hotair--2020-04-25--#DropOutBiden is trending after new evidence supporting Tara Reade's story

Today the hashtag # DropOutBiden is trending on Twitter in response to new information that supports the credibility of Tara Reade ’ s allegations against him .
Here ’ s Hillary stan Peter Daou saying the party has no credibility if it sticks with Biden : The hashtag has been used more than 74,000 times as I write this .
Many people are supporting Reade and want Biden out : There ’ s definitely a political angle to the reactions .
Quite a few of the people using the hashtag are obviously Bernie Sanders supporters who never liked Biden in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bernie ’ s former Press Secretary seems to be piling on the trend without actually calling for Biden to drop out .
Of course not everyone using the hashtag is on board with this .
The Krassenstein brothers , who were removed from Twitter but seem to have sidestepped the ban , are still pushing doubts about Reade ’ s story .
They , and a number of other people , are suggesting the hashtag is part of a Russian plot : What ’ s driving this is new evidence supporting Reade ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yesterday ) .
Specifically , Reade claimed she told three people about what happened to her at the time .
One of those people was her mother who passed away in 2016 .
However , Reade recalled that back in 1993 her mother was so outraged about what had happened to her that she called into a television show and described the situation to the host .
Yesterday , Ryan Grim of the intercept was given a transcript of the Larry King show and within hours the Media Research Center had located video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since confirmed is her mother ’ s voice : The call doesn ’ t specify what issues Reade was having with the Senator but the fact that it would be newsworthy and damaging to the Senator ( Biden ) is suggestive .
If nothing else , this clip proves that Reade did have a problem in Biden ’ s office which she told her mother about at the time , consistent with what she has been saying all along .
Reade ’ s best friend at the time has also confirmed that Reade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including the situation where Biden allegedly maneuvered her against a wall and put his hand under her skirt .
We ’ re still a long , long way from the kind of saturation coverage of this story that we saw with regard to Christine Blasey Ford during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing , but CNN did publish another story on the new information and discussed the significance of the call featuring Reade ’ s mother on air : So the media logjam hasn ’ t completely broken yet but the pressure behind it continues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe there ’ s any chance he ’ ll drop out but after weeks of getting a pass , Biden is going to be asked about this the next time he does an interview .
And that is going to give this story even more oxygen .
And that means that all of the hypocritical progressives who wanted us to “ believe all women ” a couple of years ago are going to have to start calling Reade a liar more loudly now .

Today the hashtag #DropOutBiden is trending on Twitter in response to new information that supports the credibility of Tara Reade’s allegations against him. Here’s Hillary stan Peter Daou saying the party has no credibility if it sticks with Biden:
DIFFICULT THREAD — #BIDEN SHOULD WITHDRAW 1. I respect the will of the voters. 2. But new information has emerged supporting #TaraReade's account of being sexually assaulted by #JoeBiden. 3. Credible rape accusations are disqualifying or we have NO moral standards. — Peter Daou (@peterdaou) April 25, 2020
9. This is the ethical position AND the smarter strategy to beat Trump. 10. We lose ALL moral authority if we embrace "the lesser of two accused rapists." 11. Polls show other Dem candidates can win. PRINCIPLES MATTER. WE CAN BEAT TRUMP AND PROTECT OUR VALUES.#DropOutBiden — Peter Daou (@peterdaou) April 25, 2020
The hashtag has been used more than 74,000 times as I write this. Many people are supporting Reade and want Biden out:
I am a professional in the field of sexual violence. I find Tara Reade and her allegations of rape against @JoeBiden to be credible and believable and I am calling for Joe Biden, who has been credibly accused of rape, to drop out now. #DropOutBiden — Prof Zenkus (@anthonyzenkus) April 25, 2020
There’s definitely a political angle to the reactions. Quite a few of the people using the hashtag are obviously Bernie Sanders supporters who never liked Biden in the first place. In fact, Bernie’s former Press Secretary seems to be piling on the trend without actually calling for Biden to drop out.
The Democratic Party effectively chose Biden as its candidate when it coerced competing moderates to drop out following SC. Now it can choose to remedy that mistake, but it would have to put the interests of the people before corporate donors. https://t.co/mJwlW9B6Sh — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) April 24, 2020
Democrats could've treated these allegations seriously, offered contrition and attempted rehabilitation. It's not clear if the public would have (or should've) accepted it, but it would have preserved their credibility w/r/t issues of sexual misconduct. Now what do we have? https://t.co/6R8eSB2giI — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) April 25, 2020
It's a good time to note that Bernie's on the ballot. — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) April 25, 2020
Progressives didn't make this happen. Corporate Democrats chose Biden. https://t.co/95xVE0TkOt — Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) April 25, 2020
Of course not everyone using the hashtag is on board with this. The Krassenstein brothers, who were removed from Twitter but seem to have sidestepped the ban, are still pushing doubts about Reade’s story. They, and a number of other people, are suggesting the hashtag is part of a Russian plot:
Again #DropOutBiden begins trending in the middle of the day in Russia, while most Americans are sleeping. Again it’s pushing the story of a woman who praised Biden for helping stop sexual assault for over a decade before suddenly claiming he raped her. https://t.co/cdCwd4zGDj — Mrs. Krassenstein (@HKrassenstein) April 25, 2020
What’s driving this is new evidence supporting Reade’s story (I wrote about it yesterday). Specifically, Reade claimed she told three people about what happened to her at the time. One of those people was her mother who passed away in 2016. However, Reade recalled that back in 1993 her mother was so outraged about what had happened to her that she called into a television show and described the situation to the host. Yesterday, Ryan Grim of the intercept was given a transcript of the Larry King show and within hours the Media Research Center had located video of the phone call which Reade has since confirmed is her mother’s voice:
#BREAKING: HERE is the video from August 11,1993's 'Larry King Live' described by @TheIntercept (and Tara Reade) as allegedly featuring her mother calling in and alluding to Reade's sexual assault claims against @JoeBiden (blog here by @ScottJW) https://t.co/fCgEqBnX7n pic.twitter.com/V5FGHskv56 — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 24, 2020
The call doesn’t specify what issues Reade was having with the Senator but the fact that it would be newsworthy and damaging to the Senator (Biden) is suggestive. If nothing else, this clip proves that Reade did have a problem in Biden’s office which she told her mother about at the time, consistent with what she has been saying all along. Reade’s best friend at the time has also confirmed that Reade told her the details of what happened including the situation where Biden allegedly maneuvered her against a wall and put his hand under her skirt.
We’re still a long, long way from the kind of saturation coverage of this story that we saw with regard to Christine Blasey Ford during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing, but CNN did publish another story on the new information and discussed the significance of the call featuring Reade’s mother on air:
CNN addressed Tara Reade’s allegation against Joe Biden on-air today. A few hours ago, the network wrote up an article about a video that appears to show Reade’s mother calling into “Larry King Live” in 1993. Many outlets still yet to cover:pic.twitter.com/CykDN8J2Vl — Shelby Talcott (@ShelbyTalcott) April 25, 2020
So the media logjam hasn’t completely broken yet but the pressure behind it continues to build. I don’t believe there’s any chance he’ll drop out but after weeks of getting a pass, Biden is going to be asked about this the next time he does an interview. And that is going to give this story even more oxygen. And that means that all of the hypocritical progressives who wanted us to “believe all women” a couple of years ago are going to have to start calling Reade a liar more loudly now.


hotair--2020-04-25--FEC report: Pelosi's favorite ice cream is Joe Biden's favorite, too.

Who knew that Lunch Bucket Joe had such expensive taste in ice cream ?
He ’ s right up there with Nancy Pelosi in his love of Jeni ’ s Splendid Ice Cream .
Not only does Every Man Joe partake in the treat himself , but he also rewards his campaign donors with it , too .
The photo used at the top of this post is one of Joe Biden and Jeni Britton Bauer of Columbus , Ohio , the founder of Jeni ’ s Splendid Ice Cream .
It ’ s a bit dated , from 2012 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between Biden and Jeni goes back at least a few years .
She ’ s a Biden supporter and she ’ s not new to the political scene .
The Daily Wire even reports that Biden gifts his campaign donors with the ice cream and reports the pints to the FEC .
The individual amounts are between $ 71 and $ 78.74 .
Biden has spent over $ 10,000 so far during his presidential campaign .
Jeni is described as a pioneer of the artisan ice cream movement .
I admit I had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damning video filmed in Nancy Pelosi ’ s posh kitchen in San Francisco circulated .
Then I read that a pint of the frozen treat costs $ 12 and it quickly became clear why I didn ’ t know about it .
My family enjoys ice cream as much as the next but that ’ s a bit extravagant .
A pint is one normal serving size , amirite ?
Politics is in everything these days , even our guilty pleasures .
Jeni , as it turns out , is a Democrat activist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s March in Washington , D.C , even after the controversial anti-Semite leaders of that movement were exposed and participation dropped off .
Her employees march in Cleveland , too .
It is “ healing and inspiring , ” she says .
Jeni Britton Bauer , founder of Jeni ’ s Splendid Ice Creams , with about 1,200 employees seasonally , sees support for women as a defining characteristic of her business .
On February 2 , Britton Bauer will be donating all profits from Ice Cream for Breakfast Day to not-for-profit She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more women to run for elected office .
Britton Bauer marched in Washington last year , calling it “ healing and inspiring , ” and says a group of employees will march in Columbus this year .
Says Britton Bauer : “ It ’ s time to refocus and remember there is only forward.
” Pardon my cynicism but Jeni ’ s is an Ohio company .
Ohio is a swing state in presidential elections .
Joe Biden really wants to win Ohio in November , so when San Fran Nan received publicity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s ice cream , Joe jumped at the chance to compliment her on her taste in ice cream .
“ My name is Joe Biden and I love ice cream.
” There is video posted in 2016 of Biden speaking at an event hosted by Jeni to promote overtime law changes .
An article in Eater asks the question , “ Is bougie ice cream the “ arugula-gate ” of 2020 ?
” Remember the fun conservatives had with then-candidate Barack Obama ’ s mention that he loved eating arugula from Whole Foods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind of guy ?
The folks he was trying to appeal to were more likely to purchase ordinary and economical iceberg lettuce instead of over-priced lettuce from Whole Foods .
Good times .
I don ’ t mind the same thing happening to phony Democrats like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi now either .
Biden also touted his love of ice cream in a video in 2010 .
Small business owners , like the owners of The Penny Ice Creamery in California , expressed thanks to Obama/Biden for their $ 250,000 Recovery Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden saw it and gave them a call .
“ I don ’ t drink or smoke but I eat a lot of ice cream.
” So , if Sleepy Joe wins in November , perhaps he ’ ll make Jeni ’ s Splendid Ice Cream the official ice cream of the White House .
We can assume it won ’ t be Ben and Jerry ’ s since that ’ s the favorite of Bernie Sanders .
I wonder if Joe will get any questions about how many scoops of ice cream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonsense written by reporters about President Trump getting two scoops for dessert .
Never mind , we know what the answer to that is , don ’ t we ?

Who knew that Lunch Bucket Joe had such expensive taste in ice cream? He’s right up there with Nancy Pelosi in his love of Jeni’s Splendid Ice Cream. Not only does Every Man Joe partake in the treat himself, but he also rewards his campaign donors with it, too.
The photo used at the top of this post is one of Joe Biden and Jeni Britton Bauer of Columbus, Ohio, the founder of Jeni’s Splendid Ice Cream. It’s a bit dated, from 2012, but it shows that the friendship between Biden and Jeni goes back at least a few years. She’s a Biden supporter and she’s not new to the political scene. The Daily Wire even reports that Biden gifts his campaign donors with the ice cream and reports the pints to the FEC. The individual amounts are between $71 and $78.74. Biden has spent over $10,000 so far during his presidential campaign.
Jeni is described as a pioneer of the artisan ice cream movement. I admit I had never heard of this brand until the damning video filmed in Nancy Pelosi’s posh kitchen in San Francisco circulated. Then I read that a pint of the frozen treat costs $12 and it quickly became clear why I didn’t know about it. My family enjoys ice cream as much as the next but that’s a bit extravagant. A pint is one normal serving size, amirite?
Politics is in everything these days, even our guilty pleasures. Jeni, as it turns out, is a Democrat activist. She participates in the Women’s March in Washington, D.C, even after the controversial anti-Semite leaders of that movement were exposed and participation dropped off. Her employees march in Cleveland, too. It is “healing and inspiring,” she says.
Jeni Britton Bauer, founder of Jeni’s Splendid Ice Creams, with about 1,200 employees seasonally, sees support for women as a defining characteristic of her business. On February 2, Britton Bauer will be donating all profits from Ice Cream for Breakfast Day to not-for-profit She Should Run, which aims to convince more women to run for elected office. Britton Bauer marched in Washington last year, calling it “healing and inspiring,” and says a group of employees will march in Columbus this year. Says Britton Bauer: “It’s time to refocus and remember there is only forward.”
Pardon my cynicism but Jeni’s is an Ohio company. Ohio is a swing state in presidential elections. Joe Biden really wants to win Ohio in November, so when San Fran Nan received publicity for her tone-deaf promotion of Jeni’s ice cream, Joe jumped at the chance to compliment her on her taste in ice cream.
“My name is Joe Biden and I love ice cream.” There is video posted in 2016 of Biden speaking at an event hosted by Jeni to promote overtime law changes.
An article in Eater asks the question, “Is bougie ice cream the “arugula-gate” of 2020?” Remember the fun conservatives had with then-candidate Barack Obama’s mention that he loved eating arugula from Whole Foods as he campaigned as just a working-class kind of guy? The folks he was trying to appeal to were more likely to purchase ordinary and economical iceberg lettuce instead of over-priced lettuce from Whole Foods. Good times. I don’t mind the same thing happening to phony Democrats like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi now either.
Biden also touted his love of ice cream in a video in 2010. Small business owners, like the owners of The Penny Ice Creamery in California, expressed thanks to Obama/Biden for their $250,000 Recovery Act small business loan in a video. Biden saw it and gave them a call. “I don’t drink or smoke but I eat a lot of ice cream.”
So, if Sleepy Joe wins in November, perhaps he’ll make Jeni’s Splendid Ice Cream the official ice cream of the White House. We can assume it won’t be Ben and Jerry’s since that’s the favorite of Bernie Sanders. I wonder if Joe will get any questions about how many scoops of ice cream he eats at a time like the nonsense written by reporters about President Trump getting two scoops for dessert. Never mind, we know what the answer to that is, don’t we?


hotair--2020-04-25--The end of Trump's daily coronavirus briefings?

A single line from this Axios piece , quoting someone “ close to the deliberations ” about the briefings , summarizes the diminishing returns from Trump ’ s appearances better than I can : “ I mean , you wonder how we got to the point where you ’ re talking about injecting disinfectant.
” Republicans have been warning him for weeks that the briefings are doing him more harm than good politically but it ’ s impossible to convince a narcissist that *more* exposure might lead people to like him *less .
* The mockery he ’ s endured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disinfectant treatments for COVID may have finally persuaded him to cut his losses .
Yesterday ’ s briefing was unusually short and he took no questions , no doubt knowing what those questions would entail .
Now sources are whispering that he may start cutting back his appearances , showing up only sporadically to announce good news .
I give it five days before he ’ s doing hour-long Q & A ’ s again .
A week , tops .
President Trump plans to pare back his coronavirus press conferences , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deliberations .
He may stop appearing daily and make shorter appearances when he does , the sources said — a practice that may have started with Friday ’ s unusually short briefing… “ I told him it ’ s not helping him , ” said one adviser to the president .
“ Seniors are scared .
And the spectacle of him fighting with the press isn ’ t what people want to see.
” CNN has background on how his already legendary monologue about “ bringing light into the body ” came to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence ’ s coronavirus task force meetings ( sometimes not for 10 days at a time ) , his chance to ask questions about DHS ’ s findings on how sunlight and disinfectant affect the virus was limited to a “ quick ” briefing by a DHS official in the minutes before the evening news conference .
He ended up reacting to the new information while at the podium , live to the whole world , and because he believes he ’ s a genius it didn ’ t occur to him that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ body somehow might be considered … not genius .
The humiliation may have steered him towards finally pulling the plug .
But there ’ s hard data weighing on him too : Republicans were taken aback this past week by the results of a 17-state survey commissioned by the Republican National Committee .
It found the president struggling in the Electoral College battlegrounds and likely to lose without signs of an economic rebound this fall , according to a party strategist outside the R.N.C .
who is familiar with the poll ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own surveys have also shown an erosion of support , according to four people familiar with the data , as the coronavirus remains the No .
1 issue worrying voters… Republican lawmakers have gone from watching his lengthy daily briefings with a tight-lipped grimace to looking upon them with horror… One prominent G.O.P .
senator said the nightly sessions were so painful he could not bear watching any longer .
Some Republicans fear that this is shaping up to be a replay of the 2006 and 2008 cycles , in which the party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wiped out in the presidential election .
Currently , Dem fundraising in key congressional races far outpaces the GOP ’ s .
The best thing the president could do for himself is follow Biden ’ s lead by lowering his public profile and letting the more competent members of the task force — Birx , Fauci , even Pence — become the face of the federal government ’ s COVID response .
The more public trust rises that the White House is equal to the challenge , the more Trump will benefit politically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cameras , there ’ s no way to keep him off of Twitter , posting stuff like this : It ’ s true that the U.S. has tested more than any other country ( although not true that we ’ ve tested more than all other major countries combined ) , but the raw numbers of testing don ’ t tell us anything .
We ’ re the third most populous country in the world ; of course we ’ re going to test more people than most others are .
The relevant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing per capita .
In that metric we ’ re behind Italy , Germany , Switzerland , Spain , Australia , Belgium , even Russia .
Even if we were ahead of them , it wouldn ’ t change the fact that most epidemiologists believe we need many more tests per capita to reach a point where we can safely reopen most of the country without fear of a sudden spike .
Tweeting about how many tests we ’ ve already performed suggests complacency about that , the last thing people want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focus on what progress has been made in the past 24 hours to get us to the testing levels we need .
Focusing instead on testing that ’ s already been done smacks of him having given up on the possibility of progress .
“ His logic [ insisting on doing daily briefings ] failed to take into account the reality that not every American who tunes in to the nightly briefings will ultimately vote for Trump in the fall , especially suburban and female voters whom White House advisers have long worried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s also his logic in tweeting about how many tests have already been done .
It ’ s a talking point for his base , not an earnest attempt to address the ongoing problem with testing .
He ’ s convinced himself either that the whole country reacts to him the way his base does or that there are enough members of his base that he can win this fall simply by continually pandering to them .
His aides are going to try to scratch his itch to appear in front @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the road , possibly on goodwill visits to businesses that have reopened , so that he has another outlet apart from the daily briefing to get face time with fans that he used to get at rallies .
Next stop : West Point ?

A single line from this Axios piece, quoting someone “close to the deliberations” about the briefings, summarizes the diminishing returns from Trump’s appearances better than I can: “I mean, you wonder how we got to the point where you’re talking about injecting disinfectant.”
Republicans have been warning him for weeks that the briefings are doing him more harm than good politically but it’s impossible to convince a narcissist that *more* exposure might lead people to like him *less.* The mockery he’s endured since Thursday night’s fiasco over disinfectant treatments for COVID may have finally persuaded him to cut his losses. Yesterday’s briefing was unusually short and he took no questions, no doubt knowing what those questions would entail. Now sources are whispering that he may start cutting back his appearances, showing up only sporadically to announce good news.
I give it five days before he’s doing hour-long Q&A’s again. A week, tops.
President Trump plans to pare back his coronavirus press conferences, according to four sources familiar with the internal deliberations. He may stop appearing daily and make shorter appearances when he does, the sources said — a practice that may have started with Friday’s unusually short briefing… “I told him it’s not helping him,” said one adviser to the president. “Seniors are scared. And the spectacle of him fighting with the press isn’t what people want to see.”
CNN has background on how his already legendary monologue about “bringing light into the body” came to be. Because he only rarely attends Pence’s coronavirus task force meetings (sometimes not for 10 days at a time), his chance to ask questions about DHS’s findings on how sunlight and disinfectant affect the virus was limited to a “quick” briefing by a DHS official in the minutes before the evening news conference. He ended up reacting to the new information while at the podium, live to the whole world, and because he believes he’s a genius it didn’t occur to him that his idea of “cleaning” the body somehow might be considered … not genius.
The humiliation may have steered him towards finally pulling the plug. But there’s hard data weighing on him too:
Republicans were taken aback this past week by the results of a 17-state survey commissioned by the Republican National Committee. It found the president struggling in the Electoral College battlegrounds and likely to lose without signs of an economic rebound this fall, according to a party strategist outside the R.N.C. who is familiar with the poll’s results. The Trump campaign’s own surveys have also shown an erosion of support, according to four people familiar with the data, as the coronavirus remains the No. 1 issue worrying voters… Republican lawmakers have gone from watching his lengthy daily briefings with a tight-lipped grimace to looking upon them with horror… One prominent G.O.P. senator said the nightly sessions were so painful he could not bear watching any longer.
Some Republicans fear that this is shaping up to be a replay of the 2006 and 2008 cycles, in which the party was brutalized in the midterms and then wiped out in the presidential election. Currently, Dem fundraising in key congressional races far outpaces the GOP’s. The best thing the president could do for himself is follow Biden’s lead by lowering his public profile and letting the more competent members of the task force — Birx, Fauci, even Pence — become the face of the federal government’s COVID response. The more public trust rises that the White House is equal to the challenge, the more Trump will benefit politically.
But even if he avoids the cameras, there’s no way to keep him off of Twitter, posting stuff like this:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1254061979607711745
It’s true that the U.S. has tested more than any other country (although not true that we’ve tested more than all other major countries combined), but the raw numbers of testing don’t tell us anything. We’re the third most populous country in the world; of course we’re going to test more people than most others are. The relevant number is how many we’re testing per capita. In that metric we’re behind Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Australia, Belgium, even Russia. Even if we were ahead of them, it wouldn’t change the fact that most epidemiologists believe we need many more tests per capita to reach a point where we can safely reopen most of the country without fear of a sudden spike.
Tweeting about how many tests we’ve already performed suggests complacency about that, the last thing people want to see. His message every day should focus on what progress has been made in the past 24 hours to get us to the testing levels we need. Focusing instead on testing that’s already been done smacks of him having given up on the possibility of progress. “His logic [insisting on doing daily briefings] failed to take into account the reality that not every American who tunes in to the nightly briefings will ultimately vote for Trump in the fall, especially suburban and female voters whom White House advisers have long worried about,” Politico wrote today. That’s also his logic in tweeting about how many tests have already been done. It’s a talking point for his base, not an earnest attempt to address the ongoing problem with testing. He’s convinced himself either that the whole country reacts to him the way his base does or that there are enough members of his base that he can win this fall simply by continually pandering to them.
His aides are going to try to scratch his itch to appear in front of admiring audiences by sending him on the road, possibly on goodwill visits to businesses that have reopened, so that he has another outlet apart from the daily briefing to get face time with fans that he used to get at rallies. Next stop: West Point?


hotair--2020-04-25--SCOTUS refuses to block Trump's "public charge" rule

Back in January , the Supreme Court cleared the way for a new public charge rule put in place by the Trump administration .
The rule allows US immigration officials to consider a broader spectrum of public assistance programs , such as food stamps and Section 8 housing when considering whether or not green card applicants are self-sufficient .
Several blue-state attorneys general sued to have the rule blocked , gaining victories in four lower courts .
But by January , the matter seemed settled in favor of the White House .
A different group of attorneys general , led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the court to revisit the ruling in light of the current coronavirus pandemic .
That request apparently didn ’ t carry enough weight because the justices rejected the request without comment yesterday .
( The Hill ) The Supreme Court on Friday denied a request to block the Trump administration ’ s “ public charge ” rule during the coronavirus health crisis .
A group of state attorneys general had asked the court to issue an injunction against the rule , which links a migrant ’ s eligibility for legal status with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on public assistance .
The court had decided earlier this year to allow the rule to go into effect , but the group of state officials , led by New York Attorney General Letitia James ( D ) , had asked the justices to revisit the decision in light of the ongoing pandemic .
The court did not publish an opinion on its decision not to grant the request , nor did it publish a vote tally for the move .
The curious part about this decision was that the court didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and offered no explanation of the decision .
They simply passed on the request .
This does , however , leave the door open for the plaintiffs to continue their attempt in the Southern District of New York , which has rarely seen an attempt to Resist the Bad Orange Man that wasn ’ t approved .
There are a few states involved , but the effort is being headed by New York Attorney General Letitia James .
As you may recall , she ran for office in 2018 not on a promise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State and keep New Yorkers safe , but to Resist President Trump at every turn .
And she ’ s been good to her word , filing all manner of lawsuits against the White House , many of which are barely related to the specific needs of New York .
Well , to be fair , that ’ s not all she ’ s done .
Ms. James as also been a vocal proponent of criminal just reform and bail reform laws in New York , as well as the ongoing efforts to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s really worked out fabulously thus far , at least if you happen to be a criminal .
Looking at the supposed basis for this suit , we see yet another elected official who never lets a good pandemic crisis go to waste .
Having failed to stop the Public Charge Rule on its merits , she and her cohorts are now claiming that the novel coronavirus crisis makes it imperative that everyone , legal or illegal , has full access to medical care to prevent them from infecting anyone else .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if , ( a ) hospitals weren ’ t already required to provide medical care to anyone presenting themselves , no questions asked , and , ( b ) some areas in New York City are still seeing so many cases that you might not be able to get an ICU bed even if you have the best health insurance in the world .
But as I said , this is the authoritarian nature of executive branch elected officials during a crisis .
We ’ ve been seeing it from officials in both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its legs under it and shot off to a running start .
Whether it ’ s closing down businesses , ordering people to stay home , or restricting freedom of movement , everyone is getting in on the act .
And in this case , Letitia James is trying to use the pandemic as a lever to force the courts in a direction that ’ s already been rejected .

Back in January, the Supreme Court cleared the way for a new public charge rule put in place by the Trump administration. The rule allows US immigration officials to consider a broader spectrum of public assistance programs, such as food stamps and Section 8 housing when considering whether or not green card applicants are self-sufficient. Several blue-state attorneys general sued to have the rule blocked, gaining victories in four lower courts. But by January, the matter seemed settled in favor of the White House.
A different group of attorneys general, led by New York State, had asked the court to revisit the ruling in light of the current coronavirus pandemic. That request apparently didn’t carry enough weight because the justices rejected the request without comment yesterday. (The Hill)
The Supreme Court on Friday denied a request to block the Trump administration’s “public charge” rule during the coronavirus health crisis. A group of state attorneys general had asked the court to issue an injunction against the rule, which links a migrant’s eligibility for legal status with the likelihood that he or she will rely on public assistance. The court had decided earlier this year to allow the rule to go into effect, but the group of state officials, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), had asked the justices to revisit the decision in light of the ongoing pandemic. The court did not publish an opinion on its decision not to grant the request, nor did it publish a vote tally for the move.
The curious part about this decision was that the court didn’t reveal the results of the vote and offered no explanation of the decision. They simply passed on the request. This does, however, leave the door open for the plaintiffs to continue their attempt in the Southern District of New York, which has rarely seen an attempt to Resist the Bad Orange Man that wasn’t approved.
There are a few states involved, but the effort is being headed by New York Attorney General Letitia James. As you may recall, she ran for office in 2018 not on a promise to enforce the laws of the Empire State and keep New Yorkers safe, but to Resist President Trump at every turn. And she’s been good to her word, filing all manner of lawsuits against the White House, many of which are barely related to the specific needs of New York.
Well, to be fair, that’s not all she’s done. Ms. James as also been a vocal proponent of criminal just reform and bail reform laws in New York, as well as the ongoing efforts to “empty the jails.” That’s really worked out fabulously thus far, at least if you happen to be a criminal.
Looking at the supposed basis for this suit, we see yet another elected official who never lets a good pandemic crisis go to waste. Having failed to stop the Public Charge Rule on its merits, she and her cohorts are now claiming that the novel coronavirus crisis makes it imperative that everyone, legal or illegal, has full access to medical care to prevent them from infecting anyone else. That argument would hold a lot more water if, (a) hospitals weren’t already required to provide medical care to anyone presenting themselves, no questions asked, and, (b) some areas in New York City are still seeing so many cases that you might not be able to get an ICU bed even if you have the best health insurance in the world.
But as I said, this is the authoritarian nature of executive branch elected officials during a crisis. We’ve been seeing it from officials in both parties ever since the virus really got its legs under it and shot off to a running start. Whether it’s closing down businesses, ordering people to stay home, or restricting freedom of movement, everyone is getting in on the act. And in this case, Letitia James is trying to use the pandemic as a lever to force the courts in a direction that’s already been rejected.


hotair--2020-04-25--Acosta: WH uses "Soviet-style totalitarian-like" behavior at press briefings

The delicate egos of some White House correspondents were bruised Friday just before the daily coronavirus task force briefing began .
A White House staffer tried to get CNN ’ s Kaitlan Collins to switch seats with a print reporter who is assigned to sit in the back of the room .
We know that White House correspondents are assigned seats in the briefing room by the White House Correspondents ’ Association .
The bigger media outlets are seated upfront .
Frequently reporters will do a live shot after a press briefing for cable networks by simply standing in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the front row makes that an easy thing to do .
On Friday , CNN ’ s Kaitlan Collins snagged a front-row seat .
Because of the social distancing guidelines , there are usually only two maybe three reporters at the most on the front row .
Needless to say , when the White House asked her to move , she refused .
Chris Johnson , of the Washington Blade , a print pool reporter , was asked to switch with Collins .
He refused to do so and this gave cover to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , that was interesting .
CNN ’ s Jim Acosta spoke with Anderson Cooper later and described the White House ’ s action as “ Soviet-style totalitarian behavior ” .
Hyperbole , much ?
Granted , the White House staff doesn ’ t assign the seats but doesn ’ t Putin just jail , and sometimes murder , his opposition in the press ?
Russian media would probably welcome something as benign as asking a reporter to switch seats at a briefing .
CNN employs Acosta to be an antagonistic reporter , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Attaboy , Jim .
“ There just isn ’ t enough disinfectant at the White House to wash away what the president did.
” Acosta blames Trump specifically for the request , not entertaining the possibility that a staffer acted on instructions from elsewhere in the White House .
Hours after Friday ’ s briefing , which abruptly concluded after 22 minutes with the president refusing to answer any questions from the press , CNN ’ s Jim Acosta revealed that Trump officials had attempted a last-minute rearrangement of the press seats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Correspondents ’ Association , not the Trump administration .
“ Just to show you the Soviet-style totalitarian-like lengths they were going to , this evening , they were trying to rearrange the seats in the briefing room , so our colleague Kaitlan Collins would be stuck in the back row and another moved to the front of the briefing room , ” Acosta explained .
“ [ Washington Blade reporter ] Chris Johnson , thank goodness for him , refused to get up out of his seat .
So , it took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foil their plans .
One White House official was saying ‘ We ’ re going to get the Secret Service involved if you don ’ t switch seats around.
’ ” Perhaps the White House wanted Collins sent to the back of the room in response to some negative reporting on Thursday ’ s coronavirus task force press briefing when President Trump pondered out loud about the effects of sunlight and disinfectants on the virus .
Even Trump ’ s most loyal supporters admit the exchange he had over that was a bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporters that he was being sarcastic in his remarks .
Friday ’ s press briefing with the coronavirus task force was unusual .
Earlier in the day , Trump answered questions from reporters during a photo opportunity in the White House .
He was bombarded with questions about his remarks about disinfectants and sunlight therapy .
So , when the press briefing got underway , President Trump delivered some remarks and then a member of the task force stepped up and gave an update .
He took some questions .
After he moved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the press conference and walked out , followed by the others with him .
The whole thing only lasted 22 minutes , which is very unusual .
These press briefings with the coronavirus task force regularly last more than an hour , with Trump taking the most questions .
It has been suggested that the press briefings center around the task force and their updates instead of Trump taking the majority of the time .
It would eliminate the aggravation he receives over remarks like he made Thursday .
Frankly , the task @ @ @ @ @ @ @ briefings – and let Mike Pence run them .
It ’ s good to have Trump present and looking involved , as he is , but the press turns the briefings into contests with gotcha questions and trying to capture a soundbite for the evening news on cable stations .
Topics often veer from the coronavirus pandemic .
Meanwhile , it is just another opportunity for a dramatic recounting of a White House press briefing from the King of Drama , Jim Acosta .
CNN loves that stuff .
It ’ s all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which , by the way , continues to shrink .
You ’ d think they would notice .

The delicate egos of some White House correspondents were bruised Friday just before the daily coronavirus task force briefing began. A White House staffer tried to get CNN’s Kaitlan Collins to switch seats with a print reporter who is assigned to sit in the back of the room.
We know that White House correspondents are assigned seats in the briefing room by the White House Correspondents’ Association. The bigger media outlets are seated upfront. Frequently reporters will do a live shot after a press briefing for cable networks by simply standing in their assigned spot and reporting. Being on the front row makes that an easy thing to do. On Friday, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins snagged a front-row seat. Because of the social distancing guidelines, there are usually only two maybe three reporters at the most on the front row. Needless to say, when the White House asked her to move, she refused.
Chris Johnson, of the Washington Blade, a print pool reporter, was asked to switch with Collins. He refused to do so and this gave cover to Collins’ decision to stay put.
https://twitter.com/hunterw/status/1253794854355832833
https://twitter.com/hunterw/status/1253796245367332864
So, that was interesting. CNN’s Jim Acosta spoke with Anderson Cooper later and described the White House’s action as “Soviet-style totalitarian behavior”. Hyperbole, much? Granted, the White House staff doesn’t assign the seats but doesn’t Putin just jail, and sometimes murder, his opposition in the press? Russian media would probably welcome something as benign as asking a reporter to switch seats at a briefing. CNN employs Acosta to be an antagonistic reporter, though, so he brought the hyperbole. Attaboy, Jim. “There just isn’t enough disinfectant at the White House to wash away what the president did.” Acosta blames Trump specifically for the request, not entertaining the possibility that a staffer acted on instructions from elsewhere in the White House.
Hours after Friday’s briefing, which abruptly concluded after 22 minutes with the president refusing to answer any questions from the press, CNN’s Jim Acosta revealed that Trump officials had attempted a last-minute rearrangement of the press seats, which are assigned by the White House Correspondents’ Association, not the Trump administration. “Just to show you the Soviet-style totalitarian-like lengths they were going to, this evening, they were trying to rearrange the seats in the briefing room, so our colleague Kaitlan Collins would be stuck in the back row and another moved to the front of the briefing room,” Acosta explained. “[Washington Blade reporter] Chris Johnson, thank goodness for him, refused to get up out of his seat. So, it took almost an act of civil disobedience to foil their plans. One White House official was saying ‘We’re going to get the Secret Service involved if you don’t switch seats around.’” “That’s a good use of Secret Service resources,” CNN host Anderson Cooper snarked.
Perhaps the White House wanted Collins sent to the back of the room in response to some negative reporting on Thursday’s coronavirus task force press briefing when President Trump pondered out loud about the effects of sunlight and disinfectants on the virus. Even Trump’s most loyal supporters admit the exchange he had over that was a bit unusual. By Friday Trump was telling reporters that he was being sarcastic in his remarks.
Friday’s press briefing with the coronavirus task force was unusual. Earlier in the day, Trump answered questions from reporters during a photo opportunity in the White House. He was bombarded with questions about his remarks about disinfectants and sunlight therapy. So, when the press briefing got underway, President Trump delivered some remarks and then a member of the task force stepped up and gave an update. He took some questions. After he moved back from the podium, Trump ended the press conference and walked out, followed by the others with him. The whole thing only lasted 22 minutes, which is very unusual. These press briefings with the coronavirus task force regularly last more than an hour, with Trump taking the most questions.
It has been suggested that the press briefings center around the task force and their updates instead of Trump taking the majority of the time. It would eliminate the aggravation he receives over remarks like he made Thursday. Frankly, the task force should have more involvement in the briefings – and let Mike Pence run them. It’s good to have Trump present and looking involved, as he is, but the press turns the briefings into contests with gotcha questions and trying to capture a soundbite for the evening news on cable stations. Topics often veer from the coronavirus pandemic.
Meanwhile, it is just another opportunity for a dramatic recounting of a White House press briefing from the King of Drama, Jim Acosta. CNN loves that stuff. It’s all red meat for their anti-Trump audience, which, by the way, continues to shrink. You’d think they would notice.


hotair--2020-04-25--Federal judge: California background-check requirement for ammo "gravely injured" 2nd Amendment righ

Federal judge: California background-check requirement for ammo "gravely injured" 2nd Amendment rights

We don ’ t get too many feel-good stories in these days of COVID-19 , but this one qualifies — and it even has a pandemic hook .
The same federal judge who shot down California ’ s ban on “ high capacity ” magazines also threw out its requirement for a background check on every purchase of ammunition .
Judge Roger Benitez called the law “ onerous and convoluted , ” and ruled that its enforcement “ gravely injured ” the Second Amendment rights of Californians .
One has to wonder just how many of those who supported this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aren ’ t secretly cheering Benitez now : U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday halting the law , ruling in favor of lobby group California Rifle & Pistol Association , which asked him to stop the checks .
“ California ’ s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured , ” Benitez wrote in the order granting the group ’ s motion for a preliminary injunction .
The order also described the law as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitutionally defective ” .
Benitez even underscored his ruling by referring to the pandemic .
Americans need the ability to defend themselves and their families more than ever now , Benitez declared .
They don ’ t need California politicians who are presently emptying jails to obstruct that right : “ Criminals , tyrants , and terrorists don ’ t do background checks .
There is little evidence that pre-purchase ammunition background checking will accomplish the goal and the burden it places on the Constitutional rights of law-abiding firearm owners is profound.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which granted a preliminary injunction barring California Attorney General Xavier Becerra from enforcing the background-check law , Benitez cited the coronavirus pandemic .
“ Courts are limping by while police make arrests for only the more serious crimes , ” Benitez wrote .
“ Maintaining Second Amendment rights are especially important in times like these.
” The state argued that the background check was no burden , because it only added a “ few minutes ” to the sale “ in the vast majority of cases , ” but that also misses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stringent background-check and waiting-period requirements on firearms purchases than the federal government , which some liberals discovered to their displeasure at the beginning of the lockdown .
The ammo-purchase regime effectively burdens them not just on purchase of firearms but redundantly and repeatedly on nearly every exercise of their constitutional right .
The most offensive part of the background-check regime was that it essentially just acted as a tax .
California collected $ 1 on every sale of ammunition even if the buyer had already been entered in the ammunition-purchaser database .
Longer-term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those with even cleaner backgrounds .
This amounted to a shakedown of gun users without any rational reason or any demonstration that it served a state interest in the narrowest possible way , a requirement when infringing on a constitutional right .
Becerra claimed that the law had prevented 750 barred people from buying ammunition since the law ’ s passage in 2016 .
Big deal , wrote Tom Knighton at Bearing Arms , who puts those numbers in perspective : California Attorney General Xavier Bacerra , of course , isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argues that the law prevented some 750 criminals from obtaining ammunition .
In a state of almost 40 million people and nearly 170,000 square miles , it stopped 750 .
That ’ s a bit over one per 1,000 square miles .
Yeah , that law did all kinds of stopping of bad guys .
For the record , more people were shot in Los Angeles alone than that .
… On one hand , it made things virtually impossible for law-abiding citizens to buy ammunition .
On the other , the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of state to buy ammo , with some undoubtedly stocking up in nearby Nevada and bringing it back to fill the demand in the newly created black market for ammunition .
How many convicts has California released in the last four weeks because of the COVID-19 pandemic ?
I ’ d bet it ’ s more than 750 — and those flagged purchases are over a nearly four-year period .
That ’ s certainly one reason why the right to self-defense is “ especially important in times like these.
” Becerra filed yesterday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He ’ ll likely get one from the Ninth Circuit , but the Supreme Court will almost certainly overturn it .
And don ’ t be surprised if the disappointment on the Left turns out to be , er … somewhat muted when that happens .
That will also be part of “ times like these .
”

We don’t get too many feel-good stories in these days of COVID-19, but this one qualifies — and it even has a pandemic hook. The same federal judge who shot down California’s ban on “high capacity” magazines also threw out its requirement for a background check on every purchase of ammunition. Judge Roger Benitez called the law “onerous and convoluted,” and ruled that its enforcement “gravely injured” the Second Amendment rights of Californians.
One has to wonder just how many of those who supported this law in the salad days of pre-COVID-19 aren’t secretly cheering Benitez now:
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez in San Diego issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday halting the law, ruling in favor of lobby group California Rifle & Pistol Association, which asked him to stop the checks. “California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured,” Benitez wrote in the order granting the group’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The order also described the law as “onerous and convoluted” and “constitutionally defective”.
Benitez even underscored his ruling by referring to the pandemic. Americans need the ability to defend themselves and their families more than ever now, Benitez declared. They don’t need California politicians who are presently emptying jails to obstruct that right:
“Criminals, tyrants, and terrorists don’t do background checks. There is little evidence that pre-purchase ammunition background checking will accomplish the goal and the burden it places on the Constitutional rights of law-abiding firearm owners is profound.” … At the end of his ruling, which granted a preliminary injunction barring California Attorney General Xavier Becerra from enforcing the background-check law, Benitez cited the coronavirus pandemic. “Courts are limping by while police make arrests for only the more serious crimes,” Benitez wrote. “Maintaining Second Amendment rights are especially important in times like these.”
The state argued that the background check was no burden, because it only added a “few minutes” to the sale “in the vast majority of cases,” but that also misses the point. California has even more stringent background-check and waiting-period requirements on firearms purchases than the federal government, which some liberals discovered to their displeasure at the beginning of the lockdown. The ammo-purchase regime effectively burdens them not just on purchase of firearms but redundantly and repeatedly on nearly every exercise of their constitutional right.
The most offensive part of the background-check regime was that it essentially just acted as a tax. California collected $1 on every sale of ammunition even if the buyer had already been entered in the ammunition-purchaser database. Longer-term licenses were available for another fee for those with even cleaner backgrounds. This amounted to a shakedown of gun users without any rational reason or any demonstration that it served a state interest in the narrowest possible way, a requirement when infringing on a constitutional right.
Becerra claimed that the law had prevented 750 barred people from buying ammunition since the law’s passage in 2016. Big deal, wrote Tom Knighton at Bearing Arms, who puts those numbers in perspective:
California Attorney General Xavier Bacerra, of course, isn’t a fan of the ruling. He argues that the law prevented some 750 criminals from obtaining ammunition. In a state of almost 40 million people and nearly 170,000 square miles, it stopped 750. That’s a bit over one per 1,000 square miles. Yeah, that law did all kinds of stopping of bad guys. For the record, more people were shot in Los Angeles alone than that. … On one hand, it made things virtually impossible for law-abiding citizens to buy ammunition. On the other, the most it did was send bad guys out of state to buy ammo, with some undoubtedly stocking up in nearby Nevada and bringing it back to fill the demand in the newly created black market for ammunition.
How many convicts has California released in the last four weeks because of the COVID-19 pandemic? I’d bet it’s more than 750 — and those flagged purchases are over a nearly four-year period. That’s certainly one reason why the right to self-defense is “especially important in times like these.”
Becerra filed yesterday for a stay on Benitez’ order. He’ll likely get one from the Ninth Circuit, but the Supreme Court will almost certainly overturn it. And don’t be surprised if the disappointment on the Left turns out to be, er … somewhat muted when that happens. That will also be part of “times like these.”


hotair--2020-04-25--What's next for North Korea if Kim Jong-un is dead?

Despite repeated denials from the government and state-run media about the status of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un ’ s health , the fact remains that nobody has seen him in public in weeks .
The various claims and rumors making the rounds range from Kim being in recovery from surgery at a private residence to assertions that he ’ s brain dead or even deceased .
The hermit kingdom isn ’ t really big on sharing news , particularly if it ’ s of the bad variety , so we won ’ t know anything until they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some other sort of proof .
But given the dodgy nature of his overall health , we still have to consider the possibility that he might have shuffled off this mortal coil ( or is on his way to doing so ) .
And if so , what happens next ?
James Joyner published a deep analysis of what we might expect yesterday .
As he reminds us , Kim ’ s grandfather and father had both arranged for their own successors prior to their deaths , so the transitions took place mostly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s children are very young and there is no such clear path forward in this case .
Might his sister , Kim Yo Jong be the next in line ?
Possibly , but that country has a deeply patriarchal structure and it ’ s unclear if the other powerful factions waiting in the wings would accept a woman as their leader .
The worst-case scenario is one where no clear successor emerges and the system completely collapses .
For a look at what that might entail , Joyner points us to this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Review .
It ’ s not a pretty picture .
Most dangerous of all , the entire system could collapse , with North Korea fracturing into a patchwork of ministates ruled by warlords .
In this grim scenario , civil war and humanitarian disaster would be likely .
Cash-strapped warlords might look to sell nuclear , biological or chemical weapons or technology , or use those deadly weapons against each other .
In any of these scenarios , China is likely to act quickly .
The last thing Beijing wants is conflict on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States to intervene .
If the existing regime survived , whether under Kim Yo Jong or another senior regime official , China would probably embrace and assist the new leader .
But if North Korea collapsed into civil war , China might feel compelled to intervene directly .
I would tend to agree that China would move quickly if North Korea completely collapsed into internecine warfare .
They don ’ t want that sort of an unstable situation sitting right on their border .
But what would that intervention look like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) approach would be for China to move across the border and intervene directly , handing out food and other relief aid while using their military to reestablish order .
Given the close ties between the two countries , most of the people probably wouldn ’ t push back too hard , particularly if they were being fed and some level of normal government services came back online .
I doubt many of the feuding warlords would have the stomach for a fight against China ’ s military .
But that would effectively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or protectorate .
Whoever wound up in charge would doubtless require the stamp of approval from Beijing before they were allowed to take the reins in Pyongyang .
It would also almost certainly derail any future efforts at reunification of the peninsula since South Korea isn ’ t about to abandon their long ties to the United States in exchange for the “ privilege ” of being a Chinese client state .
So is there any upside to this scenario ?
The only one that comes to mind is that China might completely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nuclear weapons facilities .
I ’ m not saying that ’ s an ideal solution , but China already has plenty of their own nukes and could reasonably be expected to act a bit more responsibly with them .
Life for the average North Korean probably wouldn ’ t improve all that much over where they find themselves today , however .
It ’ s not as if China would come in and close down Kim ’ s gulags since the CCP already operates plenty of their own .
But if we no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threatening to nuke the planet every other week , would we really be getting that bad of a deal ?

Despite repeated denials from the government and state-run media about the status of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un’s health, the fact remains that nobody has seen him in public in weeks. The various claims and rumors making the rounds range from Kim being in recovery from surgery at a private residence to assertions that he’s brain dead or even deceased. The hermit kingdom isn’t really big on sharing news, particularly if it’s of the bad variety, so we won’t know anything until they’re ready to either produce him or offer some other sort of proof.
But given the dodgy nature of his overall health, we still have to consider the possibility that he might have shuffled off this mortal coil (or is on his way to doing so). And if so, what happens next? James Joyner published a deep analysis of what we might expect yesterday. As he reminds us, Kim’s grandfather and father had both arranged for their own successors prior to their deaths, so the transitions took place mostly in a smooth fashion. But Kim’s children are very young and there is no such clear path forward in this case. Might his sister, Kim Yo Jong be the next in line? Possibly, but that country has a deeply patriarchal structure and it’s unclear if the other powerful factions waiting in the wings would accept a woman as their leader.
The worst-case scenario is one where no clear successor emerges and the system completely collapses. For a look at what that might entail, Joyner points us to this analysis from Steve Metz at World Politics Review. It’s not a pretty picture.
Most dangerous of all, the entire system could collapse, with North Korea fracturing into a patchwork of ministates ruled by warlords. In this grim scenario, civil war and humanitarian disaster would be likely. Cash-strapped warlords might look to sell nuclear, biological or chemical weapons or technology, or use those deadly weapons against each other. In any of these scenarios, China is likely to act quickly. The last thing Beijing wants is conflict on its border or chaos that might tempt the United States to intervene. If the existing regime survived, whether under Kim Yo Jong or another senior regime official, China would probably embrace and assist the new leader. But if North Korea collapsed into civil war, China might feel compelled to intervene directly.
I would tend to agree that China would move quickly if North Korea completely collapsed into internecine warfare. They don’t want that sort of an unstable situation sitting right on their border. But what would that intervention look like?
The most obvious (and heavy-handed) approach would be for China to move across the border and intervene directly, handing out food and other relief aid while using their military to reestablish order. Given the close ties between the two countries, most of the people probably wouldn’t push back too hard, particularly if they were being fed and some level of normal government services came back online. I doubt many of the feuding warlords would have the stomach for a fight against China’s military.
But that would effectively leave North Korea as a vassal state or protectorate. Whoever wound up in charge would doubtless require the stamp of approval from Beijing before they were allowed to take the reins in Pyongyang. It would also almost certainly derail any future efforts at reunification of the peninsula since South Korea isn’t about to abandon their long ties to the United States in exchange for the “privilege” of being a Chinese client state.
So is there any upside to this scenario? The only one that comes to mind is that China might completely seize control of North Korea’s nuclear weapons facilities. I’m not saying that’s an ideal solution, but China already has plenty of their own nukes and could reasonably be expected to act a bit more responsibly with them. Life for the average North Korean probably wouldn’t improve all that much over where they find themselves today, however. It’s not as if China would come in and close down Kim’s gulags since the CCP already operates plenty of their own. But if we no longer had a madman at the helm threatening to nuke the planet every other week, would we really be getting that bad of a deal?


hotair--2020-04-25--Whitmer: I don't know how we awarded that contract to my campaign vendor who just went dark

Earlier this week we looked at the major snafu going on in Michigan , where Governor Gretchen Whitmer ’ s administration awarded a lucrative contract to one of her campaign ’ s vendors to trace coronavirus cases .
The contract was given to Great Lakes Community Engagement , who was set to turn the work over to long-time Democratic consultant Mike Kolehouse .
After alarm bells started going off over the idea of such a liberal outfit collecting that amount of personal data about Michigan voters , the contract was canceled .
Now , in the aftermath of the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has no idea how Kolehouse ended up with that sweet arrangement .
It must have been the decision of the state ’ s Health Department .
And wait until you hear what ’ s going on with Kolehouse himself .
Michigan Democratic governor Gretchen Whitmer denied responsibility after her administration awarded a coronavirus-related contract to a prominent Democratic consulting firm , blaming the decision on the state ’ s health department .
“ The department thought that that vendor was the best one for some reason .
I don ’ t know what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know that the Department of Health and Human Services does not have a political bone in their theoretical body , ” Whitmer said during a Wednesday press conference .
“ When it was brought to my attention , I told them to cancel it.
” The Whitmer administration on Monday announced that it had awarded a contract to Great Lakes Community Engagement to conduct contact tracing in the state .
This is at least the third version of the story that we ’ ve heard .
Originally , we heard that Whitmer ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But Whitmer denied that and suggested that the decision to award the contract to Kolehouse ’ s outfit was made by the State Emergency Operations Center .
But they almost immediately denied the claim , saying they had never approved the vendor .
Now the finger is pointing at the state Health Department , who doesn ’ t seem inclined to comment on it thus far .
Couldn ’ t we just clear all this up by asking Kolehouse himself ?
That ’ s going to be a lot harder than you might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ basically deleted his entire online presence in a matter of 48 hours .
If you look for the website of his company ( the one that was about to pocket nearly $ 200,000 from this deal ) you ’ ll get a 404 error .
The entire website is gone .
He also wiped out his social media accounts and is not answering emails .
On Tuesday the Whitmer administration terminated a door-to-door pandemic tracing contract awarded to Great Lakes Community Engagement , an organization led by Kolehouse , just one day after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the cancellation , Kolehouse , who was set to take in nearly $ 200,000 in the deal , took down the website for his consulting firm , K2K strategies , as well as his Twitter , Facebook , and LinkedIn accounts .
He did not return multiple requests for comment from the Washington Free Beacon and declined to answer questions about the contract , which would have tasked him with collecting sensitive health data , from the Washington Post and Crain ’ s Detroit .
You know , for a “ totally nonpartisan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is certainly some suspicious behavior .
If everything was above board as Whitmer claims , why on Earth would Kolehouse suddenly scrub his entire presence from the face of the web ?
Won ’ t that make it harder for his many other clients ( I ’ m assuming he has more ) to reach him and conduct business ?
Also , by refusing to answer questions from the media , he ’ s sort of leaving the Governor twisting in the wind here .
Keep in mind that all of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Michigan legislature is moving to potentially try to strip the Governor of many of her emergency powers .
Emperess Palpatine , I mean Whitmer , may not be looking like such a hot choice to be Joe Biden ’ s running mate at this point , even after backing down on some of the restrictions she ’ d previously placed on the citizens of her state .

Earlier this week we looked at the major snafu going on in Michigan, where Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s administration awarded a lucrative contract to one of her campaign’s vendors to trace coronavirus cases. The contract was given to Great Lakes Community Engagement, who was set to turn the work over to long-time Democratic consultant Mike Kolehouse. After alarm bells started going off over the idea of such a liberal outfit collecting that amount of personal data about Michigan voters, the contract was canceled. Now, in the aftermath of the entire mess, Whitmer is claiming that she has no idea how Kolehouse ended up with that sweet arrangement. It must have been the decision of the state’s Health Department. And wait until you hear what’s going on with Kolehouse himself.
Michigan Democratic governor Gretchen Whitmer denied responsibility after her administration awarded a coronavirus-related contract to a prominent Democratic consulting firm, blaming the decision on the state’s health department. “The department thought that that vendor was the best one for some reason. I don’t know what that reason was, but I do know that the Department of Health and Human Services does not have a political bone in their theoretical body,” Whitmer said during a Wednesday press conference. “When it was brought to my attention, I told them to cancel it.” The Whitmer administration on Monday announced that it had awarded a contract to Great Lakes Community Engagement to conduct contact tracing in the state.
This is at least the third version of the story that we’ve heard. Originally, we heard that Whitmer’s administration cooked up the idea. But Whitmer denied that and suggested that the decision to award the contract to Kolehouse’s outfit was made by the State Emergency Operations Center. But they almost immediately denied the claim, saying they had never approved the vendor. Now the finger is pointing at the state Health Department, who doesn’t seem inclined to comment on it thus far.
Couldn’t we just clear all this up by asking Kolehouse himself? That’s going to be a lot harder than you might think at first because he’s basically deleted his entire online presence in a matter of 48 hours. If you look for the website of his company (the one that was about to pocket nearly $200,000 from this deal) you’ll get a 404 error. The entire website is gone. He also wiped out his social media accounts and is not answering emails.
On Tuesday the Whitmer administration terminated a door-to-door pandemic tracing contract awarded to Great Lakes Community Engagement, an organization led by Kolehouse, just one day after its announcement. Within 24 hours of the cancellation, Kolehouse, who was set to take in nearly $200,000 in the deal, took down the website for his consulting firm, K2K strategies, as well as his Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn accounts. He did not return multiple requests for comment from the Washington Free Beacon and declined to answer questions about the contract, which would have tasked him with collecting sensitive health data, from the Washington Post and Crain’s Detroit.
You know, for a “totally nonpartisan” vendor with nothing to hide, this is certainly some suspicious behavior. If everything was above board as Whitmer claims, why on Earth would Kolehouse suddenly scrub his entire presence from the face of the web? Won’t that make it harder for his many other clients (I’m assuming he has more) to reach him and conduct business? Also, by refusing to answer questions from the media, he’s sort of leaving the Governor twisting in the wind here.
Keep in mind that all of this is playing out at that same time that the Michigan legislature is moving to potentially try to strip the Governor of many of her emergency powers. Emperess Palpatine, I mean Whitmer, may not be looking like such a hot choice to be Joe Biden’s running mate at this point, even after backing down on some of the restrictions she’d previously placed on the citizens of her state.


hotair--2020-04-26--Biden wants another stimulus bill

Biden wants another stimulus bill

Expected Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden wants an even bigger ‘ stimulus ’ bill , this one focused more on cities , states , and small businesses .
He told Politico the goal to hand out cash to cities and states is to make sure they avoid layoffs of “ teachers and cops and firefighters ” while the aid for small businesses seems more of the populist playbook of Bernie Sanders .
Biden repeatedly unloaded on big business and big banks , noting that “ this is the second time we ’ ve bailed their asses out , ” accusing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for their benefit .
He railed about banks like Wells Fargo that are “ only alive because of the American taxpayer ” giving their large corporate clients the first shot at CARES Act aid intended for small businesses .
Over the last month , 26 million Americans have lost their jobs , and Biden said many of those jobs could be gone for good if mom-and-pop operations get left behind .
“ We knew from the beginning that the big banks don ’ t like lending to small businesses , ” Biden said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though , if Main Street businesses don ’ t get help , they ’ re gone.
” Fun fact : Biden voted for the bank bailout of 2008 .
Perhaps he ’ s having second thoughts now that he ’ s got to convince Sanders and Elizabeth Warren voters to support him in November .
Biden ’ s comments on banks giving money to big businesses spawn from lawsuits filed against multiple banks , including Wells Fargo , claiming small businesses failed to get Paycheck Protection Program money .
Attorneys involved in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bigger corporate clients instead , hence why smaller businesses lacked success in securing PPP cash .
Tax attorney Jason B. Freeman did note at Forbes there ’ s no real proof but the lawsuits may influence public perception enough , especially should the banks change loan policy .
Hence why the rhetoric from the vice president likely works towards certain voters .
All he has to do is point towards the lawsuit as ‘ fact ’ regardless of what happens next .
Everything changes if leaked documents from big banks prove the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open court to putting big lenders over smaller .
The moves by Ruth ’ s Chris and Shake Shack to return loans received from the federal government also help promote this theory .
Biden ’ s other argument regarding money for states and cities to avoid layoffs of firefighters , teachers , and police officers contains a small bit of truth .
Cities and states are preparing for massive budget deficits .
However , the federal government already sent hundreds of millions of dollars to municipalities as part of coronavirus ‘ aid ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spent on virus-related issues .
This raises the question of whether the government put too many restrictions on municipality spending or allowed cities and counties to ask for too much money promoting potential wasteful spending .
Better questions are whether the so-called “ tax and spend ” policy preferred by politicians of all stripes need reconsideration even for sacred cows or if states and cities went too far in coronavirus restrictions .
The final stimulus argument from Biden simply attempts to appease those who favor the so-called Green New Deal .
Via Politico @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of legislation designed primarily to stanch the economic bleeding , the next round should include more forward-looking investments that could help the economy start to recover and grow once the virus is contained .
He suggested a “ trillion-dollar infrastructure program that can be implemented really rapidly , ” as well as “ dealing with environmental things that create good-paying jobs.
” Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have suggested that “ green stimulus ” would be a non-starter with Republicans , but Biden said investments in light rail , clean drinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vehicle chargers on the nation ’ s highways could help retool the economy for the future .
Pure pandering and not likely to gain traction especially while gas prices stay low .
Consumer demand will drive the economy of the future , not government spending .
Do not mistake this hole-poking of Biden ’ s arguments as a defense of Republicans .
The Senate and the president deserve plenty of criticism for approving a grocery list of spending including $ 8.3B in early March , $ 100B in mid-March , $ 2T in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and whatever expenditures come next .
TARP and the 2009 ‘ stimulus ’ cost “ just ” $ 1.5T .
Coronavirus spending is at least $ 3T , although it might be more dependent on supplemental bills approved by Congress and signed by the president .
So much for deficits and reduced spending mattering within the halls of government or with those who seek re-entry .

Expected Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden wants an even bigger ‘stimulus’ bill, this one focused more on cities, states, and small businesses. He told Politico the goal to hand out cash to cities and states is to make sure they avoid layoffs of “teachers and cops and firefighters” while the aid for small businesses seems more of the populist playbook of Bernie Sanders.
Biden repeatedly unloaded on big business and big banks, noting that “this is the second time we’ve bailed their asses out,” accusing the Trump administration of managing the stimulus for their benefit. He railed about banks like Wells Fargo that are “only alive because of the American taxpayer” giving their large corporate clients the first shot at CARES Act aid intended for small businesses. Over the last month, 26 million Americans have lost their jobs, and Biden said many of those jobs could be gone for good if mom-and-pop operations get left behind. “We knew from the beginning that the big banks don’t like lending to small businesses,” Biden said. “I’m telling you, though, if Main Street businesses don’t get help, they’re gone.”
Fun fact: Biden voted for the bank bailout of 2008. Perhaps he’s having second thoughts now that he’s got to convince Sanders and Elizabeth Warren voters to support him in November.
Biden’s comments on banks giving money to big businesses spawn from lawsuits filed against multiple banks, including Wells Fargo, claiming small businesses failed to get Paycheck Protection Program money. Attorneys involved in the case believe the banks gave money to bigger corporate clients instead, hence why smaller businesses lacked success in securing PPP cash. Tax attorney Jason B. Freeman did note at Forbes there’s no real proof but the lawsuits may influence public perception enough, especially should the banks change loan policy.
Hence why the rhetoric from the vice president likely works towards certain voters. All he has to do is point towards the lawsuit as ‘fact’ regardless of what happens next. Everything changes if leaked documents from big banks prove the allegations or if bank attorneys admit in open court to putting big lenders over smaller. The moves by Ruth’s Chris and Shake Shack to return loans received from the federal government also help promote this theory.
Biden’s other argument regarding money for states and cities to avoid layoffs of firefighters, teachers, and police officers contains a small bit of truth. Cities and states are preparing for massive budget deficits. However, the federal government already sent hundreds of millions of dollars to municipalities as part of coronavirus ‘aid’ packages with the requirement they only be spent on virus-related issues. This raises the question of whether the government put too many restrictions on municipality spending or allowed cities and counties to ask for too much money promoting potential wasteful spending. Better questions are whether the so-called “tax and spend” policy preferred by politicians of all stripes need reconsideration even for sacred cows or if states and cities went too far in coronavirus restrictions.
The final stimulus argument from Biden simply attempts to appease those who favor the so-called Green New Deal. Via Politico:
Biden suggested that after four rounds of legislation designed primarily to stanch the economic bleeding, the next round should include more forward-looking investments that could help the economy start to recover and grow once the virus is contained. He suggested a “trillion-dollar infrastructure program that can be implemented really rapidly,” as well as “dealing with environmental things that create good-paying jobs.” Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have suggested that “green stimulus” would be a non-starter with Republicans, but Biden said investments in light rail, clean drinking water, and half a million electric vehicle chargers on the nation’s highways could help retool the economy for the future.
Pure pandering and not likely to gain traction especially while gas prices stay low. Consumer demand will drive the economy of the future, not government spending.
Do not mistake this hole-poking of Biden’s arguments as a defense of Republicans. The Senate and the president deserve plenty of criticism for approving a grocery list of spending including $8.3B in early March, $100B in mid-March, $2T in late March, $484B last week, and whatever expenditures come next. TARP and the 2009 ‘stimulus’ cost “just” $1.5T. Coronavirus spending is at least $3T, although it might be more dependent on supplemental bills approved by Congress and signed by the president. So much for deficits and reduced spending mattering within the halls of government or with those who seek re-entry.


hotair--2020-04-26--Celebrity survivor of COVID-19 rejected as plasma donor, cries foul

Once again , the mantra of Never let a crisis go to waste rears its ugly head as we all try to survive the coronavirus pandemic .
This time it is in the charge of homophobia being tossed at the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) and its blood donation guidance .
Is it an antiquated and homophobic policy in place by the FDA which rejects blood donations ( or plasma ) from a gay man if that man has had sex within the last three months ?
This is the case that Bravo executive producer and television show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to donate plasma last week .
Cohen is a survivor of COVID-19 and was answering a call for plasma donors , specifically from coronavirus survivors , from the medical community in New York City , where he lives .
Mount Sinai hospital is looking for plasma for antibody trials .
He thought he found a perfect way to help .
On Friday Cohen went on Anderson Cooper ’ s CNN show and told him of his experience when he tried to volunteer to donate plasma .
Cohen and Cooper are friends – they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ celebration in Times Square for CNN .
“ I recovered from coronavirus and read in the paper and all over the place in New York City that Mount Sinai hospital put out an urgent call for donors who had survived coronavirus .
They were looking for plasma for antibody trials .
They were using the plasma from people who had recovered from coronavirus to treat people who had coronavirus and to study it , ” Cohen told CNN ’ s Anderson Cooper Friday .
Cohen said he responded to the call and was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ perfect candidate ” to give his plasma .
Cohen told CNN that after he expressed his interest in donating , he mentioned to the donation program that he is a gay man .
He was then told that he could not give plasma .
Andy Cohen also told his story on his own show , Watch What Happens Live on the Bravo cable network .
He did so at the end of his show and reactions from his show ’ s guests are included in the video clip .
Cohen has seen his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relationship with the popular Real Housewives of Whatever shows over the years .
He ’ s been out of the closet for years and very active in LGBTQ causes .
Why was it such a shock to him that he was rejected ?
He ’ s not stupid , he surely knew what the FDA policy was before he tried to donate .
It sure looks like to me that he did it to garner headlines and use the platform to push for change in the government guidelines .
The FDA revised its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the need for blood during the coronavirus pandemic .
The rules have been relaxed to allow gay men to donate if they have not had sex with another man for three months instead of the previous rule of 12 months .
The FDA has announced a relaxing of its restrictions on gay men being allowed to donate blood , in light of the coronavirus disease 2019 ( COVID-19 ) pandemic .
Red Cross figures in March showed a drop-off of 86,000 fewer blood donations across the United States , due to almost 2700 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Now , instead of 1 year , if a male has had sex with another male , he need only wait 3 months to donate blood .
However , controversy still surrounds the FDA ’ s newest guidance , as some say it is continues to be based not on fact but on prejudice .
The original ban on donations was born during an era when HIV was not well understood and few men with AIDS survived .
Cohen makes the point that if the concern is over HIV , a quick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could reassure that the donor was HIV-negative .
He goes on to conflate homosexual sex with heterosexual sex .
He denies that gay sex is a high-risk activity .
“ I understand the concerns about gay men being a higher risk for carrying HIV , but there are HIV tests that can be administrated in 20 minutes .
So I could go , I could take an HIV test , they could tell me in 20 minutes , and they then retest your blood from what I understand .
They do another HIV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ There could be sexually promiscuous heterosexuals who ’ ve had plenty of sex in the last three months who can go in no questions asked and give blood , ” he said .
“ I think that the plasma in my body can absolutely help someone or possibly cure someone.
” Blood donations are tested for HIV and other factors .
The quick test at the time of a blood donation though would add to the work of the medical staff , wouldn ’ t it ?
Why intentionally try @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t following the guidelines ?
Instead , he goes on television and cries foul .
Did he think his celebrity made him above the rules ?
He ’ s probably more well-known in the NYC area than in other parts of the country .
Maybe he was looking for a feel-good moment .
He specifically says he thinks his plasma can save a life .
Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson are donating blood for coronavirus vaccine research .
Let ’ s hope Cohen tried in good faith to make a donation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The FDA first put blood donation guidance from gay men into effect when HIV began to become a public health epidemic in the early 1980s .
The first restriction was that any gay man who had sex since 1977 was ineligible to donate blood .
That rule stayed in place until 2015 when , during the Obama administration , the FDA revised the rule to a one-year limit .
So , even with the emergency relaxation of that rule , it ’ s not enough .
Cohen wants to know what year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think this was deliberate on the part of Andy Cohen .
If he wants to donate his blood for plasma to fight the coronavirus pandemic , he ’ ll have to play by the rules and abstain from sex for three months .
Sometimes even celebrities aren ’ t so special .

Once again, the mantra of Never let a crisis go to waste rears its ugly head as we all try to survive the coronavirus pandemic. This time it is in the charge of homophobia being tossed at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and its blood donation guidance.
Is it an antiquated and homophobic policy in place by the FDA which rejects blood donations (or plasma) from a gay man if that man has had sex within the last three months? This is the case that Bravo executive producer and television show host Andy Cohen makes after he tried to donate plasma last week. Cohen is a survivor of COVID-19 and was answering a call for plasma donors, specifically from coronavirus survivors, from the medical community in New York City, where he lives. Mount Sinai hospital is looking for plasma for antibody trials. He thought he found a perfect way to help.
On Friday Cohen went on Anderson Cooper’s CNN show and told him of his experience when he tried to volunteer to donate plasma. Cohen and Cooper are friends – they co-host the New Year’s Eve celebration in Times Square for CNN.
“I recovered from coronavirus and read in the paper and all over the place in New York City that Mount Sinai hospital put out an urgent call for donors who had survived coronavirus. They were looking for plasma for antibody trials. They were using the plasma from people who had recovered from coronavirus to treat people who had coronavirus and to study it,” Cohen told CNN’s Anderson Cooper Friday. Cohen said he responded to the call and was told that he sounded “like a perfect candidate” to give his plasma. Cohen told CNN that after he expressed his interest in donating, he mentioned to the donation program that he is a gay man. He was then told that he could not give plasma.
Andy Cohen also told his story on his own show, Watch What Happens Live on the Bravo cable network. He did so at the end of his show and reactions from his show’s guests are included in the video clip.
Cohen has seen his career take off in connection to this relationship with the popular Real Housewives of Whatever shows over the years. He’s been out of the closet for years and very active in LGBTQ causes. Why was it such a shock to him that he was rejected? He’s not stupid, he surely knew what the FDA policy was before he tried to donate. It sure looks like to me that he did it to garner headlines and use the platform to push for change in the government guidelines.
The FDA revised its previous guidelines earlier this month because of the need for blood during the coronavirus pandemic. The rules have been relaxed to allow gay men to donate if they have not had sex with another man for three months instead of the previous rule of 12 months.
The FDA has announced a relaxing of its restrictions on gay men being allowed to donate blood, in light of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Red Cross figures in March showed a drop-off of 86,000 fewer blood donations across the United States, due to almost 2700 blood drives that had to be cancelled. Now, instead of 1 year, if a male has had sex with another male, he need only wait 3 months to donate blood. However, controversy still surrounds the FDA’s newest guidance, as some say it is continues to be based not on fact but on prejudice. The original ban on donations was born during an era when HIV was not well understood and few men with AIDS survived.
Cohen makes the point that if the concern is over HIV, a quick test taken at the blood donation location could reassure that the donor was HIV-negative. He goes on to conflate homosexual sex with heterosexual sex. He denies that gay sex is a high-risk activity.
“I understand the concerns about gay men being a higher risk for carrying HIV, but there are HIV tests that can be administrated in 20 minutes. So I could go, I could take an HIV test, they could tell me in 20 minutes, and they then retest your blood from what I understand. They do another HIV test of your blood,” Cohen said. “There could be sexually promiscuous heterosexuals who’ve had plenty of sex in the last three months who can go in no questions asked and give blood,” he said. “I think that the plasma in my body can absolutely help someone or possibly cure someone.”
Blood donations are tested for HIV and other factors. The quick test at the time of a blood donation though would add to the work of the medical staff, wouldn’t it? Why intentionally try to donate if you know you aren’t following the guidelines? Instead, he goes on television and cries foul. Did he think his celebrity made him above the rules? He’s probably more well-known in the NYC area than in other parts of the country. Maybe he was looking for a feel-good moment. He specifically says he thinks his plasma can save a life. Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson are donating blood for coronavirus vaccine research. Let’s hope Cohen tried in good faith to make a donation, not just to jump on the bandwagon.
The FDA first put blood donation guidance from gay men into effect when HIV began to become a public health epidemic in the early 1980s. The first restriction was that any gay man who had sex since 1977 was ineligible to donate blood. That rule stayed in place until 2015 when, during the Obama administration, the FDA revised the rule to a one-year limit. So, even with the emergency relaxation of that rule, it’s not enough. Cohen wants to know what year it is.
“Maybe because we’re valuing stigma over science,” he continued. “My blood could save a life, but instead it’s over here boiling! This pandemic has forced us to adapt in many ways. We’re quarantining, we’re social distancing. We’re wearing masks! Why can’t we adapt when it comes to this rule?” “It’s bad enough that quarantining has us wondering what day it is,” Cohen said. “I’m sitting here wondering what year it is! We need to think about this and do better.”
As I said, I think this was deliberate on the part of Andy Cohen. If he wants to donate his blood for plasma to fight the coronavirus pandemic, he’ll have to play by the rules and abstain from sex for three months. Sometimes even celebrities aren’t so special.