hotair--2020-12-17--Hillary: How can people who stood by Trump be offended by a Democrat using a curse word? <span class

Hillary: How can people who stood by Trump be offended by a Democrat using a curse word? Update: Dillon walks back "f***ers" comment

I mean , point taken .
But if Team Joe is semi-serious about some sort of “ heal the nation ” rapprochement with Republicans ( which will never work , by the way ) , Hillary Clinton is the last person they should want Leeroy-Jenkins-ing her way into the effort .
Well , second to last .
Obama would be the absolute last .
“ Let me be clear .
These people are f***ers.
” This whole dumb “ Biden campaign manager insults Republicans ” story is making me feel sentimental , reminiscing about the Before Times .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Democrat says or does something outre and righties unite in various degrees of outrage about it .
There ’ s now even a Hillary Clinton cameo , for cripes sake .
Nature is healing .
They ’ re not claiming to be offended that Jen O ’ Malley Dillon called McConnell ’ s caucus “ f***ers.
” They ’ re claiming to be offended that Team Joe is talking out of both sides of its mouth , crassly denigrating Republicans on the one hand while calling for an end to bitterly intractable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are even doubling down on it .
Remember Obama campaign veteran Stephanie Cutter ?
Meh .
It ’ s understandable that she and O ’ Malley Dillon would want to jab at Republicans after a month of Trump trying to overturn the election with hardly any pushback from Senate Republicans , but they ’ re both professionals and should know better than to complicate Sleepy Joe ’ s outreach effort right now .
On the other hand , a professional pol like Marco Rubio should also know better than to evince fake outrage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what awaited him if he did : He ’ s getting roundhoused in the replies to that tweet by anti-Trumpers of all stripes for pretending to care about divisive rhetoric after standing by mutely for the past four years .
( Some of the choicer responses are rounded up here . )
What we should all remember about Rubio , though , is that he ’ s potentially facing a tough primary in 2022 .
He ’ ll be strongly favored to win the general election in reddening Florida if he makes it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it that far ?
He ’ s been careful not to criticize Trump much during his presidency but he also hasn ’ t been a MAGA cheerleader , and MAGA cheerleaders have noticed .
Stone later said that he ’ s friendly with Rubio and would probably run against Rick Scott if he were to run at all , but I do think there ’ s a sense on the right that Rubio is out of touch with an increasingly populist base .
Which is ironic , as he ’ s been more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to push a populist agenda .
The day after the election , he was crowing that the GOP ’ s gains in the House and Trump ’ s improvements with Latino voters prove that it ’ s now a multiracial , mutiethnic working-class party .
The wrinkle for Rubio is that he ’ s more of an economic populist , not a culture warrior , and what the Trump-era GOP wants is culture war .
They want to see Marco fight !
, not give a floor speech about expanding the child tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a primary against some mega-Trumper like , say , Matt Gaetz — or even a Trump family member — how confident can he be of winning ?
How confident can he be of Trump ’ s endorsement ?
I assume this is why he grumbled about O ’ Malley Dillon ’ s comments and why he ’ ll continue to look for ways to fight !
in his own low-key way over the next two years .
He needs to build up his culture-warrior cred .
He has a big , big , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today , when Congress meets on January 6 to certify the electoral college results .
To this point , Rubio hasn ’ t been an election truther .
Left to his own devices , I ’ m sure he ’ d accept the results from states that voted for Biden .
But the reality of running for reelection in Florida won ’ t make it that easy .
If some Republican senator objects to a state ’ s results , which seems likely , and thereby forces the entire body to vote on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaningless vote to reject the results in order to protect his right flank ?
Or will he vote to accept them because it ’ s the right thing to do , creating extra motivation for MAGA fans in Florida to primary him ?
Rubio losing a primary to Gaetz would be the perfect bookend to the tea-party era .
He entered the Senate at the height of tea-party fever in 2010 , coming out of nowhere to defeat soulless careerist Charlie Crist .
If he ended up losing to Gaetz , he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the brash insurgent , with the party base no longer even pretending to care ( much ) about the small-government principles that swept Rubio to power .
If the GOP really is just a series of loyalty tests now more so than a political party , then certainly there are Republican politicians in Florida who can pass that test more easily than Marco .
Gaetz is just the most prominent example .
Via Newsbusters , here ’ s Ana Navarro summing up the irritation at Rubio today among anti-Trumpers .
Update : Just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , O ’ Malley Dillon has bitten the bullet and expressed … not an apology , certainly , but a little remorse .
Progressives are already annoyed .
The mea culpa came in a virtual conversation Thursday with veteran Democratic operatives Stephanie Cutter and Teddy Goff , during which O ’ Malley Dillon acknowledged she “ used some words that I probably could have chosen better ” when speaking with author Glennon Doyle for a Glamour magazine interview published Tuesday… Addressing the controversy Thursday , O ’ Malley Dillon argued that “ the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Glamour interview “ is an incredibly important point .
And that really is about the president-elect and why he was supported by over 81 million people , and what they were looking for.
” She went on to restate Biden ’ s “ belief that we can get things done , and we can get them done if we come together.
” If you really want to heal the country and bring the two sides together , here ’ s how you do it .
Update : AOC wants in on @ @ @

I mean, point taken. But if Team Joe is semi-serious about some sort of “heal the nation” rapprochement with Republicans (which will never work, by the way), Hillary Clinton is the last person they should want Leeroy-Jenkins-ing her way into the effort.
Well, second to last. Obama would be the absolute last. “Let me be clear. These people are f***ers.”
This whole dumb “Biden campaign manager insults Republicans” story is making me feel sentimental, reminiscing about the Before Times. It’s a vintage 2014-ish tale in which a Democrat says or does something outre and righties unite in various degrees of outrage about it. There’s now even a Hillary Clinton cameo, for cripes sake. Nature is healing.
People who stood by Donald Trump for the last four years are now claiming to be offended that a Democratic campaign manager used a curse word? I don't think so. — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) December 17, 2020
They’re not claiming to be offended that Jen O’Malley Dillon called McConnell’s caucus “f***ers.” They’re claiming to be offended that Team Joe is talking out of both sides of its mouth, crassly denigrating Republicans on the one hand while calling for an end to bitterly intractable partisanship on the other. Some Dems are even doubling down on it. Remember Obama campaign veteran Stephanie Cutter?
This story is based on one anonymous donor. Really? And does anyone really disagree with the sentiment? Jen just had the guts to say it. Will Republicans prove her wrong? Doubt it. “O'Malley Dillon's line that GOP are "f-ckers" worries some Biden aides”https://t.co/M0sCSw3neV — Stephanie Cutter (@stefcutter) December 17, 2020
Meh. It’s understandable that she and O’Malley Dillon would want to jab at Republicans after a month of Trump trying to overturn the election with hardly any pushback from Senate Republicans, but they’re both professionals and should know better than to complicate Sleepy Joe’s outreach effort right now. On the other hand, a professional pol like Marco Rubio should also know better than to evince fake outrage at O’Malley Dillon, knowing what awaited him if he did:
Biden talks about unity and healing, but you want to know what they really think? Read how the person he wants as the next WH deputy chief of staff called Republicans in Congress a bunch of f***ers — Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) December 17, 2020
He’s getting roundhoused in the replies to that tweet by anti-Trumpers of all stripes for pretending to care about divisive rhetoric after standing by mutely for the past four years. (Some of the choicer responses are rounded up here.) What we should all remember about Rubio, though, is that he’s potentially facing a tough primary in 2022. He’ll be strongly favored to win the general election in reddening Florida if he makes it that far, but will he make it that far? He’s been careful not to criticize Trump much during his presidency but he also hasn’t been a MAGA cheerleader, and MAGA cheerleaders have noticed.
At a weekend rally organized by Republicans outside Miami’s Freedom Tower, a crowd unified by the false belief that the 2020 election was stolen from President Donald Trump gathered and waved Trump 2020 banners, American flags — and, in one case, a sign asking “Where’s Marco?”… “Where is Marco, indeed?” Roger Stone, a former Trump adviser who spoke at the Sunday rally in Miami, wrote later on the social media site Parler. “A growing number of Florida Republicans are urging me to challenge Marco Rubio in the Republican primary.”
Stone later said that he’s friendly with Rubio and would probably run against Rick Scott if he were to run at all, but I do think there’s a sense on the right that Rubio is out of touch with an increasingly populist base. Which is ironic, as he’s been more aggressive than most Senate Republicans in trying to push a populist agenda. The day after the election, he was crowing that the GOP’s gains in the House and Trump’s improvements with Latino voters prove that it’s now a multiracial, mutiethnic working-class party. The wrinkle for Rubio is that he’s more of an economic populist, not a culture warrior, and what the Trump-era GOP wants is culture war. They want to see Marco fight!, not give a floor speech about expanding the child tax credit. If he ends up in a primary against some mega-Trumper like, say, Matt Gaetz — or even a Trump family member — how confident can he be of winning? How confident can he be of Trump’s endorsement?
I assume this is why he grumbled about O’Malley Dillon’s comments and why he’ll continue to look for ways to fight! in his own low-key way over the next two years. He needs to build up his culture-warrior cred. He has a big, big, big test coming up 20 days from today, when Congress meets on January 6 to certify the electoral college results. To this point, Rubio hasn’t been an election truther. Left to his own devices, I’m sure he’d accept the results from states that voted for Biden. But the reality of running for reelection in Florida won’t make it that easy. If some Republican senator objects to a state’s results, which seems likely, and thereby forces the entire body to vote on it, will Little Marco cast a meaningless vote to reject the results in order to protect his right flank? Or will he vote to accept them because it’s the right thing to do, creating extra motivation for MAGA fans in Florida to primary him?
Rubio losing a primary to Gaetz would be the perfect bookend to the tea-party era. He entered the Senate at the height of tea-party fever in 2010, coming out of nowhere to defeat soulless careerist Charlie Crist. If he ended up losing to Gaetz, he’d be the soulless careerist ousted by the brash insurgent, with the party base no longer even pretending to care (much) about the small-government principles that swept Rubio to power. If the GOP really is just a series of loyalty tests now more so than a political party, then certainly there are Republican politicians in Florida who can pass that test more easily than Marco. Gaetz is just the most prominent example.
Via Newsbusters, here’s Ana Navarro summing up the irritation at Rubio today among anti-Trumpers.
Update: Just as I was wrapping up this post, O’Malley Dillon has bitten the bullet and expressed … not an apology, certainly, but a little remorse. Progressives are already annoyed.
The mea culpa came in a virtual conversation Thursday with veteran Democratic operatives Stephanie Cutter and Teddy Goff, during which O’Malley Dillon acknowledged she “used some words that I probably could have chosen better” when speaking with author Glennon Doyle for a Glamour magazine interview published Tuesday… Addressing the controversy Thursday, O’Malley Dillon argued that “the point that I was really making” in the Glamour interview “is an incredibly important point. And that really is about the president-elect and why he was supported by over 81 million people, and what they were looking for.” She went on to restate Biden’s “belief that we can get things done, and we can get them done if we come together.”
If you really want to heal the country and bring the two sides together, here’s how you do it.
the fuck-it move of 2020 is outgoing Rep. Joe Cunningham (SC-01) cracking this beer in his farewell speech on the House floor (he tried to bring a 6-pack onto the House floor at the start of his term but was denied) pic.twitter.com/VYqvs4LU1Q — j.d. durkin (@jiveDurkey) December 17, 2020
Update: AOC wants in on this action:


hotair--2020-12-17--Seattle waiting on judge's decision on a lawsuit before clearing Cal Anderson Park (Update: Judge de

Seattle waiting on judge's decision on a lawsuit before clearing Cal Anderson Park (Update: Judge denies request for restraining order)

Yesterday , the city of Seattle was supposed to clear out Cal Anderson Part at 7:30 am .
In anticipation of the sweep , several dozen protesters dressed in black had gathered and set up barricades around the area .
Police did show up yesterday morning but they only circled the park and never went inside .
The question was why ?
Today we learn that the city ’ s decision to back off was prompted by a lawsuit filed on behalf of a person named Ada Yeager who has allegedly been living in the part since June .
Yeager @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a temporary restraining order to block the sweep .
The judge refused to issue one but after a hearing said he would issue a final written decision sometime today .
The federal civil rights lawsuit brought on behalf of “ an unhoused resident of Seattle ” put a daylong pause to any clearance plans Wednesday but lawyers for the Seattle City Attorney said further action to clear the park would be “ imminent ” if the request for the restraining order were denied .
The lawsuit been filed in U.S. District Court seek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Ada Yeager whose lawyer say has been living in Cal Anderson since early June and has been subjected to “ repeated harassment from the City of Seattle by way of ‘ sweeps.
’ ” The civil rights lawsuit is seeking for the clearance of Cal Anderson to be called off and “ general and special damages ” including “ pain and suffering and compensation for wrongful incarceration.
” Screenshots of the lawsuit indicate the attorneys are claiming the attempt to sweep Cal Anderson Park is a case of illegal political discrimination by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ singled out the Cal Anderson protest encampment for forced eviction due to the content and viewpoint of political messages and organizing expressed there.
” The lawsuit goes on to suggest that Mayor Durkan is eager to clear the park so she can take a job in Washington DC with the Biden administration .
The Seattle Times reports that as of yesterday most of the people living in tents in the park had left , contradicting some of the claims made by Yeager : Inside the park Wednesday , more than 20 tents remained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there had left .
As recently as Tuesday , about double that number were in the park , and people living there took up most of the area… In the petition for a restraining order , Yeager says that roughly 50 residents were at the site , along with about 200 other individuals who are “ prepared to defend the encampment from the threatened eviction.
” Just last night there was an apparent overdose in the park and emergency workers had to come out and administer Narcan to someone .
There have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and multiple threats against city workers .
Is the judge going to let this chaos continue ?
It ’ s difficult to imagine a justification for restraining the city from clearing out a public park and offering shelter to the homeless after nearly six months of this , but this is Seattle so anything is possible .
The judge has promised his decision would be made today so we won ’ t have to wait much longer to find out .
Finally , two videos to close this out .
First , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the park and the lawsuit .
Below that is a walkthrough of the park and the streets nearby by a local resident .
The clip is about 30 minutes long but if you really want a first hand sense of what it ’ s like , this is the best way to get it short of going to the park yourself .
Update : Even if the city clears the park , how long will it stay cleared ?
A member of a security team hired to monitor the park the last time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immediately .
McGhee , the owner of Jaguar Security Inc. , was hired to patrol the park Sept. 1 after city crews cleared out by a large group of campers .
But that night , McGhee said about 50 black-clad protesters confronted his team with sticks , poles and strobe lights , which they shined in the eyes of the security officers to blind them .
“ They were verbally threatening us , ” McGhee said .
“ They didn ’ t get too close but they got close enough to a point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to start firing our weapons.
” … McGhee thinks it will take a show of force to reclaim the park and will require arrests and jail time for those who refuse to leave .
In his opinion , it could be an easy fix but questions if city leaders may once again fail to follow through .
“ The city of Seattle has lost control , ” he said .
There ’ s a video version of the story here .
Update : The judge denied the request for a restraining order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the park can go forward , though I ’ m not clear if the police are required to post new signs and give another 72 hours before acting or if they can simply move forward without further notice .
Either way the anarchists have set up barricades and are likely to fight the effort .
Stay tuned .

Yesterday, the city of Seattle was supposed to clear out Cal Anderson Part at 7:30 am. In anticipation of the sweep, several dozen protesters dressed in black had gathered and set up barricades around the area. Police did show up yesterday morning but they only circled the park and never went inside. The question was why?
Today we learn that the city’s decision to back off was prompted by a lawsuit filed on behalf of a person named Ada Yeager who has allegedly been living in the part since June. Yeager’s lawyer asked a judge for a temporary restraining order to block the sweep. The judge refused to issue one but after a hearing said he would issue a final written decision sometime today.
The federal civil rights lawsuit brought on behalf of “an unhoused resident of Seattle” put a daylong pause to any clearance plans Wednesday but lawyers for the Seattle City Attorney said further action to clear the park would be “imminent” if the request for the restraining order were denied. The lawsuit been filed in U.S. District Court seek a stop to the sweep on behalf of Ada Yeager whose lawyer say has been living in Cal Anderson since early June and has been subjected to “repeated harassment from the City of Seattle by way of ‘sweeps.’” The civil rights lawsuit is seeking for the clearance of Cal Anderson to be called off and “general and special damages” including “pain and suffering and compensation for wrongful incarceration.”
Screenshots of the lawsuit indicate the attorneys are claiming the attempt to sweep Cal Anderson Park is a case of illegal political discrimination by the city: “Defendant City has singled out the Cal Anderson protest encampment for forced eviction due to the content and viewpoint of political messages and organizing expressed there.” The lawsuit goes on to suggest that Mayor Durkan is eager to clear the park so she can take a job in Washington DC with the Biden administration.
The Seattle Times reports that as of yesterday most of the people living in tents in the park had left, contradicting some of the claims made by Yeager:
Inside the park Wednesday, more than 20 tents remained, though most of the people living there had left. As recently as Tuesday, about double that number were in the park, and people living there took up most of the area… In the petition for a restraining order, Yeager says that roughly 50 residents were at the site, along with about 200 other individuals who are “prepared to defend the encampment from the threatened eviction.”
Just last night there was an apparent overdose in the park and emergency workers had to come out and administer Narcan to someone. There have been at least 5 fires at the site and multiple threats against city workers. Is the judge going to let this chaos continue? It’s difficult to imagine a justification for restraining the city from clearing out a public park and offering shelter to the homeless after nearly six months of this, but this is Seattle so anything is possible. The judge has promised his decision would be made today so we won’t have to wait much longer to find out.
Finally, two videos to close this out. First, a King 5 report on the situation at the park and the lawsuit. Below that is a walkthrough of the park and the streets nearby by a local resident. The clip is about 30 minutes long but if you really want a first hand sense of what it’s like, this is the best way to get it short of going to the park yourself.
Update: Even if the city clears the park, how long will it stay cleared? A member of a security team hired to monitor the park the last time it was cleared said people returned almost immediately.
McGhee, the owner of Jaguar Security Inc., was hired to patrol the park Sept. 1 after city crews cleared out by a large group of campers. But that night, McGhee said about 50 black-clad protesters confronted his team with sticks, poles and strobe lights, which they shined in the eyes of the security officers to blind them. “They were verbally threatening us,” McGhee said. “They didn’t get too close but they got close enough to a point where we thought we were going to have to start firing our weapons.”… McGhee thinks it will take a show of force to reclaim the park and will require arrests and jail time for those who refuse to leave. In his opinion, it could be an easy fix but questions if city leaders may once again fail to follow through. “The city of Seattle has lost control,” he said.
There’s a video version of the story here.
Update: The judge denied the request for a restraining order.
A federal judge has denied a call for an emergency restraining order to stop Seattle police and park workers from clearing the hold-out remnants of a large homeless encampment at Cal Anderson Park on Capitol Hill. U.S. District Judge Richard Jones had taken the matter under advisement following a nearly two-hour emergency hearing Wednesday evening in which the judge referred to Seattle’s miserable December weather and said it was a “horrible time” for the court to be deciding whether the clearing of the park should go forward.
This should mean the clearing of the park can go forward, though I’m not clear if the police are required to post new signs and give another 72 hours before acting or if they can simply move forward without further notice. Either way the anarchists have set up barricades and are likely to fight the effort. Stay tuned.


hotair--2020-12-17--Frosh House Dem to Pelosi: Pass a COVID-19 relief bill if you want my vote for speaker

No , it ’ s not Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , who expressed a resigned tolerance to Nancy Pelosi ’ s upcoming re-election as House Speaker .
For Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips , however , the months-long failure to produce a relief bill could be the straw that breaks the camel ’ s back — maybe .
The moderate from MN-03 , also part of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus , tells the Star Tribune that he issued an ultimatum to Pelosi , and that he plans to stick by it : But Phillips ’ work as part of the group has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suburban Third District in an awkward position .
At times he ’ s had to defend his conservative colleagues in the caucus on national TV , while privately putting the pressure on his own Democratic leadership in the House to strike a deal .
In an hourlong meeting just before Thanksgiving , Phillips said he told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that his support for her in a leadership vote on Jan. 3 will depend on getting a deal by then .
“ Most people who meet with the speaker and discuss support for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or for personal favors , ” Phillips said .
“ [ My request ] was pretty simple and it , frankly , has repercussions to me and others and they have already started.
” Without a deal , Phillips said , he will cast his ballot for someone else for speaker , though he declined to say whom he might support .
A request for comment from Pelosi ’ s office was not returned .
The timing on this ultimatum certainly raises some questions .
Phillips says that he got “ flooded with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pelosi on the spot .
Just a few days later , Pelosi suddenly shifted off her $ 2.4 trillion demand and the HEROES Act and backed the newer centrist framework for Phase 4 relief discussions .
And now , reportedly , Pelosi has even backed away from bloc-grant state and local government aid , which she had earlier sworn to get no matter what .
The shift has become rather remarkable , as The Hill pointed out today .
It looks like Mitch McConnell ’ s winning again , at least on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) is getting much of what he wants in an emerging coronavirus relief package , after months of digging in his heels against a demand by Democratic leaders to pass a multitrillion-dollar package that would shore up the ailing finances of state and local governments .
… Democrats are getting $ 90 billion in relief for local governments but it will be distributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency , meaning city and state leaders will have less control .
Democrats say that money for housing assistance will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states .
But McConnell is getting a deal a lot closer to what Democrats dismissed as the “ emaciated ” plan he pushed in recent months than the $ 2.2 trillion HEROES Act that Pelosi and Schumer said should have been the “ starting point ” of the talks .
Pelosi has been trying to spin her climb-down as a staging strategy , but The Hill ’ s report makes it clear that it was a full-on retreat — and that her caucus notices : But some House Democrats said the emerging deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Weeks before the election , White House negotiators had offered the Democrats a $ 1.9 trillion relief package , but Pelosi rejected it at the time , saying it fell short of the $ 2.2 trillion that was needed .
Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also clashed on coronavirus testing language , sources said .
Now , months later and with tens of thousands of more Americans dead from the pandemic , Pelosi is preparing to accept a COVID-19 package that is about $ 1 trillion less than that last White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pelosi to capitulate to McConnell ?
In more normal circumstances , this kind of ultimatum could be easily ignored as an empty threat .
Right now , however , it looks as though Pelosi only has a nine-vote majority in the next session of Congress .
That means she can only afford to lose four or five votes in her caucus in the Speaker election to avoid going to a second ballot — or losing altogether to Republican Kevin McCarthy , the House Minority Leader .
Either would be a humiliation that would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If Phillips managed to get a handful of House Democrats to back up that ultimatum , then that would explain why Pelosi suddenly moved off her pork-filled HEROES Act and got comfortable with getting “ skinnier.
” Better to go on a diet than to watch her career as party leader go down in flames .

No, it’s not Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who expressed a resigned tolerance to Nancy Pelosi’s upcoming re-election as House Speaker. For Minnesota Rep. Dean Phillips, however, the months-long failure to produce a relief bill could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back — maybe. The moderate from MN-03, also part of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, tells the Star Tribune that he issued an ultimatum to Pelosi, and that he plans to stick by it:
But Phillips’ work as part of the group has put the freshman from Minnesota’s suburban Third District in an awkward position. At times he’s had to defend his conservative colleagues in the caucus on national TV, while privately putting the pressure on his own Democratic leadership in the House to strike a deal. In an hourlong meeting just before Thanksgiving, Phillips said he told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that his support for her in a leadership vote on Jan. 3 will depend on getting a deal by then. “Most people who meet with the speaker and discuss support for her ask for a committee assignment … or for personal favors,” Phillips said. “[My request] was pretty simple and it, frankly, has repercussions to me and others and they have already started.” Without a deal, Phillips said, he will cast his ballot for someone else for speaker, though he declined to say whom he might support. A request for comment from Pelosi’s office was not returned.
The timing on this ultimatum certainly raises some questions. Phillips says that he got “flooded with calls” from his colleagues since putting Pelosi on the spot. Just a few days later, Pelosi suddenly shifted off her $2.4 trillion demand and the HEROES Act and backed the newer centrist framework for Phase 4 relief discussions. And now, reportedly, Pelosi has even backed away from bloc-grant state and local government aid, which she had earlier sworn to get no matter what.
The shift has become rather remarkable, as The Hill pointed out today. It looks like Mitch McConnell’s winning again, at least on the scope of the bill:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is getting much of what he wants in an emerging coronavirus relief package, after months of digging in his heels against a demand by Democratic leaders to pass a multitrillion-dollar package that would shore up the ailing finances of state and local governments. … Democrats are getting $90 billion in relief for local governments but it will be distributed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, meaning city and state leaders will have less control. Democrats say that money for housing assistance will also help ease the fiscal burdens on states. But McConnell is getting a deal a lot closer to what Democrats dismissed as the “emaciated” plan he pushed in recent months than the $2.2 trillion HEROES Act that Pelosi and Schumer said should have been the “starting point” of the talks.
Pelosi has been trying to spin her climb-down as a staging strategy, but The Hill’s report makes it clear that it was a full-on retreat — and that her caucus notices:
But some House Democrats said the emerging deal is a major blow to Pelosi. Weeks before the election, White House negotiators had offered the Democrats a $1.9 trillion relief package, but Pelosi rejected it at the time, saying it fell short of the $2.2 trillion that was needed. Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also clashed on coronavirus testing language, sources said. Now, months later and with tens of thousands of more Americans dead from the pandemic, Pelosi is preparing to accept a COVID-19 package that is about $1 trillion less than that last White House offer.
Did Phillips’ threat force Pelosi to capitulate to McConnell? In more normal circumstances, this kind of ultimatum could be easily ignored as an empty threat. Right now, however, it looks as though Pelosi only has a nine-vote majority in the next session of Congress. That means she can only afford to lose four or five votes in her caucus in the Speaker election to avoid going to a second ballot — or losing altogether to Republican Kevin McCarthy, the House Minority Leader. Either would be a humiliation that would all but force Pelosi to retire.
If Phillips managed to get a handful of House Democrats to back up that ultimatum, then that would explain why Pelosi suddenly moved off her pork-filled HEROES Act and got comfortable with getting “skinnier.” Better to go on a diet than to watch her career as party leader go down in flames.


hotair--2020-12-17--Dick Durbin: Trump's administration deserves credit for the amazing success of Operation Warp Speed

Certainly true .
I ’ ve said before that it ’ s his biggest achievement as president , although if you want to make the case for the Abraham Accords I ’ ll hear you out .
Anyway , I don ’ t think Durbin ’ s just being a swell joe in giving Team Trump a little credit here .
There ’ s a strategy behind it , one which we may see other Democrats duplicate in the next weeks and months .
Watch , then read on .
Biden has a problem .
He wants to get as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shortest time possible .
The success of Pfizer ’ s vaccine and the rosy media coverage around it has made that easier for him if you believe the polls , but he and his advisors know that convincing grassroots Republicans will be a heavy lift once Trump is out of office and no longer stands to benefit politically from the vaccine ’ s adoption .
Anti-vax messaging is already replacing “ stop the steal ” messaging in some populist media outlets .
Whether congressional Republicans adopt blind rejectionism towards Biden remains to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that chunks of the GOP base will .
How do you go about convincing those people to get vaccinated ?
Ideally , you ’ d enlist Trump himself as your salesman .
The problem is that Trump ’ s not going to lend a hand for altruistic “ being a good citizen ” reasons .
No doubt he ’ s eager to see Biden fail as president in everything he does , eager to highlight every hiccup in vaccine distribution after January 20 on his social media feeds .
I ’ d say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he turns anti-vaxxer himself out of spite , eventually seizing on some yet-to-unfurl conspiracy theory about how the vaccine was secretly “ changed ” after Biden took office and the new version is dangerous .
The fact that Republican voters want him to be given proper credit for his success in getting the vaccine distributed so quickly isn ’ t a logical barrier to many of them eventually — or already — switching over to opposing the vaccine .
If you want him to help sell the vaccine , there needs to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You need to appeal to his vanity .
Marc Thiessen understands : Nothing like this has ever happened in the history of modern medicine .
As my American Enterprise Institute colleague , former FDA chief Scott Gottlieb , told me , “ We ’ ve never really had this level of development work undertaken over such a short period of time with so many successes .
This is a singular achievement .
I can ’ t think of any historic proxy.
” … Biden has criticized Trump ’ s pandemic response failures , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for this unadulterated success ?
Because that would mean acknowledging that , for all Trump ’ s flaws in managing the pandemic , he is also responsible for ending it .
And Biden is saving that credit for himself .
Perhaps , given Trump ’ s terrible behavior , Biden is in no mood to praise the president .
But it ’ s not about Trump ; it ’ s about Biden delivering on his promise to reach out to his opponent ’ s supporters and bring Americans together .
If he truly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should give credit where credit is due — and pledge to continue Operation Warp Speed .
Nothing ’ s going to “ bring Americans together ” but giving Trump a public reputational stake in the vaccine ’ s continued adoption and success would be a shrewd way to blunt some of the politically driven opposition to it , including from Trump himself .
“ There ’ s a whole fringe of the population that listens to the president very carefully , and therefore he has an important role , ” said the head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to CNN a few days ago .
Biden ’ s team has reportedly considered reaching out to Sean Hannity and Rand Paul to try to bring righties around on the vaccine in lieu of asking Trump , but no contact has been made yet .
Trump aides told Politico that Biden “ the president-elect is intentionally ignoring Trump ’ s vaccine accomplishments and merely playing partisan politics .
Biden , they said , should vocally give Trump praise for pushing for what they have dubbed the ‘ Trump vaccine ’ in record-breaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes in .
Maybe the task of praising the president for his vaccine work has been outsourced by Biden to Senate Democrats .
Lefties won ’ t want to see the president-elect saluting Trump for anything COVID-related , especially with stuff like this continuing to dribble out in the media .
But it ’ s so rare for a congressional Democrat to celebrate a Trump achievement that having Durbin and others chatter on the record about the amazing success of Operation Warp Speed might make an impression on him .
With any other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election to their successor ( e.g.
, Bush 41 ) , this would be a simple matter of picking up the phone and politely requesting their assistance in an effort that ’ ll benefit Americans .
With Trump , there ’ s more psychological labor involved .
How do you get him to participate in the vaccine pep rally ?
Answer : You make it about him to whatever extent you can .
Speaking of hiccups in the vaccine distribution , this “ hiccup ” is worth noting — but not ( yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worker , a middle-aged woman who had no history of allergies , had an anaphylactic reaction that began 10 minutes after receiving the vaccine at Bartlett Regional Hospital in Juneau on Tuesday , a hospital official said .
She experienced a rash over her face and torso , shortness of breath and an elevated heart rate .
Dr. Lindy Jones , the hospital ’ s emergency department medical director , said the worker was first given a shot of epinephrine , a standard treatment for severe allergic reactions .
Her symptoms subsided but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with steroids and an epinephrine drip .
When doctors tried to stop the drip , her symptoms re-emerged yet again , so the woman was moved to the intensive care unit , observed throughout the night , then weaned off the drip early Wednesday morning , Dr. Jones said .
She ended up spending last night in the hospital too as a precaution .
Another worker at the same Alaska hospital also had a reaction that was treated with epinephrine , but he recovered within the hour .
Those are the only cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this week in which semi-serious reactions to the vaccine developed .
They may be pure flukes , one-in-100,000 events or whatever , but the fact that two people at the same hospital had adverse responses requiring medical treatment makes the “ fluke ” theory harder to swallow .
I wonder : Could there have been something environmental in or around the hospital , possibly connected to the specific work they were doing , that might have made them susceptible to side effects from the vaccine ?
I assume conspiracy theories are already circulating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are happening all over the country and are being covered up , but that doesn ’ t jibe with the extensive trials Pfizer did .
“ Historically with a vaccine , the terrible ( serious adverse events ) that we ’ re always worried about actually present themselves in a matter of weeks , ” said one ER doctor to USA Today .
“ We ’ re not seeing that type of spike … in the weeks we see people taking the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.
” Vaccinations in nursing homes have already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several thousand West Virginians having received the shot and more than 20,000 Floridians set to receive it this week .
No reports of serious adverse reactions in America ’ s frailest citizens so far .

Certainly true. I’ve said before that it’s his biggest achievement as president, although if you want to make the case for the Abraham Accords I’ll hear you out. Anyway, I don’t think Durbin’s just being a swell joe in giving Team Trump a little credit here. There’s a strategy behind it, one which we may see other Democrats duplicate in the next weeks and months. Watch, then read on.
Biden has a problem. He wants to get as many people vaccinated as possible in the shortest time possible. The success of Pfizer’s vaccine and the rosy media coverage around it has made that easier for him if you believe the polls, but he and his advisors know that convincing grassroots Republicans will be a heavy lift once Trump is out of office and no longer stands to benefit politically from the vaccine’s adoption. Anti-vax messaging is already replacing “stop the steal” messaging in some populist media outlets. Whether congressional Republicans adopt blind rejectionism towards Biden remains to be seen but there’s zero question that chunks of the GOP base will. How do you go about convincing those people to get vaccinated?
Ideally, you’d enlist Trump himself as your salesman.
The problem is that Trump’s not going to lend a hand for altruistic “being a good citizen” reasons. No doubt he’s eager to see Biden fail as president in everything he does, eager to highlight every hiccup in vaccine distribution after January 20 on his social media feeds. I’d say the odds are no worse than 50/50 that he turns anti-vaxxer himself out of spite, eventually seizing on some yet-to-unfurl conspiracy theory about how the vaccine was secretly “changed” after Biden took office and the new version is dangerous. The fact that Republican voters want him to be given proper credit for his success in getting the vaccine distributed so quickly isn’t a logical barrier to many of them eventually — or already — switching over to opposing the vaccine.
If you want him to help sell the vaccine, there needs to be something in it for him. You need to appeal to his vanity. Marc Thiessen understands:
Nothing like this has ever happened in the history of modern medicine. As my American Enterprise Institute colleague, former FDA chief Scott Gottlieb, told me, “We’ve never really had this level of development work undertaken over such a short period of time with so many successes. This is a singular achievement. I can’t think of any historic proxy.”… Biden has criticized Trump’s pandemic response failures, so why not give the president credit for this unadulterated success? Because that would mean acknowledging that, for all Trump’s flaws in managing the pandemic, he is also responsible for ending it. And Biden is saving that credit for himself. Perhaps, given Trump’s terrible behavior, Biden is in no mood to praise the president. But it’s not about Trump; it’s about Biden delivering on his promise to reach out to his opponent’s supporters and bring Americans together. If he truly wants to unite the country, he should give credit where credit is due — and pledge to continue Operation Warp Speed.
Nothing’s going to “bring Americans together” but giving Trump a public reputational stake in the vaccine’s continued adoption and success would be a shrewd way to blunt some of the politically driven opposition to it, including from Trump himself. “There’s a whole fringe of the population that listens to the president very carefully, and therefore he has an important role,” said the head of Operation Warp Speed, Moncef Slaoui, to CNN a few days ago. Biden’s team has reportedly considered reaching out to Sean Hannity and Rand Paul to try to bring righties around on the vaccine in lieu of asking Trump, but no contact has been made yet. Trump aides told Politico that Biden “the president-elect is intentionally ignoring Trump’s vaccine accomplishments and merely playing partisan politics. Biden, they said, should vocally give Trump praise for pushing for what they have dubbed the ‘Trump vaccine’ in record-breaking time.”
That’s where Durbin comes in. Maybe the task of praising the president for his vaccine work has been outsourced by Biden to Senate Democrats. Lefties won’t want to see the president-elect saluting Trump for anything COVID-related, especially with stuff like this continuing to dribble out in the media. But it’s so rare for a congressional Democrat to celebrate a Trump achievement that having Durbin and others chatter on the record about the amazing success of Operation Warp Speed might make an impression on him. With any other ex-president, including ones who lost an election to their successor (e.g., Bush 41), this would be a simple matter of picking up the phone and politely requesting their assistance in an effort that’ll benefit Americans. With Trump, there’s more psychological labor involved. How do you get him to participate in the vaccine pep rally? Answer: You make it about him to whatever extent you can.
Speaking of hiccups in the vaccine distribution, this “hiccup” is worth noting — but not (yet) freaking out over:
The first worker, a middle-aged woman who had no history of allergies, had an anaphylactic reaction that began 10 minutes after receiving the vaccine at Bartlett Regional Hospital in Juneau on Tuesday, a hospital official said. She experienced a rash over her face and torso, shortness of breath and an elevated heart rate. Dr. Lindy Jones, the hospital’s emergency department medical director, said the worker was first given a shot of epinephrine, a standard treatment for severe allergic reactions. Her symptoms subsided but then re-emerged, and she was treated with steroids and an epinephrine drip. When doctors tried to stop the drip, her symptoms re-emerged yet again, so the woman was moved to the intensive care unit, observed throughout the night, then weaned off the drip early Wednesday morning, Dr. Jones said.
She ended up spending last night in the hospital too as a precaution. Another worker at the same Alaska hospital also had a reaction that was treated with epinephrine, but he recovered within the hour. Those are the only cases I’ve heard of so far this week in which semi-serious reactions to the vaccine developed. They may be pure flukes, one-in-100,000 events or whatever, but the fact that two people at the same hospital had adverse responses requiring medical treatment makes the “fluke” theory harder to swallow. I wonder: Could there have been something environmental in or around the hospital, possibly connected to the specific work they were doing, that might have made them susceptible to side effects from the vaccine?
I assume conspiracy theories are already circulating on Facebook claiming that reactions like this are happening all over the country and are being covered up, but that doesn’t jibe with the extensive trials Pfizer did. “Historically with a vaccine, the terrible (serious adverse events) that we’re always worried about actually present themselves in a matter of weeks,” said one ER doctor to USA Today. “We’re not seeing that type of spike … in the weeks we see people taking the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.” Vaccinations in nursing homes have already begun, by the way, with several thousand West Virginians having received the shot and more than 20,000 Floridians set to receive it this week. No reports of serious adverse reactions in America’s frailest citizens so far.


hotair--2020-12-17--More on the media's fact-checking of the coronavirus vaccine

Earlier this week I wrote about the people in the media who repeatedly assured us that we could not have a vaccine ready before the end of 2020 .
Today the Federalist did a roundup of other news outlets that also fact-checked this point : “ Trump ’ s inaccurate coronavirus vaccine timeline , ” read a Washington Post headline that has since been updated to replace “ inaccurate ” with “ accelerated.
” “ Trump appears to be expediting the vaccine development process , misrepresenting how fast a vaccine will be available to the public in fighting the novel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citing leftist media ’ s unassailable hero , Dr. Anthony Fauci .
You can read the Post ’ s fact-check analysis here .
But it wasn ’ t the only story at the time making this point .
A day earlier the Post had published a story titled “ Trump coronavirus effort undermined by mixed messages and falsehoods.
” The falsehoods in this case related to when the vaccine would be available : At a Monday roundtable meeting at the White House , Trump prodded pharmaceutical executives about how quickly they could get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeared not to understand the vaccine testing process , despite efforts by some executives to clarify the timeline , and incorrectly asserted that a vaccine could be ready “ over the next few months ” or “ within a year.
” It fell to Fauci to correct the president .
But on Tuesday , during a gathering of the National Association of Counties , Trump presented a rosy outlook .
“ We ’ re moving at a maximum speed to develop the therapies , not only the vaccines , but therapies , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of another word for cure .
” And he claimed that during his meeting with pharmaceutical executives , he had pressed the leaders to expedite the vaccine process .
“ I said , ‘ Do me a favor .
Speed it up , speed it up , ’ he said .
“ And they will .
They are working really hard and quick.
” It ’ s fair to say that Trump ’ s suggestion the vaccine might be ready in a few months was way off , but then so was Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take a year and a half ( August of 2021 ) to get there .
The truth turned out to be somewhere in the middle .
But by early March the media had set the narrative on this topic .
Here ’ s a video the Washington Post produced to amplify this idea that a year to a year and a half was the soonest we could see a vaccine .
It ’ s worth noting that by July , Dr. Fauci had changed his tune and was saying he was “ cautiously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or more than one vaccine approved for use by the end of the year .
So Fauci ’ s initial assessment was wrong but he eventually self-corrected .
The media also gradually came around but without really acknowledging that it had confidently told us for months a vaccine couldn ’ t happen in 2020 .
The point is that Trump ’ s statements about the vaccine were always meant to be aspirational .
But in the rush to fact-check his every statement as wrong , the media missed the real possibility that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ timeline .
As the Federalist points out , you have to wonder what some of these news outlets might have written about Kennedy ’ s plan to send a man to the moon .
Sometimes you just have to push toward something that doesn ’ t seem possible because it ’ s important .
In this case it seems to have helped despite all the confident assertions early on that it wasn ’ t possible .

Earlier this week I wrote about the people in the media who repeatedly assured us that we could not have a vaccine ready before the end of 2020. Today the Federalist did a roundup of other news outlets that also fact-checked this point:
“Trump’s inaccurate coronavirus vaccine timeline,” read a Washington Post headline that has since been updated to replace “inaccurate” with “accelerated.” “Trump appears to be expediting the vaccine development process, misrepresenting how fast a vaccine will be available to the public in fighting the novel coronavirus,” the article claimed, citing leftist media’s unassailable hero, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
You can read the Post’s fact-check analysis here. But it wasn’t the only story at the time making this point. A day earlier the Post had published a story titled “Trump coronavirus effort undermined by mixed messages and falsehoods.” The falsehoods in this case related to when the vaccine would be available:
At a Monday roundtable meeting at the White House, Trump prodded pharmaceutical executives about how quickly they could get a coronavirus vaccine to market. He appeared not to understand the vaccine testing process, despite efforts by some executives to clarify the timeline, and incorrectly asserted that a vaccine could be ready “over the next few months” or “within a year.” It fell to Fauci to correct the president. “A year to a year and a half,” Fauci said… But on Tuesday, during a gathering of the National Association of Counties, Trump presented a rosy outlook. “We’re moving at a maximum speed to develop the therapies, not only the vaccines, but therapies,” he said. “Therapies is sort of another word for cure. ” And he claimed that during his meeting with pharmaceutical executives, he had pressed the leaders to expedite the vaccine process. “I said, ‘Do me a favor. Speed it up, speed it up,’ he said. “And they will. They are working really hard and quick.”
It’s fair to say that Trump’s suggestion the vaccine might be ready in a few months was way off, but then so was Dr. Fauci’s suggestion that it might take a year and a half (August of 2021) to get there. The truth turned out to be somewhere in the middle. But by early March the media had set the narrative on this topic. Here’s a video the Washington Post produced to amplify this idea that a year to a year and a half was the soonest we could see a vaccine.

It’s worth noting that by July, Dr. Fauci had changed his tune and was saying he was “cautiously optimistic” that we could have one or more than one vaccine approved for use by the end of the year. So Fauci’s initial assessment was wrong but he eventually self-corrected. The media also gradually came around but without really acknowledging that it had confidently told us for months a vaccine couldn’t happen in 2020.
The point is that Trump’s statements about the vaccine were always meant to be aspirational. But in the rush to fact-check his every statement as wrong, the media missed the real possibility that we might be able to achieve this record timeline. As the Federalist points out, you have to wonder what some of these news outlets might have written about Kennedy’s plan to send a man to the moon.
“President Kennedy says moon landing will be coming by the end of the decade, despite contrary evidence,” CNBC 1961 might have written. “Moon Landing in 10 Years? Experts Urge Reality Check,” Bloomberg 1961 could have reported.
Sometimes you just have to push toward something that doesn’t seem possible because it’s important. In this case it seems to have helped despite all the confident assertions early on that it wasn’t possible.


hotair--2020-12-17--"War zone": Investors avoiding Minneapolis for some reason

Alternate headline : Elections and unrest have consequences .
Why should investors put capital into rebuilding Minneapolis when its city council won ’ t put resources in place to keep the peace ?
With violent crime exploding in the Twin Cities , the prospects of recovery would normally be slow anyway .
However , the council ’ s efforts to abolish the city ’ s police department has investors looking for greener pastures , all but ensuring decline in the short run , as the Washington Examiner reports : Since violent unrest broke out over the summer , local developer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % to 20 % vacancies in downtown apartment buildings that had just 2 % to 3 % vacancies in the last five years .
Newer , modern buildings in the downtown area are also at 20 % vacancy rates .
As the city grapples with rising crime rates , along with droves of police retirements , and a council vote to reimagine parts of traditional public safety , Doran believes a full economic recovery for Minneapolis will be slow .
“ They don ’ t seem to care , ” Doran said of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t know why anybody would seriously consider investing in the city.
” Mica Soellner spoke with a number of venture capital figures and developers , including former Minneapolis councilor Steve Minn. Minn was around for the “ Murderapolis ” years in the Twin Cities , and recognizes the need for investment in law enforcement to create a safe space for critical business investment .
The radical-progressive turn at City Hall over the last few years has opened up a costly — and damaging — blind spot , Minn argues .
Minn also warns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the ballot box : Minn believes the contentious relationship between the council and the business community is largely due to a lack of understanding by members , and he believes this budget will follow many to the ballot box next year .
“ None of them understand or appreciate the value in the business community , and none of them have outreached a hand to help the business community , ” Minn said .
“ They ’ re going to get a fairly sobering budget to work with when the business community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They don ’ t understand the kind of damage they ’ ve done yet.
” Another former councilor , Don Samuels , sued the city over its lack of police resources since the George Floyd riots .
Samuels puts the issue more succinctly : “ [ There ’ s ] crime and drug dealing on the street , homicides happening on the street , so people are not looking to the street , ” Samuels told the Washington Examiner .
“ Target was there .
Target left [ because of ] too much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind of trying to be there , they ’ re struggling.
” … “ If you go to downtown Minneapolis now , it looks like a war zone , ” Doran said .
It doesn ’ t just look like a war zone .
Murders have gone up more than 50 % , shootings have increased more than that , and most famously , carjackings have increased a whopping 537 % year-on-year for November .
With the police force down 20 % in manpower since June , the Minneapolis PD hasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put a dent in the impression of impunity that carjacking rings have felt .
So instead , they put a few more resources in the air , in partnership with the Hennepin County sheriff ’ s office : To combat a rash of recent violent carjackings , Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo said his department teamed up with the Hennepin County Sheriff ’ s Office and Minnesota State Patrol in using helicopter surveillance to make more than 40 arrests .
The three-day crackdown last week resulted in 41 felony arrests and the recovery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Arradondo said at a Tuesday evening news conference inside City Hall while flanked by Sheriff David Hutchinson .
“ We ’ re teaming up to make sure people can live their lives and not get their car stolen in broad daylight by a few bad actors , ” Hutchinson said .
Arradondo said the helicopter hovering over Minneapolis last Wednesday , Thursday and Friday was noticed by many residents and that he wanted to provide an update that it was an intentional strategy and may be used again .
Having grown up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grew used to police helicopters in the air .
That was routine even in the suburbs .
Here in Minnesota , though , it ’ s rare enough that people will come out of their houses to see what ’ s going on .
While the increased enforcement is certainly welcome , the helicopters only add to the impression of Minneapolis being a “ war zone.
” And it ’ s not just Minneapolis , either .
The violence spills over into St. Paul with deadly consequences : A man driving on University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killed late Wednesday , bringing the number of homicides in the city this year to 32 .
The driver , whose name has not been released , called 911 about 10 p.m. to report that he had been hit by gunfire near the intersection of University and Snelling avenues , said police spokesman Steve Linders .
Officers found the man inside his car , which had come to rest in the southbound lanes of Snelling Avenue next to the Spruce Tree Center , with a gunshot wound to his chest .
He was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ died Thursday morning , Linders said .
… The homicide pushed the city past last year ’ s total of 31 — there also was a fatal shooting by police not counted in that total — and was just two short of the record of 34 set in 1992 .
The looting in the summer was bad enough to scare off investors , especially those who wanted to open or maintain family-owned businesses in the Twin Cities .
The ongoing explosion of violence is more than enough to have larger capital stakeholders looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Perhaps that vote-by-feet outcome will be enough to convince Twin Cities residents to start looking for new leadership .
If it ’ s really “ the economy , stupid , ” then those voters have a lot of stupidity to flush out of City Hall .

Alternate headline: Elections and unrest have consequences. Why should investors put capital into rebuilding Minneapolis when its city council won’t put resources in place to keep the peace? With violent crime exploding in the Twin Cities, the prospects of recovery would normally be slow anyway. However, the council’s efforts to abolish the city’s police department has investors looking for greener pastures, all but ensuring decline in the short run, as the Washington Examiner reports:
Since violent unrest broke out over the summer, local developer Kelly Doran said he estimates around 10% to 20% vacancies in downtown apartment buildings that had just 2% to 3% vacancies in the last five years. Newer, modern buildings in the downtown area are also at 20% vacancy rates. As the city grapples with rising crime rates, along with droves of police retirements, and a council vote to reimagine parts of traditional public safety, Doran believes a full economic recovery for Minneapolis will be slow. “They don’t seem to care,” Doran said of the council. “I don’t know why anybody would seriously consider investing in the city.”
Mica Soellner spoke with a number of venture capital figures and developers, including former Minneapolis councilor Steve Minn. Minn was around for the “Murderapolis” years in the Twin Cities, and recognizes the need for investment in law enforcement to create a safe space for critical business investment. The radical-progressive turn at City Hall over the last few years has opened up a costly — and damaging — blind spot, Minn argues.
Minn also warns that the real vote might not be at the ballot box:
Minn believes the contentious relationship between the council and the business community is largely due to a lack of understanding by members, and he believes this budget will follow many to the ballot box next year. “None of them understand or appreciate the value in the business community, and none of them have outreached a hand to help the business community,” Minn said. “They’re going to get a fairly sobering budget to work with when the business community responds by voting with their feet. They don’t understand the kind of damage they’ve done yet.”
Another former councilor, Don Samuels, sued the city over its lack of police resources since the George Floyd riots. Samuels puts the issue more succinctly:
“[There’s] crime and drug dealing on the street, homicides happening on the street, so people are not looking to the street,” Samuels told the Washington Examiner. “Target was there. Target left [because of] too much theft. … The businesses that are kind of trying to be there, they’re struggling.” … “If you go to downtown Minneapolis now, it looks like a war zone,” Doran said.
It doesn’t just look like a war zone. Murders have gone up more than 50%, shootings have increased more than that, and most famously, carjackings have increased a whopping 537% year-on-year for November. With the police force down 20% in manpower since June, the Minneapolis PD hasn’t had enough presence on the street to put a dent in the impression of impunity that carjacking rings have felt.
So instead, they put a few more resources in the air, in partnership with the Hennepin County sheriff’s office:
To combat a rash of recent violent carjackings, Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo said his department teamed up with the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office and Minnesota State Patrol in using helicopter surveillance to make more than 40 arrests. The three-day crackdown last week resulted in 41 felony arrests and the recovery of seven stolen vehicles and five guns, Arradondo said at a Tuesday evening news conference inside City Hall while flanked by Sheriff David Hutchinson. “We’re teaming up to make sure people can live their lives and not get their car stolen in broad daylight by a few bad actors,” Hutchinson said. Arradondo said the helicopter hovering over Minneapolis last Wednesday, Thursday and Friday was noticed by many residents and that he wanted to provide an update that it was an intentional strategy and may be used again.
Having grown up and lived in Southern California, I grew used to police helicopters in the air. That was routine even in the suburbs. Here in Minnesota, though, it’s rare enough that people will come out of their houses to see what’s going on. While the increased enforcement is certainly welcome, the helicopters only add to the impression of Minneapolis being a “war zone.”
And it’s not just Minneapolis, either. The violence spills over into St. Paul with deadly consequences:
A man driving on University Avenue in St. Paul was shot and killed late Wednesday, bringing the number of homicides in the city this year to 32. The driver, whose name has not been released, called 911 about 10 p.m. to report that he had been hit by gunfire near the intersection of University and Snelling avenues, said police spokesman Steve Linders. Officers found the man inside his car, which had come to rest in the southbound lanes of Snelling Avenue next to the Spruce Tree Center, with a gunshot wound to his chest. He was taken to Regions Hospital, where he died Thursday morning, Linders said. … The homicide pushed the city past last year’s total of 31 — there also was a fatal shooting by police not counted in that total — and was just two short of the record of 34 set in 1992.
The looting in the summer was bad enough to scare off investors, especially those who wanted to open or maintain family-owned businesses in the Twin Cities. The ongoing explosion of violence is more than enough to have larger capital stakeholders looking for better places to put their money. Perhaps that vote-by-feet outcome will be enough to convince Twin Cities residents to start looking for new leadership. If it’s really “the economy, stupid,” then those voters have a lot of stupidity to flush out of City Hall.


hotair--2020-12-17--Border security success: Trump finalized agreement with El Salvador on asylum-seekers

President Trump officially completed an agreement with El Salvador that has been on the table for more than a year .
In September 2019 , the Trump administration and the government of El Salvador agreed to allow the United States to return asylum-seekers who pass through El Salvador back to that country , This means that asylum-seekers from other countries who pass through El Salvador on the way to the U.S. southern border can be returned to apply for asylum in El Salvador .
Chad Wolf , acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security , traveled to El Salvador @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the agreement .
No asylum-seekers have been sent back to El Salvador yet .
Similar agreements were reached with Guatemala and Honduras .
A record surge of Central American families crossed the U.S. southern border seeking protection which was the reason for such agreements .
U.S. courts and border security personnel were overwhelmed and processing capacity was far surpassed .
Critics jump on these agreements with Central American countries with claims that the Trump administration is not compassionate and welcoming of migrants who are vulnerable .
The administration argues that this allows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protection closer to home .
Wolf called the agreement “ a critical step in the establishment of a truly regional approach to migration , and , more specifically , to the offer of protection to those migrants who are victims of persecution.
” Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele agreed to the accord , known as an Asylum Cooperation Agreement in September 2019 .
It is being described as a humanitarian agreement .
Progressive groups like Refugees International and Human Rights Watch point to the agreement with Guatemala as one that hasn ’ t seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The U.S. sent 1,000 migrants back to Guatemala between November 2019 and March 2020 .
Of those , only 2 percent who were returned applied for asylum in Guatemala .
The rest appear to have given up and went back to their original homes .
This begs the question of what would have happened if they had been allowed to remain in the U.S. – would more migrants have participated in the legitimate asylum process or would they have scattered and never completed the legal process once they crossed the border ?
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the border illegally but claim asylum because that is what caravan coyotes have instructed them to do at the border , if challenged , there is no reason to assume they will abide by American immigration laws .
Whether or not asylum-seekers will be sent back to El Salvador before the end of Trump ’ s term in office is unclear .
DHS released a statement explaining that the agreement is part of a regional approach to offer protection to the most vulnerable fleeing violence and persecution in Central American countries .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States and El Salvador is a critical step in the establishment of a truly regional approach to migration , and , more specifically , to the offer of protection to those migrants who are victims of persecution , ” said Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad F. Wolf .
“ I am grateful to the Government of El Salvador , and to President Bukele personally , for their commitment to the implementation of the ACA , and for the resulting expansion of avenues for protection available to persecuted migrants in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ongoing humanitarian and security crisis at the Southwest border due to historic levels of irregular migration and human smuggling , the U.S. and El Salvador signed an ACA on September 20 , 2019 to allow migrants to seek protection within the region in El Salvador .
Today ’ s announcement means that all operational details relating to the implementation of the ACA have been worked out between the United States and El Salvador .
Implementation of the ACA will involve and facilitate cooperation between the two governments to expand El Salvador ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ El Salvador ’ s protection capacity will involve the use of best practices developed by the United States and the international community to increase protection options for vulnerable populations .
DHS is using every available tool at its disposal to mitigate the crisis .
During Fiscal Year 2019 , more than 71 % of migrants apprehended at the U.S. Southwest border were nationals of El Salvador , Guatemala , and Honduras .
All these countries have now reached agreements with the Trump Administration to confront irregular migration ; and all three ACAs have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has pledged $ 4 billion to tackle the root causes of migration in Central America .
During his presidential campaign , he promised to roll back Trump ’ s border security policies .
Biden is an opponent of the wall on the southern border and promised to discontinue construction on that .
Between Biden and Kamala Harris , border security will not be a top priority , if their past statements become reality .
Biden promised blanket amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants .
When he finds out the number of illegal immigrants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States , he ’ ll probably alter his pledge to include a larger number .
Kamala Harris is on the record for criticizing the agreements with Central American countries .
Look for a return of Obama-era immigration policy .
It becomes clear as we get closer to his inauguration that Joe Biden has no new ideas on much of anything .
He will rely on Obama administration retreads to fill out his cabinet and his top officials who will drag us back to the bad old days of open borders and expecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Trump administration has a record of success after four years of crafting regional agreements and winning the cooperation of governments from Mexico through Central America .
Look for Joe Biden to erase all that with a few strokes of his pen .
Joe Biden has been historically wrong on foreign policy throughout his 40-year career in the U.S. Senate .
There is certainly no indication that he has changed since he has been out of office .

President Trump officially completed an agreement with El Salvador that has been on the table for more than a year. In September 2019, the Trump administration and the government of El Salvador agreed to allow the United States to return asylum-seekers who pass through El Salvador back to that country, This means that asylum-seekers from other countries who pass through El Salvador on the way to the U.S. southern border can be returned to apply for asylum in El Salvador.
Chad Wolf, acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, traveled to El Salvador this week to finalize the implementation plans of the agreement. No asylum-seekers have been sent back to El Salvador yet. Similar agreements were reached with Guatemala and Honduras. A record surge of Central American families crossed the U.S. southern border seeking protection which was the reason for such agreements. U.S. courts and border security personnel were overwhelmed and processing capacity was far surpassed.
Critics jump on these agreements with Central American countries with claims that the Trump administration is not compassionate and welcoming of migrants who are vulnerable. The administration argues that this allows Central Americans a safe place to seek protection closer to home. Wolf called the agreement “a critical step in the establishment of a truly regional approach to migration, and, more specifically, to the offer of protection to those migrants who are victims of persecution.”
Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele agreed to the accord, known as an Asylum Cooperation Agreement in September 2019. It is being described as a humanitarian agreement.
Under Bukele, El Salvador’s murder rate has dropped, but his government’s heavy hand and crackdown on dissent has raised concerns about creeping authoritarian rule. “Implementation of the ACA will involve and facilitate cooperation between the two governments to expand El Salvador’s systems for offering humanitarian protections,” DHS said.
Progressive groups like Refugees International and Human Rights Watch point to the agreement with Guatemala as one that hasn’t seen much success for those seeking asylum. The U.S. sent 1,000 migrants back to Guatemala between November 2019 and March 2020. Of those, only 2 percent who were returned applied for asylum in Guatemala. The rest appear to have given up and went back to their original homes. This begs the question of what would have happened if they had been allowed to remain in the U.S. – would more migrants have participated in the legitimate asylum process or would they have scattered and never completed the legal process once they crossed the border? If migrants are willing to try to cross the border illegally but claim asylum because that is what caravan coyotes have instructed them to do at the border, if challenged, there is no reason to assume they will abide by American immigration laws. Whether or not asylum-seekers will be sent back to El Salvador before the end of Trump’s term in office is unclear.
DHS released a statement explaining that the agreement is part of a regional approach to offer protection to the most vulnerable fleeing violence and persecution in Central American countries.
“Implementation of the Asylum Cooperative Agreement between the United States and El Salvador is a critical step in the establishment of a truly regional approach to migration, and, more specifically, to the offer of protection to those migrants who are victims of persecution,” said Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad F. Wolf. “I am grateful to the Government of El Salvador, and to President Bukele personally, for their commitment to the implementation of the ACA, and for the resulting expansion of avenues for protection available to persecuted migrants in the region.” In order to confront the ongoing humanitarian and security crisis at the Southwest border due to historic levels of irregular migration and human smuggling, the U.S. and El Salvador signed an ACA on September 20, 2019 to allow migrants to seek protection within the region in El Salvador. Today’s announcement means that all operational details relating to the implementation of the ACA have been worked out between the United States and El Salvador. Implementation of the ACA will involve and facilitate cooperation between the two governments to expand El Salvador’s systems for offering humanitarian protections. Building El Salvador’s protection capacity will involve the use of best practices developed by the United States and the international community to increase protection options for vulnerable populations. DHS is using every available tool at its disposal to mitigate the crisis. During Fiscal Year 2019, more than 71% of migrants apprehended at the U.S. Southwest border were nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. All these countries have now reached agreements with the Trump Administration to confront irregular migration; and all three ACAs have now entered into force.
Joe Biden has pledged $4 billion to tackle the root causes of migration in Central America. During his presidential campaign, he promised to roll back Trump’s border security policies. Biden is an opponent of the wall on the southern border and promised to discontinue construction on that. Between Biden and Kamala Harris, border security will not be a top priority, if their past statements become reality. Biden promised blanket amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants. When he finds out the number of illegal immigrants is actually larger than that in the United States, he’ll probably alter his pledge to include a larger number. Kamala Harris is on the record for criticizing the agreements with Central American countries. Look for a return of Obama-era immigration policy.
Biden’s Central America plan also calls for the restoration of an Obama-era program — canceled by Trump — that allowed U.S. embassies in the region to process requests for asylum from Central American minors. Notably, Biden’s plan also says his administration will “expand efforts to register and process refugees in the region for resettlement in the U.S. and other countries,” an indication that the incoming administration might look to keep the asylum agreements at least partly in place.
It becomes clear as we get closer to his inauguration that Joe Biden has no new ideas on much of anything. He will rely on Obama administration retreads to fill out his cabinet and his top officials who will drag us back to the bad old days of open borders and expecting embassies to act as border security agents. The Trump administration has a record of success after four years of crafting regional agreements and winning the cooperation of governments from Mexico through Central America. Look for Joe Biden to erase all that with a few strokes of his pen. Joe Biden has been historically wrong on foreign policy throughout his 40-year career in the U.S. Senate. There is certainly no indication that he has changed since he has been out of office.


hotair--2020-12-17--OAN: We pledge to you that we won't call Biden the "president-elect"

At least not until the “ mountains of fraud ” which Trump ’ s lawyers remain unable to prove in court are somehow resolved .
Which they won ’ t be , at least not to OAN ’ s satisfaction .
Conspiracy theories are unfalsifiable by design .
So I guess they ’ re committing themselves to describing Biden as “ the so-called president ” for the next four years ?
It ’ s not a bad marketing angle at a moment when disaffected Fox viewers are looking around for something harder-edge .
If Fox is cocaine and Newsmax is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some sort of heroin-meth hybrid of populism to gain a competitive advantage .
Watch , then read on .
He ’ s right about Newsmax describing Biden as the president-elect .
That decision was made on Monday , after the electoral college made things official .
Although , at last check , Newsmax ’ s biggest star was still insisting that it ain ’ t over ’ til it ’ s over .
That ’ s a Fox-y approach to this dilemma .
The hallmark of Fox News , especially during the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports the news and then the opinion hosts who deliver the ratings report … their version of the news , let ’ s say .
Having Newsmax ’ s newsier hosts describe Biden as the president-elect while Greg Kelly goes his own way is in keeping with FNC ’ s model of trying to play both sides , earning some grudging industry cred by acknowledging unpleasant realities during daytime hours while letting the nighttime hosts give the people what they want .
Speaking of which , has the ratings pressure from Newsmax forced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether to call Biden the “ president-elect ” ?
They ’ ve called him that many times already , of course ; the Fox decision desk called the race for him on Saturday , November 7 , just minutes after the other networks did .
But look at how the hosts of “ Fox & Friends ” described him this morning — more than once : Is that quirk special to F & F , possibly because it ’ s the president ’ s favorite show and they know he ’ s watching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox execs insist upon it , or did Trump ?
Or did Brian Kilmeade and Ainsley Earhardt take it upon themselves to start doing it ?
Fox Kremlinology is always fun .
I wonder if the hype now surrounding Congress ’ s session on January 6 , which is destined to be a bust for the president and his fans , has led to a compromise at FNC in which they ’ ll continue to gesture rhetorically to the idea that Biden *still* isn ’ t technically the duly recognized president-elect until January @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that convention after Congress certifies the results .
Here ’ s Fox all-star and Trump buddy ( sorry , I mean former buddy ) Geraldo Rivera asking fans to please knock it off and accept that Biden won .
Exit question : What term will Hannity use to describe Biden over the next four years ?
I ’ m leaning towards “ cheater-in-chief ” but “ Cheaty Joe ” is a dark-horse contender .

At least not until the “mountains of fraud” which Trump’s lawyers remain unable to prove in court are somehow resolved.
Which they won’t be, at least not to OAN’s satisfaction. Conspiracy theories are unfalsifiable by design. So I guess they’re committing themselves to describing Biden as “the so-called president” for the next four years?
It’s not a bad marketing angle at a moment when disaffected Fox viewers are looking around for something harder-edge. If Fox is cocaine and Newsmax is crack, OAN is willing to push some sort of heroin-meth hybrid of populism to gain a competitive advantage. Watch, then read on.
“One America News will officially not be calling Joe Biden the president-elect… we are the only broadcast news network out there with the integrity to report that this election isn’t over. Fox News caved, to no one’s surprise.” pic.twitter.com/o0e6TFZ2Gf — Matthew Gertz (@MattGertz) December 17, 2020
He’s right about Newsmax describing Biden as the president-elect. That decision was made on Monday, after the electoral college made things official. Although, at last check, Newsmax’s biggest star was still insisting that it ain’t over ’til it’s over.
That’s a Fox-y approach to this dilemma. The hallmark of Fox News, especially during the Trump years, is that the news team reports the news and then the opinion hosts who deliver the ratings report … their version of the news, let’s say. Having Newsmax’s newsier hosts describe Biden as the president-elect while Greg Kelly goes his own way is in keeping with FNC’s model of trying to play both sides, earning some grudging industry cred by acknowledging unpleasant realities during daytime hours while letting the nighttime hosts give the people what they want.
Speaking of which, has the ratings pressure from Newsmax forced Fox to also hedge its bets on whether to call Biden the “president-elect”? They’ve called him that many times already, of course; the Fox decision desk called the race for him on Saturday, November 7, just minutes after the other networks did. But look at how the hosts of “Fox & Friends” described him this morning — more than once:
"the former vice president who is, according to some, president-elect" brian kilmeade keeps saying things like this, now even after the electoral college voted. i don't think he thinks that joe biden won the election. pic.twitter.com/8VfraYVcZB — Bobby Lewis (@revrrlewis) December 17, 2020
Is that quirk special to F&F, possibly because it’s the president’s favorite show and they know he’s watching? When did it begin? Did Fox execs insist upon it, or did Trump? Or did Brian Kilmeade and Ainsley Earhardt take it upon themselves to start doing it? Fox Kremlinology is always fun. I wonder if the hype now surrounding Congress’s session on January 6, which is destined to be a bust for the president and his fans, has led to a compromise at FNC in which they’ll continue to gesture rhetorically to the idea that Biden *still* isn’t technically the duly recognized president-elect until January 6 and then they’ll drop that convention after Congress certifies the results.
Here’s Fox all-star and Trump buddy (sorry, I mean former buddy) Geraldo Rivera asking fans to please knock it off and accept that Biden won. Exit question: What term will Hannity use to describe Biden over the next four years? I’m leaning towards “cheater-in-chief” but “Cheaty Joe” is a dark-horse contender.


hotair--2020-12-17--Former Obama CIA Director on what UFOs actually are

A rather intriguing bit of UFO news popped up this week that may give us yet another peek into what the government knows about the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena , or at least thinks it knows .
John O. Brennan , CIA Director under President Obama , gave an interview to Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution .
Part of their conversation turned to the subject of the UAP Task Force and possible explanations for what these UFOs are and where they might come from .
Rather than clamming up or simply laughing it off , Brennan took the question seriously .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make some Earth-shattering announcement , he did offer some speculation which at least seems to hint at the idea that the CIA has pondered the subject and they aren ’ t ruling anything out .
COWEN : At the end of all that sifting and interpreting , what do you think is the most likely hypothesis ?
BRENNAN : [ laughs ] I don ’ t know .
When people talk about it , is there other life besides what ’ s in the States , in the world , the globe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ways .
I think it ’ s a bit presumptuous and arrogant for us to believe that there ’ s no other form of life anywhere in the entire universe .
What that might be is subject to a lot of different views .
But I think some of the phenomena we ’ re going to be seeing continues to be unexplained and might , in fact , be some type of phenomenon that is the result of something that we don ’ t yet understand and that could involve some type of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different form of life .
You can read or listen to the interview at Medium and it ’ s probably worth your time if you ’ re interested in this subject .
They cover a lot more material than just UFOs , but the way Brennan answered the UAP question is of particular interest to me .
Just from the transcript above , you can see that he begins the answer with a laugh , but it sounds more like a nervous laugh than any sort of mocking tone .
He doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to string together a very large number of words that seem to dance around the question before delivering the final shot .
I was particularly taken by the way he talked about “ something we don ’ t yet understand.
” He then races through a few more qualifiers before suggesting the possibility that the origin of the UAP is something that “ some might say constitutes a different form of life.
” Those were some impressive linguistic backflips to avoid saying the word “ aliens ” or “ extraterrestrials , ” weren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could he be talking about ?
What makes Brennan more of an interesting figure in this discussion than you might expect is the fact that as the Director of the CIA , he held ( and likely still holds ) one of the highest possible security clearances in the country .
And as those of you that follow ufology and UFO history likely already know , the CIA has had a long and deep interest in the subject of UFOs going back to the earliest days of the agency .
They have frequently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( and frequently disinformation ) that later became declassified .
The CIA was heavily involved in Operation Blue Book , though primarily in the background .
The agency frequently worked hand-in-hand with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations ( AFOSI ) which , as you may recall , was responsible for the disinformation work of Richard Doty .
His efforts at blaming aliens as a cover for other classified operations eventually led to the death of a scientist named Paul Bennewitz .
The point is that the CIA has had their hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If they know anything about UFOs that ’ s being withheld from the public , it ’ s a fair bet that Brennan knows about it .
But even hearing him “ suggest ” that they might involve “ a different form of life ” is intriguing , to say the least .

A rather intriguing bit of UFO news popped up this week that may give us yet another peek into what the government knows about the Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, or at least thinks it knows. John O. Brennan, CIA Director under President Obama, gave an interview to Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution. Part of their conversation turned to the subject of the UAP Task Force and possible explanations for what these UFOs are and where they might come from. Rather than clamming up or simply laughing it off, Brennan took the question seriously. While he clearly wasn’t about to make some Earth-shattering announcement, he did offer some speculation which at least seems to hint at the idea that the CIA has pondered the subject and they aren’t ruling anything out.
COWEN: At the end of all that sifting and interpreting, what do you think is the most likely hypothesis? BRENNAN: [laughs] I don’t know. When people talk about it, is there other life besides what’s in the States, in the world, the globe? Life is defined in many different ways. I think it’s a bit presumptuous and arrogant for us to believe that there’s no other form of life anywhere in the entire universe. What that might be is subject to a lot of different views. But I think some of the phenomena we’re going to be seeing continues to be unexplained and might, in fact, be some type of phenomenon that is the result of something that we don’t yet understand and that could involve some type of activity that some might say constitutes a different form of life.
You can read or listen to the interview at Medium and it’s probably worth your time if you’re interested in this subject. They cover a lot more material than just UFOs, but the way Brennan answered the UAP question is of particular interest to me. Just from the transcript above, you can see that he begins the answer with a laugh, but it sounds more like a nervous laugh than any sort of mocking tone. He doesn’t sound entirely comfortable and goes on to string together a very large number of words that seem to dance around the question before delivering the final shot.
I was particularly taken by the way he talked about “something we don’t yet understand.” He then races through a few more qualifiers before suggesting the possibility that the origin of the UAP is something that “some might say constitutes a different form of life.” Those were some impressive linguistic backflips to avoid saying the word “aliens” or “extraterrestrials,” weren’t they? But what else could he be talking about?
What makes Brennan more of an interesting figure in this discussion than you might expect is the fact that as the Director of the CIA, he held (and likely still holds) one of the highest possible security clearances in the country. And as those of you that follow ufology and UFO history likely already know, the CIA has had a long and deep interest in the subject of UFOs going back to the earliest days of the agency. They have frequently been shown to have trafficked in information (and frequently disinformation) that later became declassified.
The CIA was heavily involved in Operation Blue Book, though primarily in the background. The agency frequently worked hand-in-hand with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) which, as you may recall, was responsible for the disinformation work of Richard Doty. His efforts at blaming aliens as a cover for other classified operations eventually led to the death of a scientist named Paul Bennewitz.
The point is that the CIA has had their hand in this game for a long time. If they know anything about UFOs that’s being withheld from the public, it’s a fair bet that Brennan knows about it. But even hearing him “suggest” that they might involve “a different form of life” is intriguing, to say the least.