked unfavorably upon their attempt to bribe voters on Trump’s behalf.
So the deal fell through. The White House’s huge, potentially gamechanging drug-price agreement was allowed to go by the boards because they couldn’t convince Pharma to bribe seniors directly instead of just in the aggregate.
Again, I’m stuck believing that they couldn’t possibly be so foolish and thinking “uh, sure they could.” I’m willing to believe that this is a smear manufactured by Pharma sources to make the White House look as bad as possible, but (a) White House sources confirmed the idea of the prepaid cards to the Times and (b) there’s a Pharma official on the record confirming it too.
White House officials insist they didn’t plan to emblazon the president’s name on the cards, which they envisioned sending to tens of millions of Americans to use for prescriptions. Mr. Trump, of course, has a long history of branding everything from skyscrapers to stimulus checks. Regardless, one drug company executive said they worried about the optics of having the chief executives of the country’s leading pharmaceutical makers stand with the president in the Rose Garden as he hoisted an oversized card and gloated about helping a crucial bloc of voters. “We could not agree to the administration’s plan to issue one-time savings cards right before a presidential election,” said Priscilla VanderVeer, the vice-president of public affairs at PhRMA, the industry’s largest trade group. “One-time savings cards will neither provide lasting help, nor advance the fundamental reforms necessary to help seniors better afford their medicines.”
Mark Meadows takes the blame in the piece for making the demand about the cards but it’s hard to believe a guy as smart as him would have let a deal like this get away over something as petty as that. The cards idea is obviously the brainchild of someone with no compunction about the appearance of overt bribery, who’s gone to unusual lengths before to make sure Americans credit him personally with payments they’ve received, who’s lately been telling federal employees that they should vote for him so that they don’t have to pay back the extra money they’re receiving from the dubious payroll-tax deferral he ordered. (Which is a lie, by the way. Unless Republicans take back the House in November, that deferred tax will likely be due in April.) Only a narcissist who fancies himself the world’s greatest negotiator could strong-arm his way out of a deal that might have helped him tremendously at the polls because his negotiating partner wouldn’t give him the most lowbrow demand on his wishlist.
Maybe I’m giving Meadows too much credit for intelligence, though. This made me laugh:
White House officials pointed a finger at PhRMA, maintaining that divisions in industry ranks over the financing of the agreement undermined negotiations. That’s precisely what Mr. Meadows told the trade group last month he would say if they did not reach a deal, according to a PhRMA email at the time.
He told them which lie he was going to use to explain why the deal blew up before he used it?
Pharma’s version of what happened is the least charitable spin for Trump. Here’s a more charitable possibility: Yes, the demand for the prepaid cards was made but it wasn’t a dealbreaker like the drug companies are claiming. Maybe it was a small thing which the White House quickly yielded on in the interest of singing the larger deal, which would make sense. Maybe there really is division in the ranks among drug companies over costs, but rather than admit that they’ve concocted this all-too-believable narrative that Trump’s ego made the cards a sticking point. This bogus story is their revenge on him for signing an executive order last weekend to cap what Medicare is willing to pay for prescription drugs based on what prices are in Europe. As for why Pharma would dare smear the president without fear of repercussions, that’s easy: They have leverage over him in the form of their vaccine trials. A vaccine announcement before Election Day might help Trump even more than an agreement on prescription-drug costs would. How aggressive can he be with them on this when he needs their cooperation on that?
There’s a middle-ground possibility too. Yes, the White House demanded the cards, yes, it was a big deal to them, but now that they’ve been embarrassed by this story they’re going to quietly do the deal and drop the cards idea. Trump obviously has a political interest in getting it done soon. He’ll lift the executive order in the interest of making it happen. And Pharma probably has a political interest as well, in that they’re better off with Trump in charge than a Biden administration that’s being leaned on by the left to push harder on Medicare for All. I’m guessing an agreement will be reached, sans cards. There’s just going to be some humiliation first over the president overtly politicizing yet another matter bearing directly on Americans’ health.


hotair--2020-09-19--Trump: I'm obligated to appoint a new SCOTUS justice -- without delay

Looks like Mitch McConnell has his work cut out for him .
With Democrats and even a couple of Republicans in the Senate calling for a delay in nominating a replacement for the now-open Supreme Court seat , Donald Trump declared this morning that he plans to do his job .
To do otherwise would be to shirk his “ obligation ” as president , Trump argued : Technically , that ’ s true .
Just as technically , the Senate could refuse to consider it until after the election .
After all , that ’ s what the Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people who defended that move then on the basis of principles and precedent are twisting themselves into knots trying to insist that principles require the Senate to act this time around .
The same people who now claim that we need a ninth justice in case of election challenges and the specter of 4-4 decisions also conveniently forget that the last election had an 8-member court and a true 4-4 ideological divide , too .
The only real principle in play now — and since 2002 — is power , on both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ George W. Bush ’ s nominees because they could , and then Republicans did the same to Obama ’ s for the same reason .
Democrats changed the rules in 2013 to stack the court because they could , and Republicans did the same in 2017 for the same reason .
They left Merrick Garland twisting in the wind for the same reason — because they could .
And so they did , all of them , over the years .
Frankly , everyone should stop pretending otherwise , especially Senate Republicans who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a while after the election .
There are no principles or precedents in play in the Senate any more ; it ’ s nothing but brute-force majoritarian power plays all the way down the line , except on legislation .
And we ’ ll see how long the filibuster lasts there after the election .
Give Trump credit for a relative lack of hypocrisy on this score .
He understands the power game and isn ’ t shy about playing it .
So who will it be ?
A better question might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden ’ s list ?
After all , Donald Trump laid out his list of potential Supreme Court nominees a couple of weeks ago , hoping to make a hypothetical opening into a campaign issue .
With the death of longtime Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , it ’ s now become an acute question .
This is an odd time to go dark on the campaign trail .
Democrats have poured into the streets demanding action to stop Trump and Senate Republicans from exercising their power to replace Ginsburg .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ than catching up on his naps .
We already know who ’ s on Trump ’ s rather lengthy list .
So who gets onto the short list this time around ?
Washington Post analyst Aaron Blake narrows it down to six contenders , five of whom are women , plus a handful of senators who aren ’ t going anywhere .
At the top of the list is Amy Coney Barrett , whose confirmation hearing to the appellate court set off a debate over religious tests imposed by Democrats : I wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense for the nomination that went to Kavanaugh , and many of the reasons hold up today .
One was her youth ( she ’ s now 48 years old , meaning she could serve on the court for decades ) .
Another was her reputation and telegenic style , along with a family of seven children that could flank her at confirmation hearings .
But maybe the X-Factor with her is this : The feelings she might engender on the left .
When Barrett was first confirmed to the federal court in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role of religion in her life and the law drew derision from some top Democrats .
Barrett had told Notre Dame graduates in 2006 that “ your legal career is but a means to an end , and … that end is building the kingdom of God.
” Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) at the time took issue with Barrett ’ s comments on Christianity and Islam .
Sen. Dianne Feinstein ( D-Calif. ) told her “ the dogma lives loudly within you , and that ’ s of concern.
” Sens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Mazie Hirono ( D-Hawaii ) had concerns as well .
Trump loves stoking culture wars , and what better way to create one for his all-important evangelical Christian base than tempt Democrats to make an issue of Barrett ’ s religiosity ?
Of course , Barrett might also be more difficult to confirm if she turns out to be divisive .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in 2018 notably told the White House that other picks would be more easily confirmed .
Missed in that entire controversy , however , and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s defense of stare decisis .
It won ’ t keep the media and Senate Democrats from a full freak-out over her nomination , but it might give some conservatives pause before signing off on a Barrett nomination .
It could be better to get someone more under the radar in this instance , and give the couple of recalcitrant Republicans better political cover to come along on the replacement .
Almost without a doubt , though , the nominee will be a woman .
Trump needs to show voters that he will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the wide gender gap in his polling .
Plus , it will force Democrats to choose whether to go on a personal-attack crusade like they did with Kavanaugh in order to derail a confirmation , or to avoid looking misogynistic just before the election and turning off vast numbers of voters they will desperately need up and down the ballot in a few weeks .
If it ’ s not Barrett , who will it be ?
Blake mentions a couple of district-court jurists appointed in the last two years , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Barbara Lagoa did serve on the Florida state supreme court , however , and she is Cuban to boot .
That would help boost Trump with Hispanics and Florida voters , both important to his re-election chances .
Joan Larsen looks a bit more likely on the basis of resume , having served three years on the appellate circuit and having been confirmed with 60 votes in 2017 , no small feat these days .
If I were to bet , I ’ d guess Barrett , but Lagoa is an intriguing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty clear that we will hear something very soon , however , so whoever gets the nomination might want to start developing a thick skin and a sense of humor right now .
She will need it , whoever she is .
Update : Via Twitchy , this reminder of the power-play dynamic from last night is especially interesting … coming from a former Obama adviser :

Looks like Mitch McConnell has his work cut out for him. With Democrats and even a couple of Republicans in the Senate calling for a delay in nominating a replacement for the now-open Supreme Court seat, Donald Trump declared this morning that he plans to do his job. To do otherwise would be to shirk his “obligation” as president, Trump argued:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1307321159113936896
Technically, that’s true. Just as technically, the Senate could refuse to consider it until after the election. After all, that’s what the Senate did in 2016, although some of the people who defended that move then on the basis of principles and precedent are twisting themselves into knots trying to insist that principles require the Senate to act this time around. The same people who now claim that we need a ninth justice in case of election challenges and the specter of 4-4 decisions also conveniently forget that the last election had an 8-member court and a true 4-4 ideological divide, too.
The only real principle in play now — and since 2002 — is power, on both sides of the aisle. Democrats blockaded George W. Bush’s nominees because they could, and then Republicans did the same to Obama’s for the same reason. Democrats changed the rules in 2013 to stack the court because they could, and Republicans did the same in 2017 for the same reason. They left Merrick Garland twisting in the wind for the same reason — because they could. And so they did, all of them, over the years.
Frankly, everyone should stop pretending otherwise, especially Senate Republicans who might not have this kind of power for a while after the election. There are no principles or precedents in play in the Senate any more; it’s nothing but brute-force majoritarian power plays all the way down the line, except on legislation. And we’ll see how long the filibuster lasts there after the election.
Give Trump credit for a relative lack of hypocrisy on this score. He understands the power game and isn’t shy about playing it.
So who will it be? A better question might be: Who’s on Joe Biden’s list? After all, Donald Trump laid out his list of potential Supreme Court nominees a couple of weeks ago, hoping to make a hypothetical opening into a campaign issue. With the death of longtime Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, it’s now become an acute question.
Don’t expect an answer today:
The Biden campaign has already called a lid, per pooler @jessbidgood, so he won’t be making any in-person campaign appearances today. — Thomas Kaplan (@thomaskaplan) September 19, 2020
This is an odd time to go dark on the campaign trail. Democrats have poured into the streets demanding action to stop Trump and Senate Republicans from exercising their power to replace Ginsburg. Biden should be leading that effort rather than catching up on his naps.
We already know who’s on Trump’s rather lengthy list. So who gets onto the short list this time around? Washington Post analyst Aaron Blake narrows it down to six contenders, five of whom are women, plus a handful of senators who aren’t going anywhere. At the top of the list is Amy Coney Barrett, whose confirmation hearing to the appellate court set off a debate over religious tests imposed by Democrats:
I wrote in 2018 that Barrett made the most sense for the nomination that went to Kavanaugh, and many of the reasons hold up today. One was her youth (she’s now 48 years old, meaning she could serve on the court for decades). Another was her reputation and telegenic style, along with a family of seven children that could flank her at confirmation hearings. But maybe the X-Factor with her is this: The feelings she might engender on the left. When Barrett was first confirmed to the federal court in 2017, her past comments about the role of religion in her life and the law drew derision from some top Democrats. Barrett had told Notre Dame graduates in 2006 that “your legal career is but a means to an end, and … that end is building the kingdom of God.” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) at the time took issue with Barrett’s comments on Christianity and Islam. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) told her “the dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.” Sens. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) had concerns as well. Trump loves stoking culture wars, and what better way to create one for his all-important evangelical Christian base than tempt Democrats to make an issue of Barrett’s religiosity? Of course, Barrett might also be more difficult to confirm if she turns out to be divisive. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in 2018 notably told the White House that other picks would be more easily confirmed.
Missed in that entire controversy, however, and in the Kavanaugh hearings, was Barrett’s defense of stare decisis. It won’t keep the media and Senate Democrats from a full freak-out over her nomination, but it might give some conservatives pause before signing off on a Barrett nomination. It could be better to get someone more under the radar in this instance, and give the couple of recalcitrant Republicans better political cover to come along on the replacement.
Almost without a doubt, though, the nominee will be a woman. Trump needs to show voters that he will promote women when he can to deal with the wide gender gap in his polling. Plus, it will force Democrats to choose whether to go on a personal-attack crusade like they did with Kavanaugh in order to derail a confirmation, or to avoid looking misogynistic just before the election and turning off vast numbers of voters they will desperately need up and down the ballot in a few weeks.
If it’s not Barrett, who will it be? Blake mentions a couple of district-court jurists appointed in the last two years, but that’s a pretty thin resume. Barbara Lagoa did serve on the Florida state supreme court, however, and she is Cuban to boot. That would help boost Trump with Hispanics and Florida voters, both important to his re-election chances. Joan Larsen looks a bit more likely on the basis of resume, having served three years on the appellate circuit and having been confirmed with 60 votes in 2017, no small feat these days.
If I were to bet, I’d guess Barrett, but Lagoa is an intriguing prospect too. It’s getting pretty clear that we will hear something very soon, however, so whoever gets the nomination might want to start developing a thick skin and a sense of humor right now. She will need it, whoever she is.
Update: Via Twitchy, this reminder of the power-play dynamic from last night is especially interesting … coming from a former Obama adviser:


hotair--2020-09-19--Minneapolis PD to business owners: Reinforcements aren't on the way

Just because you ’ re not seeing as many headline stories about the chaos in downtown Minneapolis these days doesn ’ t mean that conditions on the ground have returned to normal .
While the size of the riots and demonstrations may have abated a bit , residents and business owners there are still dealing with a “ new normal ” that ’ s anything but normal .
Crime is up across the board , including both property crime and violent crimes against persons .
Many residents have already described the situation as being akin to “ living in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the city ’ s 3rd Precinct , where robberies and assaults continue to plague the people who live and work there .
The owner of Pedego Electric Bikes sent an email to the local Police Chief saying that his employees are too frightened to come to work now .
The answer he received was none too reassuring .
In fact , it made it sound like the shop owners are pretty much on their own .
( CBS Minneapolis ) There ’ s no long-term plan , and reinforcements aren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what the head of the Minneapolis Police Department ’ s 3rd Precinct said in an email to a business owner who shared that his employees are scared to go to work .
The neighborhood block of shops near East 48th Street and Chicago Avenue has felt the impact of recent crime .
Craig Paulson owns Pedego Electric Bikes .
“ Couple robberies .
Two , three robberies in the area , and some break-ins and a couple of crazy stunts , ” Paulson said .
This is the response that Craig Paulson received @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a long-term plan I don ’ t have one .
I have lost 30 % of my street officers since the end of May .
Budget cuts from COVID-19 and an additional 1.5 million from the council in August we have let go 17 CSO ’ s and canceled a recruit class of 29 .
A potential Cadet class slated for January of 2021 was also eliminated .
It takes about a year to get a police Officer onto the streets with hiring , backgrounds and field training so reinforcements aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing everything we can with what we have .
I hate to see great businesses like yours and the rest of your corridor being victimized and feeling unsafe .
Please let me know if you have any more questions .
They don ’ t have a long-term plan .
Reinforcements are not on the way .
How would you feel if you received a message like that from the police ?
This sounds more like the script for a war movie about a hopelessly trapped platoon than a news report about a municipal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like much of the overall Minneapolis police force , is on the ropes .
Yes , there were budget cuts caused by the plague , but the cops ’ budgets were further slashed by the City Council in response to the Defund the Police movement .
A new class of recruits is not being trained at present .
Many officers have either taken early retirement or simply quit .
They are undermanned and overworked .
Adding to their woes in this specific part of the city is the fact that the 3rd Precinct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ station .
The rioters burned it to the ground in May .
Since then , they ’ ve been working out of makeshift offices at the Minneapolis Convention Center which isn ’ t even located in the precinct .
The police department was negotiating to lease space from a local business warehouse for a temporary command center , but those negotiations fell through earlier this week so they are still effectively homeless .
And how did some of the local residents respond to the news that a new precinct HQ – even a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
They celebrated .
Here ’ s the response from Robin Wonsley of the Seward Police Abolition Group .
( Emphasis added ) Keeping the burnt-out police station closed down and not being replaced is a “ victory ” in the minds of these people .
And that ’ s being announced at the same time that residents and business owners are begging for help because it ’ s not safe to even go to work or leave their homes .
And in the midst of all this mayhem , the City Council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police chief why there is so much crime .
I ’ ll close with one prediction that applies to most major cities these days .
When the cops are unavailable to come to the aid of citizens , those citizens – particularly business owners – will increasingly take matters in their own hands .
That ’ s why new , first-time firearms purchases are breaking records all over the country .
And sooner or later , the rioters robbing stores , workers and random pedestrians are going to realize that their lives were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were around .

Just because you’re not seeing as many headline stories about the chaos in downtown Minneapolis these days doesn’t mean that conditions on the ground have returned to normal. While the size of the riots and demonstrations may have abated a bit, residents and business owners there are still dealing with a “new normal” that’s anything but normal. Crime is up across the board, including both property crime and violent crimes against persons. Many residents have already described the situation as being akin to “living in a war zone.” This is particularly true of the city’s 3rd Precinct, where robberies and assaults continue to plague the people who live and work there. The owner of Pedego Electric Bikes sent an email to the local Police Chief saying that his employees are too frightened to come to work now. The answer he received was none too reassuring. In fact, it made it sound like the shop owners are pretty much on their own. (CBS Minneapolis)
There’s no long-term plan, and reinforcements aren’t coming anytime soon. That’s what the head of the Minneapolis Police Department’s 3rd Precinct said in an email to a business owner who shared that his employees are scared to go to work. The neighborhood block of shops near East 48th Street and Chicago Avenue has felt the impact of recent crime. Craig Paulson owns Pedego Electric Bikes. “Couple robberies. Two, three robberies in the area, and some break-ins and a couple of crazy stunts,” Paulson said.
This is the response that Craig Paulson received from Inspector Sean McGinty:
As far as a long-term plan I don’t have one. I have lost 30% of my street officers since the end of May. Budget cuts from COVID-19 and an additional 1.5 million from the council in August we have let go 17 CSO’s and canceled a recruit class of 29. A potential Cadet class slated for January of 2021 was also eliminated. It takes about a year to get a police Officer onto the streets with hiring, backgrounds and field training so reinforcements aren’t coming anytime soon. We are doing everything we can with what we have. I hate to see great businesses like yours and the rest of your corridor being victimized and feeling unsafe. Please let me know if you have any more questions.
They don’t have a long-term plan. Reinforcements are not on the way. How would you feel if you received a message like that from the police? This sounds more like the script for a war movie about a hopelessly trapped platoon than a news report about a municipal police force.
The 3rd Precinct, like much of the overall Minneapolis police force, is on the ropes. Yes, there were budget cuts caused by the plague, but the cops’ budgets were further slashed by the City Council in response to the Defund the Police movement. A new class of recruits is not being trained at present. Many officers have either taken early retirement or simply quit. They are undermanned and overworked.
Adding to their woes in this specific part of the city is the fact that the 3rd Precinct doesn’t even have a police station. The rioters burned it to the ground in May. Since then, they’ve been working out of makeshift offices at the Minneapolis Convention Center which isn’t even located in the precinct. The police department was negotiating to lease space from a local business warehouse for a temporary command center, but those negotiations fell through earlier this week so they are still effectively homeless.
And how did some of the local residents respond to the news that a new precinct HQ – even a temporary one – would not be forthcoming? They celebrated. Here’s the response from Robin Wonsley of the Seward Police Abolition Group. (Emphasis added)
“I think we’re celebrating this as a victory, and making it very clear to our elected leaders that you need to move forward with the process that you promised in June,” Wonsley said. “We do not want to see any movement on re-opening this precinct.”
Keeping the burnt-out police station closed down and not being replaced is a “victory” in the minds of these people. And that’s being announced at the same time that residents and business owners are begging for help because it’s not safe to even go to work or leave their homes. And in the midst of all this mayhem, the City Council actually had the nerve to ask the police chief why there is so much crime.
I’ll close with one prediction that applies to most major cities these days. When the cops are unavailable to come to the aid of citizens, those citizens – particularly business owners – will increasingly take matters in their own hands. That’s why new, first-time firearms purchases are breaking records all over the country. And sooner or later, the rioters robbing stores, workers and random pedestrians are going to realize that their lives were a lot more secure when the cops were around.