hotair--2020-04-28--MLB may combine AL and NL into three divisions, open season in early July

Just doesn ’ t seem right that thousands of vibrant American businesses will fail because of the pandemic and yet this unwatchable sport crawls on , a shadow of its former glory in the dreary era of sabermetrics , aggressive cheating , and “ three true outcomes.
” A sport which its own management clearly dislikes , since they ’ re forever tinkering with the rules to try to “ spice it up.
” If they somehow manage to put players on the field in June and July , I feel like we ’ re going to have weeks of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ !
followed by a letdown four or five games into season like , “ Oh , right .
This.
” I don ’ t understand the logic of league realignment here either .
Is it just a gimmick to pique fans ’ interest ?
That would fit with MLB ’ s general belief that fans no longer want to watch baseball as-is .
Major League Baseball officials have become cautiously optimistic this week that the season will start in late June , and no later than July 2 , playing at least 100 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with knowledge of the talks .
They requested anonymity because the plan is still under consideration .
And not only would baseball be played , but it would be played in their own major-league ballparks , albeit with no fans .
MLB is considering a three-division , 10-team plan in which teams play only within their division – a concept gaining support among owners and executives .
It would abolish the traditional American and National Leagues , and realign the divisions based on geography… MLB officials are hoping it won ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will prevail once the regular season commences , but the schedule and playoff format promises to be dramatically different .
“ It ’ s all coming together , ’ ’ said one official to USA Today .
“ I ’ m very optimistic.
” I ’ m not .
What happens when a player inevitably gets infected ?
Does the team cancel games for two weeks and self-quarantine ?
What about the teams that player ’ s team played against over the previous seven days ?
If one of more teams have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the schedule ?
Assuming every team carries 40 players , that ’ s 1,200 separate vectors of transmission — not including coaches , supporting personnel , and so on .
It ’ s going to happen .
What ’ s the plan when it does ?
Follow the link to see the proposed realignment .
Yankees , Mets , Red Sox , and Phillies ( among others ) together in the “ East , ” Dodgers , Astros , Giants , and A ’ s ( among others ) together in the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Indians , and Braves ( among others ) together in the “ Central.
” But … why ?
The idea is to “ severely ” reduce travel by grouping teams together regionally , but it ’ s not like those regions are tightly clustered .
They ’ re not going to be traveling by bus .
Atlanta and Minnesota would be in the same division .
So would Toronto and Miami .
So would Houston and Seattle .
( They ’ re in the same division in normal times too . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is okay , since each of these teams fly on their own chartered planes and don ’ t need to worry about contamination by the public .
But in that case , if they can fly more or less safely , and if they ’ re playing in their home ballparks , why do we need realignment ?
Just keep the familiar league/division structure .
The only thing realignment gets you is an opportunity to play a few more games : If the season starts in July and most teams only need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every other team in their new division , some “ travel days ” can be omitted from the schedule .
But not all of them , and players surely can ’ t be expected to play every single day for three months anyway .
They might as well just play an 81-game season and retain the traditional divisions .
Unless , as I say , MLB thinks its big return isn ’ t interesting enough for fans in its own right and needs a stunt to goose the public .
We ’ ll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ divisional realignment forever as players decide they really like not having to fly six hours overnight after a game for their next series .
As for playing in front of empty stadiums , that ’ s the way things have been trending naturally .
All this will do is accelerate it a bit .

Just doesn’t seem right that thousands of vibrant American businesses will fail because of the pandemic and yet this unwatchable sport crawls on, a shadow of its former glory in the dreary era of sabermetrics, aggressive cheating, and “three true outcomes.”
A sport which its own management clearly dislikes, since they’re forever tinkering with the rules to try to “spice it up.”
If they somehow manage to put players on the field in June and July, I feel like we’re going to have weeks of excited hype beforehand that sports is back! followed by a letdown four or five games into season like, “Oh, right. This.”
I don’t understand the logic of league realignment here either. Is it just a gimmick to pique fans’ interest? That would fit with MLB’s general belief that fans no longer want to watch baseball as-is.
Major League Baseball officials have become cautiously optimistic this week that the season will start in late June, and no later than July 2, playing at least 100 regular-season games, according to three executives with knowledge of the talks. They requested anonymity because the plan is still under consideration. And not only would baseball be played, but it would be played in their own major-league ballparks, albeit with no fans. MLB is considering a three-division, 10-team plan in which teams play only within their division – a concept gaining support among owners and executives. It would abolish the traditional American and National Leagues, and realign the divisions based on geography… MLB officials are hoping it won’t be necessary to quarantine players, and normalcy will prevail once the regular season commences, but the schedule and playoff format promises to be dramatically different.
“It’s all coming together,’’ said one official to USA Today. “I’m very optimistic.” I’m not. What happens when a player inevitably gets infected? Does the team cancel games for two weeks and self-quarantine? What about the teams that player’s team played against over the previous seven days? If one of more teams have to self-quarantine, what does that do to the schedule? Assuming every team carries 40 players, that’s 1,200 separate vectors of transmission — not including coaches, supporting personnel, and so on. It’s going to happen. What’s the plan when it does?
Follow the link to see the proposed realignment. Yankees, Mets, Red Sox, and Phillies (among others) together in the “East,” Dodgers, Astros, Giants, and A’s (among others) together in the “West,” and Cubs, Cardinals, Indians, and Braves (among others) together in the “Central.” But … why? The idea is to “severely” reduce travel by grouping teams together regionally, but it’s not like those regions are tightly clustered. They’re not going to be traveling by bus. Atlanta and Minnesota would be in the same division. So would Toronto and Miami. So would Houston and Seattle. (They’re in the same division in normal times too.) Air travel will be necessary — which is okay, since each of these teams fly on their own chartered planes and don’t need to worry about contamination by the public.
But in that case, if they can fly more or less safely, and if they’re playing in their home ballparks, why do we need realignment? Just keep the familiar league/division structure. The only thing realignment gets you is an opportunity to play a few more games: If the season starts in July and most teams only need to fly an hour or two to play every other team in their new division, some “travel days” can be omitted from the schedule. But not all of them, and players surely can’t be expected to play every single day for three months anyway. They might as well just play an 81-game season and retain the traditional divisions. Unless, as I say, MLB thinks its big return isn’t interesting enough for fans in its own right and needs a stunt to goose the public.
We’ll probably end up stuck with this Frankenstein divisional realignment forever as players decide they really like not having to fly six hours overnight after a game for their next series. As for playing in front of empty stadiums, that’s the way things have been trending naturally. All this will do is accelerate it a bit.


hotair--2020-04-28--What happens when a mayor violates her own stay at home order?

The answer is that she finds herself under investigation by the county district attorney .
Mayor Becky Ames of Beaumont , Texas ( population a little more than 118,000 ) is finding that out the hard way .
The mayor of this small city in the southeastern part of Texas visited a nail salon while Beaumont is under a shelter at home order .
She got caught .
Mayor Ames made a trip to the Nail Bar last week and the shop ’ s owner opened up for her after a phone call .
The mayor asked about removing her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manicure .
She needed acetone to do that and the shop owner agreed to sell her some .
Instead of simply leaving a bottle out for the mayor to pick up , as the mayor thought was the agreement , the owner set out a bowl with acetone in it , at a manicure station .
Guess what happened next ?
Just like that , a tweet is posted .
The mayor , wearing a face mask , sat down and put her hands in the solution as though she was preparing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she did so , someone photographed her and put it on social media , including tagging Governor Abbott in a tweet .
Of course , this is 2020 and that is what happens in 2020 .
Without the backstory , it would indeed appear that Mayor Ames is getting a manicure if someone just looks at the photo .
Here ’ s the problem , though .
Not only did the mayor violate her own stay at home order that she issued on March 27 , days before Governor Abbott issued a statewide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but she has also put the license of the salon owner in jeopardy .
An investigation has been launched by The Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation and the Jefferson County District Attorney ’ s Office .
No good deed goes unpunished .
Ames issued a public apology for her “ lapse in judgement ” though she denies acting out of personal privilege .
“ I promise there was no malice intended , ” she wrote in a statement .
“ I should never have entered the salon last Tuesday .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while asking others to sacrifice and for that I am truly remorseful.
” Ames concluded by asking for forgiveness .
“ As an elected official I am held to a higher standard , I regret my action that day .
I am honestly sorry and I pray that you will forgive me , ” she said .
Of course she used personal privilege as the mayor .
Does she think any of the nail salon ’ s regular customers would have been given this treatment ?
The mayor called and a local businesswoman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ owner is in hot water for keeping her business open despite being labeled a non-essential business .
She followed the example set by Speaker Pelosi during the State of the Union address and ripped up her citation on camera during a television interview to show her defiance .
She explained that she and her staff wear protective gear and her clients have to wear face masks in order to enter the salon .
“ We ’ re all wearing protective gear .
We ’ re all sanitizing .
Everything is completely sanitary in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for three years and she has invested about $ 35,000 into it .
Luther says she stands to lose that money and has no savings .
I would venture to say she speaks for the majority of small business owners today .
Most only have a cushion of a few months to operate without bringing in any revenue , if that .
The craziest story I ’ ve read is out of Laredo , Texas .
Two young self-employed women were arrested in separate sting operations conducted by the Laredo Police Department .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ sting operations .
No , they weren ’ t trafficking drugs or human beings across the border with Mexico .
Each was providing a salon-type service in their homes .
In one case , Ana Isabel Castro-Garcia , 31 , was arrested in the 1200 block of Harding Street after she agreed to and met with an undercover officer who posed as a customer needing a nail service .
“ Castro-Garcia admitted to running a nail salon inside her residence and promoting the business on social media , going against the mayoral decree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the second case , Brenda Stephanie Mata , 20 , was arrested in the 1100 block Hubner Street .
She allegedly agreed to perform an eyelash service inside her residence for an undercover officer posing as a customer .
That ’ s right – a manicure and an application of fake eyelashes .
Both were charged with violation of an emergency management plan , a Class B misdemeanor .
The charge carries a punishment of up to 180 days in jail , a $ 2,000 fine , or both .
Both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their salon services on social media .
Someone turned them into the Laredo Police Department .
Governor Abbott ’ s plan to reopen Texas won ’ t give the salon owners and workers relief until May 18 at the earliest .
That is when Phase Two of the Texas plan goes into effect .

The answer is that she finds herself under investigation by the county district attorney. Mayor Becky Ames of Beaumont, Texas (population a little more than 118,000) is finding that out the hard way. The mayor of this small city in the southeastern part of Texas visited a nail salon while Beaumont is under a shelter at home order. She got caught.
Mayor Ames made a trip to the Nail Bar last week and the shop’s owner opened up for her after a phone call. The mayor asked about removing her old manicure to give herself a fresh manicure. She needed acetone to do that and the shop owner agreed to sell her some. Instead of simply leaving a bottle out for the mayor to pick up, as the mayor thought was the agreement, the owner set out a bowl with acetone in it, at a manicure station. Guess what happened next? Just like that, a tweet is posted.
The mayor, wearing a face mask, sat down and put her hands in the solution as though she was preparing for a professional manicure. And, as she did so, someone photographed her and put it on social media, including tagging Governor Abbott in a tweet. Of course, this is 2020 and that is what happens in 2020.
https://twitter.com/Liberate_TX_NOW/status/1252751618824712200
Without the backstory, it would indeed appear that Mayor Ames is getting a manicure if someone just looks at the photo. Here’s the problem, though. Not only did the mayor violate her own stay at home order that she issued on March 27, days before Governor Abbott issued a statewide order closing non-essential businesses on April 2, but she has also put the license of the salon owner in jeopardy. An investigation has been launched by The Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation and the Jefferson County District Attorney’s Office. No good deed goes unpunished.
“We are reviewing to determine if there was a violation,” District Attorney Bob Wortham said. Tela Mange, a spokesperson for the state’s licensing and regulation department, said that if it is determined that a violation occurred their findings will be turned over to the agency’s prosecutor. If the prosecutor agrees, a fine of up to $1,000 could be imposed.
Ames issued a public apology for her “lapse in judgement” though she denies acting out of personal privilege.
“I promise there was no malice intended,” she wrote in a statement. “I should never have entered the salon last Tuesday. I did not intend to take personal privilege while asking others to sacrifice and for that I am truly remorseful.” Ames concluded by asking for forgiveness. “As an elected official I am held to a higher standard, I regret my action that day. I am honestly sorry and I pray that you will forgive me,” she said.
Of course she used personal privilege as the mayor. Does she think any of the nail salon’s regular customers would have been given this treatment? The mayor called and a local businesswoman responded.
In Dallas, a salon owner is in hot water for keeping her business open despite being labeled a non-essential business. She followed the example set by Speaker Pelosi during the State of the Union address and ripped up her citation on camera during a television interview to show her defiance.
In Dallas, hair salon owner Shelley Luther was issued a citation at midday but she refused to close her business. She had two stylists and a nail technician on duty, a fraction of her normal staff. Several supporters came to the salon, including a man carrying a long gun he made into a pole for a Texas flag with a coiled snake on it reading “Don’t Tread on Me.”
She explained that she and her staff wear protective gear and her clients have to wear face masks in order to enter the salon. “We’re all wearing protective gear. We’re all sanitizing. Everything is completely sanitary in there.” Her salon has been open for three years and she has invested about $35,000 into it. Luther says she stands to lose that money and has no savings. I would venture to say she speaks for the majority of small business owners today. Most only have a cushion of a few months to operate without bringing in any revenue, if that.
The craziest story I’ve read is out of Laredo, Texas. Two young self-employed women were arrested in separate sting operations conducted by the Laredo Police Department. Yes, you read that right – sting operations. No, they weren’t trafficking drugs or human beings across the border with Mexico. Each was providing a salon-type service in their homes.
In one case, Ana Isabel Castro-Garcia, 31, was arrested in the 1200 block of Harding Street after she agreed to and met with an undercover officer who posed as a customer needing a nail service. “Castro-Garcia admitted to running a nail salon inside her residence and promoting the business on social media, going against the mayoral decree currently in place,” police stated. In the second case, Brenda Stephanie Mata, 20, was arrested in the 1100 block Hubner Street. She allegedly agreed to perform an eyelash service inside her residence for an undercover officer posing as a customer.
That’s right – a manicure and an application of fake eyelashes. Both were charged with violation of an emergency management plan, a Class B misdemeanor. The charge carries a punishment of up to 180 days in jail, a $2,000 fine, or both.
Both young women made the mistake of advertising their salon services on social media. Someone turned them into the Laredo Police Department.
“Both of the violators independently solicited customers via social media. On both cases, an undercover officer working on the COVID-19 task force enforcement detail made contact with each solicitor to set up an appointment for a cosmetic, beauty service that is prohibited under the emergency ordinance,” police said in a statement.
Governor Abbott’s plan to reopen Texas won’t give the salon owners and workers relief until May 18 at the earliest. That is when Phase Two of the Texas plan goes into effect.


hotair--2020-04-29--Enthusiasm gap: Dems throwing in the towel?

On the surface , the latest poll from Emerson College looks bad for Donald Trump — and perhaps even a bit deeper than the surface .
After getting a rally-effect bump from the COVID-19 pandemic response in March , voters have significantly cooled off on the president ’ s performance .
Trump ’ s overall approval rating went from 46/45 last month to 41/50 , driven by a ten-point drop in approval for his handling of the coronavirus crisis — 39/51 , down from 49/41 .
Those trends do not bode well for an incumbent seeking re-election in six months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about their results , which is that Joe Biden hasn ’ t expanded his lead despite these significant declines : That seems very odd indeed , especially at this stage of the campaign .
Biden should be seeing a boost as Democrats rally around their presumptive nominee .
In fact , one would expect to see Biden ’ s numbers bounce up significantly even if Trump ’ s numbers didn ’ t decline at all .
The explanation ?
Democrats don ’ t feel like rallying around Biden .
Even though Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s clobbering Biden on enthusiasm : Nearly half of Joe Biden voters , 45 % , said they were very or extremely excited to support Biden in the general election , compared to 64 % of Trump voters that said they were very or extremely excited to support Trump in November .
Nearly a quarter of Biden ’ s supporters , 26 % , said they were not that excited , compared to 15 % of Trump voters .
Furthermore , 65 % of those who voted for Senator Bernie Sanders in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ excited for Biden .
That might be understandable , had the question been asked before Sanders threw in with Biden .
However , Emerson ’ s polling took place over the last three days , starting nearly two weeks after Sanders endorsed Biden on Biden ’ s podcast .
If they aren ’ t excited about Biden by now , his performance over the next few months won ’ t offer much better hope for their engagement .
Polls matter , but turnout matters more .
Voters who are not enthusiastic for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much , even in normal conditions .
When the election will take place in the middle of a pandemic , enthusiasm matters much more .
No one risks their health to cast a ballot for someone they ’ re only iffy about .
The Washington Examiner ’ s Paul Bedard thinks Democrats are “ throwing in the towel “ : Much like Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2016 , his supporters aren ’ t hugely excited about voting for him .
And according to the latest Emerson College Polling ’ s survey , Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
While Biden leads President Trump in a head-to-head matchup , 48 % -42 % , when voters overall were asked who they really think will win in November , it ’ s a Trump blowout , 57 % -43 % .
… Emerson found that Trump has a sizable 19-point advantage in the enthusiasm gap , 64 % -45 % .
Some 36 % of his supporters said they are “ extremely excited ” to vote for Trump , 28 % said they are “ very excited.
” For Biden , those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
… That 19-point enthusiasm gap dwarfs the one between Clinton and Trump in 2016 .
A September 2016 CNN/ORC poll put the gap at 12 points .
It ’ s too early to tell whether they have thrown in the towel .
However , Bedard has a point in arguing that Democrats have managed to nominate the only candidate in the field who can ’ t generate enthusiasm for blocking Trump from office , for the second straight election cycle .
That ’ s an impressive accomplishment … for all the wrong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t officially nominated Biden yet .
The more data that comes out like Emerson ’ s results , perhaps the more likely the DNC will stage an intervention .

On the surface, the latest poll from Emerson College looks bad for Donald Trump — and perhaps even a bit deeper than the surface. After getting a rally-effect bump from the COVID-19 pandemic response in March, voters have significantly cooled off on the president’s performance. Trump’s overall approval rating went from 46/45 last month to 41/50, driven by a ten-point drop in approval for his handling of the coronavirus crisis — 39/51, down from 49/41.
Those trends do not bode well for an incumbent seeking re-election in six months. However, Emerson notices something curious about their results, which is that Joe Biden hasn’t expanded his lead despite these significant declines:
Despite Trump’s drop in approval, former Vice President Joe Biden maintains only a 6 point lead in the Presidential ballot test, 48% to 42%. This is the same numerical difference as last month’s poll, where Biden led Trump 53% to 47%. Ten-percent (10%) of voters said they were undecided, but when asked to choose a candidate they were leaning towards, undecided voters slightly broke in favor of Biden, 56% to 44%, giving Biden an additional 1 point advantage.
That seems very odd indeed, especially at this stage of the campaign. Biden should be seeing a boost as Democrats rally around their presumptive nominee. In fact, one would expect to see Biden’s numbers bounce up significantly even if Trump’s numbers didn’t decline at all.
The explanation? Democrats don’t feel like rallying around Biden. Even though Trump’s numbers are down, he’s clobbering Biden on enthusiasm:
Nearly half of Joe Biden voters, 45%, said they were very or extremely excited to support Biden in the general election, compared to 64% of Trump voters that said they were very or extremely excited to support Trump in November. Nearly a quarter of Biden’s supporters, 26%, said they were not that excited, compared to 15% of Trump voters. Furthermore, 65% of those who voted for Senator Bernie Sanders in the primary season said they were not that excited for Biden.
That might be understandable, had the question been asked before Sanders threw in with Biden. However, Emerson’s polling took place over the last three days, starting nearly two weeks after Sanders endorsed Biden on Biden’s podcast. If they aren’t excited about Biden by now, his performance over the next few months won’t offer much better hope for their engagement.
Emerson encapsulates Biden’s problem in this chart:
Polls matter, but turnout matters more. Voters who are not enthusiastic for a candidate don’t turn out as much, even in normal conditions. When the election will take place in the middle of a pandemic, enthusiasm matters much more. No one risks their health to cast a ballot for someone they’re only iffy about.
The Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard thinks Democrats are “throwing in the towel“:
Much like Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2016, his supporters aren’t hugely excited about voting for him. And according to the latest Emerson College Polling’s survey, Democrats appear to be throwing in the towel. While Biden leads President Trump in a head-to-head matchup, 48%-42%, when voters overall were asked who they really think will win in November, it’s a Trump blowout, 57%-43%. … Emerson found that Trump has a sizable 19-point advantage in the enthusiasm gap, 64%-45%. Some 36% of his supporters said they are “extremely excited” to vote for Trump, 28% said they are “very excited.” For Biden, those numbers are 22% and 23%. … That 19-point enthusiasm gap dwarfs the one between Clinton and Trump in 2016. A September 2016 CNN/ORC poll put the gap at 12 points.
It’s too early to tell whether they have thrown in the towel. However, Bedard has a point in arguing that Democrats have managed to nominate the only candidate in the field who can’t generate enthusiasm for blocking Trump from office, for the second straight election cycle. That’s an impressive accomplishment … for all the wrong reasons.
Of course, Democrats haven’t officially nominated Biden yet. The more data that comes out like Emerson’s results, perhaps the more likely the DNC will stage an intervention.


hotair--2020-04-29--WHO official: Sweden's approach to coronavirus may be a "model" for a new normal in the rest of the

WHO official: Sweden's approach to coronavirus may be a "model" for a new normal in the rest of the world

The debate about whether we should move towards Sweden ’ s strategy increasingly seems like a debate about nothing since we have no choice but to move towards their strategy eventually .
Lockdowns can ’ t last forever .
Even Andrew Cuomo has begun talking about a game plan to reopen for business .
Sweden may become more relevant after we reopen and some state or city somewhere begins to experience a second wave .
Then we ’ ll have a bitter argument about whether it ’ s smarter to lock down again to douse the epidemic before it burns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what the Swedes did and let it burn in the hope and expectation that it won ’ t do as much damage as we fear .
But that ’ s later .
We ’ re going to reopen soon-ish because there ’ s no alternative .
The other quirk of the great Sweden debate is how caricatured the two sides ’ positions have become .
The American position , supposedly : Lockdowns forever .
The Swedish position , supposedly : Business as usual .
But it ’ s not business as usual there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , just with fewer formal restrictions than the U.S .
Gatherings of more than 50 people are banned .
Universities are closed down .
No sports .
Older citizens are expected to self-quarantine , and visits to nursing homes are now banned .
The economy has taken a big hit , partly because of the global economic downturn and partly because many Swedes have the good sense not to patronize crowded businesses even though they ’ re open .
Once the U.S. reopens , which has already begun in states like Georgia and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Swedish and American approaches will be the fate of elementary schools .
They ’ re open in Sweden , they ’ re closed here .
Does the Swedish experiment suggest that we can safely reopen those too ?
It depends on what data you look at and what your personal risk tolerance is .
Unquestionably Sweden has fared worse than the countries that are most similar to it in terms of ethnicity , geography , and culture : Sweden ’ s fatality rate is higher than the fatality rate in the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
But they ’ re not a catastrophe by global standards .
As the Times noted yesterday , Sweden and Ireland have had practically the same number of deaths per million residents .
Belgium , Spain , Italy , and Great Britain are far ahead of both .
Many of the deaths in Sweden have come in nursing homes , which the government admits it needs to a better job of protecting — but so do many other western countries , as assisted-living facilities have been hot spots in one nation after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospitals been overrun by the volume of patients : The ambassador projected that Stockholm could reach herd immunity as soon as next month .
If that ’ s true , the number of cases , hospitalizations , and ICU admissions should all be in decline in Stockholm sometime in June .
We ’ ll keep an eye on it .
The point of the comments by the WHO official in the clip below ( watch four minutes or so for the full flavor ) is that we shouldn ’ t misunderstand Sweden as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normal .
They ’ re not .
What they ’ re doing in the absence of formal lockdown orders is trusting people to maintain social distancing practices voluntary , exactly what the United States will soon be asking its citizens to do .
( Again , elementary schools may remain subject to formal closure . )
Can we expect a result as comparatively good as the Swedes have had , though ?
They ’ re a “ high trust ” society , it ’ s said : When their leaders request compliance on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get it .
Trust in the U.S. isn ’ t so high .
Does that mean Americans won ’ t take social distancing as seriously once the lockdowns lift as the Swedes do ?
Eh , maybe not .
Lyman Stone is a proponent of social distancing but a critic of lockdowns .
His reasoning is simple : When you look at the data , it seems like most lockdown orders are a case of the government following the people , not vice versa .
It turns out many Americans were actually beginning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March , based on the frightening information they were receiving about COVID-19 , even before stay-at-home orders were issued .
Information , not regulation , is what ’ s flattened the curve .
If that ’ s true then reopening the country and shifting towards a Sweden-style system ( with the exception of elementary schools ) in which people are free to go about their business but discouraged from doing so may not be much more dangerous than what we ’ re doing now — but may not look wildly different in practice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either .
Stone : Americans began to practice social distancing not because they were ordered to do so , but because , belatedly , our political and cultural leaders woke up to the risks of COVID and sounded the alarm around March 8–13 .
Having received credible information about the risks of COVID , Americans responded with remarkable solidarity , adopting stringent social distancing measures even in states without stay-at-home orders .
These social distancing measures have almost certainly saved tens of thousands , perhaps even hundreds of thousands , of lives .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and some county officials in California ) can not take credit for this achievement : it was a grassroots campaign by Americans of all stripes working together to protect each other .
There ’ s more to it than that .
Whenever people tell you that Americans need lockdowns because before lockdowns they were refusing to socially distance , they ’ re not just smearing Americans , they ’ re also wrong on the facts .
Americans , like people in almost every country , were quicker to understand the risks than most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alas , had our leaders taken the threat seriously a month earlier , and communicated the risks to Americans more explicitly , COVID could have been a flash in the pan .
Instead , many thousands of Americans are going to die unnecessary deaths .
If Stone ’ s right then maybe we won ’ t have a big debate over the Swedish model if reopening for business leads to a second spike after all .
That problem will be self-correcting , no lockdown orders needed .
Residents of the city or state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about it , absorb the information , cancel any plans involving retail or restaurants , and begin self-isolating again to protect themselves .
The infection rate will gradually begin to fall again , as will the local economy .
The point is , there ’ s no sustained “ business as usual ” outcome .
Certainly not in the U.S. , especially if most states are still far away from herd immunity .

The debate about whether we should move towards Sweden’s strategy increasingly seems like a debate about nothing since we have no choice but to move towards their strategy eventually. Lockdowns can’t last forever. Even Andrew Cuomo has begun talking about a game plan to reopen for business. Sweden may become more relevant after we reopen and some state or city somewhere begins to experience a second wave. Then we’ll have a bitter argument about whether it’s smarter to lock down again to douse the epidemic before it burns out of control or whether to do what the Swedes did and let it burn in the hope and expectation that it won’t do as much damage as we fear.
But that’s later. We’re going to reopen soon-ish because there’s no alternative.
The other quirk of the great Sweden debate is how caricatured the two sides’ positions have become. The American position, supposedly: Lockdowns forever. The Swedish position, supposedly: Business as usual. But it’s not business as usual there. Sweden is practicing social distancing too, just with fewer formal restrictions than the U.S. Gatherings of more than 50 people are banned. Universities are closed down. No sports. Older citizens are expected to self-quarantine, and visits to nursing homes are now banned. The economy has taken a big hit, partly because of the global economic downturn and partly because many Swedes have the good sense not to patronize crowded businesses even though they’re open.
Once the U.S. reopens, which has already begun in states like Georgia and Colorado, the chief distinction between the Swedish and American approaches will be the fate of elementary schools. They’re open in Sweden, they’re closed here. Does the Swedish experiment suggest that we can safely reopen those too?
It depends on what data you look at and what your personal risk tolerance is. Unquestionably Sweden has fared worse than the countries that are most similar to it in terms of ethnicity, geography, and culture:
Sweden — 18,926 cases and 2,274 deaths among 10.3 million people
Denmark — 9,049 cases and 427 deaths among 5.8 million people
Norway — 7,599 cases and 206 deaths among 5.4 million people
Finland — 4,695 cases and 193 deaths among 5.5 million people
Sweden’s fatality rate is higher than the fatality rate in the United States (although not in New York City). But they’re not a catastrophe by global standards. As the Times noted yesterday, Sweden and Ireland have had practically the same number of deaths per million residents. Belgium, Spain, Italy, and Great Britain are far ahead of both. Many of the deaths in Sweden have come in nursing homes, which the government admits it needs to a better job of protecting — but so do many other western countries, as assisted-living facilities have been hot spots in one nation after another. Nor have Sweden’s hospitals been overrun by the volume of patients:
2) However, it also increasingly seems that their numbers are leveling off, especially in Stockholm, which is what you would expect if 30% of the population has had it there (as their ambassador claims) providing some herd immunity. Here is their ICU data:https://t.co/I6cNalVUYL — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) April 29, 2020
The ambassador projected that Stockholm could reach herd immunity as soon as next month. If that’s true, the number of cases, hospitalizations, and ICU admissions should all be in decline in Stockholm sometime in June. We’ll keep an eye on it.
The point of the comments by the WHO official in the clip below (watch four minutes or so for the full flavor) is that we shouldn’t misunderstand Sweden as a case of people carrying on as normal. They’re not. What they’re doing in the absence of formal lockdown orders is trusting people to maintain social distancing practices voluntary, exactly what the United States will soon be asking its citizens to do. (Again, elementary schools may remain subject to formal closure.) Can we expect a result as comparatively good as the Swedes have had, though? They’re a “high trust” society, it’s said: When their leaders request compliance on something, they’re apt to get it. Trust in the U.S. isn’t so high. Does that mean Americans won’t take social distancing as seriously once the lockdowns lift as the Swedes do?
Eh, maybe not. Lyman Stone is a proponent of social distancing but a critic of lockdowns. His reasoning is simple: When you look at the data, it seems like most lockdown orders are a case of the government following the people, not vice versa. It turns out many Americans were actually beginning to practice social distancing en masse in March, based on the frightening information they were receiving about COVID-19, even before stay-at-home orders were issued. Information, not regulation, is what’s flattened the curve. If that’s true then reopening the country and shifting towards a Sweden-style system (with the exception of elementary schools) in which people are free to go about their business but discouraged from doing so may not be much more dangerous than what we’re doing now — but may not look wildly different in practice from what we’re doing now either. Stone:
Americans began to practice social distancing not because they were ordered to do so, but because, belatedly, our political and cultural leaders woke up to the risks of COVID and sounded the alarm around March 8–13. Having received credible information about the risks of COVID, Americans responded with remarkable solidarity, adopting stringent social distancing measures even in states without stay-at-home orders. These social distancing measures have almost certainly saved tens of thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands, of lives. But policymakers (outside of Washington State and some county officials in California) cannot take credit for this achievement: it was a grassroots campaign by Americans of all stripes working together to protect each other. There’s more to it than that. Whenever people tell you that Americans need lockdowns because before lockdowns they were refusing to socially distance, they’re not just smearing Americans, they’re also wrong on the facts. Americans, like people in almost every country, were quicker to understand the risks than most of the people who govern us. Alas, had our leaders taken the threat seriously a month earlier, and communicated the risks to Americans more explicitly, COVID could have been a flash in the pan. Instead, many thousands of Americans are going to die unnecessary deaths.
If Stone’s right then maybe we won’t have a big debate over the Swedish model if reopening for business leads to a second spike after all. That problem will be self-correcting, no lockdown orders needed. Residents of the city or state where the spike is happening will hear about it, absorb the information, cancel any plans involving retail or restaurants, and begin self-isolating again to protect themselves. The infection rate will gradually begin to fall again, as will the local economy. The point is, there’s no sustained “business as usual” outcome. Certainly not in the U.S., especially if most states are still far away from herd immunity.


hotair--2020-04-29--Washington Post editorial board: Voters deserve to hear from Joe Biden on Reade allegations (and he

Washington Post editorial board: Voters deserve to hear from Joe Biden on Reade allegations (and he should open his archives too)

Better late than never I guess .
The Washington Post editorial board published a brief piece arguing that Joe Biden should speak for himself about Reade ’ s allegation : The former vice president and probable Democratic presidential nominee has yet to speak publicly about the allegation Ms. Reade has lodged against him : that when she was a member of his Senate staff in the 1990s , Mr. Biden pushed her against a wall and put his fingers up her skirt and then inside her .
Mr. Biden ’ s campaign says “ this never happened.
” Contemporaneous accounts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counterweighted by the denials of her superiors at the time that she reported any misconduct , as well as inconsistencies in her retelling… Mr. Biden may have little to say besides what his campaign has already said — that he did not do this , and that this is not something he ever would do .
Yet the way to signal he takes Ms. Reade ’ s case seriously , and the cases of women like her seriously , is to go before the media and the public ready to listen and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden should make available access to his personal archives which were donated to the University of Delaware and are currently sealed .
There are , at the moment , no clear conclusions .
There may never be .
But that is no excuse for not searching .
One place to start is the records covering Mr. Biden ’ s 36-year Senate career , donated to the University of Delaware in 2012 and slated for release to the public two years after Mr. Biden “ retires from public life.
” These could contain confirmation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ either through official congressional channels or to the three other employees she claims she informed not specifically of the alleged assault but more generally of harassment .
They could also contain nothing of the sort .
Insisting on an inventory doesn ’ t mean one believes Ms. Reade or doesn ’ t believe her .
It signals only a desire for the public to know all that ’ s able to be known , which ought to be in everyone ’ s interest .
There are 1,875 boxes and 415 gigabytes of electronic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be as easy as some might assume .
But an inventory conducted with an eye toward releasing only relevant material could at least ascertain whether personnel records are part of this archive at all .
Demands for the release of the entire trove invite a worthwhile debate about candidate disclosures , yet that ’ s not a battle that needs to be fought today .
The narrower question is whether the public ought to have as much information as possible about an assault accusation against a presidential contender , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in Biden ’ s office have denied ever hearing a complaint from Reade , even a mild one , you would think his campaign would be eager to confirm that by searching the records .
But so far that hasn ’ t been the case .
Yesterday Tara Reade called on Biden to open access to those records because she believes something that supports her case could be there : “ I ’ m calling for the release of the documents being held by the University of Delaware that contain Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it will have my complaint form , as well as my separation letter and other documents , ” Reade told Fox News on Tuesday .
“ Maybe if other staffers that have tried to file complaints would come to light — why are they under seal ?
And why won ’ t they be released to the public ?
” … Fox News on Tuesday asked the University of Delaware for access to the Biden records .
The university refused , saying that the papers will not be released until two years after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t the first news organization to suggest to call on Biden to open his archives .
The Atlantic published a piece by Peter Beinart yesterday saying the same : The press can ’ t thoroughly and diligently evaluate Reade ’ s claims without access to Biden ’ s papers .
Reade attests that she filed a sexual-harassment complaint with the Senate against Biden in 1993 , but she doesn ’ t have a copy .
The Biden campaign says it doesn ’ t either .
And neither The New York Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Reade says she “ was told ” that the document “ was probably returned to Biden ’ s office .
So it ’ s an archival material.
” Is that true ?
Who knows .
But unsealing Biden ’ s papers could help reporters find out .
The Post editorial ends with a reference to similar allegations against President Trump but concludes , “ Mr .
Trump shouldn ’ t be allowed to set that standard.
” Yeah , that ’ s great , editorial writers , but the reason Biden has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing thus far is because the media has been lax and disinterested in this story .
But as usual there ’ s no self-reflection about the media ’ s role in this hypocrisy .
Having gradually been shamed into it by reporters from the Intercept and Business Insider , major papers like the Post are finally being shamed into covering this with a tiny fraction of the effort they put into the Kavanaugh allegations .
They still have a long , long way to go but this editorial is a start .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ behind-the-scenes push from “ women ’ s groups ” ( who have also been conspicuously silent in public thus far ) , it seems possible Biden ’ s silence isn ’ t a tenable position any longer .
Bottom line : It took weeks to get here but Joe Biden is finally being put on the spot .
If what the NY Times reports is accurate and not just more ass-covering by Democrats , then Biden has one day left to make a statement about this .
With Reade calling for him to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Post amplifying that , it ’ s going to look pretty suspicious if he says no .
We ’ ll have to wait and see how he responds now that the media isn ’ t quite as willing to act as his defender .

Better late than never I guess. The Washington Post editorial board published a brief piece arguing that Joe Biden should speak for himself about Reade’s allegation:
The former vice president and probable Democratic presidential nominee has yet to speak publicly about the allegation Ms. Reade has lodged against him: that when she was a member of his Senate staff in the 1990s, Mr. Biden pushed her against a wall and put his fingers up her skirt and then inside her. Mr. Biden’s campaign says “this never happened.” Contemporaneous accounts of Ms. Reade’s claim are counterweighted by the denials of her superiors at the time that she reported any misconduct, as well as inconsistencies in her retelling… Mr. Biden may have little to say besides what his campaign has already said — that he did not do this, and that this is not something he ever would do. Yet the way to signal he takes Ms. Reade’s case seriously, and the cases of women like her seriously, is to go before the media and the public ready to listen and to reply.
The editorial continues by suggesting Biden should make available access to his personal archives which were donated to the University of Delaware and are currently sealed.
There are, at the moment, no clear conclusions. There may never be. But that is no excuse for not searching. One place to start is the records covering Mr. Biden’s 36-year Senate career, donated to the University of Delaware in 2012 and slated for release to the public two years after Mr. Biden “retires from public life.” These could contain confirmation of any complaint Ms. Reade made, either through official congressional channels or to the three other employees she claims she informed not specifically of the alleged assault but more generally of harassment. They could also contain nothing of the sort. Insisting on an inventory doesn’t mean one believes Ms. Reade or doesn’t believe her. It signals only a desire for the public to know all that’s able to be known, which ought to be in everyone’s interest. There are 1,875 boxes and 415 gigabytes of electronic content, largely uncatalogued. Searching won’t be as easy as some might assume. But an inventory conducted with an eye toward releasing only relevant material could at least ascertain whether personnel records are part of this archive at all. Demands for the release of the entire trove invite a worthwhile debate about candidate disclosures, yet that’s not a battle that needs to be fought today. The narrower question is whether the public ought to have as much information as possible about an assault accusation against a presidential contender, and the answer is yes.
Given that several people in Biden’s office have denied ever hearing a complaint from Reade, even a mild one, you would think his campaign would be eager to confirm that by searching the records. But so far that hasn’t been the case. Yesterday Tara Reade called on Biden to open access to those records because she believes something that supports her case could be there:
“I’m calling for the release of the documents being held by the University of Delaware that contain Biden’s staff personnel records because I believe it will have my complaint form, as well as my separation letter and other documents,” Reade told Fox News on Tuesday. “Maybe if other staffers that have tried to file complaints would come to light — why are they under seal? And why won’t they be released to the public?”… Fox News on Tuesday asked the University of Delaware for access to the Biden records. The university refused, saying that the papers will not be released until two years after Biden retires.
The Post editorial board isn’t the first news organization to suggest to call on Biden to open his archives. The Atlantic published a piece by Peter Beinart yesterday saying the same:
The press can’t thoroughly and diligently evaluate Reade’s claims without access to Biden’s papers. Reade attests that she filed a sexual-harassment complaint with the Senate against Biden in 1993, but she doesn’t have a copy. The Biden campaign says it doesn’t either. And neither The New York Times nor The Washington Post could unearth one. Reade says she “was told” that the document “was probably returned to Biden’s office. So it’s an archival material.” Is that true? Who knows. But unsealing Biden’s papers could help reporters find out.
The Post editorial ends with a reference to similar allegations against President Trump but concludes, “Mr. Trump shouldn’t be allowed to set that standard.” Yeah, that’s great, editorial writers, but the reason Biden has gotten away with saying nothing and doing nothing thus far is because the media has been lax and disinterested in this story. But as usual there’s no self-reflection about the media’s role in this hypocrisy.
Having gradually been shamed into it by reporters from the Intercept and Business Insider, major papers like the Post are finally being shamed into covering this with a tiny fraction of the effort they put into the Kavanaugh allegations. They still have a long, long way to go but this editorial is a start. And when you combine this with the apparent behind-the-scenes push from “women’s groups” (who have also been conspicuously silent in public thus far), it seems possible Biden’s silence isn’t a tenable position any longer.
Bottom line: It took weeks to get here but Joe Biden is finally being put on the spot. If what the NY Times reports is accurate and not just more ass-covering by Democrats, then Biden has one day left to make a statement about this. With Reade calling for him to give access to his archives and the Post amplifying that, it’s going to look pretty suspicious if he says no. We’ll have to wait and see how he responds now that the media isn’t quite as willing to act as his defender.


hotair--2020-04-29--Oh my: NYT reports Dem, activist rebellion budding over Reade allegation

Perhaps the Joe Biden campaign ’ s mischaracterization of their reporting did more damage than first thought .
The New York Times follows up the Tara Reade story with news that activist women ’ s groups and key Democratic officials have not remained entirely silent about the allegation of sexual assault .
Over the last three weeks , those groups have pressed Joe Biden to speak out and deal with Reade ’ s allegations , and they have held their fire after being promised action .
Now , however , they ’ re tired of getting strung along — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Finally , several of the women ’ s groups prepared a public letter that praised Mr. Biden ’ s work as an “ outspoken champion for survivors of sexual violence ” but also pushed him to address the allegation from Tara Reade , a former aide who worked in Mr. Biden ’ s Senate office in the early 1990s .
… Then Mr. Biden ’ s team heard about the advocates ’ effort .
According to people involved in the discussions , the group put the letter on hold as it began pressuring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make a statement himself before the end of April , which is Sexual Assault Awareness Month .
Along with liberal organizers , they urged him to acknowledge the importance of survivors and the need for systemic change around issues of sexism and assault .
Nearly two weeks later , Mr. Biden and his campaign have yet to make that statement , and the advocates have not released their letter .
The Biden campaign has said little publicly beyond saying that women deserve to be heard and insisting that the allegation is not true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking points urging supporters to deny that the incident occurred .
As two more women have come forward to corroborate part of Ms. Reade ’ s allegation , the Biden campaign is facing attacks from the right and increasing pressure from the left to address the issue .
And liberal activists find themselves in a tense standoff with a candidate they want to support but who they say has made little attempt to show leadership on an issue that resonates deeply with their party ’ s base .
Biden ’ s surrogates are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while they get peppered with questions about Reade ’ s allegations .
That seems notable in itself : You mean … they ’ re tired of being treated like Republicans ?
This is a common media practice when a GOP official does or says something arguably outrageous — they ask every other Republican to either defend or condemn it .
It happens with less frequency when dealing with Democrats , and we actually have a very recent example : Biden ’ s repeated ranting about Donald Trump aiming to postpone the election .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ conspiracy theory that has been repeatedly debunked , but James Clyburn and Bernie Sanders have amplified it .
And yet no one is asking these surrogates , or any other high-ranking Democrats , to explain whether they condemn the conspiracy-theory-mongering of their party ’ s presumptive nominee and other leadership officials .
If this is leaking out to the New York Times and if the Gray Lady is reporting it , then this must be reaching critical mass behind the scenes .
The nonsense talking points asking other Democrats to imply Reade is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ straw , especially after the Times cut the legs out from under that strategy this morning .
If the women ’ s groups release that letter demanding Biden answer for himself rather than having campaign officials and surrogates do it for him , that won ’ t leave him with much political cover .
So why hasn ’ t Biden addressed the allegation ?
The most likely reason is that the allegation is so graphic , specific , and horrid that Biden will have no choice but to issue a flat-out denial and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There isn ’ t any room for a Chris Matthews-style “ her allegation is credible ” admission because Matthews ’ peccadilloes were far more minor — flirtatious comments in inappropriate settings that put underlings in uncomfortable positions .
It ’ s far easier to cop to that then to come up with a way to present Reade as credible while denying that he stuck his fingers inside her genitalia without her permission .
Biden will have to deny it and insist that Reade can ’ t be trusted , which will leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worse position than before .
For that reason , I ’ m skeptical that those activists really will push it any farther than this .
This is probably as close as they get to attempting to force Biden out into the open .
If Biden publicly calls Reade a liar — which is his only tenable political and legal option — then these groups will have to decide whether they prioritize their cause over their partisan ambitions .
We got an answer to that over twenty years ago when Bill Clinton was president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t changed since then , either .

Perhaps the Joe Biden campaign’s mischaracterization of their reporting did more damage than first thought. The New York Times follows up the Tara Reade story with news that activist women’s groups and key Democratic officials have not remained entirely silent about the allegation of sexual assault. Over the last three weeks, those groups have pressed Joe Biden to speak out and deal with Reade’s allegations, and they have held their fire after being promised action.
Now, however, they’re tired of getting strung along — and may soon make their unhappiness public:
Finally, several of the women’s groups prepared a public letter that praised Mr. Biden’s work as an “outspoken champion for survivors of sexual violence” but also pushed him to address the allegation from Tara Reade, a former aide who worked in Mr. Biden’s Senate office in the early 1990s. … Then Mr. Biden’s team heard about the advocates’ effort. According to people involved in the discussions, the group put the letter on hold as it began pressuring Biden advisers to push the candidate to make a statement himself before the end of April, which is Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Along with liberal organizers, they urged him to acknowledge the importance of survivors and the need for systemic change around issues of sexism and assault. Nearly two weeks later, Mr. Biden and his campaign have yet to make that statement, and the advocates have not released their letter. The Biden campaign has said little publicly beyond saying that women deserve to be heard and insisting that the allegation is not true; privately, Biden advisers have circulated talking points urging supporters to deny that the incident occurred. As two more women have come forward to corroborate part of Ms. Reade’s allegation, the Biden campaign is facing attacks from the right and increasing pressure from the left to address the issue. And liberal activists find themselves in a tense standoff with a candidate they want to support but who they say has made little attempt to show leadership on an issue that resonates deeply with their party’s base.
Biden’s surrogates are getting tired of the presumptive nominee hiding while they get peppered with questions about Reade’s allegations. That seems notable in itself:
Already, the allegation against Mr. Biden has caused top female allies — including several widely considered to be vice-presidential prospects, like Stacey Abrams of Georgia and Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota — to face questioning about whether they stand with Mr. Biden after the allegation. Privately, some female Democrats are growing frustrated with being put in the position of answering for Mr. Biden when he has remained silent, and male progressive leaders, even outspoken allies in combating sexual assault, have not been pressured to address this point.
You mean … they’re tired of being treated like Republicans? This is a common media practice when a GOP official does or says something arguably outrageous — they ask every other Republican to either defend or condemn it. It happens with less frequency when dealing with Democrats, and we actually have a very recent example: Biden’s repeated ranting about Donald Trump aiming to postpone the election. It’s sheer nonsense, a conspiracy theory that has been repeatedly debunked, but James Clyburn and Bernie Sanders have amplified it. And yet no one is asking these surrogates, or any other high-ranking Democrats, to explain whether they condemn the conspiracy-theory-mongering of their party’s presumptive nominee and other leadership officials.
If this is leaking out to the New York Times and if the Gray Lady is reporting it, then this must be reaching critical mass behind the scenes. The nonsense talking points asking other Democrats to imply Reade is a liar might have been the last straw, especially after the Times cut the legs out from under that strategy this morning. If the women’s groups release that letter demanding Biden answer for himself rather than having campaign officials and surrogates do it for him, that won’t leave him with much political cover.
So why hasn’t Biden addressed the allegation? The most likely reason is that the allegation is so graphic, specific, and horrid that Biden will have no choice but to issue a flat-out denial and leave the conclusion that Reade is lying. There isn’t any room for a Chris Matthews-style “her allegation is credible” admission because Matthews’ peccadilloes were far more minor — flirtatious comments in inappropriate settings that put underlings in uncomfortable positions. It’s far easier to cop to that then to come up with a way to present Reade as credible while denying that he stuck his fingers inside her genitalia without her permission. Biden will have to deny it and insist that Reade can’t be trusted, which will leave those activist groups in perhaps an even worse position than before.
For that reason, I’m skeptical that those activists really will push it any farther than this. This is probably as close as they get to attempting to force Biden out into the open. If Biden publicly calls Reade a liar — which is his only tenable political and legal option — then these groups will have to decide whether they prioritize their cause over their partisan ambitions. We got an answer to that over twenty years ago when Bill Clinton was president, and I suspect the answer hasn’t changed since then, either.


hotair--2020-04-29--Operation Warp Speed: Trump admin hoping to have 100 million vaccine doses -- by year's end

Great policy and great politics .
Can you imagine Trump walking out to the podium circa mid-October with a surprise announcement that a vaccine should be available by New Year ’ s thanks to aggressive action by his administration to fast-track development ?
That might singlehandedly guarantee his reelection , whatever the polls ( and the economy ) happen to look like on Election Day .
Is it feasible , though ?
Fauci and other experts have stuck doggedly to the 12-to-18-month timeframe in public comments , a mind-blowing pace to derive a vaccine for any illness .
Bear in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a human vaccine for any coronavirus ( although it has produced them for animals ) .
My ignorant layman ’ s understanding is that that ’ s due less to the technical challenge involved than to the fact that common coronaviruses aren ’ t dangerous and therefore there hasn ’ t been a pressing need to vaccinate against them .
But still — this would be Manhattan-Project-type stuff , taking something that exists for the moment only in theory and turning it into a reality that reshapes the planet in the span of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months , if Operation Warp Speed succeeds .
Called “ Operation Warp Speed , ” the program will pull together private pharmaceutical companies , government agencies and the military to try to cut the development time for a vaccine by as much as eight months , one of the people said… There are at least 70 different coronavirus vaccines in development by drugmakers and research groups , according to the World Health Organization .
But drugmakers have not coordinated their efforts to the extent they could through the Warp Speed project , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effort , the Defense Department would make its animal research resources available for pre-clinical work on vaccines .
The group is also discussing the use of what ’ s known as a master protocol to test the vaccines .
Instead of multiple clinical trials run by each drugmaker , competing for patients and resources , the government would organize one large trial to test several vaccines at once and advance the most promising ones .
Part of the plan involves an idea I first heard from Bill Gates in an interview earlier this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine doesn ’ t begin until clinical trials are over and the vaccine has proven successful .
That means a lag of months between the time we know it works and the time people can finally begin to get vaccinated , which in our present reality means an even longer period of social distancing and an anemic economy .
The solution is to start mass manufacturing millions of doses of each of the most promising vaccine candidates earlier in the process .
Once clinical trials are finished and we know which candidate is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out immediately to doctor ’ s offices and pharmacies for delivery to the public while the millions of doses of the less promising vaccines go into the trash .
It means spending billions knowing that much of that expenditure will go to waste , but it ’ ll save many billions more in lost economic productivity by expediting vaccinations and herd immunity .
It ’ ll be the first time in history that wasteful spending was a good idea .
What ’ s novel about Operation Warp Speed isn ’ t its ambition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year ’ s end .
It ’ s the number — 100 million , enough to get the entire country well along the path to herd immunity .
But even if it fails , we should expect to see reports this fall of vaccines being dosed out to some greater or lesser extent .
Oxford researchers continue to sound bullish about their version ( “ I have a high degree of confidence about this vaccine , because it ’ s technology that I ’ ve used before ” ) and believe it could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( !
! )
.
The world ’ s largest drug manufacturer , based in India , is planning to start production next month in the hope/expectation that subsequent clinical trials will confirm its effectiveness .
Pfizer is planning to start testing on its own vaccine next week with authorization on an emergency basis possible by fall and full approval by the end of the year .
Moderna is aiming to start its final phase of testing by fall and possibly to seek approval by the start of 2021 .
And there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re working on in Pittsburgh , which would apply the vaccine to the skin via a small patch that looks like a band-aid with tiny spikes on it .
The many immune cells found in human skin would then jump-start production of antibodies .
What makes that interesting ?
Two things .
“ There are two additional benefits to the patch delivery system .
The first is that it ’ s easy to produce .
The second is that the patches don ’ t need to be kept cold .
Once the antigen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ array , it ’ s stable at room temperature.
” If the patch wins the vaccine beauty contest , maybe it could be available even sooner than some of its competitors would be .
There ’ s one more way to speed up the vaccine process , but this one ’ s controversial .
What if we inject human beings with the vaccine in a clinical trial … and then inject them with COVID-19 ?
Deliberate infection .
What could go wrong ?
Typical vaccine trials take a long time because thousands of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ placebo , and researchers track who becomes infected in the course of their daily lives .
A challenge study could in theory be much faster : a much smaller group of volunteers would receive a candidate vaccine and then be intentionally infected with the virus , to judge the efficacy of the immunization… Morrison says that the people who have signed up to be part of a challenge trial tend to be young and live in urban areas , and are highly motivated to do something constructive to address the coronavirus pandemic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk but believe the benefits of vaccine acceleration are so tremendous that it is worth it to them , ” he says .
Some members of Congress are open to the idea .
America being America , Netflix should fund the whole thing and film the subjects ’ progress like a reality show .
It ’ d be the hottest thing on television .
Here ’ s Scott Gottlieb ( a board member of Pfizer ) predicting that some companies will have “ substantial doses ” of vaccine available by fall .
Again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they ’ ll be generally available — the doses will probably be reserved for emergency use , in case there ’ s a major outbreak somewhere .
But it ’ s cause for hope .

Great policy and great politics. Can you imagine Trump walking out to the podium circa mid-October with a surprise announcement that a vaccine should be available by New Year’s thanks to aggressive action by his administration to fast-track development?
That might singlehandedly guarantee his reelection, whatever the polls (and the economy) happen to look like on Election Day.
Is it feasible, though? Fauci and other experts have stuck doggedly to the 12-to-18-month timeframe in public comments, a mind-blowing pace to derive a vaccine for any illness. Bear in mind too that science has never produced a human vaccine for any coronavirus (although it has produced them for animals). My ignorant layman’s understanding is that that’s due less to the technical challenge involved than to the fact that common coronaviruses aren’t dangerous and therefore there hasn’t been a pressing need to vaccinate against them. But still — this would be Manhattan-Project-type stuff, taking something that exists for the moment only in theory and turning it into a reality that reshapes the planet in the span of a few years.
Or a few months, if Operation Warp Speed succeeds.
Called “Operation Warp Speed,” the program will pull together private pharmaceutical companies, government agencies and the military to try to cut the development time for a vaccine by as much as eight months, one of the people said… There are at least 70 different coronavirus vaccines in development by drugmakers and research groups, according to the World Health Organization. But drugmakers have not coordinated their efforts to the extent they could through the Warp Speed project, one of the people said. Under the effort, the Defense Department would make its animal research resources available for pre-clinical work on vaccines. The group is also discussing the use of what’s known as a master protocol to test the vaccines. Instead of multiple clinical trials run by each drugmaker, competing for patients and resources, the government would organize one large trial to test several vaccines at once and advance the most promising ones.
Part of the plan involves an idea I first heard from Bill Gates in an interview earlier this month. Normally mass production of a vaccine doesn’t begin until clinical trials are over and the vaccine has proven successful. That means a lag of months between the time we know it works and the time people can finally begin to get vaccinated, which in our present reality means an even longer period of social distancing and an anemic economy. The solution is to start mass manufacturing millions of doses of each of the most promising vaccine candidates earlier in the process. Once clinical trials are finished and we know which candidate is most effective, that vaccine will roll out immediately to doctor’s offices and pharmacies for delivery to the public while the millions of doses of the less promising vaccines go into the trash. It means spending billions knowing that much of that expenditure will go to waste, but it’ll save many billions more in lost economic productivity by expediting vaccinations and herd immunity.
It’ll be the first time in history that wasteful spending was a good idea.
What’s novel about Operation Warp Speed isn’t its ambition to have *some* doses of vaccine by year’s end. It’s the number — 100 million, enough to get the entire country well along the path to herd immunity. But even if it fails, we should expect to see reports this fall of vaccines being dosed out to some greater or lesser extent. Oxford researchers continue to sound bullish about their version (“I have a high degree of confidence about this vaccine, because it’s technology that I’ve used before”) and believe it could be “widely available” by September(!!). The world’s largest drug manufacturer, based in India, is planning to start production next month in the hope/expectation that subsequent clinical trials will confirm its effectiveness. Pfizer is planning to start testing on its own vaccine next week with authorization on an emergency basis possible by fall and full approval by the end of the year. Moderna is aiming to start its final phase of testing by fall and possibly to seek approval by the start of 2021.
And there’s also that interesting variation they’re working on in Pittsburgh, which would apply the vaccine to the skin via a small patch that looks like a band-aid with tiny spikes on it. The many immune cells found in human skin would then jump-start production of antibodies. What makes that interesting? Two things. “There are two additional benefits to the patch delivery system. The first is that it’s easy to produce. The second is that the patches don’t need to be kept cold. Once the antigen is incorporated and solidified in the microneedle array, it’s stable at room temperature.” If the patch wins the vaccine beauty contest, maybe it could be available even sooner than some of its competitors would be.
There’s one more way to speed up the vaccine process, but this one’s controversial. What if we inject human beings with the vaccine in a clinical trial … and then inject them with COVID-19? Deliberate infection. What could go wrong?
Typical vaccine trials take a long time because thousands of people receive either a vaccine or a placebo, and researchers track who becomes infected in the course of their daily lives. A challenge study could in theory be much faster: a much smaller group of volunteers would receive a candidate vaccine and then be intentionally infected with the virus, to judge the efficacy of the immunization… Morrison says that the people who have signed up to be part of a challenge trial tend to be young and live in urban areas, and are highly motivated to do something constructive to address the coronavirus pandemic. “Many note that they recognize the risk but believe the benefits of vaccine acceleration are so tremendous that it is worth it to them,” he says.
Some members of Congress are open to the idea. America being America, Netflix should fund the whole thing and film the subjects’ progress like a reality show. It’d be the hottest thing on television.
Here’s Scott Gottlieb (a board member of Pfizer) predicting that some companies will have “substantial doses” of vaccine available by fall. Again, that’s not to say that they’ll be generally available — the doses will probably be reserved for emergency use, in case there’s a major outbreak somewhere. But it’s cause for hope.


hotair--2020-04-29--Half of Americans say they or someone in their household has lost a job or income

This morning Ed wrote about the dramatic drop in Q1 GDP and the fear of what that might mean next quarter .
A poll published today by NPR/Marist suggests just how widely the pain is being felt , with fully half of Americans surveyed saying that they or someone in their household has lost a job or lost income .
Fifty percent of Americans said they or someone in their household has either lost hours or a job because of the coronavirus , up from 18 % a month ago .
And the pandemic is having a harsher economic effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a college degree , younger people and those who make less money .
Of nonwhites , 60 % said they or someone in their household has lost hours or a job , compared with 43 % of whites .
In addition , 55 % percent of those without a degree , those under 45 and those making less than $ 50,000 a year said so .
“ There are few households in the country that haven ’ t been affected by this crisis , through health , through school , through jobs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all backgrounds , ” said Barbara Carvalho , director of the Marist Poll , which conducted the survey .
“ No one has really gone untouched .
Given the widespread impact you might guess that this is driving many people to push for a reopening of states and restarting of the economy .
That clearly is happening in many places around the country , but this poll found an overwhelming majority are still not ready to return to life as normal : Eighty percent or more of people who responded do not want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to start taking place as normal again until there is further testing .
And two-thirds don ’ t want Americans to physically go back to work without that widespread testing , but a majority of Republicans do .
Here ’ s a chart which summarizes the data overall : There is a divide when you look at the same data broken down by party .
For instance , 94 % of Democrats think it ’ s a bad idea to send kids back to school compared to 71 % of Republicans .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 83 % of Republicans say restarting them would be a bad idea .
The most significant difference comes on the question of returning to work where 84 % of Dems say it ’ s a bad idea while only 47 % of Republicans agree .
In fact , 51 % of Republicans think it ’ s a good idea to get people back to work .
As for President Trump ’ s handling of the crisis , his numbers dropped slightly this month but he ’ s still above water : Later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather have handling the crisis .
Democrats chose Biden over Trump 87 % to 8 % while Republicans said the reverse by 87 % to 11 percent .
More or less a tie except that slightly more Democrats remain undecided .
Like with a lot of polling this is probably based on party affiliation as much as anything else .
What exactly has Joe Biden done during the crisis besides talk about it from his rec room ?

This morning Ed wrote about the dramatic drop in Q1 GDP and the fear of what that might mean next quarter. A poll published today by NPR/Marist suggests just how widely the pain is being felt, with fully half of Americans surveyed saying that they or someone in their household has lost a job or lost income.
Fifty percent of Americans said they or someone in their household has either lost hours or a job because of the coronavirus, up from 18% a month ago. And the pandemic is having a harsher economic effect on people of color, those without a college degree, younger people and those who make less money. Of nonwhites, 60% said they or someone in their household has lost hours or a job, compared with 43% of whites. In addition, 55% percent of those without a degree, those under 45 and those making less than $50,000 a year said so. “There are few households in the country that haven’t been affected by this crisis, through health, through school, through jobs, from all walks of life, from all backgrounds,” said Barbara Carvalho, director of the Marist Poll, which conducted the survey. “No one has really gone untouched.
Given the widespread impact you might guess that this is driving many people to push for a reopening of states and restarting of the economy. That clearly is happening in many places around the country, but this poll found an overwhelming majority are still not ready to return to life as normal:
Eighty percent or more of people who responded do not want schools, restaurants or large sporting events to start taking place as normal again until there is further testing. And two-thirds don’t want Americans to physically go back to work without that widespread testing, but a majority of Republicans do.
Here’s a chart which summarizes the data overall:
There is a divide when you look at the same data broken down by party. For instance, 94% of Democrats think it’s a bad idea to send kids back to school compared to 71% of Republicans. For sporting events, 97% of Dems and 83% of Republicans say restarting them would be a bad idea. The most significant difference comes on the question of returning to work where 84% of Dems say it’s a bad idea while only 47% of Republicans agree. In fact, 51% of Republicans think it’s a good idea to get people back to work.
As for President Trump’s handling of the crisis, his numbers dropped slightly this month but he’s still above water:
Later the poll asked respondents who they would rather have handling the crisis. Democrats chose Biden over Trump 87% to 8% while Republicans said the reverse by 87% to 11 percent. More or less a tie except that slightly more Democrats remain undecided. Like with a lot of polling this is probably based on party affiliation as much as anything else. What exactly has Joe Biden done during the crisis besides talk about it from his rec room?


hotair--2020-04-29--Great news! Convicted murderer in Boston released early because of coronavirus

Back in 1998 , a Gloucester , Massachusetts woman ( and known drug addict ) named Barbara Goucher approached Florence “ Bunny ” Munroe and demanded money .
Munroe had attempted to help Goucher straighten out her life in the past , but not this time .
Apparently not willing to support Goucher ’ s addiction , Munroe demurred .
As a reward for her decision , Goucher stabbed her with a knife 108 times and finished off the job by suffocating her .
She was found guilty and sent to prison .
That brings us to the current day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from her scheduled date to be moved from that prison to a lower security jail , transitioning to supervised release after that .
But yesterday she hit the bricks , thanks to the state deciding that the coronavirus made confinement too dangerous .
Goucher ’ s victim ’ s daughter was less than impressed with the decision .
( CBS Boston ) A convicted murderer will be released one year earlier than expected due to concerns over the coronavirus .
Barbara Goucher , 54 , will be released by the Massachusetts Parole Board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pleaded guilty to second degree murder in 1999 after stabbing Gloucester resident , Florence “ Bunny ” Munroe to death .
“ My mother ’ s dying words were , you ’ re going to jail for this , ” Munroe ’ s daughter , Tammy O ’ Donnell told WBZ .
“ To sit here today and know that she ’ s getting out , that , you know , I can ’ t honor her last wish.
” O ’ Donnell said she was informed of Goucher ’ s release last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this point is that it ’ s dangerous to be in a Massachusetts prison while the virus is spreading around .
Fair enough .
Hard to argue with that .
But you know what else is dangerous ?
Not giving Barbara Goucher all of your money when she ’ s jonesing for a fix .
That has proven to be able to kill you one hell of a lot faster than the novel coronavirus .
At least in New York City , the majority ( but not all ) of the prisoners being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” initiative have been more of the nonviolent variety .
Far too many of them immediately turned around and committed new crimes within a week and wound up back behind bars .
But as I suggested , there were exceptions .
We recently discussed a convicted rapist who was dumped back out on the streets early and didn ’ t last ten days before he attempted to rape another woman .
Another prisoner was cut loose and only managed one day on the streets before he was arrested for murder .
All of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shocking surprise to Mayor Bill de Blasio .
We don ’ t know what Barbara Goucher ’ s prospects are in terms of potential recidivism versus walking the straight and narrow .
The linked article mentions that “ health concerns ” were one factor that was considered when deciding to cut her loose .
Perhaps she ’ s not well enough to go out and kill anyone else at this point .
But that ’ s one heck of a roll of the dice when you consider the possible consequences .
But is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convicted of a horrible crime by a jury of her peers and given an appropriate sentence .
The victim ’ s family clearly wants to see her serve her full term .
The real question is why Massachusetts isn ’ t following the example of other states and at least restricting the early releases to nonviolent offenders .
If you get rid of all of them , the jails will be far more empty so it should be easier to keep the violent offenders separated , reducing the risk of further contagion .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ face of common sense while being unfair to the family of Bunny Munroe .
And just as with the cases in New York , if Goucher goes on to commit another crime and/or ( God forbid ) kill someone else , it will be the elected officials of Massachusetts who will have blood on their hands .

Back in 1998, a Gloucester, Massachusetts woman (and known drug addict) named Barbara Goucher approached Florence “Bunny” Munroe and demanded money. Munroe had attempted to help Goucher straighten out her life in the past, but not this time. Apparently not willing to support Goucher’s addiction, Munroe demurred. As a reward for her decision, Goucher stabbed her with a knife 108 times and finished off the job by suffocating her. She was found guilty and sent to prison.
That brings us to the current day. Goucher was still a year away from her scheduled date to be moved from that prison to a lower security jail, transitioning to supervised release after that. But yesterday she hit the bricks, thanks to the state deciding that the coronavirus made confinement too dangerous. Goucher’s victim’s daughter was less than impressed with the decision. (CBS Boston)
A convicted murderer will be released one year earlier than expected due to concerns over the coronavirus. Barbara Goucher, 54, will be released by the Massachusetts Parole Board on Tuesday, April 28. Goucher pleaded guilty to second degree murder in 1999 after stabbing Gloucester resident, Florence “Bunny” Munroe to death. “My mother’s dying words were, you’re going to jail for this,” Munroe’s daughter, Tammy O’Donnell told WBZ. “To sit here today and know that she’s getting out, that, you know, I can’t honor her last wish.” O’Donnell said she was informed of Goucher’s release last Thursday.
So the prevailing wisdom at this point is that it’s dangerous to be in a Massachusetts prison while the virus is spreading around. Fair enough. Hard to argue with that. But you know what else is dangerous? Not giving Barbara Goucher all of your money when she’s jonesing for a fix. That has proven to be able to kill you one hell of a lot faster than the novel coronavirus.
At least in New York City, the majority (but not all) of the prisoners being released in their “empty the jails” initiative have been more of the nonviolent variety. Far too many of them immediately turned around and committed new crimes within a week and wound up back behind bars. But as I suggested, there were exceptions. We recently discussed a convicted rapist who was dumped back out on the streets early and didn’t last ten days before he attempted to rape another woman. Another prisoner was cut loose and only managed one day on the streets before he was arrested for murder. All of this seems to have come as a shocking surprise to Mayor Bill de Blasio.
We don’t know what Barbara Goucher’s prospects are in terms of potential recidivism versus walking the straight and narrow. The linked article mentions that “health concerns” were one factor that was considered when deciding to cut her loose. Perhaps she’s not well enough to go out and kill anyone else at this point. But that’s one heck of a roll of the dice when you consider the possible consequences.
But is that really the point? She was convicted of a horrible crime by a jury of her peers and given an appropriate sentence. The victim’s family clearly wants to see her serve her full term. The real question is why Massachusetts isn’t following the example of other states and at least restricting the early releases to nonviolent offenders. If you get rid of all of them, the jails will be far more empty so it should be easier to keep the violent offenders separated, reducing the risk of further contagion.
This all seems to fly in the face of common sense while being unfair to the family of Bunny Munroe. And just as with the cases in New York, if Goucher goes on to commit another crime and/or (God forbid) kill someone else, it will be the elected officials of Massachusetts who will have blood on their hands.


hotair--2020-04-29--Arizona woman who gave husband chloroquine being investigated by homicide detectives

Last week an investigation by the Washington Free Beacon uncovered some intriguing information about the Arizona couple who took chloroquine to protect themselves from the coronavirus .
It turned out Gary Lenius , who died in that incident , was a well-educated engineer .
There were also indications that the marriage had experienced some problems including one call to police and an arrest of Gary ’ s wife Wanda for domestic abuse .
She also occasionally lashed out by destroying things that belonged to her husband ( a laptop screen , some model airplanes ) .
Yesterday the Free Beacon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Mesa , AZ are now investigating Gary ’ s death : The Mesa City Police Department ’ s homicide division is investigating the death of Gary Lenius , the Arizona man whose wife served him soda mixed with fish tank cleaner in what she claimed was a bid to fend off the coronavirus .
A detective handling the case confirmed the investigation to the Washington Free Beacon on Tuesday after requesting a recording of the Free Beacon ’ s interviews with Lenius ’ s wife , Wanda .
Gary Lenius , 68 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 61 , told several news outlets last month that both she and her husband had ingested a substance used to clean aquariums after hearing President Donald Trump tout one of its ingredients , chloroquine phosphate , from the White House briefing room .
Detective Teresa Van Galder , the homicide detective handling the case for the Mesa City Police Department , confirmed that the investigation is ongoing but declined to provide additional details .
“ As this is an active investigation , I can not go into any details at this time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
The Free Beacon provided a recording of its interview last month with Wanda Lenius .
The fact that police asked for recording the Free Beacon made of conversations with the wife isn ’ t surprising .
One of the striking quotes ( among many ) in the original piece was Wanda ’ s response to whether or not she and Gary had had a conversation about the drug before taking it .
“ No .
I mean , it was really kind of a spur of the moment thing , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friend questioned whether Gary knew what he was taking saying , “ I really can ’ t see the scenario where Gary would say , ‘ Yes , please , I would love to drink some of that Koi fish tank cleaner . '
” The same friend added , “ I really don ’ t think Gary knew what he was taking.
” At this point it ’ s hard to imagine how police could make a case this was something other than stupidity .
Wanda took the same drug and wound @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only she and Gary were there and he is no longer alive to tell his version , her story about what happened is the only one we have .
That said , given that Gary died based on something she instigated it probably does make sense to have police ask Wanda what happened in a more formal setting .
Her story never made much sense and makes even less knowing that Gary was a fairly well-educated person not prone to doing reckless things .

Last week an investigation by the Washington Free Beacon uncovered some intriguing information about the Arizona couple who took chloroquine to protect themselves from the coronavirus. It turned out Gary Lenius, who died in that incident, was a well-educated engineer. There were also indications that the marriage had experienced some problems including one call to police and an arrest of Gary’s wife Wanda for domestic abuse. She also occasionally lashed out by destroying things that belonged to her husband (a laptop screen, some model airplanes). Yesterday the Free Beacon published a follow-up story saying homicide detectives in Mesa, AZ are now investigating Gary’s death:
The Mesa City Police Department’s homicide division is investigating the death of Gary Lenius, the Arizona man whose wife served him soda mixed with fish tank cleaner in what she claimed was a bid to fend off the coronavirus. A detective handling the case confirmed the investigation to the Washington Free Beacon on Tuesday after requesting a recording of the Free Beacon’s interviews with Lenius’s wife, Wanda. Gary Lenius, 68, died on March 22. Wanda, 61, told several news outlets last month that both she and her husband had ingested a substance used to clean aquariums after hearing President Donald Trump tout one of its ingredients, chloroquine phosphate, from the White House briefing room. Detective Teresa Van Galder, the homicide detective handling the case for the Mesa City Police Department, confirmed that the investigation is ongoing but declined to provide additional details. “As this is an active investigation, I cannot go into any details at this time regarding the case,” Van Galder said. The Free Beacon provided a recording of its interview last month with Wanda Lenius.
The fact that police asked for recording the Free Beacon made of conversations with the wife isn’t surprising. One of the striking quotes (among many) in the original piece was Wanda’s response to whether or not she and Gary had had a conversation about the drug before taking it. “No. I mean, it was really kind of a spur of the moment thing,” she said.
At least one former friend questioned whether Gary knew what he was taking saying, “I really can’t see the scenario where Gary would say, ‘Yes, please, I would love to drink some of that Koi fish tank cleaner.'” The same friend added, “I really don’t think Gary knew what he was taking.”
At this point it’s hard to imagine how police could make a case this was something other than stupidity. Wanda took the same drug and wound up in the ICU. And since only she and Gary were there and he is no longer alive to tell his version, her story about what happened is the only one we have.
That said, given that Gary died based on something she instigated it probably does make sense to have police ask Wanda what happened in a more formal setting. Her story never made much sense and makes even less knowing that Gary was a fairly well-educated person not prone to doing reckless things.