hotair--2020-06-02--Voting during a plague, riots

Voting during a plague, riots

While it may come as a surprise to some , there ’ s still a presidential primary season going on , along with a number of state and local primary races to be decided .
And since today is Tuesday , there ’ s going to be a bunch of people voting today .
In addition to the four elections previously scheduled for today ( New Mexico , South Dakota , Washington , D.C. and Montana ) , four other states postponed their votes until today due to the pandemic ( Indiana , Maryland , Pennsylvania , and Rhode Island @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic Super Tuesday .
Of course , since the Democrats have already settled on Uncle Joe and there ’ s no realistic challenger to Trump , I ’ m guessing that turnout may be somewhat depressed , to say the least .
We no longer live in ordinary times , however .
Many states have expanded their vote-by-mail options , but some people will still be looking to go to the polls in person .
And how do they do that if they are still worried about either contracting the virus or running @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is further complicated for places like the District of Columbia which normally keeps the polls open until 8 pm but now has a mandatory curfew set to start at 7 pm .
That ’ s the question being tackled at Slate this week .
Washington , D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser put the city under a strict curfew Monday and Tuesday nights , barring most residents from leaving their house after 7 p.m .
But the District is in the midst of a primary election , and voting centers will remain open until 8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the final day to cast a ballot .
Residents who vote on either night may therefore risk arrest while walking to or from the polls after curfew .
And Bowser has declined to explain how they can avoid a confrontation with law enforcement in the process… But what about voters ?
Bowser has urged residents to vote early , and Monday is the last day of early voting .
Tuesday is Election Day .
Because DC is overwhelmingly Democratic , the primary effectively determines the winner of most races for the city council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open until 8 p.m. What happens to voters who leave their homes to cast a ballot after curfew ?
Yesterday , Mayor Bowser put out a statement intended to settle this issue .
She declared that voting was an “ essential ” activity , so “ DC residents voting will be exempt to the curfew.
” That sounds great in theory , but how does she plan to implement it ?
If the cops see somebody running down the street at 7:30 carrying a Molotov and a baseball bat and try to stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the dude insists he ’ s just trying to make it to his polling place before it closes ?
The District obviously couldn ’ t print up any sort of “ voting pass ” to show the police and distribute it to everyone who needs one on a single day ’ s notice .
The Mayor ’ s spokesperson was asked about all of these issues but had no answers .
Wouldn ’ t the solution be to push the curfew back by 90 minutes ?
That should give everyone time to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plan on obeying the law .
Of course , judging by the activity we ’ ve seen in previous nights , most of the people intent on rioting and looting aren ’ t going to be paying any attention to the curfew anyway .
They appear to be taking a “ Raid Area 51 ” approach to their rioting .
They can ’ t arrest all of us !
And sadly , they appear to be correct .
This discussion centers on the District of Columbia , but the questions being raised apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting today as well .
In South Dakota , both Rapid City and Sioux Falls have now implemented curfews , but they don ’ t begin until 10 pm so that shouldn ’ t impact voting .
But Philadelphia has been under a curfew starting at 6 pm for the past three days with no end in sight .
There are more examples around the country .
And even if people aren ’ t facing complications arising from curfews , is it really fair to expect people in the larger cities to try @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through streets filled with rioters and looters ?
And that ’ s on top of worries about maintaining social distancing .
The turnout for these primaries may wind up being so ridiculously low that few will place much faith in the final numbers .
Also keep in mind that in some of the very blue cities like D.C. and Baltimore , when it comes to the local and municipal elections , the primary basically is the general election because Republicans are so vastly outnumbered .
This combination of catastrophes is going to wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ greater degree than some people may have anticipated .

While it may come as a surprise to some, there’s still a presidential primary season going on, along with a number of state and local primary races to be decided. And since today is Tuesday, there’s going to be a bunch of people voting today. In addition to the four elections previously scheduled for today (New Mexico, South Dakota, Washington, D.C. and Montana), four other states postponed their votes until today due to the pandemic (Indiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island). Think of it as a pandemic Super Tuesday. Of course, since the Democrats have already settled on Uncle Joe and there’s no realistic challenger to Trump, I’m guessing that turnout may be somewhat depressed, to say the least.
We no longer live in ordinary times, however. Many states have expanded their vote-by-mail options, but some people will still be looking to go to the polls in person. And how do they do that if they are still worried about either contracting the virus or running into hordes of protesters/rioters? The question is further complicated for places like the District of Columbia which normally keeps the polls open until 8 pm but now has a mandatory curfew set to start at 7 pm. That’s the question being tackled at Slate this week.
Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser put the city under a strict curfew Monday and Tuesday nights, barring most residents from leaving their house after 7 p.m. But the District is in the midst of a primary election, and voting centers will remain open until 8 p.m. on both nights. Tuesday is the final day to cast a ballot. Residents who vote on either night may therefore risk arrest while walking to or from the polls after curfew. And Bowser has declined to explain how they can avoid a confrontation with law enforcement in the process… But what about voters? Bowser has urged residents to vote early, and Monday is the last day of early voting. Tuesday is Election Day. Because DC is overwhelmingly Democratic, the primary effectively determines the winner of most races for the city council. Polls are still set to stay open until 8 p.m. What happens to voters who leave their homes to cast a ballot after curfew?
Yesterday, Mayor Bowser put out a statement intended to settle this issue. She declared that voting was an “essential” activity, so “DC residents voting will be exempt to the curfew.”
That sounds great in theory, but how does she plan to implement it? If the cops see somebody running down the street at 7:30 carrying a Molotov and a baseball bat and try to stop them, what do they do when the dude insists he’s just trying to make it to his polling place before it closes? The District obviously couldn’t print up any sort of “voting pass” to show the police and distribute it to everyone who needs one on a single day’s notice. The Mayor’s spokesperson was asked about all of these issues but had no answers.
Wouldn’t the solution be to push the curfew back by 90 minutes? That should give everyone time to vote and get back home, assuming they plan on obeying the law. Of course, judging by the activity we’ve seen in previous nights, most of the people intent on rioting and looting aren’t going to be paying any attention to the curfew anyway. They appear to be taking a “Raid Area 51” approach to their rioting. They can’t arrest all of us! And sadly, they appear to be correct.
This discussion centers on the District of Columbia, but the questions being raised apply to many of the other seven states voting today as well. In South Dakota, both Rapid City and Sioux Falls have now implemented curfews, but they don’t begin until 10 pm so that shouldn’t impact voting. But Philadelphia has been under a curfew starting at 6 pm for the past three days with no end in sight. There are more examples around the country.
And even if people aren’t facing complications arising from curfews, is it really fair to expect people in the larger cities to try to make their way to the polls through streets filled with rioters and looters? And that’s on top of worries about maintaining social distancing. The turnout for these primaries may wind up being so ridiculously low that few will place much faith in the final numbers. Also keep in mind that in some of the very blue cities like D.C. and Baltimore, when it comes to the local and municipal elections, the primary basically is the general election because Republicans are so vastly outnumbered. This combination of catastrophes is going to wind up impacting the 2020 elections to a greater degree than some people may have anticipated.


hotair--2020-06-02--Whitmer: Maybe we're done with the lockdown

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer had become the poster child for oppressive lockdown orders during the pandemic .
Her over-the-top orders restricting the movement of citizens – even between private residences that they own – were seen as examples of the worst authoritarian impulses by elected executive officials .
But now it seems that those days are coming to an end .
Despite the fact that the virus is still out there and flaring up in some places , Whitmer announced yesterday that the lockdown is basically over and people can largely resume their normal activities provided they observe social distancing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gretchen Whitmer on Monday moved to further reopen the Midwest state ’ s economy , largely rescinding a stay-at- home order in place since March and allowing retailers and restaurants to open back up over the next week .
Whitmer ’ s new executive order will allow retailers to reopen on Thursday and restaurants on June 8 , both subject to capacity limits .
Effective immediately , groups of 100 or less will be allowed to gather outdoors with social distancing and office work that can not be done remotely can resume .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are ready to carefully move our state into the next phase , ” Whitmer said in a statement .
“ While Michiganders are no longer required to stay home , we must all continue to be smart and practice social distancing.
” I ’ m sure many Michiganders will be relieved to hear this news and begin getting back to whatever passes for “ normal ” these days .
But at the same time , they are no doubt being left with plenty of questions as we all should be .
One thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus is still out there .
We definitely “ flattened the curve ” in some of our most densely populated areas and drove the daily number of deaths , hospitalizations and new cases down considerably .
( Which is great , obviously . )
But it ’ s going to take a very long time before we can get even a significant minority of the country ’ s entire population tested for both the virus and the presence of antibodies in their system , with the latter suggesting the person already had the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reach 100 % testing .
With that in mind , if we can return to work and gatherings now while observing social distancing protocols , why couldn ’ t we have done that a week ago ?
Or a month ago ?
It ’ s kind of hard to shake the feeling that all we really needed to do was shut down long enough for businesses , schools and all the rest to restructure their environments to allow six feet of space between people , stagger egress and ingress , and require facemasks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could have opened the country up as soon as everyone was in compliance , couldn ’ t we ?
I ’ m not saying that process is either cheap or easy .
We ’ ve spent a long time working off a model that encouraged packing people in as closely as possible to cut down on costs .
But if it ’ s a choice between that or catching a potentially fatal disease that ’ s probably going to be with us for a very long time , it ’ s a pretty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us back to a question that many of us were asking when all of these lockdowns and social distancing orders were originally put in place .
This may not be an issue of when all of this ends , but if it ever ends .
Are we now just a society that ’ s going to keep our distance from each other in all circumstances outside the home and forgo shaking hands , hugging or other physical contact permanently ?
After all , even if we do somehow wipe out this virus and/or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there ’ s always going to be another virus coming along sooner or later .
It ’ s a rather alarming prospect and a vast change to centuries of social customs .
But then , it would probably take only one generation before the old ways are forgotten .
I ’ m still not sure how I feel about this .

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer had become the poster child for oppressive lockdown orders during the pandemic. Her over-the-top orders restricting the movement of citizens – even between private residences that they own – were seen as examples of the worst authoritarian impulses by elected executive officials. But now it seems that those days are coming to an end. Despite the fact that the virus is still out there and flaring up in some places, Whitmer announced yesterday that the lockdown is basically over and people can largely resume their normal activities provided they observe social distancing rules. (Reuters)
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer on Monday moved to further reopen the Midwest state’s economy, largely rescinding a stay-at- home order in place since March and allowing retailers and restaurants to open back up over the next week. Whitmer’s new executive order will allow retailers to reopen on Thursday and restaurants on June 8, both subject to capacity limits. Effective immediately, groups of 100 or less will be allowed to gather outdoors with social distancing and office work that cannot be done remotely can resume. “The data has shown that we are ready to carefully move our state into the next phase,” Whitmer said in a statement. “While Michiganders are no longer required to stay home, we must all continue to be smart and practice social distancing.”
I’m sure many Michiganders will be relieved to hear this news and begin getting back to whatever passes for “normal” these days. But at the same time, they are no doubt being left with plenty of questions as we all should be.
One thing we know for sure is that the virus is still out there. We definitely “flattened the curve” in some of our most densely populated areas and drove the daily number of deaths, hospitalizations and new cases down considerably. (Which is great, obviously.) But it’s going to take a very long time before we can get even a significant minority of the country’s entire population tested for both the virus and the presence of antibodies in their system, with the latter suggesting the person already had the disease and recovered. We may never reach 100% testing.
With that in mind, if we can return to work and gatherings now while observing social distancing protocols, why couldn’t we have done that a week ago? Or a month ago? It’s kind of hard to shake the feeling that all we really needed to do was shut down long enough for businesses, schools and all the rest to restructure their environments to allow six feet of space between people, stagger egress and ingress, and require facemasks on the premises. And then we could have opened the country up as soon as everyone was in compliance, couldn’t we?
I’m not saying that process is either cheap or easy. We’ve spent a long time working off a model that encouraged packing people in as closely as possible to cut down on costs. But if it’s a choice between that or catching a potentially fatal disease that’s probably going to be with us for a very long time, it’s a pretty easy call.
And that possibility brings us back to a question that many of us were asking when all of these lockdowns and social distancing orders were originally put in place. This may not be an issue of when all of this ends, but if it ever ends. Are we now just a society that’s going to keep our distance from each other in all circumstances outside the home and forgo shaking hands, hugging or other physical contact permanently? After all, even if we do somehow wipe out this virus and/or make every person in the country immune, there’s always going to be another virus coming along sooner or later.
It’s a rather alarming prospect and a vast change to centuries of social customs. But then, it would probably take only one generation before the old ways are forgotten. I’m still not sure how I feel about this.


hotair--2020-06-03--Romney's approval rises to 56/42 in new Utah poll. How come?

A fascinating result considering how he was polling after his fateful impeachment vote .
I ’ ll give you three theories to explain it .
A new UtahPolicy.com/KUTV 2News survey shows 56 percent of Utah voters either “ strongly ” or “ somewhat ” approve of Romney ’ s job performance .
42 percent say they disapprove .
Romney is in a strong political position right now with a net positive approval of +14 .
That ’ s a massive reversal from our previous survey in March when just 36 percent of Utahns approved of Romney ’ s job performance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of “ strong ” Republicans disapprove of how Romney is handling his job , but 55 percent of moderate Republicans approve of him .
A majority of independents and Democrats also say they approve .
That ’ s a net turnaround of 27 points in two months despite the fact that Romney hasn ’ t had much to do lately in Congress except rubber-stamp coronavirus fiscal relief packages .
Mike Lee , Utah ’ s other senator , is at 46/47 approval .
Romney ’ s more popular than he is !
Three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t stay mad at the first Mormon major-party presidential nominee in American history , especially since his impeachment vote ultimately didn ’ t prevent Trump ’ s acquittal .
Hardcore Trumpers will bear him a grudge forever ( note his disapproval among “ strong ” Republicans in the excerpt ) but Utah has fewer hardcore Trumpers than most other states .
He ’ s not out of the woods on a tough primary but he has four years to solve that problem .
Second , the last time Romney skirmished with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting , and Utahns are on his side on that .
“ In my state , I ’ ll bet 90 % of us vote by mail .
It works very very well and it ’ s a very Republican state , ” he told reporters a few weeks ago when Trump was ranting about the process as some sort of election-rigging conspiracy .
Maybe his constituents were glad to see him sticking up for their way of doing things .
Third , and most intriguingly , maybe his bounce is a reaction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Reading today ’ s poll , I thought back to the fact that Obama spent much of his presidency polling in the mid-40s in job approval until the 2016 campaign really got rolling , when he began to creep up .
He topped 50 percent reliably through much of 2016 and ended up at 57 percent on Election Day , which I ’ ve always taken as a reflection of how voters felt about the choice facing them : “ I ’ m not crazy about Obama but he ’ s better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s benefiting from the same effect .
As a politician whose legacy will be defined by his willingness to remove Trump from office , the worse Trump ’ s performance is , the more Romney seems “ prescient ” in hindsight — sort of .
Someone who doesn ’ t like how Trump is handling the pandemic , say , logically shouldn ’ t let that affect their assessment of whether the House ’ s case against Trump in the Ukraine matter had merit .
But politics doesn ’ t work in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who ’ ve grown to feel dissatisfied with Trump ’ s performance may decide in their annoyance that “ Romney was right ” and reward him for it with a good rating of his own .
Today Trump is at 43.5 percent approval in the RCP average , his lowest number since early December , i.e .
the impeachment era .
Last week his disapproval touched 54.1 percent , the highest level since mid-November .
Whether it ’ s the pandemic or the economic crater or the fallout from his handling of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s unquestionably having a bad patch here .
Maybe Romney ’ s a beneficiary .
Joe Biden ’ s definitely a beneficiary .
New from Monmouth : Biden currently has the support of 52 % of registered voters and Trump has the support of 41 % .
The Democrat ’ s lead has been slowly widening .
It stood at 50 % to 41 % last month , 48 % to 44 % in April , and 48 % to 45 % in March… More voters think that Trump ’ s handling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely ( 38 % ) rather than more likely ( 18 % ) that he will be reelected in November .
This marks a shift from April when opinion on this question was almost evenly divided ( 31 % less likely to 27 % more likely ) .
That ’ s four months in a row that Biden ’ s lead has grown , coincidentally beginning when the epidemic exploded and the lockdowns began .
Here ’ s the most alarming number for Trump : Biden ’ s favorable rating isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers are largely stable for him .
( They were identical in January . )
Trump ’ s never been as low as 38 percent favorable or as high as 57 percent unfavorable in a Monmouth poll over the past nine months , not even during impeachment .
His numbers are in uncharted territory in other polling too : The Washington Post had Trump trailing Biden by 10 over the weekend , 53/43 , when they had the race nearly tied two months ago .
Reuters also has Trump trailing Biden today by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number for an incumbent .
His overall job approval is at 39 percent ; on the specific issue of how he ’ s handling the Floyd protests it ’ s lower than that , with 55 percent disapproving .
Weirdly , although the spread of COVID-19 has slowed down and the country has begun to reopen , he ’ s getting unusually bad marks on the pandemic too .
Morning Consult has him at 41/53 on that issue right now , his worst rating yet , with approval down in all three partisan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans since March ) .
If I ’ m right that Romney ’ s political fortunes are destined to increase ( modestly ) the more Trump looks unequal to the enormous challenges that face him then it ’ s no surprise that he ’ s up in Utah right now .
Trump ’ s having the roughest stretch of his presidency — or any presidency in modern times , really .
The guy who voted to remove him might be getting a second look from some heretofore skeptical Utahns .

A fascinating result considering how he was polling after his fateful impeachment vote. I’ll give you three theories to explain it.
A new UtahPolicy.com/KUTV 2News survey shows 56 percent of Utah voters either “strongly” or “somewhat” approve of Romney’s job performance. 42 percent say they disapprove. Romney is in a strong political position right now with a net positive approval of +14. That’s a massive reversal from our previous survey in March when just 36 percent of Utahns approved of Romney’s job performance, while 49 percent disapproved… 69 percent of “strong” Republicans disapprove of how Romney is handling his job, but 55 percent of moderate Republicans approve of him. A majority of independents and Democrats also say they approve.
That’s a net turnaround of 27 points in two months despite the fact that Romney hasn’t had much to do lately in Congress except rubber-stamp coronavirus fiscal relief packages. Mike Lee, Utah’s other senator, is at 46/47 approval. Romney’s more popular than he is!
Three theories. First, Utah Republicans just can’t stay mad at the first Mormon major-party presidential nominee in American history, especially since his impeachment vote ultimately didn’t prevent Trump’s acquittal. Hardcore Trumpers will bear him a grudge forever (note his disapproval among “strong” Republicans in the excerpt) but Utah has fewer hardcore Trumpers than most other states. He’s not out of the woods on a tough primary but he has four years to solve that problem.
Second, the last time Romney skirmished with Trump was over the issue of mail-in voting, and Utahns are on his side on that. “In my state, I’ll bet 90% of us vote by mail. It works very very well and it’s a very Republican state,” he told reporters a few weeks ago when Trump was ranting about the process as some sort of election-rigging conspiracy. Maybe his constituents were glad to see him sticking up for their way of doing things.
Third, and most intriguingly, maybe his bounce is a reaction to the rocky patch Trump has hit. Reading today’s poll, I thought back to the fact that Obama spent much of his presidency polling in the mid-40s in job approval until the 2016 campaign really got rolling, when he began to creep up. He topped 50 percent reliably through much of 2016 and ended up at 57 percent on Election Day, which I’ve always taken as a reflection of how voters felt about the choice facing them: “I’m not crazy about Obama but he’s better than these two losers.” Maybe Romney’s benefiting from the same effect. As a politician whose legacy will be defined by his willingness to remove Trump from office, the worse Trump’s performance is, the more Romney seems “prescient” in hindsight — sort of. Someone who doesn’t like how Trump is handling the pandemic, say, logically shouldn’t let that affect their assessment of whether the House’s case against Trump in the Ukraine matter had merit.
But politics doesn’t work in logical linear fashion that way. Some who’ve grown to feel dissatisfied with Trump’s performance may decide in their annoyance that “Romney was right” and reward him for it with a good rating of his own. Today Trump is at 43.5 percent approval in the RCP average, his lowest number since early December, i.e. the impeachment era. Last week his disapproval touched 54.1 percent, the highest level since mid-November. Whether it’s the pandemic or the economic crater or the fallout from his handling of the George Floyd protests is unclear but he’s unquestionably having a bad patch here. Maybe Romney’s a beneficiary.
Joe Biden’s definitely a beneficiary. New from Monmouth:
Biden currently has the support of 52% of registered voters and Trump has the support of 41%. The Democrat’s lead has been slowly widening. It stood at 50% to 41% last month, 48% to 44% in April, and 48% to 45% in March… More voters think that Trump’s handling of the outbreak has made it less likely (38%) rather than more likely (18%) that he will be reelected in November. This marks a shift from April when opinion on this question was almost evenly divided (31% less likely to 27% more likely).
That’s four months in a row that Biden’s lead has grown, coincidentally beginning when the epidemic exploded and the lockdowns began. Here’s the most alarming number for Trump:
Biden’s favorable rating isn’t great either at just 42/49 but those numbers are largely stable for him. (They were identical in January.) Trump’s never been as low as 38 percent favorable or as high as 57 percent unfavorable in a Monmouth poll over the past nine months, not even during impeachment. His numbers are in uncharted territory in other polling too:
RCP poll leads on this day in history: 2020: Biden +8.0
2016: Clinton +1.5
2012: Obama +1.3
2008: Obama +1.4 I think people generally remember the Obama wins as much easier and more predictable than they were. — Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) June 3, 2020
Trump's disapproval rating has been on the rise again, now up to 54%. There were some presidents with lower approval ratings to this point in their first terms, but no president had a higher *disapproval* rating than Trump now has.https://t.co/Vfmzd6B2ps pic.twitter.com/X3qpeAwoAe — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) June 2, 2020
The Washington Post had Trump trailing Biden by 10 over the weekend, 53/43, when they had the race nearly tied two months ago. Reuters also has Trump trailing Biden today by 10, 47/37, an almost unimaginable number for an incumbent. His overall job approval is at 39 percent; on the specific issue of how he’s handling the Floyd protests it’s lower than that, with 55 percent disapproving. Weirdly, although the spread of COVID-19 has slowed down and the country has begun to reopen, he’s getting unusually bad marks on the pandemic too. Morning Consult has him at 41/53 on that issue right now, his worst rating yet, with approval down in all three partisan groups (by 19 net points among Republicans since March).
If I’m right that Romney’s political fortunes are destined to increase (modestly) the more Trump looks unequal to the enormous challenges that face him then it’s no surprise that he’s up in Utah right now. Trump’s having the roughest stretch of his presidency — or any presidency in modern times, really. The guy who voted to remove him might be getting a second look from some heretofore skeptical Utahns.


hotair--2020-06-03--Cruz to Rosenstein: Crossfire Hurricane makes Watergate pale in comparison

It ’ s not exactly a palate-cleanser for the evening , but at least it has fireworks .
The first public hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee ’ s probe of Operation Crossfire Hurricane put former deputy AG Rod Rosenstein on the hot seat today .
Sen. Ted Cruz teed off on Rosenstein and the Obama-era Department of Justice in a fiery examination , at one point arguing that the attempt to kneecap an incoming administration made Crossfire Hurricane worse than Watergate .
“ Either that you were complicit in the wrongdoing , which I don ’ t believe was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rosenstein , “ or that your performance of your duties was grossly negligent.
” For his part , however , Rosenstein never did get pushed into admitting much , which means fireworks are pretty much all Senate Republicans got out of today ’ s session ( via Red State ) : “ Are you aware of other instances the Department of Justice employees fraudulently creating evidence to submit to court ?
” Cruz asked .
“ Every instance that I am aware of , senator , would be appropriately investigated and — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Rosenstein responded .
… “ On May 17 , you appointed Bob Mueller the special counsel .
On June 29 , you signed the third [ Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ] application .
On Aug. 2 , you signed the second scope application , ” Cruz said .
He continued , “ Was there any more important case the Department of Justice had that an investigation into whether the president of the United States is a Russian asset , colluding against the United States ?
” Rosenstein replied : “ Well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re characterizing the investigation , senator .
There was certainly lots of important investigations , but I view this as one of the most important.
” The most important point scored by Cruz in his interrogation comes near the end .
The predicate for the continued pursuit of Michael Flynn — the heart of Crossfire Hurricane — was ludicrous on its face , Cruz declared , and said Rosenstein should have jolly well known it , too .
The Logan Act is an unconstitutional absurdity , Cruz said , and has never been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hardly ever attempted .
“ John Kerry is probably violating the Logan Act right now , ” Cruz quipped , adding quickly that the law ’ s unconstitutional nature makes it a non-sequitur .
How did Rosenstein allow that probe to continue on the basis of the Logan Act ?
Rosenstein never does give a clear answer to that question .
It didn ’ t get any easier for Rosenstein after that , either : Hawley at one point cut him off when he was trying to explain that he relied on information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agent swore under oath that the facts were correct , when signing off on a FISA application .
“ I know and that ’ s why you can ’ t be held responsible .
Everyone at the FBI says they can ’ t be held responsible and so at the end of the day it ’ s nobody ’ s fault , ” Hawley said .
Rosenstein held his ground , telling Hawley he was being “ accountable ” by showing up to testify .
“ I ’ m here being chastised by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solve the problem , ” Rosenstein said .
No , but it sure makes everyone feel good afterward .
To quote from Thank You for Smoking , “ It ’ s good to see that the public beating has not gone out of style.
” The real issue isn ’ t so much what happened after Rosenstein ’ s arrival at the DoJ , but what took place before that .
Republicans argue that the Obama administration abused their authority to remove Flynn and to try to remove Donald Trump too , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to offer on that score .
To move the ball on that theory , Republicans will have to get Obama-era officials under oath , and that … will probably take some doing .
This isn ’ t the only game in town , however .
John Durham is conducting an investigation into that very theory , and he has full law-enforcement authority for warrants and subpoenas .
In a very large sense , this is just a sideshow .
An entertaining sideshow , and perhaps even a salutary sideshow in establishing some public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manipulations at the DoJ , but it ’ s the Durham probe that will either establish that theory with indictments … or dismiss it with the lack of them .

It’s not exactly a palate-cleanser for the evening, but at least it has fireworks. The first public hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s probe of Operation Crossfire Hurricane put former deputy AG Rod Rosenstein on the hot seat today. Sen. Ted Cruz teed off on Rosenstein and the Obama-era Department of Justice in a fiery examination, at one point arguing that the attempt to kneecap an incoming administration made Crossfire Hurricane worse than Watergate.
“Either that you were complicit in the wrongdoing, which I don’t believe was the case,” Cruz thundered at Rosenstein, “or that your performance of your duties was grossly negligent.” For his part, however, Rosenstein never did get pushed into admitting much, which means fireworks are pretty much all Senate Republicans got out of today’s session (via Red State):
“Are you aware of other instances the Department of Justice employees fraudulently creating evidence to submit to court?” Cruz asked. “Every instance that I am aware of, senator, would be appropriately investigated and — and hopefully appropriate action would be taken,” Rosenstein responded. … “On May 17, you appointed Bob Mueller the special counsel. On June 29, you signed the third [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] application. On Aug. 2, you signed the second scope application,” Cruz said. He continued, “Was there any more important case the Department of Justice had that an investigation into whether the president of the United States is a Russian asset, colluding against the United States?” Rosenstein replied: “Well, that’s the way you’re characterizing the investigation, senator. There was certainly lots of important investigations, but I view this as one of the most important.”
The most important point scored by Cruz in his interrogation comes near the end. The predicate for the continued pursuit of Michael Flynn — the heart of Crossfire Hurricane — was ludicrous on its face, Cruz declared, and said Rosenstein should have jolly well known it, too. The Logan Act is an unconstitutional absurdity, Cruz said, and has never been prosecuted successfully since its passage — and hardly ever attempted. “John Kerry is probably violating the Logan Act right now,” Cruz quipped, adding quickly that the law’s unconstitutional nature makes it a non-sequitur. How did Rosenstein allow that probe to continue on the basis of the Logan Act? Rosenstein never does give a clear answer to that question.
It didn’t get any easier for Rosenstein after that, either:
Hawley at one point cut him off when he was trying to explain that he relied on information the FBI gathered, in which an agent swore under oath that the facts were correct, when signing off on a FISA application. “I know and that’s why you can’t be held responsible. Everyone at the FBI says they can’t be held responsible and so at the end of the day it’s nobody’s fault,” Hawley said. Rosenstein held his ground, telling Hawley he was being “accountable” by showing up to testify. “I’m here being chastised by you…yelling at me is not going to solve the problem,” Rosenstein said.
No, but it sure makes everyone feel good afterward. To quote from Thank You for Smoking, “It’s good to see that the public beating has not gone out of style.” The real issue isn’t so much what happened after Rosenstein’s arrival at the DoJ, but what took place before that. Republicans argue that the Obama administration abused their authority to remove Flynn and to try to remove Donald Trump too, but Rosenstein wouldn’t have any testimony to offer on that score. To move the ball on that theory, Republicans will have to get Obama-era officials under oath, and that … will probably take some doing.
This isn’t the only game in town, however. John Durham is conducting an investigation into that very theory, and he has full law-enforcement authority for warrants and subpoenas. In a very large sense, this is just a sideshow. An entertaining sideshow, and perhaps even a salutary sideshow in establishing some public costs to reputation for incompetence and political manipulations at the DoJ, but it’s the Durham probe that will either establish that theory with indictments … or dismiss it with the lack of them.


hotair--2020-06-03--Mattis denounces Trump: "The first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American p

Mattis denounces Trump: "The first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people"

Trump critics have been after him for years to speak up forcefully against his former boss , but he wouldn ’ t budge .
Until now .
Which makes me a little nervous .
I don ’ t think he would do this just to do it , having held out for so long .
I don ’ t think he has an electoral aim .
If he wanted to lend Biden a hand , he would have waited until October for maximum impact .
What makes me nervous is the possibility that he felt he *had* to speak up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump might try to do with the military at a moment of national crisis , amid excited chatter about using the Insurrection Act .
Tom Cotton , who ’ s clearly angling for the GOP nomination in 2024 and possibly Mark Esper ’ s job right now , has an op-ed in the Times today entitled “ Send in the Troops.
” Tucker Carlson has all but called Trump a pussy on Fox News for not sending in soldiers to start cracking heads .
The hardcore nationalists really want to see Strength , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to American citizens here .
They ’ re egging him on .
If Mattis is piping up now , it makes me think he ’ s legit concerned that Trump will do it — and legit concerned about how the military will act .
What he , and Mike Mullen , and James Stavridis , are doing by suddenly cranking out op-eds denouncing him are using their legitimacy as respected former military brass to offer a counterweight of authority to the troops with respect to whatever Trump might do .
I didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d have the president and former military figures at the highest levels playing tug-of-war over whether American soldiers should carry out operations against Americans , but here we are .
When I joined the military , some 50 years ago , I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution .
Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief , with military leadership standing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our cities as a “ battlespace ” that our uniformed military is called upon to “ dominate.
” At home , we should use our military only when requested to do so , on very rare occasions , by state governors .
Militarizing our response , as we witnessed in Washington , D.C. , sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society .
It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them… Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try .
Instead he tries to divide us .
We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort .
We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership .
We can unite without him , drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the past few days have shown , but we owe it to our fellow citizens ; to past generations that bled to defend our promise ; and to our children .
You can read it all here .
“ We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers , ” he says of the protesters ’ righteous demand for equal justice from the police .
“ We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Park , ” he adds later .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that stunt on Monday set him and Mullen and Stavridis and 10,000 other officers off , I bet .
It was the crassest fascist spectacle of Trump ’ s presidency .
If all he ’ d done is walk across a quiet street to wave a book he ’ s never read in front of St. John ’ s church , that would have been crass too but only slightly more so than standard cynical religious pandering .
Sending in the goon squad to clear out protesters from a public park where they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to punctuating it with a bit of Bible-waving was such a crude display of strongman authoritarianism that I bet even Putin winced at it for being lowbrow .
Mattis knows a fascist display when he sees one and he knows what ’ ll happen if it isn ’ t deemed beyond the pale by authority figures .
He understands and values the civic culture of his country .
Trump doesn ’ t , which is one of the most persistently strange things about him .
He ’ s in his 70s , born @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sworn nationalist known to physically hug the flag at events , yet his approach to power is roughly what you ’ d expect if you took an Egyptian policeman under Mubarak and suddenly made him president .
“ How can I enrich myself ?
” “ How can I look strong ?
” “ Let ’ s send the police into a public square to remove the people so that I can wave my religious book around for the cameras.
” But what ’ s really worrisome is that we on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely will in time .
Watching Cotton salivate at the thought of U.S. troops giving “ no quarter ” to looters , I had the thought on Monday that I ’ d rather be governed by Trump than him .
Same goes for Tucker .
Trump talks tough but usually backs down ; he ’ s not an ideologue , he ’ s a showman .
As Ross Douthat said in a column a few weeks ago , he seems to crave power less because he has some burning desire on how to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than because it brings him attention .
Other ambitious Republican politicians have different ambitions and will respond differently to incentives than Trump does .
If there ’ s a demand among the electorate for soldiers to crack the heads of the bad guys here at home , someone will be willing to meet it .
Probably not Trump — but Mattis , who knows him and worked closely with him for two years , seems uncertain .
Which , as I say , makes me nervous .

Trump critics have been after him for years to speak up forcefully against his former boss, but he wouldn’t budge. Until now.
Which makes me a little nervous.
I don’t think he would do this just to do it, having held out for so long. I don’t think he has an electoral aim. If he wanted to lend Biden a hand, he would have waited until October for maximum impact.
What makes me nervous is the possibility that he felt he *had* to speak up because he’s worried about what Trump might try to do with the military at a moment of national crisis, amid excited chatter about using the Insurrection Act. Tom Cotton, who’s clearly angling for the GOP nomination in 2024 and possibly Mark Esper’s job right now, has an op-ed in the Times today entitled “Send in the Troops.” Tucker Carlson has all but called Trump a pussy on Fox News for not sending in soldiers to start cracking heads. The hardcore nationalists really want to see Strength, red in tooth and claw, applied to American citizens here. They’re egging him on.
If Mattis is piping up now, it makes me think he’s legit concerned that Trump will do it — and legit concerned about how the military will act. What he, and Mike Mullen, and James Stavridis, are doing by suddenly cranking out op-eds denouncing him are using their legitimacy as respected former military brass to offer a counterweight of authority to the troops with respect to whatever Trump might do. I didn’t think in my lifetime we’d have the president and former military figures at the highest levels playing tug-of-war over whether American soldiers should carry out operations against Americans, but here we are.
When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside. We must reject any thinking of our cities as a “battlespace” that our uniformed military is called upon to “dominate.” At home, we should use our military only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors. Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict—a false conflict—between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part. Keeping public order rests with civilian state and local leaders who best understand their communities and are answerable to them… Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.
You can read it all here. “We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers,” he says of the protesters’ righteous demand for equal justice from the police. “We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Park,” he adds later. It can’t be overestimated how much that stunt on Monday set him and Mullen and Stavridis and 10,000 other officers off, I bet. It was the crassest fascist spectacle of Trump’s presidency. If all he’d done is walk across a quiet street to wave a book he’s never read in front of St. John’s church, that would have been crass too but only slightly more so than standard cynical religious pandering. Sending in the goon squad to clear out protesters from a public park where they had a right to be and then to punctuating it with a bit of Bible-waving was such a crude display of strongman authoritarianism that I bet even Putin winced at it for being lowbrow.
Mattis knows a fascist display when he sees one and he knows what’ll happen if it isn’t deemed beyond the pale by authority figures. He understands and values the civic culture of his country. Trump doesn’t, which is one of the most persistently strange things about him. He’s in his 70s, born and raised in the United States, a sworn nationalist known to physically hug the flag at events, yet his approach to power is roughly what you’d expect if you took an Egyptian policeman under Mubarak and suddenly made him president. “How can I enrich myself?” “How can I look strong?” “Let’s send the police into a public square to remove the people so that I can wave my religious book around for the cameras.”
But what’s really worrisome is that we on the right can do worse, and we likely will in time. Watching Cotton salivate at the thought of U.S. troops giving “no quarter” to looters, I had the thought on Monday that I’d rather be governed by Trump than him. Same goes for Tucker. Trump talks tough but usually backs down; he’s not an ideologue, he’s a showman. As Ross Douthat said in a column a few weeks ago, he seems to crave power less because he has some burning desire on how to use it (trade war excepted) than because it brings him attention. Other ambitious Republican politicians have different ambitions and will respond differently to incentives than Trump does. If there’s a demand among the electorate for soldiers to crack the heads of the bad guys here at home, someone will be willing to meet it. Probably not Trump — but Mattis, who knows him and worked closely with him for two years, seems uncertain.
Which, as I say, makes me nervous.


hotair--2020-06-03--Washington Post: Trump and his family were 'rushed' to the bunker after protesters breached a fence

The Washington Post is reporting that Trump and his family were “ rushed ” to the bunker beneath the White House Friday after some protesters breached a fence outside .
The security move came after multiple people crossed over fences that had been erected to create a larger barrier around the White House complex around 7 p.m. Secret Service officers detained at least four protesters , who were charged with unlawful entry at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue , according to arrest records .
The incident took place near the border between the White House lawn and Treasury Department , about 350 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close to a Treasury fence line that has been at the center of past security failures .
The breach occurred around the time that the Secret Service alert level on the White House complex was elevated from “ yellow ” to “ red , ” according to a law enforcement official , who , like others , spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal safety maneuvers .
Officials familiar with the incident told colleagues that the president , the first lady and their son Barron were rushed to the bunker because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people familiar with their accounts .
Trump dismissed as “ false ” reports that the Secret Service rushed him into the bunker Friday night as protests inspired by the death of George Floyd escalated across the street .
“ I went down during the day , and I was there for a tiny little short period of time , ” he said during an interview with radio talk-show host Brian Kilmeade .
“ It was much more for an inspection .
There was no problem during the day.
” … Trump went down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Secret Service in an abundance of caution , said one official familiar with the incident , speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters .
The official said he was only in the bunker for a short period of time .
Asked by Kilmeade if the Secret Service told him he needed to head to the bunker , Trump said , “ No , they didn ’ t tell me that at all .
They said it would be a good time to go down , take a look because maybe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need it.
” Trump ’ s claim that he went down to the bunker during the day for an inspection doesn ’ t make sense according to former Secret Service agents the Post spoke with .
Presidents are given security briefings about the bunker early on in their tenure so President Trump would have inspected it long before last Friday .
Later in the story , the Post says Trump was taken to the bunker once before in 2017 when a man named Jonathan Tuan-Anh Tran hopped a fence and almost made it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before he was stopped .
Most of the people mocking Trump online with # BunkerBoy hashtags make it sound as if this was about personal cowardice , i.e .
he got scared and wanted to hide .
But if the Post story is accurate ( there ’ s no on-the-record quote here , but for the sake of argument let ’ s assume ) then it sounds as if Trump was taken to the bunker on the advice of Secret Service who were monitoring the security situation outside .
I guess Trump could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing their job an he went along with it .
The real story here , in my view , is that precautions taken by the Secret Service are being turned into a dumb , grade school myth about Trump being a chicken .
Frankly , it ’ s hard to blame him for being irritated by that .

The Washington Post is reporting that Trump and his family were “rushed” to the bunker beneath the White House Friday after some protesters breached a fence outside.
The security move came after multiple people crossed over fences that had been erected to create a larger barrier around the White House complex around 7 p.m. Secret Service officers detained at least four protesters, who were charged with unlawful entry at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, according to arrest records. The incident took place near the border between the White House lawn and Treasury Department, about 350 feet from the East Wing, and close to a Treasury fence line that has been at the center of past security failures. The breach occurred around the time that the Secret Service alert level on the White House complex was elevated from “yellow” to “red,” according to a law enforcement official, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal safety maneuvers. Officials familiar with the incident told colleagues that the president, the first lady and their son Barron were rushed to the bunker because of the episode, according to two people familiar with their accounts.
That story contradicts a claim Trump made earlier today on Brian Kilmeade’s radio show:
Trump dismissed as “false” reports that the Secret Service rushed him into the bunker Friday night as protests inspired by the death of George Floyd escalated across the street. “I went down during the day, and I was there for a tiny little short period of time,” he said during an interview with radio talk-show host Brian Kilmeade. “It was much more for an inspection. There was no problem during the day.”… Trump went down to the bunker at the behest of the Secret Service in an abundance of caution, said one official familiar with the incident, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. The official said he was only in the bunker for a short period of time. Asked by Kilmeade if the Secret Service told him he needed to head to the bunker, Trump said, “No, they didn’t tell me that at all. They said it would be a good time to go down, take a look because maybe some time you’re going to need it.”
Trump’s claim that he went down to the bunker during the day for an inspection doesn’t make sense according to former Secret Service agents the Post spoke with. Presidents are given security briefings about the bunker early on in their tenure so President Trump would have inspected it long before last Friday.
Later in the story, the Post says Trump was taken to the bunker once before in 2017 when a man named Jonathan Tuan-Anh Tran hopped a fence and almost made it to an entrance to the White House before he was stopped.
Most of the people mocking Trump online with #BunkerBoy hashtags make it sound as if this was about personal cowardice, i.e. he got scared and wanted to hide. But if the Post story is accurate (there’s no on-the-record quote here, but for the sake of argument let’s assume) then it sounds as if Trump was taken to the bunker on the advice of Secret Service who were monitoring the security situation outside. I guess Trump could have refused their advice but they were doing their job an he went along with it.
The real story here, in my view, is that precautions taken by the Secret Service are being turned into a dumb, grade school myth about Trump being a chicken. Frankly, it’s hard to blame him for being irritated by that.


hotair--2020-06-03--Trump to GOP: Find another convention venue after Cooper balked at "full" event

Got ta say , I ’ d have had more sympathy for Roy Cooper in this situation two weeks ago .
That would have been before the same people who scolded Republicans and conservatives who wanted to reopen the public square and demonstrate for those policies suddenly thought squeezing several thousand people into streets for demonstrations for a week on end was no problem at all .
Political speech takes precedence over commerce , they have argued — so why does that not apply to a full political convention in August ?
North Carolina ’ s Democratic governor apparently thinks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others : Governor Roy Cooper sent his letter to Republican Party leaders a day before the deadline President Donald Trump set for the state to guarantee that convention attendance in Charlotte would not be limited by social distancing restrictions .
Cooper said he could make no such promise for the four-day nominating convention scheduled to open on Aug. 24 .
Without knowing how the COVID-19 outbreak will continue to unfold , he said , “ planning for a scaled-down convention with fewer people , social distancing and face coverings is a necessity.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a “ full convention ” rather than one with fewer participants and social distancing as requested by the state , Cooper said .
“ As much as we want the conditions surrounding COVID-19 to be favorable enough for you to hold the convention you describe in late August , it is very unlikely , ” Cooper said .
That ’ s a common-sense approach in a pandemic , but the problem with those restrictions is that they aren ’ t applied equally .
Police have arrested people for taking their children to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entirely uninterested in enforcing quarantine restrictions on large public protests , especially in relation to the George Floyd homicide .
Of course , those are outdoors , but the vectors for transmission aren ’ t impossible outdoors either , especially in crowds of these densities .
If we ’ re going to have a standard for public events , including political speech , it should be one standard .
The RNC says pass on Cooper ’ s separate standard for the GOP ’ s convention : Trump had already made that decision last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response on the matter : President Trump said Tuesday that the Republican Party would seek to pull its August nominating convention out of North Carolina , after Democratic Gov .
Roy Cooper refused to heed a party demand that he pre-authorize a gathering of at least 19,000 people .
“ Governor Cooper is still in Shelter-In-Place Mode , and not allowing us to occupy the arena as originally anticipated and promised , ” Trump tweeted shortly after 9 p.m. “ .
.
.
We are now forced to seek another State to host @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party chair Ronna McDaniel had said earlier in the day that the party would begin exploring options outside North Carolina .
“ We have an obligation to our delegates and nominee to begin visiting the multiple cities and states who have reached out in recent days about hosting an historic event to show that America is open for business , ” she said in a statement .
There will inevitably be some red-state governors looking to boost the GOP by promising them a full convention , although one has to wonder whether they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indoor venue .
That would minimize ( although not eliminate ) the COVID-19 risk , while giving plenty of room for a big convention response .
Security would be tougher but hardly impossible ; Trump holds outdoor rallies all the time .
This still leaves a couple of problems .
First , red states don ’ t really need a convention to stoke enthusiasm .
The point of picking North Carolina was because it ’ s on the bubble , the same reason the DNC chose Wisconsin for its convention .
Republicans hoped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put it firmly in the red column in November .
Florida might be on the bubble enough to benefit from that , as might ( gulp ) Georgia , but any potential loss of enthusiasm in NC over the change would theoretically complicate Trump ’ s election chances there .
Even if you don ’ t entirely buy the idea that convention awards help the ticket — I ’ m skeptical — pulling out at the last minute is bound to cause some resentment .
Trump and the RNC appear to be betting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that price , but I ’ m skeptical about that , too .
Second , Cooper ’ s double standard aside … what ’ s really the point here for either party ?
The conventions are anachronisms with pointless security headaches at best , and arguably deleterious to public health in this cycle .
The only worthwhile point in pushing this is to highlight the double standard of catering to mobs while restricting everyone else , including businesses , but at the end of the day it ’ s still about meaningless political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact at all on voter behavior .
The 2020 convention fight looks like a game of chicken between two old drivers who don ’ t know that there ’ s no point at all in the collision .
Here ’ s a suggestion to change Cooper ’ s mind .
Rather than call this the Republican National Convention , perhaps the GOP can re-brand it as the Republican National Demonstration for Urban Police Reform , and dare Cooper to cancel it .
Not only would that highlight the double standard , it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the event .

Gotta say, I’d have had more sympathy for Roy Cooper in this situation two weeks ago. That would have been before the same people who scolded Republicans and conservatives who wanted to reopen the public square and demonstrate for those policies suddenly thought squeezing several thousand people into streets for demonstrations for a week on end was no problem at all. Political speech takes precedence over commerce, they have argued — so why does that not apply to a full political convention in August?
North Carolina’s Democratic governor apparently thinks some political speech requires more planning than others:
Governor Roy Cooper sent his letter to Republican Party leaders a day before the deadline President Donald Trump set for the state to guarantee that convention attendance in Charlotte would not be limited by social distancing restrictions. Cooper said he could make no such promise for the four-day nominating convention scheduled to open on Aug. 24. Without knowing how the COVID-19 outbreak will continue to unfold, he said, “planning for a scaled-down convention with fewer people, social distancing and face coverings is a necessity.” Republican officials so far have submitted proposals for a “full convention” rather than one with fewer participants and social distancing as requested by the state, Cooper said. “As much as we want the conditions surrounding COVID-19 to be favorable enough for you to hold the convention you describe in late August, it is very unlikely,” Cooper said.
That’s a common-sense approach in a pandemic, but the problem with those restrictions is that they aren’t applied equally. Police have arrested people for taking their children to play in the park, but seem entirely uninterested in enforcing quarantine restrictions on large public protests, especially in relation to the George Floyd homicide. Of course, those are outdoors, but the vectors for transmission aren’t impossible outdoors either, especially in crowds of these densities. If we’re going to have a standard for public events, including political speech, it should be one standard.
The RNC says pass on Cooper’s separate standard for the GOP’s convention:
NEW: the RNC has just issued this statement regarding the convention in August. @SpecNewsCLT has team coverage on every development #RNC2020 #cltnews pic.twitter.com/vm2rIxkVZY — Katy Solt (@katysolt) June 3, 2020
Trump had already made that decision last night, after Cooper’s final response on the matter:
President Trump said Tuesday that the Republican Party would seek to pull its August nominating convention out of North Carolina, after Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper refused to heed a party demand that he pre-authorize a gathering of at least 19,000 people. “Governor Cooper is still in Shelter-In-Place Mode, and not allowing us to occupy the arena as originally anticipated and promised,” Trump tweeted shortly after 9 p.m. “. . . We are now forced to seek another State to host the 2020 Republican National Convention.” Republican Party chair Ronna McDaniel had said earlier in the day that the party would begin exploring options outside North Carolina. “We have an obligation to our delegates and nominee to begin visiting the multiple cities and states who have reached out in recent days about hosting an historic event to show that America is open for business,” she said in a statement.
There will inevitably be some red-state governors looking to boost the GOP by promising them a full convention, although one has to wonder whether they will press for an outdoor rather than indoor venue. That would minimize (although not eliminate) the COVID-19 risk, while giving plenty of room for a big convention response. Security would be tougher but hardly impossible; Trump holds outdoor rallies all the time.
This still leaves a couple of problems. First, red states don’t really need a convention to stoke enthusiasm. The point of picking North Carolina was because it’s on the bubble, the same reason the DNC chose Wisconsin for its convention. Republicans hoped to boost turnout in the state to put it firmly in the red column in November. Florida might be on the bubble enough to benefit from that, as might (gulp) Georgia, but any potential loss of enthusiasm in NC over the change would theoretically complicate Trump’s election chances there. Even if you don’t entirely buy the idea that convention awards help the ticket — I’m skeptical — pulling out at the last minute is bound to cause some resentment. Trump and the RNC appear to be betting that Cooper’s going to pay that price, but I’m skeptical about that, too.
Second, Cooper’s double standard aside … what’s really the point here for either party? The conventions are anachronisms with pointless security headaches at best, and arguably deleterious to public health in this cycle. The only worthwhile point in pushing this is to highlight the double standard of catering to mobs while restricting everyone else, including businesses, but at the end of the day it’s still about meaningless political posturing and revelry that has almost no impact at all on voter behavior. The 2020 convention fight looks like a game of chicken between two old drivers who don’t know that there’s no point at all in the collision.
Here’s a suggestion to change Cooper’s mind. Rather than call this the Republican National Convention, perhaps the GOP can re-brand it as the Republican National Demonstration for Urban Police Reform, and dare Cooper to cancel it. Not only would that highlight the double standard, it would actually provide a useful and needed point for the event.


hotair--2020-06-03--Active-duty troops were set to begin leaving D.C. today -- until Mark Esper suddenly canceled the or

Active-duty troops were set to begin leaving D.C. today -- until Mark Esper suddenly canceled the order

The AP reported earlier that members of the 82nd Airborne would leave Washington this afternoon and return to their home base , with other troops stationed in Virginia and Maryland set to follow if things remain quiet over the next few days .
But then this happened and , well , hoo boy .
Ed noted earlier that the White House didn ’ t take kindly to Esper ’ s comments this morning about opposing use of the Insurrection Act .
So now here ’ s the SecDef tilting back towards showing “ strength ” : Maybe it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last night before darkness fell that Trump had already begun backing off invoking the Insurrection Act , with one source alleging that the president “ saw and continues to see the act as a mechanism only if governors can ’ t contain chaos in their states.
” An earlier AP story posted this morning agreed , noting that “ interest in exerting that extraordinary federal authority appeared to be waning in the White House.
” Now , suddenly , the troops in D.C. are staying put .
It could be that Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to appear that he ’ s backing off his willingness to use the military .
I think it was the bipartisan backlash to that repulsive fascist stunt Trump pulled on Monday in Lafayette Park that spooked Esper this morning , as he ’ s been caught more than once in a tug of war between Trump ’ s political whims on the one hand and military SOP on the other .
There was the episode where Trump insisted on Eddie Gallagher being allowed to retire from the Navy SEALs with his trident @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Navy secretary Richard Spencer .
Then came the equally bizarre episode in which Spencer ’ s successor , Thomas Modly , fired Capt .
Brett Crozier for going outside the chain of command in reporting the COVID-19 outbreak on the USS Theodore Roosevelt .
Modly declined to wait for a formal Navy investigation ; reportedly he acted because Trump felt embarrassed by Crozier ’ s letter and he was eager to impress the boss , with Esper once again stuck in the middle .
Lots of unorthodox Trump-pleasing politicized behavior lately by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the expense of normal military procedure lately , in other words , capped by Esper trotting over to St. John ’ s church with the president on Monday so he could wave around a Bible and do his Christian warrior photo op .
That was a bad look on a day when the president was threatening to send the military into America ’ s streets to do battle with “ terrorists ” ; Esper himself told America ’ s governors on a conference call with Trump that afternoon that the Pentagon was prepared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deployed , which is an interesting way to describe crowd control amid rioting .
Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley was seen in camouflage in the streets of D.C. on Monday night , a sort of military show pony for the president , and a National Guard helicopter ( with Red Cross markings , of all things ) was filmed flying low over protesters to try to intimidate them into dispersing , a tactic normally used abroad against demonstrators .
It all felt familiar , and not in a good way : The caudillo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of America ’ s military leadership because soon media outlets were filling up with quotes about unease in and around the Pentagon .
Mike Mullen and James Stavridis each penned op-eds politely reminding the military that civilians aren ’ t the enemy .
Others are whispering to the press about their discomfort anonymously : The anxiety [ inside the Pentagon ] hit a high point on Monday , when word leaked out that Defense Secretary Mark Esper referred to cities undergoing protests as a “ battlespace , ” and as Esper and Joint @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump across the street from the White House after protesters were cleared from Lafayette Square in advance of a staged photo op in front of St. John ’ s Episcopal Church… “ There is growing concern that this is not good for the role of the military going forward , ” the official said .
“ Now you ’ ve injected the military into a moment in a political way .
It just doesn ’ t seem right.
” … A fourth defense official who was not authorized to speak publicly said there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among Pentagon officials over the past day that Milley wasn ’ t more attuned to how his presence could send the wrong message — and muddle the military ’ s hard-fought reputation as being above the political fray .
Sources at the Pentagon assured the Daily Beast that it ’ s the White House , not them , that wants a face-off between soldiers and looters : These Pentagon officials added that it was the White House , not the Defense Department , that was pushing for active military might in the streets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the White House that requested military helicopters fly low over protesters in D.C. and that it was part of a broader request from the Trump team that the national guard ramp up its presence in the city .
The Associated Press was the first to report about the military flyover being connected to a request from President Trump .
Additionally , the president has pressed aides and Pentagon officials for graphic details on the kind of armored vehicles , military units , aircraft , and even “ tanks ” that they could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ areas rocked by protests and rioting , according to two people familiar with recent discussions .
One of the sources , a senior administration official , insisted that the president wasn ’ t ordering tanks to roll down the streets , but was inquiring about “ the kind of hardware ” that could be used in military shows of force , and at one point Trump threw out the word “ tanks.
” Go figure that the military doesn ’ t want to be used as a prop in some sort of martial-law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look “ strong ” ahead of November .
Ironically , if he had been more low-key about his strongman fascination with pitting troops against citizens he might have encountered less resistance to the idea from politicians and military leaders .
“ [ A ] t least three governors of states experiencing large-scale protests contacted the Trump administration requesting that it not push them to accept active military personnel , claiming it would only inflame tensions on the ground , ” the Daily Beast reported .
CNN claims that National Guard troops were initially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York , Delaware , and Virginia — but all three deployments were canceled by the relevant governors , probably because they realized that Trump wanted them for what was essentially a big show of his own power .
Reportedly it wasn ’ t the mayor of D.C. who requested the troops ; a Virginia official tells CNN they would have been under Bill Barr ’ s command as AG .
“ The call with governors made it clear that the President was interested in escalating the situation and the governor did not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Put it all together and there was no upside and much downside for the military in being roped into this mess .
They ’ re not trained in law enforcement ; an ugly incident involving looters and/or protesters caught in the crossfire would have cost them public legitimacy ; and Trump ’ s obsession on meeting the moment with force , right down to his own backyard in Lafayette Park , would have branded the military as essentially “ Trump ’ s troops ” if they had been deployed to American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the local state governor .
On top of everything else , if you had to bet right now you ’ d bet that Democrats will control more of the government next year than they do this year and there might be payback for “ Trump ’ s troops ” in the Pentagon brass from the ruling party .
( Senate Dems are already issuing warnings . )
I bet Esper got an earful about all of that , certainly publicly and probably privately , which is why he started backpedaling about the Insurrection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably got an earful from Trump and decided he needed to appease him .
Voila — the troops are staying in D.C. for another day , whether they ’ re needed or not .
Update : Speaking of caudillo optics , why would we need U.S. troops in the streets when we can have heavily armed unidentified government agents instead ?

The AP reported earlier that members of the 82nd Airborne would leave Washington this afternoon and return to their home base, with other troops stationed in Virginia and Maryland set to follow if things remain quiet over the next few days. But then this happened and, well, hoo boy.
Doesn’t sound great for Esper pic.twitter.com/pSomNldbKz — Acyn (@Acyn) June 3, 2020
Ed noted earlier that the White House didn’t take kindly to Esper’s comments this morning about opposing use of the Insurrection Act. So now here’s the SecDef tilting back towards showing “strength”:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Esper has reversed decision to return active-duty troops deployed near DC to home bases, Army secretary tells AP. — Jonathan Lemire (@JonLemire) June 3, 2020
Maybe it’s not all on Esper. Axios claimed last night before darkness fell that Trump had already begun backing off invoking the Insurrection Act, with one source alleging that the president “saw and continues to see the act as a mechanism only if governors can’t contain chaos in their states.” An earlier AP story posted this morning agreed, noting that “interest in exerting that extraordinary federal authority appeared to be waning in the White House.” Now, suddenly, the troops in D.C. are staying put. It could be that Trump is reacting to those reports, not wanting it to appear that he’s backing off his willingness to use the military.
I think it was the bipartisan backlash to that repulsive fascist stunt Trump pulled on Monday in Lafayette Park that spooked Esper this morning, as he’s been caught more than once in a tug of war between Trump’s political whims on the one hand and military SOP on the other. There was the episode where Trump insisted on Eddie Gallagher being allowed to retire from the Navy SEALs with his trident pin, which ended up pitting Esper against Navy secretary Richard Spencer. Then came the equally bizarre episode in which Spencer’s successor, Thomas Modly, fired Capt. Brett Crozier for going outside the chain of command in reporting the COVID-19 outbreak on the USS Theodore Roosevelt. Modly declined to wait for a formal Navy investigation; reportedly he acted because Trump felt embarrassed by Crozier’s letter and he was eager to impress the boss, with Esper once again stuck in the middle.
Lots of unorthodox Trump-pleasing politicized behavior lately by the SecDef and his top deputies at the expense of normal military procedure lately, in other words, capped by Esper trotting over to St. John’s church with the president on Monday so he could wave around a Bible and do his Christian warrior photo op. That was a bad look on a day when the president was threatening to send the military into America’s streets to do battle with “terrorists”; Esper himself told America’s governors on a conference call with Trump that afternoon that the Pentagon was prepared to “dominate the battlespace” if deployed, which is an interesting way to describe crowd control amid rioting. Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley was seen in camouflage in the streets of D.C. on Monday night, a sort of military show pony for the president, and a National Guard helicopter (with Red Cross markings, of all things) was filmed flying low over protesters to try to intimidate them into dispersing, a tactic normally used abroad against demonstrators.
It all felt familiar, and not in a good way:
Congrats, America! You have joined the Middle East nations where you cannot peacefully protest outside the presidential palaces. pic.twitter.com/7T03rRMXQO — Ragıp Soylu (@ragipsoylu) June 2, 2020
The caudillo optics seem to have understandably alarmed members of America’s military leadership because soon media outlets were filling up with quotes about unease in and around the Pentagon. Mike Mullen and James Stavridis each penned op-eds politely reminding the military that civilians aren’t the enemy. Others are whispering to the press about their discomfort anonymously:
The anxiety [inside the Pentagon] hit a high point on Monday, when word leaked out that Defense Secretary Mark Esper referred to cities undergoing protests as a “battlespace,” and as Esper and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Mark Milley walked with Trump across the street from the White House after protesters were cleared from Lafayette Square in advance of a staged photo op in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church… “There is growing concern that this is not good for the role of the military going forward,” the official said. “Now you’ve injected the military into a moment in a political way. It just doesn’t seem right.”… A fourth defense official who was not authorized to speak publicly said there has been a significant level of consternation among Pentagon officials over the past day that Milley wasn’t more attuned to how his presence could send the wrong message — and muddle the military’s hard-fought reputation as being above the political fray.
Sources at the Pentagon assured the Daily Beast that it’s the White House, not them, that wants a face-off between soldiers and looters:
These Pentagon officials added that it was the White House, not the Defense Department, that was pushing for active military might in the streets. A senior DOD official said it was the White House that requested military helicopters fly low over protesters in D.C. and that it was part of a broader request from the Trump team that the national guard ramp up its presence in the city. The Associated Press was the first to report about the military flyover being connected to a request from President Trump. Additionally, the president has pressed aides and Pentagon officials for graphic details on the kind of armored vehicles, military units, aircraft, and even “tanks” that they could potentially send to maintain order in U.S. areas rocked by protests and rioting, according to two people familiar with recent discussions. One of the sources, a senior administration official, insisted that the president wasn’t ordering tanks to roll down the streets, but was inquiring about “the kind of hardware” that could be used in military shows of force, and at one point Trump threw out the word “tanks.”
Go figure that the military doesn’t want to be used as a prop in some sort of martial-law pageant that Trump thinks will make him look “strong” ahead of November. Ironically, if he had been more low-key about his strongman fascination with pitting troops against citizens he might have encountered less resistance to the idea from politicians and military leaders. “[A]t least three governors of states experiencing large-scale protests contacted the Trump administration requesting that it not push them to accept active military personnel, claiming it would only inflame tensions on the ground,” the Daily Beast reported. CNN claims that National Guard troops were initially expected to be sent to D.C. from New York, Delaware, and Virginia — but all three deployments were canceled by the relevant governors, probably because they realized that Trump wanted them for what was essentially a big show of his own power. Reportedly it wasn’t the mayor of D.C. who requested the troops; a Virginia official tells CNN they would have been under Bill Barr’s command as AG. “The call with governors made it clear that the President was interested in escalating the situation and the governor did not think that was responsible,” he said.
Put it all together and there was no upside and much downside for the military in being roped into this mess. They’re not trained in law enforcement; an ugly incident involving looters and/or protesters caught in the crossfire would have cost them public legitimacy; and Trump’s obsession on meeting the moment with force, right down to his own backyard in Lafayette Park, would have branded the military as essentially “Trump’s troops” if they had been deployed to American streets, especially over the objection of the local state governor. On top of everything else, if you had to bet right now you’d bet that Democrats will control more of the government next year than they do this year and there might be payback for “Trump’s troops” in the Pentagon brass from the ruling party. (Senate Dems are already issuing warnings.) I bet Esper got an earful about all of that, certainly publicly and probably privately, which is why he started backpedaling about the Insurrection Act this morning. But then he probably got an earful from Trump and decided he needed to appease him. Voila — the troops are staying in D.C. for another day, whether they’re needed or not.
Update: Speaking of caudillo optics, why would we need U.S. troops in the streets when we can have heavily armed unidentified government agents instead?


hotair--2020-06-03--Black Lives Matter solidarity march in London is mostly peaceful (Update)

Several thousand people in London held a solidarity march today .
It started in London ’ s Hyde Park .
There was supposed to be social distancing taking place , but as you can see that really wasn ’ t happening .
People marched through the city and gathered in Parliament Square .
Actor John Boyega , who appeared in the Star Wars sequels spoke to the crowd at one point .
The AP reports that Boyega asked the crowd to stay peaceful : “ Because they want us to mess up , they want us to be disorganized , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll have to settle for mostly peaceful because there was a moment of chaos outside # 10 Downing Street when the protesters started throwing things at police : You might be able to make out that in the center/right of that scene , police appear to be arresting someone .
Sky News reported things got out of control after one of the protesters punched a police officer : Here ’ s video of how this happened .
Thinks returned to relative calm after that : As of a few hours ago , most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalists were chased out a few people were refusing to go home .
There were also some last minute scuffles with police : As you can see in that last clip , it ’ s just getting dark now .
We ’ ll have to see if things settle down or flare up tonight .
Update : NSFW language in this clip .
He ’ s watching two police officers retreating from the crowd .
Update : A teenager organizers of today ’ s march explained why she didn ’ t really care @ @ @ @

Several thousand people in London held a solidarity march today. It started in London’s Hyde Park.
Thousands of #GeorgeFloyd protesters who left a Hyde Park in central London now marching to parliament square to meet up with another large group of demonstrators pic.twitter.com/u4aHSkJdMd — Mark White (@skymarkwhite) June 3, 2020
There was supposed to be social distancing taking place, but as you can see that really wasn’t happening.
Thousands of people gather in Hyde Park in central London for a Black Lives Matter rally in solidarity with US protests against the death of unarmed African-American George Floydhttps://t.co/MIyUBSMbVs pic.twitter.com/itAuCqNYhl — BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) June 3, 2020
People marched through the city and gathered in Parliament Square.
“We’re not victims, we’re warriors” It’s a full house at Parliament Square as the #BlackLivesMattter protest has taken over Westminster. But so tightly packed together you can barely see the grass, let alone 2m apart. @LBC @LBCNews pic.twitter.com/1Kb4xVk7tR — Matthew Thompson (@mattuthompson) June 3, 2020
Actor John Boyega, who appeared in the Star Wars sequels spoke to the crowd at one point.
Outside parliament @JohnBoyega tells everyone to take a knee and says black people “I love you” pic.twitter.com/2egDZwmBzE — SymeonBrown (@symeonbrown) June 3, 2020
The AP reports that Boyega asked the crowd to stay peaceful: “Because they want us to mess up, they want us to be disorganized, but not today.” But he’ll have to settle for mostly peaceful because there was a moment of chaos outside #10 Downing Street when the protesters started throwing things at police:
It's kicking off now. Unclear exactly what started things. Police appeared to attempt to take a man from the crowd and pandemonium ensued pic.twitter.com/6XPGXV2HKt — Mattha Busby (@matthabusby) June 3, 2020
You might be able to make out that in the center/right of that scene, police appear to be arresting someone. Sky News reported things got out of control after one of the protesters punched a police officer:
BREAKING – Crowd confronting police outside the gates of Downing Street. Officer punched in the face, numerous objects being thrown at police now. pic.twitter.com/tJ6ZnXUcv6 — Mark White (@skymarkwhite) June 3, 2020
Lots of people giving us grief down here outside Downing Street claiming our reporting of an officer being punched in the face is fake news. Make your own mind up – pic.twitter.com/JCLXQ9gmmS — Mark White (@skymarkwhite) June 3, 2020
Here’s video of how this happened.
Thinks returned to relative calm after that:
As of now… Larger police presence, especially on far side where the incident occurred pic.twitter.com/EgsnLTKnfw — Mattha Busby (@matthabusby) June 3, 2020
As of a few hours ago, most of the crowd had left but some journalists were chased out a few people were refusing to go home.
“Please go home” Dissent in the ranks. Protestors are now being urged to leave. Most of them have now gone. A few hard core seem less willing to do so…@LBC @LBCNews #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/iG5KG4v2fh — Matthew Thompson (@mattuthompson) June 3, 2020
There were also some last minute scuffles with police:
Unpleasant end to a day of largely peaceful protests in London. Met Police management clearly wanted a low key approach today, to avoid accusations of heavy handed policing. But it left some officers horribly exposed when trouble erupted . pic.twitter.com/rjQkA9RVqu — Mark White (@skymarkwhite) June 3, 2020
As you can see in that last clip, it’s just getting dark now. We’ll have to see if things settle down or flare up tonight.
Update: NSFW language in this clip. He’s watching two police officers retreating from the crowd.
Update: A teenager organizers of today’s march explained why she didn’t really care about social distancing.


hotair--2020-06-03--When your school dean quotes a domestic terrorist

With all of the protests and riots consuming the nation in the wake of George Floyd ’ s death , the dean of students at Stanford University decided to send out a supportive , uplifting email to all of the students to comfort them in these troubling times .
And what better way to inspire young minds than with an inspirational quote ?
Perhaps something from Martin Luther King , Rosa Parks , or even Malcolm X ?
Naw .
Those are all too milquetoast for this occasion .
Instead , Dr. Mona Hicks decided to go with something a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She chose a quote from a convicted cop-killer who remains on the FBI ’ s top ten most wanted list to this very day .
( Free Beacon ) In a message addressing the nationwide protests and riots that followed the death of George Floyd at the hands of police , the university ’ s dean of students , Dr. Mona Hicks , cited the “ loving ” words of Assata Shakur , who was convicted in 1973 for the murder of a police officer and remains on the FBI ’ s “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Black woman , I am also struggling to make meaning in our world today… .
This loving refrain from Assata Shakur still rings true as I shelter-in-place : ‘ It is our duty to fight for our freedom .
It is our duty to win .
We must love and support each other .
We have nothing to lose but our chains , ' ” Hicks said .
The quote Hicks cited borrowed from the words of Karl Marx , who wrote in The Communist Manifesto that workers have “ nothing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In case you don ’ t recall , Shakur , aka Joanne Chesimard , was a member of the Black Panthers back in the 70s until she decided they weren ’ t quite radical enough for her .
She then joined the Black Liberation Army and murdered a New Jersey State Police trooper execution-style by the side of a highway .
( She was already wanted in connection with several bank robberies and other felonies . )
She later escaped from prison and fled to Cuba where she remains today .
Shakur remains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and among Democrats .
If that quote she used in her email sounds familiar to you , it might be because it was the same quote chanted at the opening of the 2019 “ We the People Summit ” for Democratic presidential candidates .
The chant was led by a leader of the NAACP and none of the candidates made a peep about the choice of quotable material .
Of course , Shakur didn ’ t come up with it herself .
She cribbed it from Karl Marx and The Communist Manifesto .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ example of Democrats ’ love affair with the cop-murdering fugitive .
In 2017 , the Women ’ s March tweeted out a painting of Shakur on her birthday in “ celebration ” of her “ revolutionary ” lifestyle and her contributions to feminism and against racism or something .
They then had to issue a flurry of tweets as to why they weren ’ t a violent organization but Shakur still deserves recognition .
Further out west , USC Berkeley at one point tried to rename one of their buildings after her .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ university president David Barrows , an anthropologist .
And you know how anthropologists are , amirite ? )
Barrows wasn ’ t a slave owner .
He was president of the university in the 1920s .
But he was “ problematic , ” unlike a convicted cop killer .
Some things never change , I suppose .
Shakur remains an icon on the left , which really says a lot more about her liberal admirers than it does about Shakur herself .
She was just a common criminal with a history of violence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sending you a pretty solid signal in terms of what they think of law enforcement .

With all of the protests and riots consuming the nation in the wake of George Floyd’s death, the dean of students at Stanford University decided to send out a supportive, uplifting email to all of the students to comfort them in these troubling times. And what better way to inspire young minds than with an inspirational quote? Perhaps something from Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, or even Malcolm X? Naw. Those are all too milquetoast for this occasion. Instead, Dr. Mona Hicks decided to go with something a bit more “in your face.” She chose a quote from a convicted cop-killer who remains on the FBI’s top ten most wanted list to this very day. (Free Beacon)
In a message addressing the nationwide protests and riots that followed the death of George Floyd at the hands of police, the university’s dean of students, Dr. Mona Hicks, cited the “loving” words of Assata Shakur, who was convicted in 1973 for the murder of a police officer and remains on the FBI’s “Most Wanted” list. “As a Black woman, I am also struggling to make meaning in our world today…. This loving refrain from Assata Shakur still rings true as I shelter-in-place: ‘It is our duty to fight for our freedom. It is our duty to win. We must love and support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains,'” Hicks said. The quote Hicks cited borrowed from the words of Karl Marx, who wrote in The Communist Manifesto that workers have “nothing to lose but [their] chains.”
In case you don’t recall, Shakur, aka Joanne Chesimard, was a member of the Black Panthers back in the 70s until she decided they weren’t quite radical enough for her. She then joined the Black Liberation Army and murdered a New Jersey State Police trooper execution-style by the side of a highway. (She was already wanted in connection with several bank robberies and other felonies.) She later escaped from prison and fled to Cuba where she remains today.
Shakur remains a very popular figure on the left and among Democrats. If that quote she used in her email sounds familiar to you, it might be because it was the same quote chanted at the opening of the 2019 “We the People Summit” for Democratic presidential candidates. The chant was led by a leader of the NAACP and none of the candidates made a peep about the choice of quotable material. Of course, Shakur didn’t come up with it herself. She cribbed it from Karl Marx and The Communist Manifesto.
That’s far from the only example of Democrats’ love affair with the cop-murdering fugitive. In 2017, the Women’s March tweeted out a painting of Shakur on her birthday in “celebration” of her “revolutionary” lifestyle and her contributions to feminism and against racism or something. They then had to issue a flurry of tweets as to why they weren’t a violent organization but Shakur still deserves recognition.
Further out west, USC Berkeley at one point tried to rename one of their buildings after her. (The building was named after former university president David Barrows, an anthropologist. And you know how anthropologists are, amirite?) Barrows wasn’t a slave owner. He was president of the university in the 1920s. But he was “problematic,” unlike a convicted cop killer.
Some things never change, I suppose. Shakur remains an icon on the left, which really says a lot more about her liberal admirers than it does about Shakur herself. She was just a common criminal with a history of violence. Those who adore her are probably sending you a pretty solid signal in terms of what they think of law enforcement.