hotair--2020-05-23--NBA legend trashes Trump for mail-in voting opposition

Boston Celtics legend Bill Russell is no stranger to voicing opposition to President Trump .
The coronavirus pandemic has given him an opportunity to publicly criticize the president again – this time for his opposition to mail-in ballots on a widespread , nationwide basis .
A narrative is developing among those in The Resistance that voter suppression is running rampant in the United States and it is at the hands of Republicans .
For example , Stacey Abrams and Hillary Clinton have made that argument for several years now after losing elections themselves .
It is an excuse used by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could have had access to voting , they would have won .
It ’ s an excuse for sore losers .
When President Trump threatened to halt federal funding to two states earlier this week over the distribution of absentee ballots , Michigan and Nevada , Bill Russell posted a response on Twitter .
Jumping into the political fray isn ’ t unusual for Russell – as a matter of fact , his Twitter bio begins with “ Civil rights activist ” .
After the original tweet , he posted a clarification .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ polling places due to concerns about the coronavirus pandemic .
By making it personal , though , Russell defeats his reason to criticize Trump .
He says he doesn ’ t want to risk death in order to vote .
Well , Bill Russell is 86 years old and literally any state will allow him to vote by mail because of his advanced age .
He doesn ’ t have to risk his life .
I ’ m not sure how old his wife is but I assume she is exempt from having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We know that those over age 60 are most at-risk for the coronavirus .
While deaths in all age categories are continuing to fall , according to the latest chart from the CDC , with the week ending of May 16 , ages 85 years and older has the most deaths , followed by 75- 84 years old , and 65 to 74 years old .
This is a main reason that we have been told from the beginning to justify a countrywide lockdown – do it for the older people in your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and flatten the curve .
If it is necessary for November , mail-in voting is a good solution for older voters .
Bill Russell already has that option .
His hyperbole was for effect .
Russell likes drama , it seems .
Throughout the Trump years , Russell has been at the ready to post tweets blasting the president .
When Trump was in the midst of the NFL controversy with athletes taking a knee on the field during the National Anthem , Russell donned his Medal of Freedom ( presented to him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posed on his knee on Twitter , in support of social justice .
He also responded to Trump ’ s sh**hole comment with a slavery reference .
And he has comforted others criticized by Trump by saying it ’ s “ the biggest compliment ” to come under fire from the president .
You get the picture .
The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board published an opinion piece about mail-in voting Friday .
It points to the potential nightmare scenario if all states go to mail-in voting .
Before the coronavirus pandemic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system in place – Colorado , Hawaii , Oregon , Utah , and Washington .
The WSJ points out that in the Heroes Act passed in the House , some of the standard problems of mail-in ballots are actually enabled by Democrats .
Issues like late arrivals of ballots in the mail and the likelihood of ballot harvesting are two such problems .
The worst of this nightmare can be avoided .
As states extend mail voting , they should tighten deadlines and ban ballot harvesting .
The push for all-mail voting is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is important .
But ensuring ballot integrity is crucial for public confidence in election outcomes and , ultimately , for democratic legitimacy .
Democrats in Congress want to go the other direction .
The Heroes Act , passed by the House this month , would mandate the counting of late ballots postmarked before Election Day , with a uniform 10 days to cure bad signatures .
The bill also says that states “ shall permit a voter to designate any person to return a voted and sealed absentee ballot , ” on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per vote .
In effect it would impose ballot harvesting nationwide .
At best , mass mail voting is a roll of the dice , calculated against the grim reality of the pandemic .
If the country is lucky , the 2020 election , whoever wins , won ’ t be decided by a whisker .
Then as the coronavirus is tamed , the temporary measures should end .
For ballot security and democratic legitimacy , it ’ s hard to beat going to the polls on Election Day .
If the number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in November , the number of errors commonly made by voters will increase , too .
Signatures will be questioned if they do not match signatures on file , ballots will be returned late in the mail , and all of these incidents will be challenged .
State election officials are not prepared to be overwhelmed by such an increase in mail-in voting .
Republicans speak out that ballot security and election integrity are crucial in free elections .
Ballot harvesting is ripe for corruption .
As the Wall Street Journal op-ed suggests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be avoided during the coronavirus pandemic .
Any temporary measures put into place due to the pandemic should end after the pandemic eases up .
There is no substitute for in-person voting to insure ballot security and democratic legitimacy .

Boston Celtics legend Bill Russell is no stranger to voicing opposition to President Trump. The coronavirus pandemic has given him an opportunity to publicly criticize the president again – this time for his opposition to mail-in ballots on a widespread, nationwide basis.
A narrative is developing among those in The Resistance that voter suppression is running rampant in the United States and it is at the hands of Republicans. For example, Stacey Abrams and Hillary Clinton have made that argument for several years now after losing elections themselves. It is an excuse used by election losers – if only more people could have had access to voting, they would have won. It’s an excuse for sore losers.
When President Trump threatened to halt federal funding to two states earlier this week over the distribution of absentee ballots, Michigan and Nevada, Bill Russell posted a response on Twitter.
Hello @realDonaldTrump there is a good reason for #VoteByMail not sure if you have heard of #coronavirus #COVIDー19 or better known as a #pandemic bit I don’t want to risk my life to #vote ! @MSNBC @CNN — TheBillRussell (@RealBillRussell) May 21, 2020
Jumping into the political fray isn’t unusual for Russell – as a matter of fact, his Twitter bio begins with “Civil rights activist”. After the original tweet, he posted a clarification. His concern is all about safety at polling places due to concerns about the coronavirus pandemic.
To clarify, #VoteByMail should be available to all eligible voters. To @realDonaldTrump & others who say if we can go shop we should stand in line to vote, I don’t go out! I worry for my wife every time she has to run errands & I am grateful she has a strict protocol to stay safe https://t.co/1ymIYsfym2 — TheBillRussell (@RealBillRussell) May 22, 2020
By making it personal, though, Russell defeats his reason to criticize Trump. He says he doesn’t want to risk death in order to vote. Well, Bill Russell is 86 years old and literally any state will allow him to vote by mail because of his advanced age. He doesn’t have to risk his life. I’m not sure how old his wife is but I assume she is exempt from having to vote in person, too.
We know that those over age 60 are most at-risk for the coronavirus. While deaths in all age categories are continuing to fall, according to the latest chart from the CDC, with the week ending of May 16, ages 85 years and older has the most deaths, followed by 75- 84 years old, and 65 to 74 years old. This is a main reason that we have been told from the beginning to justify a countrywide lockdown – do it for the older people in your life, keep the elderly safe, and flatten the curve. If it is necessary for November, mail-in voting is a good solution for older voters. Bill Russell already has that option. His hyperbole was for effect. Russell likes drama, it seems.
Throughout the Trump years, Russell has been at the ready to post tweets blasting the president. When Trump was in the midst of the NFL controversy with athletes taking a knee on the field during the National Anthem, Russell donned his Medal of Freedom (presented to him by President Obama in 2011) and posed on his knee on Twitter, in support of social justice. He also responded to Trump’s sh**hole comment with a slavery reference. And he has comforted others criticized by Trump by saying it’s “the biggest compliment” to come under fire from the president. You get the picture.
The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board published an opinion piece about mail-in voting Friday. It points to the potential nightmare scenario if all states go to mail-in voting. Before the coronavirus pandemic, only 5 states had a mail-in voting system in place – Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. The WSJ points out that in the Heroes Act passed in the House, some of the standard problems of mail-in ballots are actually enabled by Democrats. Issues like late arrivals of ballots in the mail and the likelihood of ballot harvesting are two such problems.
The worst of this nightmare can be avoided. As states extend mail voting, they should tighten deadlines and ban ballot harvesting. The push for all-mail voting is relentlessly focused on ballot access, which is important. But ensuring ballot integrity is crucial for public confidence in election outcomes and, ultimately, for democratic legitimacy. Democrats in Congress want to go the other direction. The Heroes Act, passed by the House this month, would mandate the counting of late ballots postmarked before Election Day, with a uniform 10 days to cure bad signatures. The bill also says that states “shall permit a voter to designate any person to return a voted and sealed absentee ballot,” on the sole condition that canvassers not be paid per vote. In effect it would impose ballot harvesting nationwide. At best, mass mail voting is a roll of the dice, calculated against the grim reality of the pandemic. If the country is lucky, the 2020 election, whoever wins, won’t be decided by a whisker. Then as the coronavirus is tamed, the temporary measures should end. For ballot security and democratic legitimacy, it’s hard to beat going to the polls on Election Day.
If the number of first-timers using mail-in ballots vastly increases in November, the number of errors commonly made by voters will increase, too. Signatures will be questioned if they do not match signatures on file, ballots will be returned late in the mail, and all of these incidents will be challenged. State election officials are not prepared to be overwhelmed by such an increase in mail-in voting. Republicans speak out that ballot security and election integrity are crucial in free elections. Ballot harvesting is ripe for corruption. As the Wall Street Journal op-ed suggests, all of the potential problems can be avoided during the coronavirus pandemic. Any temporary measures put into place due to the pandemic should end after the pandemic eases up. There is no substitute for in-person voting to insure ballot security and democratic legitimacy.


hotair--2020-05-23--"You're damn fortunate I did": Sessions blasts Trump over recusal criticism in late-night Twitter fi

"You're damn fortunate I did": Sessions blasts Trump over recusal criticism in late-night Twitter fight

So the pretense has finally evaporated , right ?
We ’ ll see .
Jeff Sessions has continued to sell himself as a MAGA-backing candidate in his bid to win back his Senate seat in Alabama , while Donald Trump has continued to trash his former Attorney General on Twitter .
Until now , Sessions has largely ignored it , but apparently he had enough last night .
Trump marked the three-year anniversary of Sessions ’ recusal from the Operation Crossfire Hurricane probe by telling Alabama voters “ do not trust Jeff Sessions.
” Is Sessions sure about that ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Alabama , but he ’ s certainly going to have an influence on that decision .
Sessions had an answer for that in his follow-up tweet by arguing that Trump ’ s getting hoodwinked by Tuberville .
The real # MAGA agenda champion is Sessions , not Trump ’ s pick , who Sessions claims is too afraid to debate the former AG about it : Why did Sessions take the gloves off at this late date ?
Trump has been trashing Sessions non-stop for three years over the recusal , regardless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keeping Sessions on as AG .
Alabama is # MAGA Country , of course , so it would be political suicide for Sessions to have attacked Trump , but Sessions made himself conspicuously obsequious to Trump in this campaign .
Literally his first ad was a tribute to his former boss , perhaps in hope that Trump would be mollified enough to just stay out of the primary .
It appeared to work — at first .
Despite ongoing praise and expressions of loyalty for Trump and an attack on John Bolton for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sessions once the runoff was set up , now scheduled for July 14 .
The first hint that Sessions might have decided to start pushing back came at the beginning of the month , when Sessions told Fox News that he warned Trump to fire James Comey “ on Day One ” of his presidency .
Now comes this clear brushback directly at Trump for perhaps the first time in three years .
What gives ?
Perhaps being down twenty-plus points in the runoff has convinced Sessions that he needs to be less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll conducted May 7-10 by the firm Cygnal shows Tommy Tuberville leading Jeff Sessions in the Republican runoff in Alabama ’ s U.S. Senate race by more than 20 percentage points .
The survey of 607 likely Republican voters showed 55.1 % probably or definitely favoring Tuberville , to 31.8 % probably or definitely favoring Sessions .
Breaking that down further , 36.5 % definitely favored Tuberville , and 19.4 % definitely favored Sessions .
That ’ s an awful poll for a near-incumbent with decades of experience in the Senate against a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second behind Tuberville in the primary , 33/31 , in early March .
If this poll is accurate ( RealClearPolitics has nothing since the primary ) , Sessions hasn ’ t picked up any voters since then .
Tuberville has managed to consolidate most of the rest of the Republican vote , which might explain why Tuberville doesn ’ t feel the need to debate Sessions .
What would he gain by doing so ?
Sessions might figure that fighting back might win him a little more respect from # MAGA voters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably not going to work , but obsequiously brown-nosing Trump while getting trashed by him clearly wasn ’ t working either .
This might be a Hail Mary play to get Trump to shower Sessions with earned media in an open and now two-sided feud , and perhaps getting more support with the extra attention .
Or , perhaps , Sessions realizes that his goose is cooked whatever happens now , and with nothing left to lose , is no longer worried about openly criticizing Trump .
If so , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and still leaves some room for pretense .

So the pretense has finally evaporated, right? We’ll see. Jeff Sessions has continued to sell himself as a MAGA-backing candidate in his bid to win back his Senate seat in Alabama, while Donald Trump has continued to trash his former Attorney General on Twitter. Until now, Sessions has largely ignored it, but apparently he had enough last night. Trump marked the three-year anniversary of Sessions’ recusal from the Operation Crossfire Hurricane probe by telling Alabama voters “do not trust Jeff Sessions.”
Sessions responded by telling Trump to pound sand:
.@realdonaldtrump Look, I know your anger, but recusal was required by law. I did my duty & you're damn fortunate I did. It protected the rule of law & resulted in your exoneration. Your personal feelings don't dictate who Alabama picks as their senator, the people of Alabama do. https://t.co/QQKHNAgmiE — Jeff Sessions (@jeffsessions) May 23, 2020
Is Sessions sure about that? Trump might not dictate voters’ choice in Alabama, but he’s certainly going to have an influence on that decision. Sessions had an answer for that in his follow-up tweet by arguing that Trump’s getting hoodwinked by Tuberville. The real #MAGA agenda champion is Sessions, not Trump’s pick, who Sessions claims is too afraid to debate the former AG about it:
Tuberville's a coward who is rightly too afraid to debate me. He says you're wrong on China & trade. He wants to bring in even more foreign workers to take American jobs. That's not your agenda and it's not mine or Alabama's. I know Alabama. Tuberville doesn't. — Jeff Sessions (@jeffsessions) May 23, 2020
Why did Sessions take the gloves off at this late date? Trump has been trashing Sessions non-stop for three years over the recusal, regardless of its debatable wisdom, even while keeping Sessions on as AG. Alabama is #MAGA Country, of course, so it would be political suicide for Sessions to have attacked Trump, but Sessions made himself conspicuously obsequious to Trump in this campaign. Literally his first ad was a tribute to his former boss, perhaps in hope that Trump would be mollified enough to just stay out of the primary. It appeared to work — at first. Despite ongoing praise and expressions of loyalty for Trump and an attack on John Bolton for criticizing the president, Trump started slamming Sessions once the runoff was set up, now scheduled for July 14.
The first hint that Sessions might have decided to start pushing back came at the beginning of the month, when Sessions told Fox News that he warned Trump to fire James Comey “on Day One” of his presidency. Now comes this clear brushback directly at Trump for perhaps the first time in three years. What gives? Perhaps being down twenty-plus points in the runoff has convinced Sessions that he needs to be less supine to win back support:
A poll conducted May 7-10 by the firm Cygnal shows Tommy Tuberville leading Jeff Sessions in the Republican runoff in Alabama’s U.S. Senate race by more than 20 percentage points. The survey of 607 likely Republican voters showed 55.1% probably or definitely favoring Tuberville, to 31.8% probably or definitely favoring Sessions. Breaking that down further, 36.5% definitely favored Tuberville, and 19.4% definitely favored Sessions.
That’s an awful poll for a near-incumbent with decades of experience in the Senate against a celebrity upstart. Sessions finished a close second behind Tuberville in the primary, 33/31, in early March. If this poll is accurate (RealClearPolitics has nothing since the primary), Sessions hasn’t picked up any voters since then. Tuberville has managed to consolidate most of the rest of the Republican vote, which might explain why Tuberville doesn’t feel the need to debate Sessions. What would he gain by doing so?
Sessions might figure that fighting back might win him a little more respect from #MAGA voters, if not affection. That’s probably not going to work, but obsequiously brown-nosing Trump while getting trashed by him clearly wasn’t working either. This might be a Hail Mary play to get Trump to shower Sessions with earned media in an open and now two-sided feud, and perhaps getting more support with the extra attention. Or, perhaps, Sessions realizes that his goose is cooked whatever happens now, and with nothing left to lose, is no longer worried about openly criticizing Trump. If so, it’s still mild enough to be hedging bets, and still leaves some room for pretense.


hotair--2020-05-23--China's new "national security law" for Hong Kong is really... something

John covered the shifting situation for Hong Kong ’ s pro-democracy movement yesterday , noting how the Chinese Communist Party appears to be trying to take advantage of the global fixation on the pandemic to achieve their goals .
One of the pro-democracy Hong Kong legislators quoted in that article described his fear that we may be witnessing “ the end of Hong Kong as an international financial and business center.
” That may very well turn out to be the case if China continues their crackdown unchecked , but the impact on the freedoms traditionally enjoyed by Hong Kong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will probably be taking an even worse beating .
It may not just be the end of Hong Kong as a financial center , but a complete shift toward what looks more like a “ one country , one system ” policy where Hong Kong is essentially just another province under the thumb of Beijing .
And at least thus far , leader Carrie Lam is singing the CCP ’ s tune in a pitch-perfect fashion .
( Reuters ) Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam says her government will “ fully cooperate ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security , which she said would not affect rights , freedoms or judicial independence .
“ We are not wealthy people and not financially sound .
To earn a living is of the utmost importance so as to feed my family , ” said Ben Ip , 45 , a mechanic and owner of a vehicle paint shop in the city ’ s Tai Hang district .
“ As an ordinary Hong Kong citizen , we want to have a stable life in a safe environment .
The law may speed up some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a good thing in the longer run , leading to a calmer Hong Kong.
” They ’ ve reached the point where some of the residents are actually hoping that the pro-democracy protesters will simply give up and leave the country , which is rather sad .
But some of those activists will probably be considering that option carefully in the near future .
The new social order under these “ national security ” laws is going to look very different .
Details of the law are thin , but that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s basically a ban on anything the CCP doesn ’ t like .
CNN recently assembled a roundup of some of the ways these laws are already being applied on the mainland and it ’ s chilling to say the least .
Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo was sent to prison for “ inciting subversion of state power.
” ( Which could mean virtually anything . )
He died behind bars of cancer without ever leaving the prison .
Uyghur economist Ilham Tohti was given a life sentence for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent to jail for seven years for “ illegally providing state secrets to foreign entities.
” ( She had given an unclassified , internal CCP document to a foreign media outlet . )
A pastor named Wang Yi got seven years for “ inciting subversion of state power.
” ( You can translate that as… “ talking.
” ) Lawyer Zhou Shifeng received an identical sentence for “ subverting state power.
” In other words , under the new law , Hong Kong residents can be detained , rushed through some sort of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the act of saying anything that the CCP disapproves of .
China was already in the process of cracking down on democracy-minded residents of Hong Kong , but they ’ d previously left at least a facade of some sort of Democratic process in place .
It now appears that they ’ ve grown tired of the charade and are ready to bring down the hammer .
The real question is , what , if anything , can the United States and the rest of the west do about it ?
Slap @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll just ignore anyway ?
Let ’ s face it… we ’ ve got a lot on our collective plates already and nobody is seriously talking about military action against China in defense of Hong Kong .
( Or Taiwan for that matter . )
The CCP clearly doesn ’ t want to let a good global crisis go to waste and they ’ re seeking to take advantage of it .
And it really looks like they might get away with it .

John covered the shifting situation for Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement yesterday, noting how the Chinese Communist Party appears to be trying to take advantage of the global fixation on the pandemic to achieve their goals. One of the pro-democracy Hong Kong legislators quoted in that article described his fear that we may be witnessing “the end of Hong Kong as an international financial and business center.”
That may very well turn out to be the case if China continues their crackdown unchecked, but the impact on the freedoms traditionally enjoyed by Hong Kong residents under the control of Great Britain will probably be taking an even worse beating. It may not just be the end of Hong Kong as a financial center, but a complete shift toward what looks more like a “one country, one system” policy where Hong Kong is essentially just another province under the thumb of Beijing. And at least thus far, leader Carrie Lam is singing the CCP’s tune in a pitch-perfect fashion. (Reuters)
Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam says her government will “fully cooperate” with the Chinese parliament to safeguard national security, which she said would not affect rights, freedoms or judicial independence. “We are not wealthy people and not financially sound. To earn a living is of the utmost importance so as to feed my family,” said Ben Ip, 45, a mechanic and owner of a vehicle paint shop in the city’s Tai Hang district. “As an ordinary Hong Kong citizen, we want to have a stable life in a safe environment. The law may speed up some people to leave … it can be a good thing in the longer run, leading to a calmer Hong Kong.”
They’ve reached the point where some of the residents are actually hoping that the pro-democracy protesters will simply give up and leave the country, which is rather sad. But some of those activists will probably be considering that option carefully in the near future. The new social order under these “national security” laws is going to look very different. Details of the law are thin, but that’s largely because the laws are so vague. It’s basically a ban on anything the CCP doesn’t like. CNN recently assembled a roundup of some of the ways these laws are already being applied on the mainland and it’s chilling to say the least.
Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo was sent to prison for “inciting subversion of state power.” (Which could mean virtually anything.) He died behind bars of cancer without ever leaving the prison. Uyghur economist Ilham Tohti was given a life sentence for “separatism.”
Journalist Gao Yu was sent to jail for seven years for “illegally providing state secrets to foreign entities.” (She had given an unclassified, internal CCP document to a foreign media outlet.) A pastor named Wang Yi got seven years for “inciting subversion of state power.” (You can translate that as… “talking.”) Lawyer Zhou Shifeng received an identical sentence for “subverting state power.”
In other words, under the new law, Hong Kong residents can be detained, rushed through some sort of Kangaroo court and tossed into a dungeon for the act of saying anything that the CCP disapproves of. China was already in the process of cracking down on democracy-minded residents of Hong Kong, but they’d previously left at least a facade of some sort of Democratic process in place. It now appears that they’ve grown tired of the charade and are ready to bring down the hammer.
The real question is, what, if anything, can the United States and the rest of the west do about it? Slap more sanctions on them that they’ll just ignore anyway? Let’s face it… we’ve got a lot on our collective plates already and nobody is seriously talking about military action against China in defense of Hong Kong. (Or Taiwan for that matter.) The CCP clearly doesn’t want to let a good global crisis go to waste and they’re seeking to take advantage of it. And it really looks like they might get away with it.


hotair--2020-05-23--New Brooklyn coronavirus hospital closes... without opening

Back at the end of March , near the height of the pandemic outbreak in New York City , Mayor Bill de Blasio announced that the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal at Red Hook was going to be converted to a temporary hospital to handle the anticipated overflow of COVID-19 patients .
In a remarkable display of the normally stagnant bureaucracy moving at lightning speed , money for the project was “ found , ” a contractor from Texas was signed on and the work began .
In only a few weeks , the facility was ready to go into operation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ closing… without ever having treated a single patient .
A roughly $ 21 million Brooklyn field hospital authorized by the de Blasio administration at the height of the coronavirus pandemic opened and closed without ever seeing one patient , according to city officials .
The Brooklyn Cruise Terminal in Red Hook was one of several sites across the five boroughs converted into a medical facility as a way to relieve the city ’ s overburdened hospital system as the COVID-19 crisis mounted .
Mayor Bill de Blasio announced plans on Mar .
31 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospital ship arrived in New York Harbor to aid in the coronavirus fight — for the $ 20.8 million Red Hook field hospital with an estimated capacity for 750 beds .
Hey , it was only $ 21 million , amirite ?
And I ’ m sure that SLSCO , the Texas construction contractor hired to do the work was thrilled to have the business .
To be fair to the Mayor , that money is supposedly being reimbursed by FEMA .
Of course , that may take a little while to happen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of FEMA ’ s normal funding like a California wildfire .
But don ’ t let that bother you .
Just like everything else during this pandemic , if FEMA ’ s cash runs out we ’ ll just send somebody back out to the Rose Garden and pluck another half-trillion off of the money tree that apparently grows there .
The cruise terminal wasn ’ t the only facility to undergo such a transformation .
Several others were similarly modified , including the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up on the courts there .
Three other sites were identified for the same purpose , though it ’ s unclear how far the reconstruction work went on those .
It ’ s kind of hard to fault the Mayor too much on this plan .
At the time the decision was made , the number of deaths and new hospitalizations in the Big Apple was climbing steeply .
New York was the first major , densely populated metropolitan area to get hit with such a widespread outbreak and nobody really knew when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be reached .
The fear of running out of hospital beds was very real , and both the Mayor and the Governor of New York were faced with the choice of crossing their fingers and doing nothing or trying to expand the city ’ s hospital bed capacity .
So Bill de Blasio took a gamble that wound up not being needed .
I suppose that ’ s better than the alternative scenario of not acting and running out of beds .
But it ’ s also a reminder that the government usually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a reason .
And when taxpayer money starts flying around in a fast and furious manner , it ’ s more important than ever to ensure that some oversight is taking place .
These are precisely the times when friends and well-connected political allies tend to mysteriously wind up winning government contracts that are hastily set up and awarded , sometimes without a competitive bidding process being put in place .

Back at the end of March, near the height of the pandemic outbreak in New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced that the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal at Red Hook was going to be converted to a temporary hospital to handle the anticipated overflow of COVID-19 patients. In a remarkable display of the normally stagnant bureaucracy moving at lightning speed, money for the project was “found,” a contractor from Texas was signed on and the work began. In only a few weeks, the facility was ready to go into operation. And now the makeshift medical center is closing… without ever having treated a single patient.
A roughly $21 million Brooklyn field hospital authorized by the de Blasio administration at the height of the coronavirus pandemic opened and closed without ever seeing one patient, according to city officials. The Brooklyn Cruise Terminal in Red Hook was one of several sites across the five boroughs converted into a medical facility as a way to relieve the city’s overburdened hospital system as the COVID-19 crisis mounted. Mayor Bill de Blasio announced plans on Mar. 31 — a day after the USNS Comfort hospital ship arrived in New York Harbor to aid in the coronavirus fight — for the $20.8 million Red Hook field hospital with an estimated capacity for 750 beds.
Hey, it was only $21 million, amirite? And I’m sure that SLSCO, the Texas construction contractor hired to do the work was thrilled to have the business.
To be fair to the Mayor, that money is supposedly being reimbursed by FEMA. Of course, that may take a little while to happen since we’re currently burning through all of FEMA’s normal funding like a California wildfire. But don’t let that bother you. Just like everything else during this pandemic, if FEMA’s cash runs out we’ll just send somebody back out to the Rose Garden and pluck another half-trillion off of the money tree that apparently grows there.
The cruise terminal wasn’t the only facility to undergo such a transformation. Several others were similarly modified, including the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center. There were another 350 mostly empty beds set up on the courts there. Three other sites were identified for the same purpose, though it’s unclear how far the reconstruction work went on those.
It’s kind of hard to fault the Mayor too much on this plan. At the time the decision was made, the number of deaths and new hospitalizations in the Big Apple was climbing steeply. New York was the first major, densely populated metropolitan area to get hit with such a widespread outbreak and nobody really knew when (or if) the peak would be reached. The fear of running out of hospital beds was very real, and both the Mayor and the Governor of New York were faced with the choice of crossing their fingers and doing nothing or trying to expand the city’s hospital bed capacity.
So Bill de Blasio took a gamble that wound up not being needed. I suppose that’s better than the alternative scenario of not acting and running out of beds. But it’s also a reminder that the government usually tends to move more slowly and deliberatively for a reason. And when taxpayer money starts flying around in a fast and furious manner, it’s more important than ever to ensure that some oversight is taking place. These are precisely the times when friends and well-connected political allies tend to mysteriously wind up winning government contracts that are hastily set up and awarded, sometimes without a competitive bidding process being put in place.


hotair--2020-05-24--Quieter night in Hong Kong following protests, mass arrests

Hong Kong ’ s evening stayed relatively quiet on Sunday following a day of mass arrests and protests over the changes to their Basic Law .
RTHK reported protesters and police clashed several times during the evening hours with multiple people either led away in handcuffs or ticketed .
In Tsim Sha Tsui , police said dozens of protesters had gathered at the Ocean Terminal shopping centre to chant slogans in apparent violation of the government ’ s gathering ban .
Officers gave chase and subdued many of the protesters .
Around a dozen were taken away .
The online @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a female journalist who was filming the apparent arrests was grabbed from behind by an officer and pushed away .
There was also a brief standoff in Mong Kok outside the Langham Place mall between a group of protesters who set up a wall of umbrellas as officers ordered them to disperse .
Some people also scattered Styrofoam boxes on the street , while a group chanted anti-government slogans inside the shopping centre .
Police stopped and searched some people , handing some HK $ 2,000 penalty tickets for apparently violating the ban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
At least two young men with their hands tied behind their backs were taken away by police after being searched on Nelson Street .
Later , a young man was led away in handcuffs by Langham Place mall .
The Hong Kong government , never one to let the crisis go to waste , blamed protesters for the entirety of the violence with a spokesperson claiming the events of Sunday were proof more Chinese government involvement was needed .
Like that would calm things down given the powder keg about ready to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rhetorical war remained strong in Hong Kong , as well , as government entities and allies attempt to justify the incursion on Hongkongers ’ rights .
“ The new national security law will finally resolve the inability of the Hong Kong government to legislate Article 23 in the Basic Law for almost two decades , ” Alex Lo at South China Morning Post squawked on Sunday .
He once attempted to get both sides to come together and talk but now openly roots for China .
“ It will neuter the anti-government/anti-China protest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adopt a more moderate platform in running for the Legislative Council elections in September.
” Chinese authorities also promised to draw Hong Kong completely under its power .
Via SCMP : “ Don ’ t underestimate Beijing ’ s determination .
When the decision is made , we will implement it till the end , ” the delegation ’ s deputy convenor , Wong Yuk-shan , quoted [ Vice-Premier Han Zheng ] as saying .
“ Han stressed that the move was made after careful deliberation , taking into account the long-term interests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , of the state and the nation.
” State broadcaster CCTV reported Han as saying the law would target only a small faction of people who advocated Hong Kong independence and the “ dark forces ” behind them .
The term is used by Beijing to refer to supposed overseas support for the anti-government movement .
According to sources from the meeting , Han said only three groups would be affected – pro-independence activists , violent radicals and protesters seeking to derail the city ’ s economy with a mentality of “ if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
Ah , the old “ if you don ’ t do anything wrong , you have nothing to worry about ” routine .
Worked extremely well with the Patriot Act in America .
There is a theory amongst Hongkongers desiring universal suffrage that China planned this years ago when it negotiated its treaty with Great Britain regarding the expiring lease of Hong Kong .
From Hong Kong Free Press : When it was promulgated in 1990 , China ’ s then paramount leader Deng Xiaoping hailed the Basic Law as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Observers indulged the veteran leader ’ s enthusiasm for the project he had overseen .
But in retrospect , maybe Deng was right after all .
Because it contains so many grey areas and opt-out clauses , Hong Kong ’ s Basic Law constitution can easily be manipulated to serve both the appearance of autonomy and the reality of cross-border integration currently underway .
The world is currently watching the run-up to “ what ’ s next ” in Hong Kong : carnage , totalitarianism , and the death of freedom .

Hong Kong’s evening stayed relatively quiet on Sunday following a day of mass arrests and protests over the changes to their Basic Law. RTHK reported protesters and police clashed several times during the evening hours with multiple people either led away in handcuffs or ticketed.
In Tsim Sha Tsui, police said dozens of protesters had gathered at the Ocean Terminal shopping centre to chant slogans in apparent violation of the government’s gathering ban. Officers gave chase and subdued many of the protesters. Around a dozen were taken away. The online news outlet, Stand News, said a female journalist who was filming the apparent arrests was grabbed from behind by an officer and pushed away. There was also a brief standoff in Mong Kok outside the Langham Place mall between a group of protesters who set up a wall of umbrellas as officers ordered them to disperse. Some people also scattered Styrofoam boxes on the street, while a group chanted anti-government slogans inside the shopping centre. Police stopped and searched some people, handing some HK$2,000 penalty tickets for apparently violating the ban on public gatherings of over eight people. At least two young men with their hands tied behind their backs were taken away by police after being searched on Nelson Street. Later, a young man was led away in handcuffs by Langham Place mall.
The Hong Kong government, never one to let the crisis go to waste, blamed protesters for the entirety of the violence with a spokesperson claiming the events of Sunday were proof more Chinese government involvement was needed. Like that would calm things down given the powder keg about ready to explode in the current climate.
The rhetorical war remained strong in Hong Kong, as well, as government entities and allies attempt to justify the incursion on Hongkongers’ rights.
“The new national security law will finally resolve the inability of the Hong Kong government to legislate Article 23 in the Basic Law for almost two decades,” Alex Lo at South China Morning Post squawked on Sunday. He once attempted to get both sides to come together and talk but now openly roots for China. “It will neuter the anti-government/anti-China protest movement and compel potential pan-democratic candidates to adopt a more moderate platform in running for the Legislative Council elections in September.”
Chinese authorities also promised to draw Hong Kong completely under its power. Via SCMP:
“Don’t underestimate Beijing’s determination. When the decision is made, we will implement it till the end,” the delegation’s deputy convenor, Wong Yuk-shan, quoted [Vice-Premier Han Zheng] as saying. “Han stressed that the move was made after careful deliberation, taking into account the long-term interests of Hong Kong, and more importantly, of the state and the nation.” State broadcaster CCTV reported Han as saying the law would target only a small faction of people who advocated Hong Kong independence and the “dark forces” behind them. The term is used by Beijing to refer to supposed overseas support for the anti-government movement. According to sources from the meeting, Han said only three groups would be affected – pro-independence activists, violent radicals and protesters seeking to derail the city’s economy with a mentality of “if we burn, you burn with us”.
Ah, the old “if you don’t do anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about” routine. Worked extremely well with the Patriot Act in America.
There is a theory amongst Hongkongers desiring universal suffrage that China planned this years ago when it negotiated its treaty with Great Britain regarding the expiring lease of Hong Kong. From Hong Kong Free Press:
When it was promulgated in 1990, China’s then paramount leader Deng Xiaoping hailed the Basic Law as a “masterpiece” of constitutional drafting. Observers indulged the veteran leader’s enthusiasm for the project he had overseen. But in retrospect, maybe Deng was right after all. Because it contains so many grey areas and opt-out clauses, Hong Kong’s Basic Law constitution can easily be manipulated to serve both the appearance of autonomy and the reality of cross-border integration currently underway.
The world is currently watching the run-up to “what’s next” in Hong Kong: carnage, totalitarianism, and the death of freedom.


hotair--2020-05-24--George Will's misguided endorsement of Gina Raimondo

Before getting started , I will point out that I ’ ve been reading George Will ’ s columns for almost as long as I can remember .
Back in the pre-internet days , our local paper used to run his syndicated columns every Sunday alongside those of Molly Ivins as a sort of right vs left balancing act .
I ’ ve always admired Will ’ s craft as a wordsmith , even when I disagreed with some of his positions .
George Will has been on the NeverTrump train pretty much since it pulled out of the station @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has to make up their own minds on such things .
But his despair over the results of the 2016 election may be taking a toll on him now .
For evidence , I point to his recent column at the Washington Post where he enthusiastically sings the praises of Rhode Island ’ s Democratic Governor Gina Raimondo and his suggestion that she would be the ideal running mate for Joe Biden .
After delving into her lengthy resume , Will concludes that she would be the perfect Vice President to “ restore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s choice of a running mate will matter to the electorate ’ s large moderate majority more than such choices usually do , for two reasons .
Biden will be 78 on Jan. 20 , 2021 .
And his choice will indicate whether the trajectory of the world ’ s oldest party will be determined by its left-wing minority that strenuously opposed his nomination , or by the party ’ s temperate majority , which produced the Democrats ’ 2018 success .
The Democratic left , with its addiction to indignation and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recoil from Raimondo because she understands the enormous financial sector of a nation now chin-deep in red ink… A Biden-Raimondo ticket would achieve the left ’ s primary goal , the removal of President Trump .
And the resulting administration would restore adult supervision in Washington .
The idea that an elder conservative thinker like Will would be taking such an interest in the welfare and prospects of the Democratic ticket really isn ’ t all that surprising in the era of the NeverTrumpers .
But this sort of uncritical analysis of Gina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misses the mark badly .
At one point in the column where Will is listing the Governor ’ s many accomplishments , he notes that her poll numbers “ have soared during the pandemic , ” presumably because of Rhode Island ’ s high per capita coronavirus testing numbers .
There are two points to make about that statement .
First , it ’ s not as hard to get those numbers when you ’ re running a state with such a comparatively tiny population and a similarly small amount of acreage .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ very little room to go anywhere except upward .
Until very recently , Raimondo had consistently ranked near or at the very bottom of the list of American governors in terms of popularity and approval ratings .
( At the beginning of February her approval rating stood at 35 % . )
There are plenty of things to point to that should deter any conservative ( and probably a fair number of liberals ) from feting the Rhode Island governor in this fashion , and some of them also have to do with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , when New York City was experiencing the worst of the pandemic surge , Raimondo ’ s first impulse was to send out both the state police and the National Guard to try to turn back any cars with New York license plates attempting to cross the border into her state .
She eventually had to back off from that policy when the courts intervened , so she settled for imposing a mandatory two-week quarantine on any New Yorkers finding lodging in Rhode Island .
Let us also not forget that the Governor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious ethics investigation over a suspicious-looking deal she arranged regarding the contractor who handles the state ’ s lottery system .
The company in question was given a massive extension/renewal deal on their contract without any other bids being considered .
And this was being done while one of the principal architects of the deal was not only a close associate and fundraiser for the Governor but also the former CEO of that company who retains close ties to them .
And how did she respond to those allegations ?
By repeatedly ignoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contract was handled and who was involved in it .
If you ’ re looking for a promising pick in the Joe Biden veepstakes because you hate Donald Trump , that ’ s up to you .
But Gina Raimondo has demonstrated some of the worst authoritarian impulses imaginable as Governor , along with conducting business in an ethically questionable fashion and opposing transparency regarding her activities .
I hardly think those are the characteristics we ’ re looking for in someone who could wind up being only a heartbeat away from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true when the heart in question is beating in the chest of a man of Joe Biden ’ s considerable age and dubious grasp on his mental faculties .

Before getting started, I will point out that I’ve been reading George Will’s columns for almost as long as I can remember. Back in the pre-internet days, our local paper used to run his syndicated columns every Sunday alongside those of Molly Ivins as a sort of right vs left balancing act. I’ve always admired Will’s craft as a wordsmith, even when I disagreed with some of his positions.
George Will has been on the NeverTrump train pretty much since it pulled out of the station, which is perfectly fine. Everyone has to make up their own minds on such things. But his despair over the results of the 2016 election may be taking a toll on him now. For evidence, I point to his recent column at the Washington Post where he enthusiastically sings the praises of Rhode Island’s Democratic Governor Gina Raimondo and his suggestion that she would be the ideal running mate for Joe Biden. After delving into her lengthy resume, Will concludes that she would be the perfect Vice President to “restore adult supervision in Washington.”
Joe Biden’s choice of a running mate will matter to the electorate’s large moderate majority more than such choices usually do, for two reasons. Biden will be 78 on Jan. 20, 2021. And his choice will indicate whether the trajectory of the world’s oldest party will be determined by its left-wing minority that strenuously opposed his nomination, or by the party’s temperate majority, which produced the Democrats’ 2018 success. The Democratic left, with its addiction to indignation and its aversion to practical politics, might recoil from Raimondo because she understands the enormous financial sector of a nation now chin-deep in red ink… A Biden-Raimondo ticket would achieve the left’s primary goal, the removal of President Trump. And the resulting administration would restore adult supervision in Washington.
The idea that an elder conservative thinker like Will would be taking such an interest in the welfare and prospects of the Democratic ticket really isn’t all that surprising in the era of the NeverTrumpers. But this sort of uncritical analysis of Gina Raimondo’s record in New Hampshire misses the mark badly.
At one point in the column where Will is listing the Governor’s many accomplishments, he notes that her poll numbers “have soared during the pandemic,” presumably because of Rhode Island’s high per capita coronavirus testing numbers. There are two points to make about that statement. First, it’s not as hard to get those numbers when you’re running a state with such a comparatively tiny population and a similarly small amount of acreage. And second, her poll numbers had very little room to go anywhere except upward. Until very recently, Raimondo had consistently ranked near or at the very bottom of the list of American governors in terms of popularity and approval ratings. (At the beginning of February her approval rating stood at 35%.)
There are plenty of things to point to that should deter any conservative (and probably a fair number of liberals) from feting the Rhode Island governor in this fashion, and some of them also have to do with the pandemic. As you may recall, when New York City was experiencing the worst of the pandemic surge, Raimondo’s first impulse was to send out both the state police and the National Guard to try to turn back any cars with New York license plates attempting to cross the border into her state. She eventually had to back off from that policy when the courts intervened, so she settled for imposing a mandatory two-week quarantine on any New Yorkers finding lodging in Rhode Island.
Let us also not forget that the Governor remains in the midst of a very serious ethics investigation over a suspicious-looking deal she arranged regarding the contractor who handles the state’s lottery system. The company in question was given a massive extension/renewal deal on their contract without any other bids being considered. And this was being done while one of the principal architects of the deal was not only a close associate and fundraiser for the Governor but also the former CEO of that company who retains close ties to them.
And how did she respond to those allegations? By repeatedly ignoring FOIA requests for information about how the contract was handled and who was involved in it.
If you’re looking for a promising pick in the Joe Biden veepstakes because you hate Donald Trump, that’s up to you. But Gina Raimondo has demonstrated some of the worst authoritarian impulses imaginable as Governor, along with conducting business in an ethically questionable fashion and opposing transparency regarding her activities. I hardly think those are the characteristics we’re looking for in someone who could wind up being only a heartbeat away from the presidency. And that’s particularly true when the heart in question is beating in the chest of a man of Joe Biden’s considerable age and dubious grasp on his mental faculties.


hotair--2020-05-24--Jo Jorgensen wins Libertarian presidential primary

Libertarians selected Clemson University professor Dr. Jo Jorgesen as their nominee for president following an all-day online convention on Saturday .
Jorgensen , who was the party ’ s vice presidential nominee in 1996 , captured the nomination following four rounds of voting .
She never trailed and only saw her lead grow over the evening as other members of the so-called pragmatic caucus of the Libertarian Party consolidated their support .
“ I am glad that the voters will finally have a real choice because the non-choice between Trump and Biden is still an option between big government and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a statement released by the party early Sunday .
“ The volunteers are already pouring in and it looks like it will be the most massive volunteer effort that the LP has ever seen .
It is really growing from the grass roots.
” Jorgensen ’ s rise to the nomination proved the adage , “ It ’ s a marathon , not a sprint.
” She won only one of the non-binding Libertarian Party primaries , capturing Nebraska on May 12th .
The Future of Freedom Foundation co-founder and president , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humorist Vermin Supreme won two ( again , these primaries are non-binding , but Supreme was impressive in his knowledge of the issues and ability to meld serious and humorous answers together , head boot and all. )
.
Yet , Jorgensen pushed forward in the campaign coming in second to Michigan Congressman Justin Amash in a poll of Kentucky LP delegates earlier this month .
The Libertarian Party presidential nomination , as usual , became a fight between the aforementioned pragmatic caucus and the almost anarchist caucus .
The former sees electability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a candidate who espouses freedom and liberty no matter the circumstance .
Hornberger represented the almost anarchist caucus quite well in his full-throated defense of smaller , weaker government and free markets .
He walked and talked the talk without fear of repercussions .
Hornberger ideologically attacked Jorgensen as being too pragmatic during the final presidential primary debate last week .
“ Hornberger believes Libertarians give up their valuable moral high ground if they give an inch to any variety of statism , including Social Security and Medicaid , ” Reason ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the debate .
“ Jorgensen stressed the limits in our constitutional system of how much libertarian change a president alone could unilaterally deliver .
She said she ’ d be quick to veto excessive spending and to pardon victimless criminals , but she thinks those who have paid into Social Security deserve to get that money back—so she ’ s against instantly killing the system entirely , though she said she would allow people to stop paying into it from day one.
” Jorgensen was correct in her assertions on the constitutional system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sort of Libertarian agenda .
Rule by executive fiat needs to be avoided at all costs despite its growing power by the day in the White House .
Checks and balances exist for a reason meaning Congress , as currently constructed , would likely pass on any sort of legislation eliminating entitlement programs .
Negotiations work if sentiment for reform existed within hearts and minds .
Libertarian delegates realized Jorgensen ’ s pragmatic method might sway voters more easily than a 70-minute speech on the ideals of freedom and liberty .
The big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ access and media coverage .
LP successfully got on all 50 state ballots in 2016 and will need a repeat performance this year .
The coronavirus pandemic puts a damper on ballot access despite recent efforts to reopen certain states .
The possible second wave of coronavirus might cause even more difficulties depending on the circumstances .
Media access will also be an issue .
Jorgensen is a better speaker than former Governor Gary Johnson , the 2012 and 2016 nominee .
It ’ s doubtful she ’ ll have an Aleppo moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , once he realized it was in Syria , was quite thorough and understandable .
Jorgensen will need to fight through the partisanship of the airwaves while navigating the constant pandemic news cycle in hopes of reaching out to voters .
Alternative media including podcasts will be a factor although whether it makes an impact on polling is still the question .
Can she do it ?
Absolutely .
Neither President Donald Trump or former vice president Joe Biden are enthralling candidates for one reason or another .
It ’ s an uphill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not to win given the political duopoly currently in American politics .
The fight is still worth it especially for those who want their voices heard at the ballot box and in the political spectrum .
Thankfully , there are people out there who are willing to listen and advocate for their beliefs .

Libertarians selected Clemson University professor Dr. Jo Jorgesen as their nominee for president following an all-day online convention on Saturday. Jorgensen, who was the party’s vice presidential nominee in 1996, captured the nomination following four rounds of voting. She never trailed and only saw her lead grow over the evening as other members of the so-called pragmatic caucus of the Libertarian Party consolidated their support.
“I am glad that the voters will finally have a real choice because the non-choice between Trump and Biden is still an option between big government and more big government,” Jorgensen said in a statement released by the party early Sunday. “The volunteers are already pouring in and it looks like it will be the most massive volunteer effort that the LP has ever seen. It is really growing from the grass roots.”
Jorgensen’s rise to the nomination proved the adage, “It’s a marathon, not a sprint.” She won only one of the non-binding Libertarian Party primaries, capturing Nebraska on May 12th. The Future of Freedom Foundation co-founder and president, Jacob Hornberger, won seven while political humorist Vermin Supreme won two (again, these primaries are non-binding, but Supreme was impressive in his knowledge of the issues and ability to meld serious and humorous answers together, head boot and all.). Yet, Jorgensen pushed forward in the campaign coming in second to Michigan Congressman Justin Amash in a poll of Kentucky LP delegates earlier this month.
The Libertarian Party presidential nomination, as usual, became a fight between the aforementioned pragmatic caucus and the almost anarchist caucus. The former sees electability key while the latter appears to prefer a candidate who espouses freedom and liberty no matter the circumstance. Hornberger represented the almost anarchist caucus quite well in his full-throated defense of smaller, weaker government and free markets. He walked and talked the talk without fear of repercussions. Hornberger ideologically attacked Jorgensen as being too pragmatic during the final presidential primary debate last week.
“Hornberger believes Libertarians give up their valuable moral high ground if they give an inch to any variety of statism, including Social Security and Medicaid,” Reason’s Brian Doherty wrote in his recap of the debate. “Jorgensen stressed the limits in our constitutional system of how much libertarian change a president alone could unilaterally deliver. She said she’d be quick to veto excessive spending and to pardon victimless criminals, but she thinks those who have paid into Social Security deserve to get that money back—so she’s against instantly killing the system entirely, though she said she would allow people to stop paying into it from day one.”
Jorgensen was correct in her assertions on the constitutional system making it hard to immediately enforce any sort of Libertarian agenda. Rule by executive fiat needs to be avoided at all costs despite its growing power by the day in the White House. Checks and balances exist for a reason meaning Congress, as currently constructed, would likely pass on any sort of legislation eliminating entitlement programs. Negotiations work if sentiment for reform existed within hearts and minds. Libertarian delegates realized Jorgensen’s pragmatic method might sway voters more easily than a 70-minute speech on the ideals of freedom and liberty.
The big question for the Libertarian Party remains ballot access and media coverage. LP successfully got on all 50 state ballots in 2016 and will need a repeat performance this year. The coronavirus pandemic puts a damper on ballot access despite recent efforts to reopen certain states. The possible second wave of coronavirus might cause even more difficulties depending on the circumstances.
Media access will also be an issue. Jorgensen is a better speaker than former Governor Gary Johnson, the 2012 and 2016 nominee. It’s doubtful she’ll have an Aleppo moment despite the fact Johnson’s answer, once he realized it was in Syria, was quite thorough and understandable. Jorgensen will need to fight through the partisanship of the airwaves while navigating the constant pandemic news cycle in hopes of reaching out to voters. Alternative media including podcasts will be a factor although whether it makes an impact on polling is still the question.
Can she do it? Absolutely. Neither President Donald Trump or former vice president Joe Biden are enthralling candidates for one reason or another. It’s an uphill battle and one she’s likely not to win given the political duopoly currently in American politics. The fight is still worth it especially for those who want their voices heard at the ballot box and in the political spectrum. Thankfully, there are people out there who are willing to listen and advocate for their beliefs.


hotair--2020-05-24--Chinese Foreign Minister: U.S. pushing towards a "New Cold War"

During a news conference Sunday , Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the United States should abandon its “ wishful thinking about changing China ” and stop pushing the two countries “ to the brink of a new Cold War.
” He sent this message to Washington during the National People ’ s Congress , described by the Washington Post as “ an annual piece of political theatre.
” That ’ s one way to spin the growing tensions between the United States and China , I suppose .
Most Americans , however , expect China to be held responsible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the initial outbreak of the coronavirus that turned into a pandemic .
As more countries around the world look for answers , China is feeling the pressure , so its foreign minister is lashing out at the United States .
Wang said American politicians “ are taking China-U.S. relations hostage and pushing our two countries to the brink of a new Cold War.
” Perhaps Wang is trying to distract with this aggressive language – China is feeling pressure from the WHO to allow them to investigate the source of the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such a request .
At the same time , President Trump has put the WHO on notice that the United States will cut off funding if the WHO doesn ’ t stop acting as a puppet for the Communist China government .
So far China is refusing to allow such an investigation , saying that an investigation should wait until the pandemic ends .
It ’ s rich that Wang called on the United States to contain the coronavirus and “ stop wasting time and stop wasting precious lives ” when China allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into Europe after stopping air travel into its country earlier this year .
Those flights from Europe brought the virus to the United States , especially to states like New York , while flights from China to western states like Washington State and California brought the coronavirus to them before Trump initiated the U.S. travel ban .
Fortunately , after the initial case in Washington State appeared , Trump moved quickly at the suggestion of expert advisers to mostly stop air travel into the United States , beginning with flights from China .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ finger at the Chinese government while projecting guilt back on the United States .
Wang calls it a “ political virus ” coming from the United States and frankly , he sounds a lot like many of Trump ’ s opponents – the Chinese are needlessly being attacked and smeared .
“ Aside from the devastation caused by the novel coronavirus , there is also a political virus spreading through the US , ” he said .
“ This political virus is the use of every opportunity to attack and smear China .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ have fabricated too many lies targeting China , and plotted too many conspiracies.
” Let ’ s not forget that Chinese officials have been guilty of propaganda smears against the United States during this pandemic .
For example , a spokesman for Wang suggested American soldiers brought the coronavirus to Wuhan during military games held there last October .
President Trump initially bent over backward to not blame the Chinese government for its gross mishandling of the coronavirus outbreak .
He continued to praise his working relationship with President Xi Jinping through February @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Communist Party – reports that “ punitive countermeasures ” may be coming against specific American politicians .
The Global Times , a newspaper affiliated with the Communist Party , reported Sunday that China was “ considering punitive countermeasures ” against some American politicians leading the efforts to hold it accountable for the virus .
These included Eric Schmitt , the Missouri attorney general who filed a lawsuit against China seeking compensation for the coronavirus pandemic , and congressmen including Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton , the paper reported , citing anonymous “ sources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four representatives and two entities would be sanctioned by China , reported the paper , which often reflects the foreign policy thinking of the party .
That ’ s as big a waste of time as the lawsuits filed against the Chinese government by Schmitt and any other American politicians looking to create headlines .
This hyperbole may also be an attempt to distract international attention away from Chinese legislation proposed Friday that imposes a law to suppress Hong Kong ’ s pro-democracy movement .
The Communist Chinese government has never been worthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were taken during the pandemic simply reminded the world of how brutal the government is and must now be held accountable for the damage the pandemic brought to human life and economies around the world .

During a news conference Sunday, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the United States should abandon its “wishful thinking about changing China” and stop pushing the two countries “to the brink of a new Cold War.” He sent this message to Washington during the National People’s Congress, described by the Washington Post as “an annual piece of political theatre.”
“China has no intention to change, still less replace the United States,” Wang said Sunday before a selected group of journalists. “It’s time for the United States to give up its wishful thinking of changing China and stopping 1.4 billion people in their historic march toward modernization.”
That’s one way to spin the growing tensions between the United States and China, I suppose. Most Americans, however, expect China to be held responsible for its lack of transparency and mishandling of the initial outbreak of the coronavirus that turned into a pandemic. As more countries around the world look for answers, China is feeling the pressure, so its foreign minister is lashing out at the United States. Wang said American politicians “are taking China-U.S. relations hostage and pushing our two countries to the brink of a new Cold War.”
“This dangerous attempt to turn back the will of history will undo the fruits of decades-long China-U.S. cooperation, dampen America’s own development prospects and put world stability and prosperity in jeopardy,” Wang said.
Perhaps Wang is trying to distract with this aggressive language – China is feeling pressure from the WHO to allow them to investigate the source of the coronavirus, with other countries signing on to such a request. At the same time, President Trump has put the WHO on notice that the United States will cut off funding if the WHO doesn’t stop acting as a puppet for the Communist China government. So far China is refusing to allow such an investigation, saying that an investigation should wait until the pandemic ends.
It’s rich that Wang called on the United States to contain the coronavirus and “stop wasting time and stop wasting precious lives” when China allowed air travel out of its country and into Europe after stopping air travel into its country earlier this year. Those flights from Europe brought the virus to the United States, especially to states like New York, while flights from China to western states like Washington State and California brought the coronavirus to them before Trump initiated the U.S. travel ban. Fortunately, after the initial case in Washington State appeared, Trump moved quickly at the suggestion of expert advisers to mostly stop air travel into the United States, beginning with flights from China.
Wang criticizes U.S. politicians for pointing a finger at the Chinese government while projecting guilt back on the United States. Wang calls it a “political virus” coming from the United States and frankly, he sounds a lot like many of Trump’s opponents – the Chinese are needlessly being attacked and smeared.
“Aside from the devastation caused by the novel coronavirus, there is also a political virus spreading through the US,” he said. “This political virus is the use of every opportunity to attack and smear China. Some politicians completely disregard basic facts and have fabricated too many lies targeting China, and plotted too many conspiracies.”
Let’s not forget that Chinese officials have been guilty of propaganda smears against the United States during this pandemic. For example, a spokesman for Wang suggested American soldiers brought the coronavirus to Wuhan during military games held there last October.
President Trump initially bent over backward to not blame the Chinese government for its gross mishandling of the coronavirus outbreak. He continued to praise his working relationship with President Xi Jinping through February. One newspaper – affiliated with the Communist Party – reports that “punitive countermeasures” may be coming against specific American politicians.
The Global Times, a newspaper affiliated with the Communist Party, reported Sunday that China was “considering punitive countermeasures” against some American politicians leading the efforts to hold it accountable for the virus. These included Eric Schmitt, the Missouri attorney general who filed a lawsuit against China seeking compensation for the coronavirus pandemic, and congressmen including Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton, the paper reported, citing anonymous “sources close to the matter.” At least four representatives and two entities would be sanctioned by China, reported the paper, which often reflects the foreign policy thinking of the party.
That’s as big a waste of time as the lawsuits filed against the Chinese government by Schmitt and any other American politicians looking to create headlines.
This hyperbole may also be an attempt to distract international attention away from Chinese legislation proposed Friday that imposes a law to suppress Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement.
The Communist Chinese government has never been worthy of American trust. The actions that were taken during the pandemic simply reminded the world of how brutal the government is and must now be held accountable for the damage the pandemic brought to human life and economies around the world.


hotair--2020-05-24--"Complete blithering idiot": Coulter erupts at Trump for attacking Jeff Sessions

As background , you need to know that not only has Sessions finally begun complaining publicly about how Trump has treated him , he was at it again last night .
And Trump noticed .
I agree completely with Ed ’ s take on why Sessions finally took off the gloves .
He ’ s getting crushed by Tommy Tuberville in polling of the Alabama GOP Senate primary runoff , so what does he have to lose ?
If he keeps doing what he ’ s doing Tuberville ’ s going to send him packing into retirement two months from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , like standing up to Trump , there ’ s a one-in-a-thousand chance it ’ ll change the momentum of the race .
And even if it doesn ’ t , it must feel good to Sessions to defend himself at long last .
His obsequiousness until now has been pitiful .
If he ’ s destined to lose and to lose ignominiously , at least he ’ s recovered a shred of manhood in the end .
I ’ ll add one thing to Ed ’ s point .
It *may* be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slipped a bit in Alabama lately amid national criticism of his handling of the pandemic .
I can ’ t find polling on it , and if he ’ s slipped the decline is undoubtedly modest .
But Sessions may have reason to believe that ( politely ) rebuking Trump is somewhat less politically dangerous in his home state than it used to be .
Plus , a lot can happen in the two months before the runoff : If there ’ s a second wave of the disease after Trump pushed for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might materialize .
So what does Sessions have to lose at this point by scrapping with him ?
Anyway , on to Coulter .
I saw her tweets last night for the first time in this Rod Dreher post about “ Trump ’ s Twitter Madness ” and thought maybe he got suckered by a fake Coulter account .
That ’ s not because it ’ s unusual for her to blast Trump .
She ’ s done that before , especially on immigration and matters that are immigration-adjacent ( e.g.
, Jeff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s most notable pre-Trump restrictionist ) , and he ’ s returned the favor .
I ’ ve written about it before too : Coulter is one of a select few righty pundits who , when forced to choose between nationalist principles and fealty to Trump , will choose nationalism .
It ’ s not that surprising that she ’ d be outraged at Trump for knifing a politician who served border hawks well in the Senate .
What threw me is the tweet here about his lack of humanity on handling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normally hear populists yelling at Trump to be more compassionate ; rather the opposite .
But here we are .
Sessions didn ’ t “ have ” to recuse himself but it ’ s lucky for Trump that he did .
He could have ignored the conflict of interest he had and corruptly remained in charge of the Russiagate probe in order to meddle in Mueller ’ s investigation , like the Roy Cohn figure Trump hoped he ’ d be .
That would have backfired spectacularly on Trump by giving the public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ultimate finding that there was no conspiracy between Trump ’ s campaign and Russia .
And Coulter ’ s right that Trump ’ s dopey admission that he fired Comey because of the Russia probe helped make the case for a special prosecutor .
Once he signaled that career DOJ officials were apt to be fired for pursuing the Russia investigation , pressure on the department increased to appoint someone with a modicum of independence from the president to continue it .
Coulter ’ s kidding herself about Tuberville potentially blowing the Alabama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Doug Jones because he spent years pursuing polarizing moral crusades and then had a nuclear scandal revealed at the last minute — and even then , he barely lost .
Unless the media digs up something truly hair-raising on Tuberville , who ’ s been a prominent figure in the state for years thanks to his time at Auburn , he ’ ll cruise to a win .
Also , what does she mean when she says , “ GREAT WORK IN THE LAST ALABAMA SENATE RACE , MR. PRESIDENT ” ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump of having “ spoiled what should have been an easy win for the GOP in the race to replace Sessions ( who had resigned to become Trump ’ s AG ) by coming out for the seriously flawed Judge Roy Moore.
” But , er , Trump didn ’ t support Moore in the primary .
At McConnell ’ s urging , on electability grounds , he supported the establishment choice , Luther Strange .
He even campaigned for him before the runoff with Moore .
A lot of people misremember this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sort of Trump-hugging populist rebel whom Trump normally *would* endorse ; the president ’ s endorsement of Strange at the time seemed half-hearted because of that .
But the fact remains that he asked Alabama Republicans to nominate the establishmentarian , which was smart politics .
They ignored him and paid the price against Doug Jones .
I ’ m eager to see if any of Sessions ’ s friends in Fox News primetime come riding to his rescue this week like Coulter did last night .
Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be loyal to nationalism first and to Trump second .
Well , Sessions is an old-school nationalist , especially on immigration .
How about going to bat for him ?
The sparring with Sessions is the least part of “ Trump ’ s Twitter Madness ” lately , by the way .
Last night he retweeted one fan who called Hillary Clinton a “ skank ” and has smeared Joe Scarborough as a murderer twice more in the past 16 hours after doing so a few days ago .
I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deteriorating , but really , this is just who he is — and was , back when “ Morning Joe ” was promoting him as a candidate .
Exit quotations :

As background, you need to know that not only has Sessions finally begun complaining publicly about how Trump has treated him, he was at it again last night. And Trump noticed.
.@realDonaldTrump: Mr. President, Alabama can and does trust me, as do conservatives across the country. Perhaps you’ve forgotten. They trusted me when I stepped out and put that trust on the line for you. — Jeff Sessions (@jeffsessions) May 23, 2020
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264328756736536576
You and I fight for the same agenda. @TTuberville is so weak he won’t debate me & too weak for Alabama. AL will vote for you this fall, but Alabama will not take orders from Washington on who to send to the Senate. @realDonaldTrump — Jeff Sessions (@jeffsessions) May 24, 2020
I agree completely with Ed’s take on why Sessions finally took off the gloves. He’s getting crushed by Tommy Tuberville in polling of the Alabama GOP Senate primary runoff, so what does he have to lose?
Sessions might figure that fighting back might win him a little more respect from #MAGA voters, if not affection. That’s probably not going to work, but obsequiously brown-nosing Trump while getting trashed by him clearly wasn’t working either. This might be a Hail Mary play to get Trump to shower Sessions with earned media in an open and now two-sided feud, and perhaps getting more support with the extra attention. Or, perhaps, Sessions realizes that his goose is cooked whatever happens now, and with nothing left to lose, is no longer worried about openly criticizing Trump.
If he keeps doing what he’s doing Tuberville’s going to send him packing into retirement two months from now. If he does something different, like standing up to Trump, there’s a one-in-a-thousand chance it’ll change the momentum of the race. And even if it doesn’t, it must feel good to Sessions to defend himself at long last. His obsequiousness until now has been pitiful. If he’s destined to lose and to lose ignominiously, at least he’s recovered a shred of manhood in the end.
I’ll add one thing to Ed’s point. It *may* be that Trump’s job approval has slipped a bit in Alabama lately amid national criticism of his handling of the pandemic. I can’t find polling on it, and if he’s slipped the decline is undoubtedly modest. But Sessions may have reason to believe that (politely) rebuking Trump is somewhat less politically dangerous in his home state than it used to be. Plus, a lot can happen in the two months before the runoff: If there’s a second wave of the disease after Trump pushed for businesses to reopen, a real backlash might materialize.
So what does Sessions have to lose at this point by scrapping with him?
Anyway, on to Coulter. I saw her tweets last night for the first time in this Rod Dreher post about “Trump’s Twitter Madness” and thought maybe he got suckered by a fake Coulter account. That’s not because it’s unusual for her to blast Trump. She’s done that before, especially on immigration and matters that are immigration-adjacent (e.g., Jeff Sessions’s status as the GOP’s most notable pre-Trump restrictionist), and he’s returned the favor. I’ve written about it before too: Coulter is one of a select few righty pundits who, when forced to choose between nationalist principles and fealty to Trump, will choose nationalism. It’s not that surprising that she’d be outraged at Trump for knifing a politician who served border hawks well in the Senate.
What threw me is the tweet here about his lack of humanity on handling the coronavirus. You don’t normally hear populists yelling at Trump to be more compassionate; rather the opposite. But here we are.
3 years ago, a complete moron of a president told NBC's Lester Holt, "I was going to fire Comey. … [W]hen I decided to just do it I said to myself, I said, 'You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story.'" BAM! SPECIAL PROSECUTOR! https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
The most disloyal actual retard that has ever set foot in the Oval Office is trying to lose AND take the Senate with him. Another Roy Moore fiasco so he can blame someone else for his own mess. https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
Trump didn't build the wall and never had any intention of doing so. The ONE PERSON in the Trump administration who did anything about immigration was Jeff Session. And this lout attacks him. https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
COVID gave Trump a chance to be a decent, compassionate human being (or pretending to be). But he couldn't even do that. https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
The media is salivating over the former football coach, Tommy Tuberville (choice of the most disloyal human God ever created, DJT). https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
GREAT WORK IN THE LAST ALABAMA SENATE RACE, MR. PRESIDENT! Keep it up and we'll have zero Republican senators. The next Republican president will be elected in the year 4820. https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
Sessions HAD to recuse himself, you complete blithering idiot. YOU did not have to go on Lester Holt's show and announce you fired Comey over the Russian investigation. That's what got you a Special Prosecutor. https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
I can't wait to see what the media have in store for the former football coach, Tuberville. This is going to be another Roy Moore catastrophe – also engineered by Trump. #SaveTheSenate https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
I will never apologize for supporting the issues that candidate Trump advocated, but I am deeply sorry for thinking that this shallow and broken man would show even some remote fealty to the promises that got him elected. https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
Trump's first attempt to blame someone else for his decision to tell Lester Holt he fired Comey over Russia (thus getting him a Special Prosecutor): pic.twitter.com/J5quK9mC8Q — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
Yeah, it was Sessions fault Trump got a Special Prosecutor. You don't even need Nexis to see it was ALL TRUMP'S FAULT. He had to brag it that was HIS decision to fire Comey! pic.twitter.com/z2yNxnOAnL — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
Sessions didn’t “have” to recuse himself but it’s lucky for Trump that he did. He could have ignored the conflict of interest he had and corruptly remained in charge of the Russiagate probe in order to meddle in Mueller’s investigation, like the Roy Cohn figure Trump hoped he’d be. That would have backfired spectacularly on Trump by giving the public a reason to dismiss Mueller’s ultimate finding that there was no conspiracy between Trump’s campaign and Russia. And Coulter’s right that Trump’s dopey admission that he fired Comey because of the Russia probe helped make the case for a special prosecutor. Once he signaled that career DOJ officials were apt to be fired for pursuing the Russia investigation, pressure on the department increased to appoint someone with a modicum of independence from the president to continue it.
Coulter’s kidding herself about Tuberville potentially blowing the Alabama Senate race, though. Moore lost to Doug Jones because he spent years pursuing polarizing moral crusades and then had a nuclear scandal revealed at the last minute — and even then, he barely lost. Unless the media digs up something truly hair-raising on Tuberville, who’s been a prominent figure in the state for years thanks to his time at Auburn, he’ll cruise to a win. Also, what does she mean when she says, “GREAT WORK IN THE LAST ALABAMA SENATE RACE, MR. PRESIDENT”? Dreher made that point too, accusing Trump of having “spoiled what should have been an easy win for the GOP in the race to replace Sessions (who had resigned to become Trump’s AG) by coming out for the seriously flawed Judge Roy Moore.”
But, er, Trump didn’t support Moore in the primary. At McConnell’s urging, on electability grounds, he supported the establishment choice, Luther Strange. He even campaigned for him before the runoff with Moore. A lot of people misremember this, I think, because Moore is the sort of Trump-hugging populist rebel whom Trump normally *would* endorse; the president’s endorsement of Strange at the time seemed half-hearted because of that. But the fact remains that he asked Alabama Republicans to nominate the establishmentarian, which was smart politics. They ignored him and paid the price against Doug Jones.
I’m eager to see if any of Sessions’s friends in Fox News primetime come riding to his rescue this week like Coulter did last night. Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham also claim (I think?) to be loyal to nationalism first and to Trump second. Well, Sessions is an old-school nationalist, especially on immigration. How about going to bat for him?
The sparring with Sessions is the least part of “Trump’s Twitter Madness” lately, by the way. Last night he retweeted one fan who called Hillary Clinton a “skank” and has smeared Joe Scarborough as a murderer twice more in the past 16 hours after doing so a few days ago. I’m tempted to say that he’s deteriorating, but really, this is just who he is — and was, back when “Morning Joe” was promoting him as a candidate. Exit quotations:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264346866780700675
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264564261327720450