hotair--2020-07-21--Minnesota: We should give unemployment benefits to high school students

We ’ re still in the midst of a debate over continued federal enhancement of state unemployment insurance benefits and it doesn ’ t appear to be ending any time soon .
But similar arguments are taking place at the state level as well .
This is true of Minnesota , where legislators are rushing to get a few last-minutes items off their plates before they adjourn the current session .
I ’ ll confess to being a bit confused when I saw this headline , however .
There is a fight going on over whether or not the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ students .
The first thing to find out is whether they ’ re talking about all students or just the ones who are working .
( CBS Minnesota ) Organizations are calling on lawmakers to extend unemployment benefits to high school students before Minnesota ’ s special session ends .
Organizers behind the Don ’ t Forget Us campaign want students 16 and older to get temporary unemployment benefits if they ’ ve been laid off .
Marcus Pope , vice president of Youthprise , says Minnesota is one of the only states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We have a diverse range of high school students that are using their income for various kind of life-sustaining , practical needs .
This isn ’ t just about pocket change , ” Pope said .
“ This is about young people who are working to really meet the needs of themselves and their families during this pandemic.
” From the way this reads , they ’ re not talking about just starting to send unemployment checks to every high school student age 16 and older .
That ’ s a relief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contrary to the entire concept of the program .
So if we ’ re narrowing this down to just the students who actually have ( or in this case “ had ” ) jobs , it ’ s a far more reasonable proposal .
To the best of my knowledge , the states withhold unemployment insurance payments from all workers , regardless of age or whether they work full or part-time .
If they ’ ve been paying into the system and making enough to qualify , why not allow them to file @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the laws were the same back in the day when I was growing up , but I know I never received unemployment benefits .
The problem is that the vast majority of the work I did was all private jobs involving shoveling snow , mowing lawns , garden work , etc .
Most of the time I wasn ’ t drawing an actual paycheck , so I wasn ’ t having anything withheld .
But if enough of these Minnesota teens are working on the books , again , why not let them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that few teenagers are able to work a significant amount of hours every week on top of their schoolwork and whatever else they have going on at home .
The amount of benefits they would likely qualify for probably wouldn ’ t be a significant amount of money .
But then , particularly when you ’ re a teenager , something is always better than nothing , right ?
It ’ s hard enough to find teenagers willing to work these days as it is .
( I think it ’ s been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come around my neighborhood offering to mow lawns for pay . )
If you can find some who are actually working , this is another way for them to dip a toe into the adult world and prepare for life after their schooling is complete .

We’re still in the midst of a debate over continued federal enhancement of state unemployment insurance benefits and it doesn’t appear to be ending any time soon. But similar arguments are taking place at the state level as well. This is true of Minnesota, where legislators are rushing to get a few last-minutes items off their plates before they adjourn the current session. I’ll confess to being a bit confused when I saw this headline, however. There is a fight going on over whether or not the state should offer unemployment benefits to high school students. The first thing to find out is whether they’re talking about all students or just the ones who are working. (CBS Minnesota)
Organizations are calling on lawmakers to extend unemployment benefits to high school students before Minnesota’s special session ends. Organizers behind the Don’t Forget Us campaign want students 16 and older to get temporary unemployment benefits if they’ve been laid off. Marcus Pope, vice president of Youthprise, says Minnesota is one of the only states where high school students are excluded. “We have a diverse range of high school students that are using their income for various kind of life-sustaining, practical needs. This isn’t just about pocket change,” Pope said. “This is about young people who are working to really meet the needs of themselves and their families during this pandemic.”
From the way this reads, they’re not talking about just starting to send unemployment checks to every high school student age 16 and older. That’s a relief because that would be fairly insane and contrary to the entire concept of the program. So if we’re narrowing this down to just the students who actually have (or in this case “had”) jobs, it’s a far more reasonable proposal. To the best of my knowledge, the states withhold unemployment insurance payments from all workers, regardless of age or whether they work full or part-time. If they’ve been paying into the system and making enough to qualify, why not allow them to file?
I’m not sure if the laws were the same back in the day when I was growing up, but I know I never received unemployment benefits. The problem is that the vast majority of the work I did was all private jobs involving shoveling snow, mowing lawns, garden work, etc. Most of the time I wasn’t drawing an actual paycheck, so I wasn’t having anything withheld. But if enough of these Minnesota teens are working on the books, again, why not let them participate?
The major drawback here is that few teenagers are able to work a significant amount of hours every week on top of their schoolwork and whatever else they have going on at home. The amount of benefits they would likely qualify for probably wouldn’t be a significant amount of money. But then, particularly when you’re a teenager, something is always better than nothing, right?
It’s hard enough to find teenagers willing to work these days as it is. (I think it’s been five years since any local teens have come around my neighborhood offering to mow lawns for pay.) If you can find some who are actually working, this is another way for them to dip a toe into the adult world and prepare for life after their schooling is complete.


hotair--2020-07-21--Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Missile defense, doxxing offense, policing common sense, Phase 4 expens

Today's hot topics on #TEMS: Missile defense, doxxing offense, policing common sense, Phase 4 expense, and more!

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show ( 4 pm ET ) , we have another great lineup for the news of the day !
The show will be streamed on Hot Air ’ s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook .
Join us as we welcome : • Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew !
The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day .
We ’ ll talk about Andrew ’ s latest column , plus we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accusation of doxxing by the New York Times .
We may also take your questions , so get a few ready !
• Has the US gone in the wrong direction on missile defense ?
Ian Williams joins us for the first time to warn that we might have taken a risky leap rather than stick with the slow-and-steady approach that has worked for years .
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page .
Be sure to join us , and don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on my Facebook page , too !
How can Republicans and conservatives keep the momentum going ?
Find out in GOING RED , published in April from Crown Forum !

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have another great lineup for the news of the day! The show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook.
Join us as we welcome:
Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew! The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day. We’ll talk about Andrew’s latest column, plus we’ll also discuss Tucker Carlson’s accusation of doxxing by the New York Times. We may also take your questions, so get a few ready!
Has the US gone in the wrong direction on missile defense? Ian Williams joins us for the first time to warn that we might have taken a risky leap rather than stick with the slow-and-steady approach that has worked for years.
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, and don’t forget to keep up with the debate on my Facebook page, too!
How can Republicans and conservatives keep the momentum going? Find out in GOING RED, published in April from Crown Forum!


hotair--2020-07-21--Too gross to check: Did Ghislaine Maxwell hire political-hit buffoons to smear victims -- and get Be

Too gross to check: Did Ghislaine Maxwell hire political-hit buffoons to smear victims -- and get Berman fired?

So says the Daily Mail , and it might make a few people uncomfortable if true — William Barr among them .
According to their source , Maxwell spent $ 25,000 to retain the services of Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman , the men behind an alleged attempt to smear Robert Mueller ( and others ) with false sexual-harassment claims .
The idea was to attack Jeffrey Epstein ’ s victims in order to end any prosecution efforts against her — as well as getting US Attorney Geoffrey Berman fired before he could indict her .
If true , what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s choice of operatives , or the paltry sum she offered ?
Ghislaine Maxwell hired fake news purveyor Jacob Wohl to smear her and Jeffrey Epstein ’ s alleged victims , a former friend has told DailyMail.com in an exclusive interview .
As part of a $ 25,000 deal made in June , Wohl and his lobbyist colleague Jack Burkman also allegedly pushed to get New York US Attorney Geoffrey Berman , who had led Epstein ’ s case , fired in order to stall or stop the criminal investigation into Maxwell .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to use for their smear plots , Maryland model and paralegal Kristin Spealman , told DailyMail.com the men had been hired by Maxwell , who currently faces trial over charges she and Epstein trafficked underage girls for sex .
… Wohl and Burkman told Spealman that Maxwell also used the secretive LLC to hire them as lobbyists around early June , the model claimed .
‘ Her company Granite Realty LLC hired them to first get rid of the US attorney Jeffrey Berman , ’ the paralegal said .
‘ She wanted him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assumed the charges would go away or maybe she wouldn ’ t be prosecuted .
I think that was the goal.
’ That could be a problem for Barr , who actually did fire Berman — although for reasons not related to the Maxwell probe .
The White House wanted to move someone else into Berman ’ s position and offered Berman a couple of other slots if he resigned .
Berman refused to do so , and House Democrats now say they want to know why the White House pushed Berman out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s enthusiasm for investigating corruption among Donald Trump ’ s friends might have been the reason , but they ’ ll likely want to pull the Epstein thread now too — especially if they can tie Wohl and Burkman to Barr .
Of course , the indictment of Maxwell came two weeks after Berman got canned , which tends to negate the idea that the Epstein case had much to do with that decision .
It also points up how idiotic the idea of targeting Berman would have been , if this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wohl and Burkman to do it .
Regardless of who the US Attorney was , Maxwell was the top target after Epstein committed suicide ( well , officially ) and short-circuited justice for his victims .
In fact , the idea that embarrassing Berman out of office alone would secure Maxwell ’ s freedom is so absurd that this story can ’ t possibly be on the level .
Right ?
Er … not so fast , says Law & Crime ’ s Colin Kalmbacher .
The core of the story — Maxwell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — is legit : Jeffrey Epstein ‘ s former girlfriend and alleged groomer Ghislaine Maxwell appears to have hired conservative activist and would-be smear artist Jacob Wohl for unknown reasons , according to a lobbying disclosure form filed with the U.S. Congress .
According to an LD-1 Disclosure Form filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate , J M Burkman and Associates–a lobbying firm owned by far-right activist Jack Burkman and co-run by Wohl–were hired by “ Granite Realty [ sic ] LLC ” in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] ssues relating to US DOJ , Senate Judiciary , [ and the ] House Judiciary.
” … To be clear , Maxwell ’ s alleged shell company is “ Granite Reality ” ( as in the “ quality or state of being real “ ) .
However , the official form on file with congress lists a company named “ Granite Realty ” ( as in real estate ) .
The LD-1 does , however list the address for the Boston-based company that federal prosecutors have tied to Maxwell .
In other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ address of Maxwell ’ s said-to-be affiliated company , Granite Reality , and it appears the name of the company is simply misspelled on the congressional documents .
Say what ?
As the Daily Mail notes , Wohl and Burkman have a reputation as laughing stocks .
Mueller ’ s not the only faceplant the two have made ; their targets have reportedly ranged from Ted Cruz to Nancy Pelosi and even to Anthony Fauci .
They ’ re more like comic relief rather than successful oppo-research experts , or even effective character @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hire good help these days !
Of course , just because Maxwell hired Wohl and Burkman doesn ’ t prove that she was ordering smear campaigns against victims and Berman .
It certainly suggests something nefarious , and it might also suggest something else — that Maxwell didn ’ t have too many resources left .
If all she could muster was $ 25,000 to pay Wohl and Burkman , Maxwell must be close to tapped out , both financially and socially .
Legally , she might be tapped out as well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , done over two days in April and July 2016 , offers the only substantive public record from Maxwell about what she did for the sex offender .
It ’ s also part of the reason why she was arrested earlier this month — prosecutors allege she lied nine times while giving her answers under oath .
The questioning was part of a defamation lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre , who has said she was abused by Epstein and Maxwell .
An appeals court unsealed 40 of the 613 transcript pages of her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s publicly available , Maxwell is asked at least five different times if she believed that Epstein sexually abused minors .
She doesn ’ t give a yes or no response , instead attacking Giuffre as a liar .
The most she says in the public transcript : “ You are asking me to speculate and I won ’ t speculate.
” … The indictment , unsealed on July 2 , includes two counts of perjury based on her deposition .
Prosecutors say she lied about her knowledge of Epstein ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his recruitment of underage girls and his interactions with underage women at his properties .
The defamation lawsuit , which was settled for an undisclosed amount , was brought against Maxwell because she denied Giuffre ’ s account of abuse in print .
A day after portions of Maxwell ’ s deposition were made public last August , Epstein died of an apparent suicide in a Manhattan jail where he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges involving underage girls .
This will be one hell of a circus when Maxwell gets to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the trial , that is .

So says the Daily Mail, and it might make a few people uncomfortable if true — William Barr among them. According to their source, Maxwell spent $25,000 to retain the services of Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman, the men behind an alleged attempt to smear Robert Mueller (and others) with false sexual-harassment claims. The idea was to attack Jeffrey Epstein’s victims in order to end any prosecution efforts against her — as well as getting US Attorney Geoffrey Berman fired before he could indict her.
If true, what would be more pathetic — Maxwell’s choice of operatives, or the paltry sum she offered?
Ghislaine Maxwell hired fake news purveyor Jacob Wohl to smear her and Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged victims, a former friend has told DailyMail.com in an exclusive interview. As part of a $25,000 deal made in June, Wohl and his lobbyist colleague Jack Burkman also allegedly pushed to get New York US Attorney Geoffrey Berman, who had led Epstein’s case, fired in order to stall or stop the criminal investigation into Maxwell. … One of the women they tried to use for their smear plots, Maryland model and paralegal Kristin Spealman, told DailyMail.com the men had been hired by Maxwell, who currently faces trial over charges she and Epstein trafficked underage girls for sex. … Wohl and Burkman told Spealman that Maxwell also used the secretive LLC to hire them as lobbyists around early June, the model claimed. ‘Her company Granite Realty LLC hired them to first get rid of the US attorney Jeffrey Berman,’ the paralegal said. ‘She wanted him fired. And then I guess she assumed the charges would go away or maybe she wouldn’t be prosecuted. I think that was the goal.’
That could be a problem for Barr, who actually did fire Berman — although for reasons not related to the Maxwell probe. The White House wanted to move someone else into Berman’s position and offered Berman a couple of other slots if he resigned. Berman refused to do so, and House Democrats now say they want to know why the White House pushed Berman out the door. They assume that Berman’s enthusiasm for investigating corruption among Donald Trump’s friends might have been the reason, but they’ll likely want to pull the Epstein thread now too — especially if they can tie Wohl and Burkman to Barr.
Of course, the indictment of Maxwell came two weeks after Berman got canned, which tends to negate the idea that the Epstein case had much to do with that decision. It also points up how idiotic the idea of targeting Berman would have been, if this story is true, let along using Wohl and Burkman to do it. Regardless of who the US Attorney was, Maxwell was the top target after Epstein committed suicide (well, officially) and short-circuited justice for his victims. In fact, the idea that embarrassing Berman out of office alone would secure Maxwell’s freedom is so absurd that this story can’t possibly be on the level. Right?
Er … not so fast, says Law & Crime’s Colin Kalmbacher. The core of the story — Maxwell’s connection to Wohl and Burkman — is legit:
Jeffrey Epstein‘s former girlfriend and alleged groomer Ghislaine Maxwell appears to have hired conservative activist and would-be smear artist Jacob Wohl for unknown reasons, according to a lobbying disclosure form filed with the U.S. Congress. According to an LD-1 Disclosure Form filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate, J M Burkman and Associates–a lobbying firm owned by far-right activist Jack Burkman and co-run by Wohl–were hired by “Granite Realty [sic] LLC” in order to lobby on “[i]ssues relating to US DOJ, Senate Judiciary, [and the] House Judiciary.” … To be clear, Maxwell’s alleged shell company is “Granite Reality” (as in the “quality or state of being real“). However, the official form on file with congress lists a company named “Granite Realty” (as in real estate). The LD-1 does, however list the address for the Boston-based company that federal prosecutors have tied to Maxwell. In other words, the lobbying form has the address of Maxwell’s said-to-be affiliated company, Granite Reality, and it appears the name of the company is simply misspelled on the congressional documents.
Say what? As the Daily Mail notes, Wohl and Burkman have a reputation as laughing stocks. Mueller’s not the only faceplant the two have made; their targets have reportedly ranged from Ted Cruz to Nancy Pelosi and even to Anthony Fauci. They’re more like comic relief rather than successful oppo-research experts, or even effective character assassins.
You just can’t hire good help these days!
Of course, just because Maxwell hired Wohl and Burkman doesn’t prove that she was ordering smear campaigns against victims and Berman. It certainly suggests something nefarious, and it might also suggest something else — that Maxwell didn’t have too many resources left. If all she could muster was $25,000 to pay Wohl and Burkman, Maxwell must be close to tapped out, both financially and socially.
Legally, she might be tapped out as well, Bloomberg reported this morning:
The deposition, done over two days in April and July 2016, offers the only substantive public record from Maxwell about what she did for the sex offender. It’s also part of the reason why she was arrested earlier this month — prosecutors allege she lied nine times while giving her answers under oath. The questioning was part of a defamation lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre, who has said she was abused by Epstein and Maxwell. An appeals court unsealed 40 of the 613 transcript pages of her deposition last August. In the portion that’s publicly available, Maxwell is asked at least five different times if she believed that Epstein sexually abused minors. She doesn’t give a yes or no response, instead attacking Giuffre as a liar. The most she says in the public transcript: “You are asking me to speculate and I won’t speculate.” … The indictment, unsealed on July 2, includes two counts of perjury based on her deposition. Prosecutors say she lied about her knowledge of Epstein’s activities, including denying knowledge of his recruitment of underage girls and his interactions with underage women at his properties. The defamation lawsuit, which was settled for an undisclosed amount, was brought against Maxwell because she denied Giuffre’s account of abuse in print. A day after portions of Maxwell’s deposition were made public last August, Epstein died of an apparent suicide in a Manhattan jail where he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges involving underage girls.
This will be one hell of a circus when Maxwell gets to trial. Assuming she makes it to the trial, that is.
Update: A great point from our friend J.E. Dyer:


hotair--2020-07-21--WHO sent investigators to China to identify the source of the coronavirus (but don't expect much)

The World Health Organization has sent a team of experts to Beijing to try to pin down the exact origin of the coronavirus .
The NY Times reports China is spinning this as a sign of their openness and transparency but in reality China has been resisting this investigation for months .
And even now there is reason to think the CCP will do whatever it takes to make sure China comes out looking good , whether it deserves to or not .
With relations between China and Western countries deteriorating rapidly over military , technology , trade and human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will seek to limit the scope of the research so that it does not embarrass the government .
“ The whole political landscape is not favorable to doing an unbiased scientific investigation , ” said Wang Linfa , a virologist in Singapore who took part in a similar W.H.O .
study in China during the SARS epidemic in 2002 and 2003 .
“ I feel sorry for the team members.
” The Chinese government initially covered up the SARS outbreak , but Mr. Wang said it was later eager to cooperate with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , the W.H.O.
’ s investigation was likely to be largely symbolic because the broader geopolitical climate could make Chinese experts unwilling to share valuable research… While the Chinese government has said it welcomes an inquiry , officials have not yet provided details about their own efforts to trace the origins of the virus .
Research into the matter has in several cases been blocked or delayed , Chinese scientists say .
The Times reported back in February that the CDC and WHO had been awaiting an offer to investigate the source @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came .
That situation has continued until now .
In April China ’ s education ministry put out a memo stating that limited the publication of research on the origin of the virus .
CNN reported at the time that a Chinese researcher ( who remained anonymous for obvious reasons ) saw it as an attempt to control the narrative : In May , WHO was still waiting for that invitation to be part of an investigation into the virus ’ origin but at the time it seemed China had decided to run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that month , the Wall Street Journal noted that China had still not released information on samples it collected from animals at the Wuhan market before it was shut down .
But a Columbia University virologist said he ’ d heard from Chinese colleagues that Chinese attempts to identify the source had failed : Dr. Lipkin , who also helped tackle SARS , said that George Gao , the China CDC chief , was initially convinced that the culprit was a bamboo rat , a rodent often sold as meat in China .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this exhaustive search of the live and the dead and the frozen animals in various freezers , and they didn ’ t come up with anything , they had to revise their model , ” said Dr. Lipkin .
He said Dr. Gao had told him that Chinese scientists had found the virus in the environmental samples but had been unable to identify which animal they likely came from .
China didn ’ t want to invite outsiders in to examine the source of the virus when China itself had failed to identify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that none of the animals from the market seemed to have the virus may suggest that it didn ’ t originate there at all .
And if that ’ s so , it raises uncomfortable questions about where it did arise and when .
Given the CCP ’ s behavior over the past six months it seems very unlikely WHO investigations are being invited in for an open-ended investigation whose conclusions are unknown .
The question then is this : Did China finally invite the WHO to investigate its data because it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Alternatively , did they invite WHO in because they have finally worked out a convincing cover story which fits with their propaganda narrative ?
China has been involved in a cover up since at least January , even making doctors who spoke up about the truth disappear .
For much of that time the WHO has been acting as a useful idiot , repeating to the world whatever lies China told them .
So there ’ s not much reason to hope we ’ ll get reliable information out of this investigation @

The World Health Organization has sent a team of experts to Beijing to try to pin down the exact origin of the coronavirus. The NY Times reports China is spinning this as a sign of their openness and transparency but in reality China has been resisting this investigation for months. And even now there is reason to think the CCP will do whatever it takes to make sure China comes out looking good, whether it deserves to or not.
With relations between China and Western countries deteriorating rapidly over military, technology, trade and human rights concerns, experts worry that Beijing will seek to limit the scope of the research so that it does not embarrass the government. “The whole political landscape is not favorable to doing an unbiased scientific investigation,” said Wang Linfa, a virologist in Singapore who took part in a similar W.H.O. study in China during the SARS epidemic in 2002 and 2003. “I feel sorry for the team members.” The Chinese government initially covered up the SARS outbreak, but Mr. Wang said it was later eager to cooperate with the international experts. This time, he said, the W.H.O.’s investigation was likely to be largely symbolic because the broader geopolitical climate could make Chinese experts unwilling to share valuable research… While the Chinese government has said it welcomes an inquiry, officials have not yet provided details about their own efforts to trace the origins of the virus. Research into the matter has in several cases been blocked or delayed, Chinese scientists say.
The Times reported back in February that the CDC and WHO had been awaiting an offer to investigate the source of the virus but the invitation never came. That situation has continued until now. In April China’s education ministry put out a memo stating that limited the publication of research on the origin of the virus. CNN reported at the time that a Chinese researcher (who remained anonymous for obvious reasons) saw it as an attempt to control the narrative:
“I think it is a coordinated effort from (the) Chinese government to control (the) narrative, and paint it as if the outbreak did not originate in China,” the researcher told CNN. “And I don’t think they will really tolerate any objective study to investigate the origination of this disease.”
In May, WHO was still waiting for that invitation to be part of an investigation into the virus’ origin but at the time it seemed China had decided to run it’s own investigation.
“We know that some national investigation is happening but at this stage we have not been invited to join,” Dr Gauden Galea said. “WHO is making requests of the health commission and of the authorities,” he said.
Later that month, the Wall Street Journal noted that China had still not released information on samples it collected from animals at the Wuhan market before it was shut down. But a Columbia University virologist said he’d heard from Chinese colleagues that Chinese attempts to identify the source had failed:
Dr. Lipkin, who also helped tackle SARS, said that George Gao, the China CDC chief, was initially convinced that the culprit was a bamboo rat, a rodent often sold as meat in China. “After they went through and did this exhaustive search of the live and the dead and the frozen animals in various freezers, and they didn’t come up with anything, they had to revise their model,” said Dr. Lipkin. He said Dr. Gao had told him that Chinese scientists had found the virus in the environmental samples but had been unable to identify which animal they likely came from.
China didn’t want to invite outsiders in to examine the source of the virus when China itself had failed to identify it. More specifically, the fact that none of the animals from the market seemed to have the virus may suggest that it didn’t originate there at all. And if that’s so, it raises uncomfortable questions about where it did arise and when.
Given the CCP’s behavior over the past six months it seems very unlikely WHO investigations are being invited in for an open-ended investigation whose conclusions are unknown. The question then is this: Did China finally invite the WHO to investigate its data because it has successfully worked out the source for itself? Alternatively, did they invite WHO in because they have finally worked out a convincing cover story which fits with their propaganda narrative?
China has been involved in a cover up since at least January, even making doctors who spoke up about the truth disappear. For much of that time the WHO has been acting as a useful idiot, repeating to the world whatever lies China told them. So there’s not much reason to hope we’ll get reliable information out of this investigation.


hotair--2020-07-21--Planned Parenthood of New York: We're cancelling Margaret Sanger for supporting eugenics

I know what you ’ re thinking , but rest assured : The baby-killing will continue .
It ’ ll simply continue for “ good ” modern reasons rather than bad archaic reasons like eugenics .
But hope springs eternal .
It took them 100 years to steer around to the position that eugenics is so shameful that an adherent of it isn ’ t fit to be honored .
Maybe by 2120 they ’ ll get around to taking a second look at abortion .
“ The removal of Margaret Sanger ’ s name from our building is both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with our legacy and acknowledge Planned Parenthood ’ s contributions to historical reproductive harm within communities of color , ” Karen Seltzer , the chair of the New York affiliate ’ s board , said in a statement .
The group is also talking to city leaders about replacing Ms. Sanger ’ s name on a street sign that has hung near its offices on Bleecker Street for more than two decades… [ PPNY chief equity and engagement officer Merle ] McGee said the group could not worry about how conservative figures might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ described as a response to the concerns of patients and people of color… “ The biggest concern with Margaret Sanger is her public support for the eugenics medical philosophy which was rooted in racism , ableism and classism , ” Ms. McGee said .
There ’ s some backstory in the Times article about how PPNY recently dumped its executive director due to allegations that she mistreated black employees .
Maybe this is a form of atonement .
“ Yes , fine , we might pay our black employees less , but what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ removing the name of the dead eugenicist who once addressed the KKK from our clinic ?
” Or maybe they were just tired of having to defend Sanger every few years when America would once again have some occasion to rediscover that she wrote things like this : As an advocate of Birth Control , I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the “ unfit ” and the “ fit ” , admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a cradle competition between these two classes .
In this matter , the example of the inferior classes , the fertility of the feeble-minded , the mentally defective , the poverty-stricken classes , should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes .
On the contrary , the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective .
Birth Control is not advanced as a panacea by which past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be magically eliminated .
Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupidly cruel sentimentalism .
The surest way to avoid having to kill off the unfit en masse , it seems , was to stop them from breeding in the first place .
A lot of institutional energy from PP has gone into massaging that legacy over the years , with the NYT noting this fact sheet put out by Planned Parenthood ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to redeem Sanger for modern audiences .
She was pretty woke later in life , it notes , and was even praised by Martin Luther King Jr !
She ’ s also frequently misquoted or taken out of context in statements of her eugenic beliefs !
Plus , lots of “ progressives ” held eugenic views in her day ; she ’ s a creature of her times the same way the Founders were in holding slaves !
Gloria Steinem once even postulated that maybe Sanger wasn ’ t a true blue eugenicist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crowd because she knew it ’ d be easier to popularize birth control among the upper classes by speaking their language .
But even PP in its fact sheet felt it had no choice but to acknowledge that some of her views were , ah , problematic : “ Planned Parenthood acknowledges these major flaws in Sanger ’ s views — and we believe that they are wrong , ” the fact sheet goes on to say .
Which is nice , but I feel like it shouldn ’ t have taken George @ @ @ @ @ @ @ massive wave of anti-racist protests to get PPNY to firmly disavow an outspoken advocate of sterilizing “ defectives ” so that they can ’ t reproduce .
Yet here we are .
The twisted punchline is that Sanger ’ s view that we ’ d do well to have fewer of the “ unfit ” around informs plenty of abortions even in 2020 .
Pro-choicers rarely acknowledge it — sometimes , although rarely — but it ’ s there .
One of the icons of American liberalism , Ruth Bader Ginsburg , famously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided , there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don ’ t want to have too many of.
” She said she was disabused of that notion by a different ruling some years later , but drink that in : One of the most influential feminists in American history believed that legalized abortion was a de facto eugenic tactic as late as 1972 .
And presumably approved of the outcome in Roe anyway .
Anyway , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today ’ s decision dug up by Jeryl Bier : Where does Sanger fit in the great “ canceling historical figures ” debate we ’ ve been having this summer ?
If you ’ re pro-life you might analogize her to a Confederate leader , someone unworthy of being memorialized under any circumstances because the cause with which she ’ s primarily identified — legalized abortion — is evil .
If you ’ re pro-choice you might analogize her to Washington or Jefferson , a flawed figure whose misdeeds mustn ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great enough that she should be commemorated anyway .
That was PP ’ s stance circa 2004 , but in the cancel-a-thon of 2020 a respectably progressive outfit can no longer demand that its hero ’ s sins be viewed in proper historical context and weighed against her virtues .
Sins against wokeness are cause for cancellation , period .
That ’ s the attitude taken by the New York chapter today .
It ’ s a creature of its times too .

I know what you’re thinking, but rest assured: The baby-killing will continue.
It’ll simply continue for “good” modern reasons rather than bad archaic reasons like eugenics.
But hope springs eternal. It took them 100 years to steer around to the position that eugenics is so shameful that an adherent of it isn’t fit to be honored. Maybe by 2120 they’ll get around to taking a second look at abortion.
“The removal of Margaret Sanger’s name from our building is both a necessary and overdue step to reckon with our legacy and acknowledge Planned Parenthood’s contributions to historical reproductive harm within communities of color,” Karen Seltzer, the chair of the New York affiliate’s board, said in a statement. The group is also talking to city leaders about replacing Ms. Sanger’s name on a street sign that has hung near its offices on Bleecker Street for more than two decades… [PPNY chief equity and engagement officer Merle] McGee said the group could not worry about how conservative figures might react to the move, which she described as a response to the concerns of patients and people of color… “The biggest concern with Margaret Sanger is her public support for the eugenics medical philosophy which was rooted in racism, ableism and classism,” Ms. McGee said.
There’s some backstory in the Times article about how PPNY recently dumped its executive director due to allegations that she mistreated black employees. Maybe this is a form of atonement. “Yes, fine, we might pay our black employees less, but what if we show our good faith by removing the name of the dead eugenicist who once addressed the KKK from our clinic?”
Or maybe they were just tired of having to defend Sanger every few years when America would once again have some occasion to rediscover that she wrote things like this:
As an advocate of Birth Control, I wish to take advantage of the present opportunity to point out that the unbalance between the birth rate of the “unfit” and the “fit”, admittedly the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between these two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation to the mentally and physically fit though less fertile parents of the educated and well-to-do classes. On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective. Birth Control is not advanced as a panacea by which past and present evils of dysgenic breeding can be magically eliminated. Possibly drastic and Spartan methods may be forced upon society if it continues complacently to encourage the chance and chaotic breeding that has resulted from our stupidly cruel sentimentalism.
The surest way to avoid having to kill off the unfit en masse, it seems, was to stop them from breeding in the first place.
A lot of institutional energy from PP has gone into massaging that legacy over the years, with the NYT noting this fact sheet put out by Planned Parenthood’s national organization four years ago to try to redeem Sanger for modern audiences. She was pretty woke later in life, it notes, and was even praised by Martin Luther King Jr! She’s also frequently misquoted or taken out of context in statements of her eugenic beliefs! Plus, lots of “progressives” held eugenic views in her day; she’s a creature of her times the same way the Founders were in holding slaves! Gloria Steinem once even postulated that maybe Sanger wasn’t a true blue eugenicist but was simply going along with the crowd because she knew it’d be easier to popularize birth control among the upper classes by speaking their language.
But even PP in its fact sheet felt it had no choice but to acknowledge that some of her views were, ah, problematic:
“Planned Parenthood acknowledges these major flaws in Sanger’s views — and we believe that they are wrong,” the fact sheet goes on to say. Which is nice, but I feel like it shouldn’t have taken George Floyd’s brutal death plus a massive wave of anti-racist protests to get PPNY to firmly disavow an outspoken advocate of sterilizing “defectives” so that they can’t reproduce. Yet here we are.
The twisted punchline is that Sanger’s view that we’d do well to have fewer of the “unfit” around informs plenty of abortions even in 2020. Pro-choicers rarely acknowledge it — sometimes, although rarely — but it’s there. One of the icons of American liberalism, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, famously admitted in an interview in 2009, “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” She said she was disabused of that notion by a different ruling some years later, but drink that in: One of the most influential feminists in American history believed that legalized abortion was a de facto eugenic tactic as late as 1972. And presumably approved of the outcome in Roe anyway.
Anyway, here’s an interesting contrast to today’s decision dug up by Jeryl Bier:
Planned Parenthood, 2004:"attempts to discredit the family planning movement because its early 20th-century founder was not a perfect model of early 21st-century values is like disavowing the Declaration of Independence because its author, Thomas Jefferson, bought & sold slaves." pic.twitter.com/n3N1YvHTPk — Jeryl Bier (@JerylBier) July 21, 2020
Where does Sanger fit in the great “canceling historical figures” debate we’ve been having this summer? If you’re pro-life you might analogize her to a Confederate leader, someone unworthy of being memorialized under any circumstances because the cause with which she’s primarily identified — legalized abortion — is evil. If you’re pro-choice you might analogize her to Washington or Jefferson, a flawed figure whose misdeeds mustn’t be forgotten but whose contributions to society were great enough that she should be commemorated anyway. That was PP’s stance circa 2004, but in the cancel-a-thon of 2020 a respectably progressive outfit can no longer demand that its hero’s sins be viewed in proper historical context and weighed against her virtues. Sins against wokeness are cause for cancellation, period. That’s the attitude taken by the New York chapter today. It’s a creature of its times too.


hotair--2020-07-21--Police find body in Minneapolis pawnshop which was burned during riots in May

Yesterday , police searched a Minneapolis pawnshop which had been burned during rioting on May 28 .
Inside they found the charred body of an unidentified person .
At this point police aren ’ t saying how the body got there but it appears it may have been there for nearly two months .
Investigators from the Minneapolis Police Department , Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives and the state fire marshal ’ s division were acting on a tip when they discovered the body Monday morning in the rubble of Max It Pawn , at 2726 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department spokesman John Elder .
“ The body appears to have suffered thermal injury and we do have somebody charged with setting fire to that place , ” said Elder , adding that city homicide detectives had taken over the investigation .
He said that the victim ’ s identity would be released by medical examiners after an autopsy is completed , along with the precise cause and manner of death .
The site is several blocks east of the shuttered Third Precinct police station , the epicenter of the protests that broke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 25 under the knee of a since-fired city police officer .
Last month police arrested 25-year-old Montez Terrill Lee after receiving videos from an anonymous source .
Lee has been charged with arson by federal prosecutors .
The two images above come from the videos used to identify Lee .
On the left you see someone pouring a flammable liquid on the ground .
On the right you see Lee standing with his fist raised before the burning pawn shop .
Here ’ s the description of the videos from the complaint : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Max It Pawn .
Then a masked man , identified as LEE , is shown pouring liquid out from a metal container throughout the pawn store .
The video then cuts to outside the pawn shop , which is now on fire .
LEE is show , now not wearing a shirt , holding his fist up .
The man taking the video exclaims “ Oh , s**t- you really did it !
” The second video begins with the man identified as LEE standing in front of the pawn shop as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asks LEE “ What you do , Tez ?
” LEE responds “ F*** this place .
We ‘ re gon na bum this b**ch down.
” Lee could presumably be facing additional charges now , but authorities aren ’ t saying that yet .
If the timing of this death is confirmed to date back to May , it would be the 2nd death connected to rioting in Minneapolis .
The other death also took place at a pawn shop .
John Rieple , owner of Cadillac Pawn , shot and killed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to loot his store .
Finally , my friend Jeryl Bier points out that the NY Times published an article last month referring to the burning of the police precinct in Minneapolis as a “ glorious poetic rage.
” That headline came from an organizer who described the arson that way .
“ The reason this got so big is because it has been happening , ” Junauda Petrus-Nasah , an author and organizer from Minneapolis , where Mr. Floyd lived and was killed , told me .
On the third day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ house was lit on fire , “ it felt like a glorious poetic rage , ” she said .
I guess that ’ s pretty much how Montez Lee was feeling at the time too .
But now that we know someone could have died in the flames , I wonder if the organizer or the NY Times regrets poeticizing arson and rioting .

Yesterday, police searched a Minneapolis pawnshop which had been burned during rioting on May 28. Inside they found the charred body of an unidentified person. At this point police aren’t saying how the body got there but it appears it may have been there for nearly two months.
Investigators from the Minneapolis Police Department, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the state fire marshal’s division were acting on a tip when they discovered the body Monday morning in the rubble of Max It Pawn, at 2726 E. Lake St., according to Police Department spokesman John Elder. “The body appears to have suffered thermal injury and we do have somebody charged with setting fire to that place,” said Elder, adding that city homicide detectives had taken over the investigation. He said that the victim’s identity would be released by medical examiners after an autopsy is completed, along with the precise cause and manner of death. The site is several blocks east of the shuttered Third Precinct police station, the epicenter of the protests that broke out after Floyd’s death May 25 under the knee of a since-fired city police officer.
Last month police arrested 25-year-old Montez Terrill Lee after receiving videos from an anonymous source. Lee has been charged with arson by federal prosecutors. The two images above come from the videos used to identify Lee. On the left you see someone pouring a flammable liquid on the ground. On the right you see Lee standing with his fist raised before the burning pawn shop. Here’s the description of the videos from the complaint:
The first video begins with people looting the Max It Pawn. Then a masked man, identified as LEE, is shown pouring liquid out from a metal container throughout the pawn store. The video then cuts to outside the pawn shop, which is now on fire. LEE is show, now not wearing a shirt, holding his fist up. The man taking the video exclaims “Oh, s**t- you really did it! ” The second video begins with the man identified as LEE standing in front of the pawn shop as it is in flames The individual filming asks LEE “What you do, Tez?” LEE responds “F*** this place. We ‘re gonna bum this b**ch down.”
Lee could presumably be facing additional charges now, but authorities aren’t saying that yet.
If the timing of this death is confirmed to date back to May, it would be the 2nd death connected to rioting in Minneapolis. The other death also took place at a pawn shop. John Rieple, owner of Cadillac Pawn, shot and killed Calvin Horton, allegedly while Horton was trying to loot his store.
Finally, my friend Jeryl Bier points out that the NY Times published an article last month referring to the burning of the police precinct in Minneapolis as a “glorious poetic rage.” That headline came from an organizer who described the arson that way.
“The reason this got so big is because it has been happening,” Junauda Petrus-Nasah, an author and organizer from Minneapolis, where Mr. Floyd lived and was killed, told me. On the third day of protests, when a police station house was lit on fire, “it felt like a glorious poetic rage,” she said.
I guess that’s pretty much how Montez Lee was feeling at the time too. But now that we know someone could have died in the flames, I wonder if the organizer or the NY Times regrets poeticizing arson and rioting.


hotair--2020-07-21--Chicago Fraternal Order of Police President begs Trump for help. Mayor is "a failure"

I was going to start this article by providing yet another roundup of the horrific number of shootings in Chicago between Friday and yesterday , but tragically , at this point , that ’ s just pretty much another day at the office for the Windy City .
Support from City Hall for the embattled police is thin at best and things have been spiraling further out of control .
All of this has led the President of the local Fraternal Order of Police to sound the alarm and go over Mayor Lori Lightfoot ’ s head .
He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the troops and help save them , calling the Mayor a “ complete failure.
” ( CBS Chicago ) Chicago Fraternal Order of Police President John Catanzara Jr. issued a letter to President Donald Trump on Saturday , asking for help from the federal government to fight “ chaos ” in Chicago and calling Mayor Lori Lightfoot a “ complete failure.
” The letter was posted on the FOP Lodge 7 Facebook page on Saturday , with a note that it would “ get to President Trump ’ s desk one way or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote : “ I am certain you are aware of the chaos currently affecting our city on a regular basis now .
I am writing to formally ask you for help from the federal government .
Mayor Lightfoot has proved to be a complete failure who is either unwilling or unable to maintain law and order here.
” So how did Mayor Lightfoot respond to this obvious slap to her job performance ?
She described it as “ a litany of nonsense.
” The mayor also slammed Trump for “ a litany of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House recently sent her , urging her to “ secure your city.
” The latest flare-up came after White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany accused Lightfoot on Thursday of not doing enough to tackle gun violence in Chicago , calling her a “ derelict mayor.
” Lightfoot fired back on Twitter , saying “ Hey Karen , watch your mouth.
” Karen has become a stereotypical name to refer to rude and self-entitled middle-aged white women .
The Mayor may not be “ backing down ” as CBS put it , but that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days .
FOP President Catanzara turned out to be a smart cookie .
He ’ s clearly familiar with the way Donald Trump operates and knows that the President loves to be the guy to come riding to the rescue .
Whether or not the FOP letter made its way directly to the Oval Office , Trump just announced that more than 150 federal officers are heading to Chitown to help restore order and the rule of law .
( Associated Press ) The Department of Homeland Security was planning to deploy about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to an official with direct knowledge of the plans who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity .
Those agents generally do lengthy investigations into human trafficking , drugs and weapons smuggling and child exploitation , but they have also been deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border during the height of the crisis there to help .
The Trump administration sent federal officers in Portland , Oregon , after weeks of protests there over police brutality and racial injustice that followed the killing of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s governor and Portland ’ s mayor have expressed anger with the presence of the federal agents , saying that the city ’ s protests had started to ease just as the federal agents started taking action .
However , Trump , framing such protests in the nation ’ s large cities as a failure by “ liberal Democrats ” who run them , praised the officers ’ actions and said he was looking to send agents to other cities .
Under more normal conditions , it would be nice if the President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ larger cities could be seen cooperating and working to solve problems like this together .
Sadly , these are far from normal times .
Lori Lightfoot is part of “ the Resistance ” and knows that she must be seen as opposing the Bad Orange Man no matter what he says or does .
But at the same time , she ’ s allowed her city to crash out of control , with mobs ruling the streets in too many districts .
Neither she nor the ACLU really has any say over whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Chicago .
They have offices there at federal buildings that are not under her control .
The President can ’ t tell the Chicago PD what to do , but the Mayor can ’ t boss around the Department of Homeland Security .
This isn ’ t any sort of standoff taking place .
The Mayor doesn ’ t have a paddle to put in the water here .
What ’ s really a pity is the fact that Lightfoot can ’ t see the light , for lack of a better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and her city is in desperate need of it .
And yet , here she is , standing in the doorway and trying to prevent some relief from arriving to secure her streets and dampen down the rising tide of gun violence and gang warfare that has broken out under the cloak of the George Floyd protests .
But as with all of the other large cities with liberal leadership , the fault for this lies first and foremost with the citizens of Chicago .
They keep electing these people to office and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sown .
It ’ s sad , but it ’ s true .

I was going to start this article by providing yet another roundup of the horrific number of shootings in Chicago between Friday and yesterday, but tragically, at this point, that’s just pretty much another day at the office for the Windy City. Support from City Hall for the embattled police is thin at best and things have been spiraling further out of control. All of this has led the President of the local Fraternal Order of Police to sound the alarm and go over Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s head. He’s asked the President to send in the troops and help save them, calling the Mayor a “complete failure.” (CBS Chicago)
Chicago Fraternal Order of Police President John Catanzara Jr. issued a letter to President Donald Trump on Saturday, asking for help from the federal government to fight “chaos” in Chicago and calling Mayor Lori Lightfoot a “complete failure.” The letter was posted on the FOP Lodge 7 Facebook page on Saturday, with a note that it would “get to President Trump’s desk one way or another.” In the letter, Catanzara wrote: “I am certain you are aware of the chaos currently affecting our city on a regular basis now. I am writing to formally ask you for help from the federal government. Mayor Lightfoot has proved to be a complete failure who is either unwilling or unable to maintain law and order here.”
So how did Mayor Lightfoot respond to this obvious slap to her job performance? She described it as “a litany of nonsense.”
The mayor also slammed Trump for “a litany of nonsense” in a letter the White House recently sent her, urging her to “secure your city.” The latest flare-up came after White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany accused Lightfoot on Thursday of not doing enough to tackle gun violence in Chicago, calling her a “derelict mayor.” Lightfoot fired back on Twitter, saying “Hey Karen, watch your mouth.” Karen has become a stereotypical name to refer to rude and self-entitled middle-aged white women.
The Mayor may not be “backing down” as CBS put it, but that may not matter in a couple of days. FOP President Catanzara turned out to be a smart cookie. He’s clearly familiar with the way Donald Trump operates and knows that the President loves to be the guy to come riding to the rescue. Whether or not the FOP letter made its way directly to the Oval Office, Trump just announced that more than 150 federal officers are heading to Chitown to help restore order and the rule of law. (Associated Press)
The Department of Homeland Security was planning to deploy about 150 Homeland Security Investigations agents to Chicago, according to an official with direct knowledge of the plans who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity. Those agents generally do lengthy investigations into human trafficking, drugs and weapons smuggling and child exploitation, but they have also been deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border during the height of the crisis there to help. The Trump administration sent federal officers in Portland, Oregon, after weeks of protests there over police brutality and racial injustice that followed the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Oregon’s governor and Portland’s mayor have expressed anger with the presence of the federal agents, saying that the city’s protests had started to ease just as the federal agents started taking action. However, Trump, framing such protests in the nation’s large cities as a failure by “liberal Democrats” who run them, praised the officers’ actions and said he was looking to send agents to other cities.
Under more normal conditions, it would be nice if the President and the Mayor of one of our larger cities could be seen cooperating and working to solve problems like this together. Sadly, these are far from normal times. Lori Lightfoot is part of “the Resistance” and knows that she must be seen as opposing the Bad Orange Man no matter what he says or does. But at the same time, she’s allowed her city to crash out of control, with mobs ruling the streets in too many districts.
Neither she nor the ACLU really has any say over whether or not more DHS personnel show up in Chicago. They have offices there at federal buildings that are not under her control. The President can’t tell the Chicago PD what to do, but the Mayor can’t boss around the Department of Homeland Security. This isn’t any sort of standoff taking place. The Mayor doesn’t have a paddle to put in the water here.
What’s really a pity is the fact that Lightfoot can’t see the light, for lack of a better term. Help is on the way and her city is in desperate need of it. And yet, here she is, standing in the doorway and trying to prevent some relief from arriving to secure her streets and dampen down the rising tide of gun violence and gang warfare that has broken out under the cloak of the George Floyd protests. But as with all of the other large cities with liberal leadership, the fault for this lies first and foremost with the citizens of Chicago. They keep electing these people to office and now they are reaping what they have sown. It’s sad, but it’s true.


hotair--2020-07-21--Georgia Dem to Joy Reid: Do you plan to ask Biden about his repeated use of the N-word?

The short answer turned out to be … no , but it ’ s the right call — both ethically and strategically , as it turns out .
Joy Reid launched her prime-time show on MSNBC last night with a splash , landing Joe Biden as her guest .
Reid ended up probing Biden ’ s work in picking a woman of color as his running mate , but she declined to take up the challenge from Democratic Georgia state representative Vernon Jones : Why not challenge Biden on this ?
Perhaps because it involves some specific context .
Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quotes , and used it to block a nominee who had opposed a redistricting plan supported by civil-rights advocates at the time .
Breitbart dug up thirteen such instances , all of them from 1985 , in a Senate confirmation hearing for William Reynolds , hoping to move up the DoJ ladder at the time .
Reynolds had earlier opposed a Louisiana redistricting plan supported by civil rights groups but vehemently opposed by then-Rep. Charles Bruneau .
Bruneau had publicly attacked the plan in starkly racial terms , repeatedly using the N-word .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ context reported by Breitbart that Biden used the Bruneau quote to embarrass Reynolds over his support for Bruneau ’ s campaign against the redistricting plan , not in a derogatory sense against African-Americans .
Breitbart ’ s Matthew Boyle argues it ’ s still fair game , especially on Reid ’ s platform , as she has reportedly attacked others for even quoting the term : In fact , MSNBC ’ s Joy Reid—who on Monday evening takes over the primetime slot that former anchor Chris Matthews vacated—has repeatedly argued publicly that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use the N-word even when quoting someone else .
Biden will appear on Reid ’ s new primetime program , The ReidOut , at 7:00 p.m. on Monday night—and it is unclear if she will ask him about this .
Biden ’ s campaign has not responded to requests for comment from Breitbart News about these instances of his repeated use of the N-word in U.S. Senate hearings .
But Reid has called out other politicians , including former U.S. Rep. Joe Walsh ( R-IL ) , when they have used it and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to any white people using it in any context , even if quoting someone else .
… In fact , MSNBC ’ s Joy Reid—who on Monday evening takes over the primetime slot that former anchor Chris Matthews vacated—has repeatedly argued publicly that it is never acceptable for white men to use the N-word even when quoting someone else .
Biden will appear on Reid ’ s new primetime program , The ReidOut , at 7:00 p.m. on Monday night—and it is unclear if she will ask him about this .
Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for comment from Breitbart News about these instances of his repeated use of the N-word in U.S. Senate hearings .
But Reid has called out other politicians , including former U.S. Rep. Joe Walsh ( R-IL ) , when they have used it and has a long history of being opposed to any white people using it in any context , even if quoting someone else .
That ’ s a fair argument , but applying it here would have been disingenuous .
Context matters , and the context of these quotes make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ word as a way to paint Reynolds as racist , not to demean black voters .
He used it to hold Reynolds ’ feet to the fire .
It must have worked , too ; Reynolds didn ’ t get the job as associate attorney general , remaining in his post as assistant attorney general for civil rights for the entirety of the Reagan administration .
( Reynolds passed away late last year . )
So ethically anyway , skipping this is the right call or at the very least is a defensible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t matter to Rep. Jordan , and one has to wonder why Reid took an entire pass on the issue .
If it had been a Republican repeatedly quoting the use of the N-word to argue against racism , as Biden did , would Reid have given that a pass ?
It seems unlikely , and asking it in a leading manner could have potentially helped Biden by emphasizing his fight against Bruneau and Reynolds .
At least , it would have if Reid framed the question as softly as possible and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough to turn it to his advantage .
Maybe Reid didn ’ t believe Biden could handle the question and decided to spare him , given the context .
That seems defensible , as long as Reid extends the same grace to others who are similarly situated .
( Will she ?
We ’ ll see . )
It also seems strategically sound , given how Biden answered some of her other questions .
Who , precisely , are the “ white folks ” that are vetting the “ women and men of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response to a question Biden and his team knew would be coming , can we imagine what would have happened if Reid dropped the Reynolds-hearing question on him ?

The short answer turned out to be … no, but it’s the right call — both ethically and strategically, as it turns out. Joy Reid launched her prime-time show on MSNBC last night with a splash, landing Joe Biden as her guest. Reid ended up probing Biden’s work in picking a woman of color as his running mate, but she declined to take up the challenge from Democratic Georgia state representative Vernon Jones:
.@JoyAnnReid I’ve seen @JoeBiden say the “N-word” 13 times so comfortably. Ask him on your show did practice make him perfect? https://t.co/RmJOan7Muf — Vernon Jones (@RepVernonJones) July 20, 2020
Why not challenge Biden on this? Perhaps because it involves some specific context. Biden did use the N-word but only as quotes, and used it to block a nominee who had opposed a redistricting plan supported by civil-rights advocates at the time.
Breitbart dug up thirteen such instances, all of them from 1985, in a Senate confirmation hearing for William Reynolds, hoping to move up the DoJ ladder at the time. Reynolds had earlier opposed a Louisiana redistricting plan supported by civil rights groups but vehemently opposed by then-Rep. Charles Bruneau. Bruneau had publicly attacked the plan in starkly racial terms, repeatedly using the N-word. It’s pretty clear from the context reported by Breitbart that Biden used the Bruneau quote to embarrass Reynolds over his support for Bruneau’s campaign against the redistricting plan, not in a derogatory sense against African-Americans.
Breitbart’s Matthew Boyle argues it’s still fair game, especially on Reid’s platform, as she has reportedly attacked others for even quoting the term:
In fact, MSNBC’s Joy Reid—who on Monday evening takes over the primetime slot that former anchor Chris Matthews vacated—has repeatedly argued publicly that it is never acceptable for white men to use the N-word even when quoting someone else. Biden will appear on Reid’s new primetime program, The ReidOut, at 7:00 p.m. on Monday night—and it is unclear if she will ask him about this. Biden’s campaign has not responded to requests for comment from Breitbart News about these instances of his repeated use of the N-word in U.S. Senate hearings. But Reid has called out other politicians, including former U.S. Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL), when they have used it and has a long history of being opposed to any white people using it in any context, even if quoting someone else. … In fact, MSNBC’s Joy Reid—who on Monday evening takes over the primetime slot that former anchor Chris Matthews vacated—has repeatedly argued publicly that it is never acceptable for white men to use the N-word even when quoting someone else. Biden will appear on Reid’s new primetime program, The ReidOut, at 7:00 p.m. on Monday night—and it is unclear if she will ask him about this. Biden’s campaign has not responded to requests for comment from Breitbart News about these instances of his repeated use of the N-word in U.S. Senate hearings. But Reid has called out other politicians, including former U.S. Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL), when they have used it and has a long history of being opposed to any white people using it in any context, even if quoting someone else.
That’s a fair argument, but applying it here would have been disingenuous. Context matters, and the context of these quotes make it clear that Biden was using the word as a way to paint Reynolds as racist, not to demean black voters. He used it to hold Reynolds’ feet to the fire. It must have worked, too; Reynolds didn’t get the job as associate attorney general, remaining in his post as assistant attorney general for civil rights for the entirety of the Reagan administration. (Reynolds passed away late last year.)
So ethically anyway, skipping this is the right call or at the very least is a defensible call. Still, the context didn’t matter to Rep. Jordan, and one has to wonder why Reid took an entire pass on the issue. If it had been a Republican repeatedly quoting the use of the N-word to argue against racism, as Biden did, would Reid have given that a pass? It seems unlikely, and asking it in a leading manner could have potentially helped Biden by emphasizing his fight against Bruneau and Reynolds. At least, it would have if Reid framed the question as softly as possible and if Biden was in the least adept enough to turn it to his advantage. Maybe Reid didn’t believe Biden could handle the question and decided to spare him, given the context. That seems defensible, as long as Reid extends the same grace to others who are similarly situated. (Will she? We’ll see.)
It also seems strategically sound, given how Biden answered some of her other questions. Who, precisely, are the “white folks” that are vetting the “women and men of color”?
"I'm having a 2 hour uh um vetting report from the lawyers and women and men of color as well as white um folks who are doing the vetting…" Joe Biden is having a hard time speaking woke Ridiculous. Here's a novel idea: Picking who's best for the job It clearly isn't Biden! pic.twitter.com/QpUTB72Eqr — Liz Harrington (@realLizUSA) July 21, 2020
With that as a response to a question Biden and his team knew would be coming, can we imagine what would have happened if Reid dropped the Reynolds-hearing question on him?


hotair--2020-07-21--Where wokesters and racists agree

Where wokesters and racists agree

There ’ s nothing here you don ’ t already know but seldom has a demonstration of the “ horseshoe theory ” of political ideologies been as amusing as this .
In fact , the horseshoe is less useful in visualizing this kinship than one of those left/right and authoritarian/libertarian matrixes .
Just substitute “ tribalist ” and “ individualist ” for the second pair .
Wokesters and racists are champions of their tribes , side by side on the spectrum ; each will inevitably stoop to forms of authoritarianism to advance the tribe ’ s prerogatives but it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go .
It ’ s how we end up with the Smithsonian ’ s African-American museum of history and culture promoting what looks to all the world like white-supremacist propaganda .
Or how the must-read woke tract of the summer turns out to demean black Americans : White Fragility is , in the end , a book about how to make certain educated white readers feel better about themselves .
DiAngelo ’ s outlook rests upon a depiction of Black people as endlessly delicate poster children within this self-gratifying fantasy about how white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop thinking .
Her answer to white fragility , in other words , entails an elaborate and pitilessly dehumanizing condescension toward Black people .
The sad truth is that anyone falling under the sway of this blinkered , self-satisfied , punitive stunt of a primer has been taught , by a well-intentioned but tragically misguided pastor , how to be racist in a whole new way .
The tribalists of all stripes are in ascendance in American politics today so here ’ s a toast to the unholy alliance before you watch .
@ @ @ @ @ @

There’s nothing here you don’t already know but seldom has a demonstration of the “horseshoe theory” of political ideologies been as amusing as this.
In fact, the horseshoe is less useful in visualizing this kinship than one of those left/right and authoritarian/libertarian matrixes. Just substitute “tribalist” and “individualist” for the second pair. Wokesters and racists are champions of their tribes, side by side on the spectrum; each will inevitably stoop to forms of authoritarianism to advance the tribe’s prerogatives but it’s the tribalism that makes the engines go.
It’s how we end up with the Smithsonian’s African-American museum of history and culture promoting what looks to all the world like white-supremacist propaganda. Or how the must-read woke tract of the summer turns out to demean black Americans:
White Fragility is, in the end, a book about how to make certain educated white readers feel better about themselves. DiAngelo’s outlook rests upon a depiction of Black people as endlessly delicate poster children within this self-gratifying fantasy about how white America needs to think—or, better, stop thinking. Her answer to white fragility, in other words, entails an elaborate and pitilessly dehumanizing condescension toward Black people. The sad truth is that anyone falling under the sway of this blinkered, self-satisfied, punitive stunt of a primer has been taught, by a well-intentioned but tragically misguided pastor, how to be racist in a whole new way.
The tribalists of all stripes are in ascendance in American politics today so here’s a toast to the unholy alliance before you watch. May God help us all.


hotair--2020-07-21--Biden endorsed by Million Muslim Votes Summit, pledges to end travel ban "on day one"

Joe Biden is measuring the drapes in the Oval Office and filling up his to-do list for Day One .
He spoke to the attendees of the Million Muslim Voters Summit Monday and added another task for his first day as president – he pledged to end the “ Muslim ban ” .
Biden is fond of promising the sun and the moon for his first day in office to audiences to whom he is pandering .
Monday was just another day ending with ‘ y ’ for Status Quo Joe .
He is desperate for some enthusiasm among voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his home studio and a funny thing happened .
He used a misnomer as he trashed President Trump with accusations of “ Islamicphobia ” , not the correct term , Islamophobia .
It wasn ’ t just a one-time mistake , he continued to use “ Islamicphobia ” over and over .
In a rambling speech , the presumptive Democratic nominee also railed against what he called “ Islamicphobia ” in the call attended by a handful of Muslim political activists — including anti-Zionist Sarsour who told Americans to rise up against what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Under this administration , we ’ ve seen an unconscionable , an unconscionable rise in Islamicphobia and incidents including kids being bullied in schools and hate crimes in our communities , ” Biden said , repeating the misnomer over and over .
“ He ’ s named people with a history of open Islamicphobia — open , straightforward , who have no business serving in high positions in our government — to key leadership roles in our Department of Defense and the US Agency of International Development , ” he continued .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ out the hyperbolic rhetoric yet he isn ’ t quite bold enough to name specific names .
Emgage Action hosted the summit .
It is the largest Muslim-American PAC in America .
While Biden pandered about the “ Muslim ban ” , which is more accurately described as a travel ban , he didn ’ t bother to mention that Trump ’ s travel ban simply expanded the one in place from the Obama-Biden administration .
How convenient , right ?
I guess that makes Barack Obama and him “ Islamicphobes ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden can ’ t show a desire to be strong on national security if his base doesn ’ t even want police departments in America .
He may as well pledge to ban funding for national security , too .
Biden pandered to those concerned about education by lamenting that more isn ’ t taught in schools about the Islamic faith .
He accused Trump of “ fanning the flames of hate.
” That takes some conjones , considering how the left has done its level best to take out any reference to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden is shameless .
Most importantly , the PAC is promising to get out the vote in the swing states crucial to a Biden victory – Michigan , Wisconsin , Pennsylvania , and Florida in November .
Former Bernie Sanders supporter , Linda Sarsour , gave her endorsement to Biden , too .
She is the Jew-hating socialist that even the far-left Women ’ s March founders kicked out of their organization .
She is a loyalist to Louis Farrakhan .
Nonetheless , she ’ s with Joe now .
“ This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you don ’ t like , it ’ s about whether you want to defeat fascism in America , ” she said .
“ This election for me is not about Joe Biden , ” she continued before quickly steering the conversation toward the Palestinian territories .
Brooklyn-born Sarsour was dumped from the Women ’ s March movement she helped found in September 2019 after her views were made public , including her praise for Rasmea Odeh , a Palestinian terrorist convicted in 1970 for her role in the bombing of a Jerusalem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ending the occupation of the Palestinian people , our community is committed to Muslims who are oppressed all over the world , ” Sarsour said , vowing to push Biden to support her anti-Israel agenda .
“ We want to see Joe Biden in the White House but we also want Joe Biden to know that we will hold him accountable to our communities , ” she continued .
So , this is where Joe Biden is today .
He is beholden to the far left and promising to undo everything he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s time in office .
His supporters like to pretend he is a moderate Democrat yet everything he says is a sop to the far left .
Now he wants to pretend it was Islamophobia that motivated Trump to put a stronger travel ban into place .
Trump ’ s executive order places restrictions on travel to the United States for citizens of Iran , Iraq , Libya , Somalia , Sudan , Syria , and Yemen .
Then , Iraq was taken off the list , and Trump added restrictions on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Sudan was removed .
In January , Trump further extended the travel ban to include Myanmar ( which officials referred to by its former name of Burma ) , Eritrea , Kyrgyzstan , Nigeria , and Tanzania .
Sudan was put back on the list .
Just as Venezuela is not , some of these countries are also not majority Muslim countries .
It ’ s a travel ban , not a Muslim ban .
Just as Obama told us , it is a national security issue dealing with countries that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The point is , the list changes as circumstances call for changes .
Joe Biden can get in bed with anti-Semitic hateful people like Sarsour and other far-left Muslim activists to try and win some votes but he is making a deal with the devil .
There is nothing moderate in the agendas of the likes of Sarsour .

Joe Biden is measuring the drapes in the Oval Office and filling up his to-do list for Day One. He spoke to the attendees of the Million Muslim Voters Summit Monday and added another task for his first day as president – he pledged to end the “Muslim ban”. Biden is fond of promising the sun and the moon for his first day in office to audiences to whom he is pandering.
Monday was just another day ending with ‘y’ for Status Quo Joe. He is desperate for some enthusiasm among voters. He spoke to the summit from his home studio and a funny thing happened. He used a misnomer as he trashed President Trump with accusations of “Islamicphobia”, not the correct term, Islamophobia. It wasn’t just a one-time mistake, he continued to use “Islamicphobia” over and over.
In a rambling speech, the presumptive Democratic nominee also railed against what he called “Islamicphobia” in the call attended by a handful of Muslim political activists — including anti-Zionist Sarsour who told Americans to rise up against what she called a “fascist administration.” “Under this administration, we’ve seen an unconscionable, an unconscionable rise in Islamicphobia and incidents including kids being bullied in schools and hate crimes in our communities,” Biden said, repeating the misnomer over and over. “He’s named people with a history of open Islamicphobia — open, straightforward, who have no business serving in high positions in our government — to key leadership roles in our Department of Defense and the US Agency of International Development,” he continued.
Do tell, Joe. He dishes out the hyperbolic rhetoric yet he isn’t quite bold enough to name specific names.
Emgage Action hosted the summit. It is the largest Muslim-American PAC in America. While Biden pandered about the “Muslim ban”, which is more accurately described as a travel ban, he didn’t bother to mention that Trump’s travel ban simply expanded the one in place from the Obama-Biden administration. How convenient, right? I guess that makes Barack Obama and him “Islamicphobes”, too. You have to imagine that Biden can’t show a desire to be strong on national security if his base doesn’t even want police departments in America. He may as well pledge to ban funding for national security, too.
Biden pandered to those concerned about education by lamenting that more isn’t taught in schools about the Islamic faith. He accused Trump of “fanning the flames of hate.” That takes some conjones, considering how the left has done its level best to take out any reference to Christian faith in public schools. Joe Biden is shameless.
Most importantly, the PAC is promising to get out the vote in the swing states crucial to a Biden victory – Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Florida in November. Former Bernie Sanders supporter, Linda Sarsour, gave her endorsement to Biden, too. She is the Jew-hating socialist that even the far-left Women’s March founders kicked out of their organization. She is a loyalist to Louis Farrakhan. Nonetheless, she’s with Joe now.
“This is not about who you like and who you don’t like, it’s about whether you want to defeat fascism in America,” she said. “This election for me is not about Joe Biden,” she continued before quickly steering the conversation toward the Palestinian territories. Brooklyn-born Sarsour was dumped from the Women’s March movement she helped found in September 2019 after her views were made public, including her praise for Rasmea Odeh, a Palestinian terrorist convicted in 1970 for her role in the bombing of a Jerusalem supermarket. “Our community is committed to ending the occupation of the Palestinian people, our community is committed to Muslims who are oppressed all over the world,” Sarsour said, vowing to push Biden to support her anti-Israel agenda. “We want to see Joe Biden in the White House but we also want Joe Biden to know that we will hold him accountable to our communities,” she continued.
So, this is where Joe Biden is today. He is beholden to the far left and promising to undo everything he can think of from the Trump administration’s time in office. His supporters like to pretend he is a moderate Democrat yet everything he says is a sop to the far left. Now he wants to pretend it was Islamophobia that motivated Trump to put a stronger travel ban into place. Trump’s executive order places restrictions on travel to the United States for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Then, Iraq was taken off the list, and Trump added restrictions on Chad, North Korea, and Venezuela. Sudan was removed. In January, Trump further extended the travel ban to include Myanmar (which officials referred to by its former name of Burma), Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria, and Tanzania. Sudan was put back on the list. Just as Venezuela is not, some of these countries are also not majority Muslim countries. It’s a travel ban, not a Muslim ban. Just as Obama told us, it is a national security issue dealing with countries that are less than friendly to the United States. The point is, the list changes as circumstances call for changes. Joe Biden can get in bed with anti-Semitic hateful people like Sarsour and other far-left Muslim activists to try and win some votes but he is making a deal with the devil. There is nothing moderate in the agendas of the likes of Sarsour.


hotair--2020-07-21--Should Ginsburg have lied about her cancer diagnosis?

This is such an uncomfortable question that I honestly hesitated to even discuss it , but since Josh Gerstein brought it up at Politico , it would appear that the question is now fair game .
As you likely heard , Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg spent a night in the hospital back in May , sending liberals around the nation into a panic .
But their fears were quickly assuaged when her spokesperson announced that she was receiving non-surgical treatment for a gallstone and it wouldn ’ t impact her duties on the court .
Now we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was , at a minimum , a tremendous case of obscuring the facts .
Whether she had a gallstone or not , her cancer had returned and she was undergoing another round of treatment for it .
Josh Gerstein asks whether this is the sort of transparency ( or lack thereof ) that Americans deserve when it comes to such an important position .
The five-month delay that preceded Ginsburg ’ s statement Friday was just the latest episode to prompt concern among courtwatchers that the justices are being too opaque about their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to more information about the justices ‘ medical condition .
With the court sharply divided on many pivotal issues , an unexpected health crisis on the part of one justice has the potential to upend official Washington .
But the fact the justices enjoy life tenure and have little in the way of oversight to monitor their competence also makes questions about their health more urgent than for other public officials .
“ On the one hand , Ginsburg is to be commended for the statement [ on Friday , ] but from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should have had a statement several months ago , ” said David Garrow , a renowned legal writer and historian of the civil rights movement .
This is a considerably lengthy article and Gerstein goes on to discuss the “ decrepitude ” on the Supreme Court and the outsized influence and power wielded by people who are frequently in their 80s .
He also discusses the lack of honesty on Ginsberg ’ s part , arguing that keeping silent about her health is certainly her right , but she went beyond that .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of her lastest cancer diagnosis indicating her health was just fine .
Rather than telling people to mind their own business , she chose to lie about it .
And that , in the author ’ s opinion , undermines the public ’ s trust in her high office .
As I said at the top , this subject is a very touchy one .
While I will concede that the idea of a Supreme Court Justice lying to the public is disappointing , this is one of those subjects where I would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know such very private and distressing details .
Questions about the heath of public officials are certainly fair game when they are running for office or being considered for an appointment .
While not mandatory , most candidates for high office disclose their medical records , and that ’ s appropriate because we ’ d like to know if the person we ’ re voting for has a reasonable chance of living long enough to do the job .
Supreme Court nominees are routinely asked about their health during closed Senate committee hearings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But once somebody is in office or on the bench , those questions should pretty much go out the window , shouldn ’ t they ?
We don ’ t impeach public officials for becoming ill. And particularly in the case of Supreme Court justices who are appointed for as long as they wish to remain on the bench , the odds are that they ’ re going to run into health problems eventually .
One study conducted in 2010 found that nearly half of all Supreme Court justices died in office and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their retirement as being related to health problems , with many of them not living very long after departing .
When you give people an office “ for life , ” that ’ s just the nature of the beast , I ’ m afraid .
You can ’ t force any of them to retire , so this argument seems rather pointless .
Perhaps it would have been better if Ginsburg had chosen to say nothing rather than deceiving the public , but does that really have any impact on her ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the justices began showing signs of serious mental deterioration , I suppose it would be within reason to begin discussing their removal from office , but even then it would be an ugly situation to behold .
And if it ’ s a health problem like cancer or any other malady not impairing their mental faculties , I hope we ’ re not the sort of a country that would boot them off the bench because they were sick .

This is such an uncomfortable question that I honestly hesitated to even discuss it, but since Josh Gerstein brought it up at Politico, it would appear that the question is now fair game. As you likely heard, Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg spent a night in the hospital back in May, sending liberals around the nation into a panic. But their fears were quickly assuaged when her spokesperson announced that she was receiving non-surgical treatment for a gallstone and it wouldn’t impact her duties on the court.
Now we know that the report that was issued was, at a minimum, a tremendous case of obscuring the facts. Whether she had a gallstone or not, her cancer had returned and she was undergoing another round of treatment for it. Josh Gerstein asks whether this is the sort of transparency (or lack thereof) that Americans deserve when it comes to such an important position.
The five-month delay that preceded Ginsburg’s statement Friday was just the latest episode to prompt concern among courtwatchers that the justices are being too opaque about their health… Critics say the public is entitled to more information about the justices‘ medical condition. With the court sharply divided on many pivotal issues, an unexpected health crisis on the part of one justice has the potential to upend official Washington. But the fact the justices enjoy life tenure and have little in the way of oversight to monitor their competence also makes questions about their health more urgent than for other public officials. “On the one hand, Ginsburg is to be commended for the statement [ on Friday,] but from what she said … it seems we should have had a statement several months ago,” said David Garrow, a renowned legal writer and historian of the civil rights movement.
This is a considerably lengthy article and Gerstein goes on to discuss the “decrepitude” on the Supreme Court and the outsized influence and power wielded by people who are frequently in their 80s. He also discusses the lack of honesty on Ginsberg’s part, arguing that keeping silent about her health is certainly her right, but she went beyond that. She released several statements since first learning of her lastest cancer diagnosis indicating her health was just fine. Rather than telling people to mind their own business, she chose to lie about it. And that, in the author’s opinion, undermines the public’s trust in her high office.
As I said at the top, this subject is a very touchy one. While I will concede that the idea of a Supreme Court Justice lying to the public is disappointing, this is one of those subjects where I would question the public’s right to know such very private and distressing details. Questions about the heath of public officials are certainly fair game when they are running for office or being considered for an appointment. While not mandatory, most candidates for high office disclose their medical records, and that’s appropriate because we’d like to know if the person we’re voting for has a reasonable chance of living long enough to do the job. Supreme Court nominees are routinely asked about their health during closed Senate committee hearings as part of the confirmation process.
But once somebody is in office or on the bench, those questions should pretty much go out the window, shouldn’t they? We don’t impeach public officials for becoming ill. And particularly in the case of Supreme Court justices who are appointed for as long as they wish to remain on the bench, the odds are that they’re going to run into health problems eventually. One study conducted in 2010 found that nearly half of all Supreme Court justices died in office and a significant portion of the others announced their retirement as being related to health problems, with many of them not living very long after departing.
When you give people an office “for life,” that’s just the nature of the beast, I’m afraid. You can’t force any of them to retire, so this argument seems rather pointless. Perhaps it would have been better if Ginsburg had chosen to say nothing rather than deceiving the public, but does that really have any impact on her ability to do the job? If any of the justices began showing signs of serious mental deterioration, I suppose it would be within reason to begin discussing their removal from office, but even then it would be an ugly situation to behold. And if it’s a health problem like cancer or any other malady not impairing their mental faculties, I hope we’re not the sort of a country that would boot them off the bench because they were sick.