hotair--2020-04-29--NBC: Senior Beijing official would like to tell you how much Trump stinks

And NBC would like us to know this , apparently .
Under fire from the entire global community for their efforts to suppress warnings about COVID-19 when it might have saved a lot of lives , China has pushed back vociferously over the last two months , conducting a propaganda campaign through its foreign ministry .
Its official spokesperson Zhao Lijian publicly suggested that the US Army planted COVID-19 in Hubei , later contradicted by the country ’ s ambassador to the US .
Zhao hasn ’ t stopped spreading propaganda to take the heat off China .
His boss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is merely offering a slightly more sophisticated form of misdirection — and NBC seems to be happy to amplify it : A senior Chinese government official challenged President Donald Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S. , accusing him of wasting weeks after the threat posed by the virus first became apparent .
In a wide-ranging interview with NBC News conducted in Mandarin on Tuesday , the official , Executive Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng , also hit back at the politicization of the virus .
Le , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s political establishment , rejected claims that China had covered up the initial outbreak or that it should be held financially liable for COVID-19 .
Instead , he termed the virus a “ natural disaster ” and called for greater cooperation and an end to accusations .
“ On Jan. 23 when Wuhan went under lockdown , the United States reported only one confirmed case , but on March 13 when President Trump announced a national emergency , the United States reported over 1,600 confirmed cases , ” said Le , referring to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus is believed to have emerged .
“ In this interval of 50 days , what was the U.S. government doing ?
Where have those 50 days gone ?
” said Le , a Russian speaker born on China ’ s industrial east coast , who began his diplomatic career in what was then the Soviet Union .
First off , March 13 is an interesting date .
That was the day after the New York Times first exposed Zhao ’ s ludicrous propaganda about the US Army planting the virus in China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time that it became clear that New York City was developing into a hot spot , thanks to a largely unforeseen seeding from Europe , although of course that also originated in China .
The direct seeding on the West Coast had been better controlled .
Le leaves out a few dates prior to that , though .
For instance , Trump imposed travel restrictions between the US and China on January 31 to minimize the risk of that seeding , which seems to have been effective .
At that time , China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claiming it to be unfair and unnecessary , and got backed up by their mouthpieces at the World Health Organization a few days later .
WHO chief Tedros claimed on February 3 that the spread of COVID-19 was “ minimal and slow ” based on data China was providing at the time , which turned out to be horribly wrong , but was also the only data available to the US and other countries at the time .
What about some earlier dates ?
Readers have to scroll down pretty far into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mentions the doctors in China who tried to raise the alarm about the true nature of the COVID-19 outbreak .
That resulted in their suppression by Beijing in late December , most of whom have not been heard from since .
Had China not suppressed those warnings , everyone — including China — might have saved a lot of lives .
Does NBC raise this issue ?
Sure , but not before we get six references to Trump and his performance .
And even then , NBC only barely raises it and lets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to its own reporting : When Chinese medical staff members first reported cases of the virus in Wuhan late in 2019 , reports were suppressed and some , including Dr. Li Wenliang — who later died from the virus — were reprimanded for spreading false information when they warned of the danger posed by the newly discovered disease , causing an outcry on Chinese social media .
Le stood by the country ’ s official data and said China ’ s response had been “ fast ” compared to other countries .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not covered anything up .
We did not cause any delay , ” said Le .
Oh , well , that settles it then , sorry to bother .
Great job speaking truth to power , NBC .
Is there room to criticize Trump for his reaction to the coronavirus pandemic ?
Sure , but then criticize the European nations that also got caught flat-footed right along with Trump , and everyone else who got blindsided by bad data from China and promulgated through WHO .
All of these are reactions , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China , which has generated several viral epidemics over the last few decades .
These are not “ natural disasters , ” but at best the product of horrid food-safety practices about which epidemiologists have warned for a generation .
China doesn ’ t want to take the blame for these outbreaks , and so send out their propagandists to shift it wherever they think it will stick .
Clearly , China thinks that it can ply that propaganda through American national media outlets uncritically , thanks to their obsession with Trump .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ correct in that assessment .

And NBC would like us to know this, apparently. Under fire from the entire global community for their efforts to suppress warnings about COVID-19 when it might have saved a lot of lives, China has pushed back vociferously over the last two months, conducting a propaganda campaign through its foreign ministry. Its official spokesperson Zhao Lijian publicly suggested that the US Army planted COVID-19 in Hubei, later contradicted by the country’s ambassador to the US.
Zhao hasn’t stopped spreading propaganda to take the heat off China. His boss, executive vice foreign minister Le Yucheng, is merely offering a slightly more sophisticated form of misdirection — and NBC seems to be happy to amplify it:
A senior Chinese government official challenged President Donald Trump’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S., accusing him of wasting weeks after the threat posed by the virus first became apparent. In a wide-ranging interview with NBC News conducted in Mandarin on Tuesday, the official, Executive Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng, also hit back at the politicization of the virus. Le, a rising star within the country’s political establishment, rejected claims that China had covered up the initial outbreak or that it should be held financially liable for COVID-19. Instead, he termed the virus a “natural disaster” and called for greater cooperation and an end to accusations. “On Jan. 23 when Wuhan went under lockdown, the United States reported only one confirmed case, but on March 13 when President Trump announced a national emergency, the United States reported over 1,600 confirmed cases,” said Le, referring to the city in Hubei province where the virus is believed to have emerged. “In this interval of 50 days, what was the U.S. government doing? Where have those 50 days gone?” said Le, a Russian speaker born on China’s industrial east coast, who began his diplomatic career in what was then the Soviet Union.
First off, March 13 is an interesting date. That was the day after the New York Times first exposed Zhao’s ludicrous propaganda about the US Army planting the virus in China. It’s also about the time that it became clear that New York City was developing into a hot spot, thanks to a largely unforeseen seeding from Europe, although of course that also originated in China. The direct seeding on the West Coast had been better controlled.
Le leaves out a few dates prior to that, though. For instance, Trump imposed travel restrictions between the US and China on January 31 to minimize the risk of that seeding, which seems to have been effective. At that time, China howled in outrage over the order, claiming it to be unfair and unnecessary, and got backed up by their mouthpieces at the World Health Organization a few days later. WHO chief Tedros claimed on February 3 that the spread of COVID-19 was “minimal and slow” based on data China was providing at the time, which turned out to be horribly wrong, but was also the only data available to the US and other countries at the time.
What about some earlier dates? Readers have to scroll down pretty far into the piece to the sixteenth paragraph before NBC mentions the doctors in China who tried to raise the alarm about the true nature of the COVID-19 outbreak. That resulted in their suppression by Beijing in late December, most of whom have not been heard from since. Had China not suppressed those warnings, everyone — including China — might have saved a lot of lives.
Does NBC raise this issue? Sure, but not before we get six references to Trump and his performance. And even then, NBC only barely raises it and lets Le off the hook, at least according to its own reporting:
When Chinese medical staff members first reported cases of the virus in Wuhan late in 2019, reports were suppressed and some, including Dr. Li Wenliang — who later died from the virus — were reprimanded for spreading false information when they warned of the danger posed by the newly discovered disease, causing an outcry on Chinese social media. Le stood by the country’s official data and said China’s response had been “fast” compared to other countries. “I want to say China has not covered anything up. We did not cause any delay,” said Le.
Oh, well, that settles it then, sorry to bother. Great job speaking truth to power, NBC.
Is there room to criticize Trump for his reaction to the coronavirus pandemic? Sure, but then criticize the European nations that also got caught flat-footed right along with Trump, and everyone else who got blindsided by bad data from China and promulgated through WHO. All of these are reactions, though, to the initial bad actor — China, which has generated several viral epidemics over the last few decades. These are not “natural disasters,” but at best the product of horrid food-safety practices about which epidemiologists have warned for a generation. China doesn’t want to take the blame for these outbreaks, and so send out their propagandists to shift it wherever they think it will stick.
Clearly, China thinks that it can ply that propaganda through American national media outlets uncritically, thanks to their obsession with Trump. Sadly, China appears to be completely correct in that assessment.


hotair--2020-04-29--NYC Mayor has a few words for "the Jewish community"

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has managed to put his plus-sized foot in his mouth again , this time angering most of the Big Apple ’ s Jewish residents and their supporters .
Sadly , a Rabbi passed away this week and funeral services were planned for yesterday .
A significant number of the faithful showed up for the funeral , violating the ban on large gatherings in Gotham during the pandemic .
Hizzoner got word of this and decided to go investigate the situation in person , bringing a healthy NYPD presence with him .
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twitter to air his frustration with “ the Jewish community.
” If you click through and start scrolling through the responses to that tweet you ’ ll find some really humorous ones .
I ’ d share them here , but they ’ re not exactly safe for work .
In any event , as CNN reported this morning , this pronouncement didn ’ t sit very well with the one million-plus other Jews in New York City who weren ’ t violating the social distancing rules .
The Anti-Defamation League and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mayor Bill de Blasio after he condemned a large funeral gathering , saying he targeted the entire Jewish community when only one group of people broke the rules .
De Blasio said the gathering for a rabbi ’ s funeral Tuesday in Williamsburg , New York , was “ absolutely unacceptable ” and noted it won ’ t be tolerated .
“ Something absolutely unacceptable happened in Williamsburg tonite : a large funeral gathering in the middle of this pandemic , ” de Blasio tweeted .
“ When I heard , I went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dispersed .
And what I saw WILL NOT be tolerated so long as we are fighting the Coronavirus.
” Hizzoner went on to say that his message to the Jewish community ( and all communities ) was that the time for warnings was over and he had “ instructed the NYPD to proceed immediately to summons or even arrest those who gather in large groups.
” While I understand that there are rules in place forbidding large gatherings , you really need the voluntary cooperation of the community to make them work .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rabbi with a bunch of uniformed officers in tow and ordering them to start locking up Jews isn ’ t really the look you ’ re going for .
As it turns out , the NYPD is claiming that they didn ’ t wind up arresting anyone , nor did they even issue any summonses .
But the social media damage was already done .
Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League responded to the Mayor , informing him that calling out the entire Jewish community over the actions of one relatively small group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there were already too many people scapegoating Jews in New York .
All of this is happening under not only the shadow of the pandemic but a period of time when the city has witnessed a rising number of incidents of thugs randomly attacking Orthodox Jews on the streets .
Whether it ’ s fair to say or not , this has all been happening on Bill de Blasio ’ s watch .
He ’ s paid lip service to the antisemitic attacks , but many of the crimes have gone unsolved and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waves of both fear and frustration among New York ’ s Jewish residents .
Sorry to have to say this , Mr. Mayor , but you wanted this job .
Now it ’ s time to figure out a solution .
And it should be one that doesn ’ t involve you crashing Jewish funerals with a bunch of stormtroopers behind you .

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has managed to put his plus-sized foot in his mouth again, this time angering most of the Big Apple’s Jewish residents and their supporters. Sadly, a Rabbi passed away this week and funeral services were planned for yesterday. A significant number of the faithful showed up for the funeral, violating the ban on large gatherings in Gotham during the pandemic. Hizzoner got word of this and decided to go investigate the situation in person, bringing a healthy NYPD presence with him. That’s when he decided to take to Twitter to air his frustration with “the Jewish community.”
Something absolutely unacceptable happened in Williamsburg tonite: a large funeral gathering in the middle of this pandemic. When I heard, I went there myself to ensure the crowd was dispersed. And what I saw WILL NOT be tolerated so long as we are fighting the Coronavirus — Mayor Bill de Blasio (@NYCMayor) April 29, 2020
If you click through and start scrolling through the responses to that tweet you’ll find some really humorous ones. I’d share them here, but they’re not exactly safe for work. In any event, as CNN reported this morning, this pronouncement didn’t sit very well with the one million-plus other Jews in New York City who weren’t violating the social distancing rules.
The Anti-Defamation League and a New York City councilman are calling out Mayor Bill de Blasio after he condemned a large funeral gathering, saying he targeted the entire Jewish community when only one group of people broke the rules. De Blasio said the gathering for a rabbi’s funeral Tuesday in Williamsburg, New York, was “absolutely unacceptable” and noted it won’t be tolerated. “Something absolutely unacceptable happened in Williamsburg tonite: a large funeral gathering in the middle of this pandemic,” de Blasio tweeted. “When I heard, I went there myself to ensure the crowd was dispersed. And what I saw WILL NOT be tolerated so long as we are fighting the Coronavirus.”
Hizzoner went on to say that his message to the Jewish community (and all communities) was that the time for warnings was over and he had “instructed the NYPD to proceed immediately to summons or even arrest those who gather in large groups.”
While I understand that there are rules in place forbidding large gatherings, you really need the voluntary cooperation of the community to make them work. Showing up at the funeral of a Rabbi with a bunch of uniformed officers in tow and ordering them to start locking up Jews isn’t really the look you’re going for. As it turns out, the NYPD is claiming that they didn’t wind up arresting anyone, nor did they even issue any summonses. But the social media damage was already done.
Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League responded to the Mayor, informing him that calling out the entire Jewish community over the actions of one relatively small group was outrageous. He reminded him that there were already too many people scapegoating Jews in New York.
All of this is happening under not only the shadow of the pandemic but a period of time when the city has witnessed a rising number of incidents of thugs randomly attacking Orthodox Jews on the streets. Whether it’s fair to say or not, this has all been happening on Bill de Blasio’s watch. He’s paid lip service to the antisemitic attacks, but many of the crimes have gone unsolved and we’ve seen regular reports of waves of both fear and frustration among New York’s Jewish residents.
Sorry to have to say this, Mr. Mayor, but you wanted this job. Now it’s time to figure out a solution. And it should be one that doesn’t involve you crashing Jewish funerals with a bunch of stormtroopers behind you.


hotair--2020-04-29--The highest one-day coronavirus death toll so far?

We haven ’ t paid much attention to the IHME model lately but yesterday Scott Gottlieb flagged an ominous detail about it .
For nearly two weeks , its estimate of the total U.S. death toll before August 4 has been revised upward — three separate times .
That trend finally shifted today as the new projection has dipped from 74,000+ to a shade under 73,000 .
But they may want to rethink that .
The latest national daily death toll as compiled by the COVID Tracking Project is a single-day high for the United States to date , similar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New cases are down from where they were two weeks ago but not dramatically .
On weekdays in mid-April the U.S. was seeing about 30,000 new infections each day versus the 28,000 we ’ re seeing now .
Which leads me to wonder if the current IHME projections aren ’ t waaaaay more conservative than they should be .
If IHME is right , in light of the current total death toll of 55,000+ , we should see “ only ” 18,000 more deaths over the next two months — and yet we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rate of more than 2,000 per day .
If that keeps up , we ’ ll blow past the IHME projections for all of June and July in 10 days or so .
No wonder Silver ’ s pessimistic : The mystery about today ’ s numbers is whether they represent “ new deaths , ” “ old deaths , ” or some combination of the two .
That is , how many people reflected in these numbers died overnight and how many died weeks ago but have since been reclassified from “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of death ?
There are a lot of them out there : That ’ s 9,000 “ excess deaths ” across just seven states .
Maybe some states have begun to go through their case files and include some of those excess deaths as coronavirus fatalities and that ’ s why today ’ s death toll is so ominously high .
At least I hope that ’ s the reason .
Last week ’ s numbers showed the daily death toll dipping below 2,000 for the most part , an encouraging sign that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If that trend has now reversed then consumers are going to be even more leery than we think to get back out there as businesses reopen .
We ’ re never going to answer the question of how many excess deaths are directly due to COVID , indirectly due to it , and not due to it at all .
But let me share three pieces on the subject I ’ ve read since writing this post to flesh it out a little further .
First , per Gallup , some people with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might be avoiding treatment for the simple reason that they just can ’ t afford it : Anyone who failed to seek care and then died presumably wouldn ’ t be classified as a confirmed COVID death .
Worse , when Gallup asked people if they ’ d sought medical treatment recently but been *denied* because of the heavy volume of coronavirus patients , fully six percent of Americans — 11 percent in the northeast — said yes .
They weren ’ t all coronavirus patients , of course ; some of them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then canceled while doctors focused their energy on COVID .
Some number of those people surely must have passed away over the past six weeks because they couldn ’ t get care in a timely way .
They ’ re indirect casualties of the epidemic , people who won ’ t show up in official coronavirus death counts but will show up an “ excess death ” in all-cause mortality data .
Second , it ’ s hard to tell what the “ baseline ” of deaths should be at a moment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happening alongside an economic deep freeze .
There are excess deaths from the disease , of course , and also deaths of despair caused by economic hardship .
( There are deaths of despair caused by the pandemic too . )
But certain types of deaths that would be happening during normal times aren ’ t happening now because of social distancing .
With recessions come fewer people on the roads , which means fewer traffic accidents .
And as we ’ re seeing now with worldwide lockdowns , less driving also means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quality is a public health crisis in its own right , the air cleanup caused by economic downturns could partly explain the reduction in deaths caused by respiratory and cardiovascular disease .
Less work also means fewer workplace injuries and more leisure time , which possibly leads to more exercise , more home cooking , and less money for booze and cigarettes… It ’ s a complex picture .
In some arenas , mortality rates decrease ; in others , they rise .
Based on historical patterns , the health benefits appear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers of deaths .
If a city expects 1,000 deaths a week in normal times and is experiencing 2,000 a week now , should we assume 1,000 are due directly or indirectly to coronavirus ?
Or some number greater than that since part of the “ normal ” death toll is attributable to things like auto accidents , etc , that aren ’ t happening much during lockdowns ?
Third , ER doctor Jeremy Faust got tired of hearing COVID skeptics comparing the death toll from the virus to the death toll from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a simple question .
How many deaths from the flu had they personally seen in their time as a physician ?
Faust could recall one , a child .
Some of his colleagues remembered a few , some remembered none .
How can that be if tens of thousands of people are dying from the flu every year , as the CDC regularly assures us ?
The reason , says Faust , is that flu deaths are also estimates , and maybe not very good estimates .
Anyone who ’ s treating the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ projection but flu deaths as a matter of metaphysical fact is comparing apples to oranges .
Faust compared the number of coronavirus deaths in the second week of April this year to the worst week of reported flu deaths over the past seven years in the U.S .
Result : COVID killed 9.5 to 44 times as many people as the flu did at its worst .
And those are only confirmed cases .
Toss in “ excess deaths ” as presumptively caused , directly or indirectly , by the virus and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of this makes a fine argument that it ’ s still too early to reopen for business but there ’ s a compelling , almost unanswerable counterargument .
The new unemployment numbers will be out in less than 12 hours .

We haven’t paid much attention to the IHME model lately but yesterday Scott Gottlieb flagged an ominous detail about it. For nearly two weeks, its estimate of the total U.S. death toll before August 4 has been revised upward — three separate times.
This graphic shows how the cumulative number of estimated U.S. covid deaths projected by the model have changed through the various updates. The latest 4/27 update to the model shows another increase in the projection for median cumulative deaths to 74,073. pic.twitter.com/pgDKhiCOif — Scott Gottlieb, MD (@ScottGottliebMD) April 28, 2020
That trend finally shifted today as the new projection has dipped from 74,000+ to a shade under 73,000. But they may want to rethink that. The latest national daily death toll as compiled by the COVID Tracking Project is a single-day high for the United States to date, similar to the death toll on 9/11:
US daily numbers via @COVID19Tracking: Newly reported deaths:
Today: 2,700*
Yesterday: 2,198
One week ago (4/22): 2,037 Newly reported cases:
T: 28K
Y: 24K
4/22: 28K Newly reported tests:
T: 230K
Y: 202K
4/22: 314K Share of tests positive:
T: 12%
Y: 12%
4/22: 9% * New high — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) April 29, 2020
New cases are down from where they were two weeks ago but not dramatically. On weekdays in mid-April the U.S. was seeing about 30,000 new infections each day versus the 28,000 we’re seeing now. Which leads me to wonder if the current IHME projections aren’t waaaaay more conservative than they should be. If IHME is right, in light of the current total death toll of 55,000+, we should see “only” 18,000 more deaths over the next two months — and yet we’re still seeing fatalities at a rate of more than 2,000 per day.
If that keeps up, we’ll blow past the IHME projections for all of June and July in 10 days or so. No wonder Silver’s pessimistic:
Between the *current* wave of COVID-19 remaining bad in many states, the possibility of either a long plateau or a second wave, and states going back and counting deaths they missed originally, any projections that have 5-figure death tallies for the US this year seem optimistic. — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) April 29, 2020
The mystery about today’s numbers is whether they represent “new deaths,” “old deaths,” or some combination of the two. That is, how many people reflected in these numbers died overnight and how many died weeks ago but have since been reclassified from “unknown” to COVID-19 as their cause of death? There are a lot of them out there:
That’s 9,000 “excess deaths” across just seven states. Maybe some states have begun to go through their case files and include some of those excess deaths as coronavirus fatalities and that’s why today’s death toll is so ominously high. At least I hope that’s the reason. Last week’s numbers showed the daily death toll dipping below 2,000 for the most part, an encouraging sign that new deaths had begun to abate. If that trend has now reversed then consumers are going to be even more leery than we think to get back out there as businesses reopen.
We’re never going to answer the question of how many excess deaths are directly due to COVID, indirectly due to it, and not due to it at all. But let me share three pieces on the subject I’ve read since writing this post to flesh it out a little further. First, per Gallup, some people with symptoms who haven’t been tested might be avoiding treatment for the simple reason that they just can’t afford it:
One out of every seven (14%) U.S. adults report that they would avoid seeking healthcare for a fever and a dry cough for themselves or a member of their household due to concerns about their ability to pay for it. When framed explicitly as believing to have been infected by the novel coronavirus, 9% still report that they would avoid seeking care. Adults under 30, non-whites, those with a high school education or less and those in households with incomes under $40,000 per year are the groups most likely to indicate they would avoid seeking out care.
Anyone who failed to seek care and then died presumably wouldn’t be classified as a confirmed COVID death. Worse, when Gallup asked people if they’d sought medical treatment recently but been *denied* because of the heavy volume of coronavirus patients, fully six percent of Americans — 11 percent in the northeast — said yes. They weren’t all coronavirus patients, of course; some of them had elective treatments for other diseases scheduled and then canceled while doctors focused their energy on COVID. Some number of those people surely must have passed away over the past six weeks because they couldn’t get care in a timely way. They’re indirect casualties of the epidemic, people who won’t show up in official coronavirus death counts but will show up an “excess death” in all-cause mortality data.
Second, it’s hard to tell what the “baseline” of deaths should be at a moment when there’s a global pandemic happening alongside an economic deep freeze. There are excess deaths from the disease, of course, and also deaths of despair caused by economic hardship. (There are deaths of despair caused by the pandemic too.) But certain types of deaths that would be happening during normal times aren’t happening now because of social distancing.
With recessions come fewer people on the roads, which means fewer traffic accidents. And as we’re seeing now with worldwide lockdowns, less driving also means improved air quality. Since poor air quality is a public health crisis in its own right, the air cleanup caused by economic downturns could partly explain the reduction in deaths caused by respiratory and cardiovascular disease. Less work also means fewer workplace injuries and more leisure time, which possibly leads to more exercise, more home cooking, and less money for booze and cigarettes… It’s a complex picture. In some arenas, mortality rates decrease; in others, they rise. Based on historical patterns, the health benefits appear to outweigh the costs in terms of sheer numbers of deaths.
If a city expects 1,000 deaths a week in normal times and is experiencing 2,000 a week now, should we assume 1,000 are due directly or indirectly to coronavirus? Or some number greater than that since part of the “normal” death toll is attributable to things like auto accidents, etc, that aren’t happening much during lockdowns?
Third, ER doctor Jeremy Faust got tired of hearing COVID skeptics comparing the death toll from the virus to the death toll from the flu and started calling colleagues with a simple question. How many deaths from the flu had they personally seen in their time as a physician? Faust could recall one, a child. Some of his colleagues remembered a few, some remembered none. How can that be if tens of thousands of people are dying from the flu every year, as the CDC regularly assures us? The reason, says Faust, is that flu deaths are also estimates, and maybe not very good estimates. Anyone who’s treating the number of coronavirus deaths as a gassy projection but flu deaths as a matter of metaphysical fact is comparing apples to oranges.
The 25,000 to 69,000 numbers that Trump cited do not represent counted flu deaths per year; they are estimates that the CDC produces by multiplying the number of flu death counts reported by various coefficients produced through complicated algorithms. These coefficients are based on assumptions of how many cases, hospitalizations, and deaths they believe went unreported. In the last six flu seasons, the CDC’s reported number of actual confirmed flu deaths—that is, counting flu deaths the way we are currently counting deaths from the coronavirus—has ranged from 3,448 to 15,620, which far lower than the numbers commonly repeated by public officials and even public health experts.
Faust compared the number of coronavirus deaths in the second week of April this year to the worst week of reported flu deaths over the past seven years in the U.S. Result: COVID killed 9.5 to 44 times as many people as the flu did at its worst. And those are only confirmed cases. Toss in “excess deaths” as presumptively caused, directly or indirectly, by the virus and the number would be higher.
Anyway, all of this makes a fine argument that it’s still too early to reopen for business but there’s a compelling, almost unanswerable counterargument. The new unemployment numbers will be out in less than 12 hours.


hotair--2020-04-29--Guess who is producing a Netflix documentary on Michelle Obama?

The Obamas signed a sweet , sweet deal with Netflix when Barack Obama left office .
They set up their own production company to crank out projects friendly to their political agenda .
What could be better than a documentary on the behind the scenes life of Michelle ?
That ’ s right .
Higher Ground Productions is Obama ’ s own production company and it is credited as the company producing Becoming .
I first read about this little twist at Christian Toto ’ s website ( which , if you don ’ t read on the regular , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Post and other media outlets are busy with complementary pieces about the documentary , Toto calls it as it is – a vanity project .
It is essentially Michelle Obama ’ s narcissistic behind the scenes glance of her book tour .
As Toto points out , conservatives are documented one way and liberals in quite a different way .
For example , Mrs. America on Hulu , a series on conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly portrays her as a cold , stern , joyless woman ( I watch it ) while liberal women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , capable , kind and/or deserving of the spotlight.
” If you sat through any of those , you know he ’ s right .
Now it is happening with Michelle Obama .
As I ’ ve noted before , Michelle Obama is adored by the left .
Her book Becoming was published in 2018 and quickly became a best-seller .
In 2019 , a journal was published in coordination with the book .
The autobiography was named the best selling autobiography in 2019 .
It was published by Bertelsmann ’ s Penguin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she received an advance of more than $ 60M .
Now she ’ s milking it a little bit more with a documentary about herself .
“ I ’ m figuring out , what do I want to do ?
What do I care about ?
” the former first lady says in a clip from the documentary .
“ It takes time to process your life and figure out what it all means.
” Streaming May 6 , “ Becoming ” arrives at a defining moment in Obama ’ s life .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wing , the widely admired first lady ’ s influence remains evident .
She ’ s maintained a foothold in American culture , and the presumptive Democratic nominee , former vice president Joe Biden , recently said he would choose her as his running mate “ in a heartbeat.
” She ’ s made clear that she does not want to run for office , but Biden ’ s remark raises the same question Obama asks of herself in the film : How will she choose to wield her power ?
Michelle Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton than she does , say , Laura Bush , doesn ’ t she ?
Can you imagine Laura Bush sitting around trying to “ figure out what it all means ” ?
No , of course not .
She left the White House and got on with her life .
She sure didn ’ t leave with a $ 60M book advance , either .
I don ’ t think she ’ s given to many navel-gazing moments .
The book tour from which this documentary springs was a huge hit with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were sold out in a very short time and the tickets were certainly not cheap .
She made a couple of revelations that readers previously didn ’ t know like she has never forgiven President Trump for his birther comments and she had fertility issues when she was trying to get pregnant , but other than that it is all about the greatness of Michelle ’ s life .
As I said , she is much like Hillary .
One person from more conservative circles is happy to speak up for Michelle Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of staff to former first lady Laura Bush , speaks favorably of Michelle , as the Bushes do .
She credits Michelle ’ s “ extraordinary use of media and pop culture and television ” as a way to form a connection with her supporters , though at first , she was a reluctant first lady .
McBride , who directs programming on first ladies at American University , also noted that the transition from public service to private citizenship encourages political figures to take stock of what they ’ ve accomplished and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Netflix deal is a way for the Obamas to continue elevating “ stories of challenge related to the programs and initiatives that were a part of their White House life , ” said McBride , who added that the producing partnership is unprecedented among first couples in terms of “ the reach and the impact that they want to continue to have.
” Michelle Obama has been very visible since she left the White House .
She and her husband continue to live in Washington , D.C. , and travel the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t bashful when it comes to doing get out the vote drives and formed an organization to do just that along with her celebrity friends .
She is currently promoting mail-in voting .
When President Trump ’ s critics complain about his narcissistic tendencies , I often wonder why they don ’ t make a connection to the former president .
Do they not realize that the personality trait was so strong in President Obama that it seemed almost normal for voters when Trump threw his hat in the ring .
Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now criticized .
Just as conservatives criticized Obama , liberals criticize Trump .
The Clintons took post-presidency paydays to an extreme level .
The Bushes were more modest about it but now the Obamas are going the Clinton route .
You know whatever Trump does after his presidency will be criticized without irony by Michelle and Barack ’ s supporters .
After all , the very first Netflix project the Obamas announced through their production company was one that is thought to be a diss to President Trump .

The Obamas signed a sweet, sweet deal with Netflix when Barack Obama left office. They set up their own production company to crank out projects friendly to their political agenda. What could be better than a documentary on the behind the scenes life of Michelle?
That’s right. Higher Ground Productions is Obama’s own production company and it is credited as the company producing Becoming. I first read about this little twist at Christian Toto’s website (which, if you don’t read on the regular, you should.) While the Washington Post and other media outlets are busy with complementary pieces about the documentary, Toto calls it as it is – a vanity project. It is essentially Michelle Obama’s narcissistic behind the scenes glance of her book tour.
As Toto points out, conservatives are documented one way and liberals in quite a different way. For example, Mrs. America on Hulu, a series on conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly portrays her as a cold, stern, joyless woman (I watch it) while liberal women are held up to be “smart, capable, kind and/or deserving of the spotlight.”
For years conservatives gritted their teeth while filmmakers fawned over a procession of progressive figures. Ruth Bader Ginsburg – “RBG,” “On the Basis of Sex”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – “Knock Down the House”
Rep. Ilhan Omar – “Time for Ilhan”
President Barack Obama – “Southside with You,” “Barry”
If you sat through any of those, you know he’s right. Now it is happening with Michelle Obama. As I’ve noted before, Michelle Obama is adored by the left. Her book Becoming was published in 2018 and quickly became a best-seller. In 2019, a journal was published in coordination with the book. The autobiography was named the best selling autobiography in 2019. It was published by Bertelsmann’s Penguin Random House division (German) and she received an advance of more than $60M. Now she’s milking it a little bit more with a documentary about herself.
“I’m figuring out, what do I want to do? What do I care about?” the former first lady says in a clip from the documentary. “It takes time to process your life and figure out what it all means.” Streaming May 6, “Becoming” arrives at a defining moment in Obama’s life. A few years removed from the East Wing, the widely admired first lady’s influence remains evident. She’s maintained a foothold in American culture, and the presumptive Democratic nominee, former vice president Joe Biden, recently said he would choose her as his running mate “in a heartbeat.” She’s made clear that she does not want to run for office, but Biden’s remark raises the same question Obama asks of herself in the film: How will she choose to wield her power?
Michelle Obama sounds a whole lot more like Hillary Clinton than she does, say, Laura Bush, doesn’t she? Can you imagine Laura Bush sitting around trying to “figure out what it all means”? No, of course not. She left the White House and got on with her life. She sure didn’t leave with a $60M book advance, either. I don’t think she’s given to many navel-gazing moments.
The book tour from which this documentary springs was a huge hit with her supporters. Whole stadiums and arenas were sold out in a very short time and the tickets were certainly not cheap. She made a couple of revelations that readers previously didn’t know like she has never forgiven President Trump for his birther comments and she had fertility issues when she was trying to get pregnant, but other than that it is all about the greatness of Michelle’s life. As I said, she is much like Hillary.
One person from more conservative circles is happy to speak up for Michelle Obama. Anita McBride, the former chief of staff to former first lady Laura Bush, speaks favorably of Michelle, as the Bushes do. She credits Michelle’s “extraordinary use of media and pop culture and television” as a way to form a connection with her supporters, though at first, she was a reluctant first lady.
McBride, who directs programming on first ladies at American University, also noted that the transition from public service to private citizenship encourages political figures to take stock of what they’ve accomplished and determine what they hope to carry on. The Netflix deal is a way for the Obamas to continue elevating “stories of challenge related to the programs and initiatives that were a part of their White House life,” said McBride, who added that the producing partnership is unprecedented among first couples in terms of “the reach and the impact that they want to continue to have.”
Michelle Obama has been very visible since she left the White House. She and her husband continue to live in Washington, D.C., and travel the world promoting their agendas. She isn’t bashful when it comes to doing get out the vote drives and formed an organization to do just that along with her celebrity friends. She is currently promoting mail-in voting.
When President Trump’s critics complain about his narcissistic tendencies, I often wonder why they don’t make a connection to the former president. Do they not realize that the personality trait was so strong in President Obama that it seemed almost normal for voters when Trump threw his hat in the ring. Obama normalized many things for which Trump is now criticized. Just as conservatives criticized Obama, liberals criticize Trump. The Clintons took post-presidency paydays to an extreme level. The Bushes were more modest about it but now the Obamas are going the Clinton route. You know whatever Trump does after his presidency will be criticized without irony by Michelle and Barack’s supporters. After all, the very first Netflix project the Obamas announced through their production company was one that is thought to be a diss to President Trump.


hotair--2020-04-30--US intelligence: COVID-19 evolved naturally, but laboratory leak possible

Biological weapon ?
Nope .
Biological accident ?
Maaayyyyybeeeee .
After being tasked by Donald Trump to investigate the origins of COVID-19 and the response from China and the World Health Organization , DNI Richard Grenell reported on the first part of that mandate .
The novel coronavirus responsible for a pandemic “ was not manmade or genetically modified , ” but the possibility of a lab accident triggering the outbreak remains open : The Office of the Director of National Intelligence confirmed on-record for the first time Thursday that the U.S. intelligence community is investigating whether the coronavirus outbreak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ globe , started as the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan , China .
“ The entire Intelligence Community has been consistently providing critical support to U.S. policymakers and those responding to the COVID-19 virus , which originated in China .
The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified , ” a statement from the office of acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell said .
“ As we do in all crises , the Community ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critical intelligence on issues vital to U.S. national security .
The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan , ” the statement said .
The “ biological weapon ” theory always did have more holes in it than a truckload of Swiss cheese .
In the first place , China wouldn ’ t have detonated it in Wuhan near two of its research facilities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anywhere in China at all .
They would have dropped it someplace else .
Second , the obvious reaction to such an outbreak would have been economic isolation of precisely the kind that Trump was imposing through his trade war , which suddenly looks even wiser than it did before .
In fact , the outbreak has disastrous long-term implications for China that far outweigh any potential benefits from a bioweapon .
The US had already taken a heightened interest in pulling back supply chains from China .
That has now become a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relocation of manufacturing back to the US , especially on critical supplies .
China has been globalization ’ s biggest beneficiary , both economically and technologically through its systematic theft of intellectual property in those chains .
That has dried up , perhaps permanently .
The big news here is that the virus doesn ’ t appear to be a bioweapon that was accidentally released , either .
Epidemiologists had reached that conclusion by studying the virus and its leap from bats to humans ; they had warned for years that such a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , given the conditions in China surrounding their “ wet markets ” and animal-handling protocols .
It ’ s also not the first coronavirus to make that leap over the last few decades in that manner — it ’ s just the worst .
That ’ s not to say that it didn ’ t escape from a laboratory .
The ODNI statement emphasizes that there is insufficient evidence in either direction , which means that anything ’ s possible .
That has raised some eyebrows today , Politico reports : Current and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surprised by the release , and suggested it could be a sign that the intelligence community feels it is being pulled into a political battle .
The administration has been pressuring analysts , particularly at the CIA , to search for evidence that the virus came from a lab and that the World Health Organization helped China cover it up , according to a person briefed on the discussions .
ODNI ’ s statement does not rule out that possibility — but it emphasizes the fundamental role of the spy agencies : to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ search for a particular conclusion .
There is currently no evidence to support the theory that it came from a lab , said people briefed on the intelligence , but there is also no intelligence that would allow the agencies to explicitly rule out the possibility .
Maybe this is an attempt to push away from Trump ’ s declaration earlier this week , but there ’ s a simpler explanation for this statement .
The bioweapon hypothesis has gained considerable traction , and the scientists pushing back against it have been received @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intent to find ways to humiliate China over the COVID-19 outbreak , this is a statement against obvious interests for the ODNI .
In an extraordinary circumstance as this pandemic has created , transparency is the best choice to deal with conspiracy theorists .

Biological weapon? Nope. Biological accident? Maaayyyyybeeeee. After being tasked by Donald Trump to investigate the origins of COVID-19 and the response from China and the World Health Organization, DNI Richard Grenell reported on the first part of that mandate. The novel coronavirus responsible for a pandemic “was not manmade or genetically modified,” but the possibility of a lab accident triggering the outbreak remains open:
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence confirmed on-record for the first time Thursday that the U.S. intelligence community is investigating whether the coronavirus outbreak, which has wreaked havoc across the globe, started as the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan, China. “The entire Intelligence Community has been consistently providing critical support to U.S. policymakers and those responding to the COVID-19 virus, which originated in China. The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified,” a statement from the office of acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell said. “As we do in all crises, the Community’s experts respond by surging resources and producing critical intelligence on issues vital to U.S. national security. The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan,” the statement said.
The “biological weapon” theory always did have more holes in it than a truckload of Swiss cheese. In the first place, China wouldn’t have detonated it in Wuhan near two of its research facilities, which would make it obvious, nor anywhere in China at all. They would have dropped it someplace else. Second, the obvious reaction to such an outbreak would have been economic isolation of precisely the kind that Trump was imposing through his trade war, which suddenly looks even wiser than it did before.
In fact, the outbreak has disastrous long-term implications for China that far outweigh any potential benefits from a bioweapon. The US had already taken a heightened interest in pulling back supply chains from China. That has now become a stampede, with Congress proposing subsidizing the relocation of manufacturing back to the US, especially on critical supplies. China has been globalization’s biggest beneficiary, both economically and technologically through its systematic theft of intellectual property in those chains. That has dried up, perhaps permanently.
The big news here is that the virus doesn’t appear to be a bioweapon that was accidentally released, either. Epidemiologists had reached that conclusion by studying the virus and its leap from bats to humans; they had warned for years that such a leap was not just possible but probable, given the conditions in China surrounding their “wet markets” and animal-handling protocols. It’s also not the first coronavirus to make that leap over the last few decades in that manner — it’s just the worst.
That’s not to say that it didn’t escape from a laboratory. The ODNI statement emphasizes that there is insufficient evidence in either direction, which means that anything’s possible. That has raised some eyebrows today, Politico reports:
Current and former national security officials said they were surprised by the release, and suggested it could be a sign that the intelligence community feels it is being pulled into a political battle. The administration has been pressuring analysts, particularly at the CIA, to search for evidence that the virus came from a lab and that the World Health Organization helped China cover it up, according to a person briefed on the discussions. ODNI’s statement does not rule out that possibility — but it emphasizes the fundamental role of the spy agencies: to collect and analyze information, not to search for a particular conclusion. There is currently no evidence to support the theory that it came from a lab, said people briefed on the intelligence, but there is also no intelligence that would allow the agencies to explicitly rule out the possibility.
Maybe this is an attempt to push away from Trump’s declaration earlier this week, but there’s a simpler explanation for this statement. The bioweapon hypothesis has gained considerable traction, and the scientists pushing back against it have been received skeptically. Given Trump’s clear intent to find ways to humiliate China over the COVID-19 outbreak, this is a statement against obvious interests for the ODNI. In an extraordinary circumstance as this pandemic has created, transparency is the best choice to deal with conspiracy theorists.


hotair--2020-04-30--Tomorrow: Biden to address Tara Reade allegations on "Morning Joe"

Good lord .
I ’ m tempted to say Biden should just let Jill Biden interview him , given how well disposed Joe and Mika are to him .
But Jill would probably be a tougher interview considering the nature of the allegations .
Maybe Reade should rethink Hannity ’ s offer of an interview .
She ’ s reportedly negotiating with Chris Wallace instead , not wanting to be seen as a political pawn .
But if Biden ’ s going to stick to interviewers who are in the tank for him , she might as well do the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are going to be hall-of-famers .
Or … are they ?
He sounds pretty low-energy here when asked about Reade .
Mrs. Biden will not be joining her husband for tomorrow ’ s appearance , it seems .
Meanwhile , David Rutz asks a good question .
Why didn ’ t Scarborough and Brzezinski ask Biden about this a few weeks ago when they had the chance ?
It ’ s true .
The Times story was published on April 12 and the Bidens sat down with “ Morning Joe ” on April @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say that that was back before witnesses had come forward corroborating that Reade told them about sexual misconduct by Biden years ago .
But that ’ s not true .
According to the Times ’ s own story , “ A friend said that Ms. Reade told her about the alleged assault at the time , in 1993 .
A second friend recalled Ms. Reade telling her in 2008 that Mr. Biden had touched her inappropriately and that she ’ d had a traumatic experience while working in his office.
” Not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guess it would have ruined the bonhomie .
Eliana Johnson made a nice catch , remembering that Brzezinski has spoken in defense of Biden before when women have accused him of inappropriate behavior .
No one else has accused him of anything as inappropriate as Reade has but we ’ re all very familiar with his “ busy hands ” and weird habit of sniffing women ’ s hair .
Brzezinski happily went to bat for him about that last year : The first of eight women to accuse Biden of making unwanted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ op-ed in the New York Times Monday saying that Biden ’ s response to the allegations has fallen short of a true apology .
It came less than a week after Biden ’ s entry into the crowded Democratic presidential field and rapid ascent in primary polls , which is all playing out in the # MeToo era .
“ I can promise you , I know Joe Biden .
He went up behind her and took a deep breath because he was about to go on stage , ” Brzezinksi said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ he took a deep breath before he went on stage and you took it deeply personally , and now you ’ re writing a New York Times op-ed about it demanding an apology ?
This once again is completely ridiculous , and the rest of America thinks it ’ s ridiculous , too.
” That ’ s what Biden has waiting for him tomorrow morning .
But even without Mika tipping her hand last year , we all understand the dynamic .
Scarborough and Brzezinski have become two of the most strident Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more in 2015-16 to mainstream him as a credible presidential candidate than many of their colleagues did .
They ’ re not going to go out there and nuke the last best chance of ending Trump ’ s presidency by coming down hard on Biden .
It ’ s almost as ludicrous as the thought of Hannity skeptically grilling Reade .
Frankly , I ’ m not sure there ’ s anything they can ask that might cleverly maneuver Biden off of his “ never happened ” denials .
The most forceful thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he open his archives at the University of Delaware so that reporters can comb through them to see if there ’ s any material on Reade .
But he probably won ’ t agree to that , knowing how Trump ’ s oppo research team would take advantage .
If one of two things were different I think this story might have real legs even among Democrats .
If Trump hadn ’ t been accused of sexual misconduct by so many women himself , liberals would have a harder time waving away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , they ’ ll inevitably steer themselves into the position that even if Biden ’ s a predator Trump is a worse predator so at best # MeToo issues aren ’ t something that should affect anyone ’ s vote this fall .
“ It ’ s a wash. ” On the other hand , if Democrats had a runner-up in this year ’ s presidential primaries whom they believed might be stronger head-to-head against Trump then some might seize on the Reade allegations as a reason to oust Biden as nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
No doubt that ’ s exactly what Berniebros are hoping for .
But no one outside of Sanders ’ s own diehards thinks he ’ s more of a threat to Trump than Biden is , especially at a moment when Joe is leading in practically every battleground state .
( Fox News of all places dropped a New Hampshire poll last night showing Biden winning easily , by eight points . )
Democrats aren ’ t going to exchange Biden for a “ Trump versus socialism ” crapshoot instead .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe Joe , ” hope and pray that no documentary evidence surfaces to corroborate Reade , and trust that his selection of a woman VP will paper this over with skeptical voters who were otherwise inclined to support him .
Oh , and they ’ re going to stress how seriously # MeToo allegations should be taken , as Hakeem Jeffries did four times in the span of one sentence today .
All while refusing to take this one seriously at all .
Speaking of people not taking # MeToo seriously , here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s right , you know .

Good lord. I’m tempted to say Biden should just let Jill Biden interview him, given how well disposed Joe and Mika are to him.
But Jill would probably be a tougher interview considering the nature of the allegations.
Maybe Reade should rethink Hannity’s offer of an interview. She’s reportedly negotiating with Chris Wallace instead, not wanting to be seen as a political pawn. But if Biden’s going to stick to interviewers who are in the tank for him, she might as well do the same.
Tomorrow: Joe Biden joins @Morning_Joe to respond for the first time to the recent allegation of sexual assault — Michael Del Moro (@MikeDelMoro) April 30, 2020
Trump’s tweets afterward are going to be hall-of-famers. Or … are they? He sounds pretty low-energy here when asked about Reade.
Trump: It could be false accusations. I know all about false accusations. I’ve been falsely charged numerous times pic.twitter.com/7mLpk7YVLg — Acyn (@Acyn) April 30, 2020
Mrs. Biden will not be joining her husband for tomorrow’s appearance, it seems. Meanwhile, David Rutz asks a good question. Why didn’t Scarborough and Brzezinski ask Biden about this a few weeks ago when they had the chance?
Biden and his wife were on @Morning_Joe for more than 25 minutes four days after @nytimes published its investigation of Tara Reade assault charge. The hosts didn't bring up assault allegation. — David Rutz (@DavidRutz) April 30, 2020
It’s true. The Times story was published on April 12 and the Bidens sat down with “Morning Joe” on April 16. Joe and Mika would probably say that that was back before witnesses had come forward corroborating that Reade told them about sexual misconduct by Biden years ago. But that’s not true. According to the Times’s own story, “A friend said that Ms. Reade told her about the alleged assault at the time, in 1993. A second friend recalled Ms. Reade telling her in 2008 that Mr. Biden had touched her inappropriately and that she’d had a traumatic experience while working in his office.”
Not a single question on April 16. I guess it would have ruined the bonhomie.
Eliana Johnson made a nice catch, remembering that Brzezinski has spoken in defense of Biden before when women have accused him of inappropriate behavior. No one else has accused him of anything as inappropriate as Reade has but we’re all very familiar with his “busy hands” and weird habit of sniffing women’s hair. Brzezinski happily went to bat for him about that last year:
The first of eight women to accuse Biden of making unwanted contact with them, Flores penned an op-ed in the New York Times Monday saying that Biden’s response to the allegations has fallen short of a true apology. It came less than a week after Biden’s entry into the crowded Democratic presidential field and rapid ascent in primary polls, which is all playing out in the #MeToo era. “I can promise you, I know Joe Biden. He went up behind her and took a deep breath because he was about to go on stage,” Brzezinksi said. “He was going on stage, he took a deep breath before he went on stage and you took it deeply personally, and now you’re writing a New York Times op-ed about it demanding an apology? This once again is completely ridiculous, and the rest of America thinks it’s ridiculous, too.”
That’s what Biden has waiting for him tomorrow morning. But even without Mika tipping her hand last year, we all understand the dynamic. Scarborough and Brzezinski have become two of the most strident Trump critics in big media despite having done more in 2015-16 to mainstream him as a credible presidential candidate than many of their colleagues did. They’re not going to go out there and nuke the last best chance of ending Trump’s presidency by coming down hard on Biden. It’s almost as ludicrous as the thought of Hannity skeptically grilling Reade. Frankly, I’m not sure there’s anything they can ask that might cleverly maneuver Biden off of his “never happened” denials. The most forceful thing they could do would be to demand that he open his archives at the University of Delaware so that reporters can comb through them to see if there’s any material on Reade. But he probably won’t agree to that, knowing how Trump’s oppo research team would take advantage.
If one of two things were different I think this story might have real legs even among Democrats. If Trump hadn’t been accused of sexual misconduct by so many women himself, liberals would have a harder time waving away Reade’s complaint. As it is, they’ll inevitably steer themselves into the position that even if Biden’s a predator Trump is a worse predator so at best #MeToo issues aren’t something that should affect anyone’s vote this fall. “It’s a wash.”
On the other hand, if Democrats had a runner-up in this year’s presidential primaries whom they believed might be stronger head-to-head against Trump then some might seize on the Reade allegations as a reason to oust Biden as nominee and replace him with the second-place finisher. No doubt that’s exactly what Berniebros are hoping for. But no one outside of Sanders’s own diehards thinks he’s more of a threat to Trump than Biden is, especially at a moment when Joe is leading in practically every battleground state. (Fox News of all places dropped a New Hampshire poll last night showing Biden winning easily, by eight points.) Democrats aren’t going to exchange Biden for a “Trump versus socialism” crapshoot instead. They’re going to say “I believe Joe,” hope and pray that no documentary evidence surfaces to corroborate Reade, and trust that his selection of a woman VP will paper this over with skeptical voters who were otherwise inclined to support him.
Oh, and they’re going to stress how seriously #MeToo allegations should be taken, as Hakeem Jeffries did four times in the span of one sentence today. All while refusing to take this one seriously at all.
Speaking of people not taking #MeToo seriously, here’s your exit question. Griswold’s right, you know.
https://twitter.com/HashtagGriswold/status/1255967289880559616


hotair--2020-04-30--Reade: If we can find my complaint in Biden's archives that will prove his staff lied

The Daily Caller published a story today in which Tara Reade pushes strongly for the opening of Joe Biden ’ s Senate archives in order to search for notes or complaints she claims she filed at the time .
2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden ’ s accuser Tara Reade says a complaint she filed with the Senate personnel office would prove that former Biden aides Dennis Toner and Ted Kaufman have lied in their denials of her story… Complaints of this kind were handled by the Senate Office of Fair Employment Practices in 1993 , which was replaced by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) following the passage of the Congressional Accountability Act in 1995 .
Reade tried to locate the form she filled out in 2019 but says was told it would have been returned to Biden ’ s office .
Now she believes it or something that proves she reported her problems to her superiors must be in Biden ’ s archive .
And beyond whatever details those notes show , they would demonstrate that the former Biden staffers who have denied any knowledge of her complaint were lying .
“ That would actually confirm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went to my supervisors about .
It would confirm the serving of the drinks , ” she said , referring to her allegation that Biden asked for her to serve drinks at a fundraiser because he liked her legs .
She added that it would confirm that Biden ’ s “ staff lied on the record and said that I never had meetings , when I had more than five meetings total – informal and formal , with the three of them at different times throughout my tenure.
” Ted Kaufman told the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know her .
She did not come to me .
If she had , I would have remembered her.
” But Reade said she recalls Kaufman taking notes during a meeting he held with her .
Reade believes those notes were added to her file and are probably still sitting there in the Biden archives .
In addition , Reade believes the timeline established by the records in the archive would show that shortly after she complained she was stripped of duties supervising interns and told to sit in a windowless office and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words , the documents could establish what she claims was retaliation for her complaints .
Speaking of Biden , Reade told the Daily Caller , “ You ended my job after you assaulted me .
You claim to be the champion of women ’ s rights , but your public persona does not match your personal actions.
” Since Biden has agreed to appear on Morning Joe tomorrow , I guess we ’ ll find out whether or not he agrees to open the files and let reporters find out what is in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is one that Reade doesn ’ t seem to consider .
What if all those documents did exist but they were removed from the files long ago .
How do we know , for instance , that Ted Kaufman didn ’ t take notes in that meeting with Reade and then put them in the circular file as soon as she walked out of his office ?
That ’ s not to suggest we shouldn ’ t look , but I don ’ t think powerful people tend to leave information that could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for decades .
If they ’ re capable of lying now to protect Joe Biden , they were surely capable of covering up for him back then as well .

The Daily Caller published a story today in which Tara Reade pushes strongly for the opening of Joe Biden’s Senate archives in order to search for notes or complaints she claims she filed at the time.
2020 presidential candidate Joe Biden’s accuser Tara Reade says a complaint she filed with the Senate personnel office would prove that former Biden aides Dennis Toner and Ted Kaufman have lied in their denials of her story… Complaints of this kind were handled by the Senate Office of Fair Employment Practices in 1993, which was replaced by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR) following the passage of the Congressional Accountability Act in 1995.
Reade tried to locate the form she filled out in 2019 but says was told it would have been returned to Biden’s office. Now she believes it or something that proves she reported her problems to her superiors must be in Biden’s archive. And beyond whatever details those notes show, they would demonstrate that the former Biden staffers who have denied any knowledge of her complaint were lying.
“That would actually confirm that there was an issue that I went to my supervisors about. It would confirm the serving of the drinks,” she said, referring to her allegation that Biden asked for her to serve drinks at a fundraiser because he liked her legs. She added that it would confirm that Biden’s “staff lied on the record and said that I never had meetings, when I had more than five meetings total – informal and formal, with the three of them at different times throughout my tenure.”
Ted Kaufman told the NY Times, “I did not know her. She did not come to me. If she had, I would have remembered her.” But Reade said she recalls Kaufman taking notes during a meeting he held with her. Reade believes those notes were added to her file and are probably still sitting there in the Biden archives.
In addition, Reade believes the timeline established by the records in the archive would show that shortly after she complained she was stripped of duties supervising interns and told to sit in a windowless office and look for another job. In other words, the documents could establish what she claims was retaliation for her complaints.
Speaking of Biden, Reade told the Daily Caller, “You ended my job after you assaulted me. You claim to be the champion of women’s rights, but your public persona does not match your personal actions.”
Since Biden has agreed to appear on Morning Joe tomorrow, I guess we’ll find out whether or not he agrees to open the files and let reporters find out what is in them. My final point on this is one that Reade doesn’t seem to consider. What if all those documents did exist but they were removed from the files long ago. How do we know, for instance, that Ted Kaufman didn’t take notes in that meeting with Reade and then put them in the circular file as soon as she walked out of his office?
That’s not to suggest we shouldn’t look, but I don’t think powerful people tend to leave information that could damage them hanging around in the files for decades. If they’re capable of lying now to protect Joe Biden, they were surely capable of covering up for him back then as well.


hotair--2020-04-30--Good news: After 13,000 deaths, NYC finally ready to disinfect subway cars daily

So soon ?
I was thinking we could wait until there are 20,000 dead to begin minimally responsible sanitation efforts on a turbo-charged viral incubator like subway cars .
Millions of people packed in cheek by jowl in a cramped space , day after day at the start of the epidemic , with only sporadic disinfectant procedures until now .
At this point it ’ d probably be more cost-effective to skip the cleaning and just inject passengers with the virus as they come through the turnstiles .
The New York City subway system will get you anywhere you want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Village , or herd immunity .
Cuomo floated the idea of disinfecting subway cars every 24 hours at yesterday ’ s briefing and the whole world did a double take : You mean they ’ re not doing that already ?
They were not .
New York will stop subways for four hours every night to disinfect the trains , under an agreement between the state and city aimed at protecting the essential workers who rely on mass transit .
The plan will affect about 10,000 riders who use the trains between 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has had the smallest ridership since the pandemic .
It will require a lot of work from multiple agencies , but much of the effort will fall on the city , Governor Andrew Cuomo said Thursday at a press briefing… Before the agreement , the state ’ s Metropolitan Transportation Authority was cleaning buses and trains every 72 hours , but the virus can live for hours or even days on surfaces , the governor said .
Trains and buses should be disinfected every 24 hours , to protect the health of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Cuomo said .
“ You have to disinfect every place a hand could touch on a subway car .
Every rail , every pole , every door , ” said Cuomo at today ’ s briefing .
“ Or , coughing , sneezing , wherever droplets could land.
” Right .
That ’ s been apparent since the first hour of the first day of the epidemic .
And yet .
Do he and de Blasio know they ’ re supposed to wash their hands immediately after they wipe or do they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cuomo probably does .
De Blasio , eh .
They were loathe to take this step because because taking the trains offline for a few hours will present a hardship for first responders who use the subway to get to work overnight .
Cuomo ’ s looking to “ shuttle buses , dollar vans and even for-hire vehicles ” to fill that gap .
It ’ s unclear to me , though , if it was the threat from the virus that finally prompted him to take this step — again , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his revulsion towards the homeless , whose habit of sleeping in subway cars he called “ disgusting ” a few days ago .
Clearing out the cars in the middle of the evening will partially solve that problem .
What did poor sanitation of subway cars do to feed the outbreak in New York ?
Circumstantial evidence from a new paper by MIT economist Jeffrey Harris : “ Principal transmission vehicle ” is a … weighty phrase .
What remains to be seen , and won ’ t be seen until the City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what use even 24-hour cleanings are in holding down the second wave .
A spotless subway car will be crawling with germs after morning rush hour , one would think .
That problem can be partially solved by having MTA employees wipe down poles and rails intermittently during the day while the trains are running but nothing can be done about people breathing each other ’ s air when they ’ re crowded in together during busy times .
Mask-wearing , which presumably will soon be mandatory on the subway , will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop infection altogether in conditions like that .
Anyway , congrats to Cuomo for making this a priority , even if it came about eight weeks after it would have been useful .
De Blasio would have thought of it but he was too busy ranting about Jews online .
Here ’ s the governor at today ’ s briefing .
Exit question : In worrying about new outbreaks , should we maybe focus less on people hanging out at the beach and more on whether major mass-transit arteries are being allowed to @ @ @ @ @

So soon? I was thinking we could wait until there are 20,000 dead to begin minimally responsible sanitation efforts on a turbo-charged viral incubator like subway cars.
Millions of people packed in cheek by jowl in a cramped space, day after day at the start of the epidemic, with only sporadic disinfectant procedures until now. At this point it’d probably be more cost-effective to skip the cleaning and just inject passengers with the virus as they come through the turnstiles.
The New York City subway system will get you anywhere you want to go: Central Park, the Village, or herd immunity.
Cuomo floated the idea of disinfecting subway cars every 24 hours at yesterday’s briefing and the whole world did a double take: You mean they’re not doing that already? They were not.
New York will stop subways for four hours every night to disinfect the trains, under an agreement between the state and city aimed at protecting the essential workers who rely on mass transit. The plan will affect about 10,000 riders who use the trains between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m., a period that has had the smallest ridership since the pandemic. It will require a lot of work from multiple agencies, but much of the effort will fall on the city, Governor Andrew Cuomo said Thursday at a press briefing… Before the agreement, the state’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority was cleaning buses and trains every 72 hours, but the virus can live for hours or even days on surfaces, the governor said. Trains and buses should be disinfected every 24 hours, to protect the health of essential workers who rely on mass transit, Cuomo said.
“You have to disinfect every place a hand could touch on a subway car. Every rail, every pole, every door,” said Cuomo at today’s briefing. “Or, coughing, sneezing, wherever droplets could land.” Right. That’s been apparent since the first hour of the first day of the epidemic. And yet.
Do he and de Blasio know they’re supposed to wash their hands immediately after they wipe or do they normally wait 72 hours? I think Cuomo probably does. De Blasio, eh.
They were loathe to take this step because because taking the trains offline for a few hours will present a hardship for first responders who use the subway to get to work overnight. Cuomo’s looking to “shuttle buses, dollar vans and even for-hire vehicles” to fill that gap. It’s unclear to me, though, if it was the threat from the virus that finally prompted him to take this step — again, it’s a little late — or his revulsion towards the homeless, whose habit of sleeping in subway cars he called “disgusting” a few days ago. Clearing out the cars in the middle of the evening will partially solve that problem.
What did poor sanitation of subway cars do to feed the outbreak in New York? Circumstantial evidence from a new paper by MIT economist Jeffrey Harris:
“Principal transmission vehicle” is a … weighty phrase. What remains to be seen, and won’t be seen until the City is back open for business, is of what use even 24-hour cleanings are in holding down the second wave. A spotless subway car will be crawling with germs after morning rush hour, one would think. That problem can be partially solved by having MTA employees wipe down poles and rails intermittently during the day while the trains are running but nothing can be done about people breathing each other’s air when they’re crowded in together during busy times. Mask-wearing, which presumably will soon be mandatory on the subway, will help. But it won’t stop infection altogether in conditions like that.
Anyway, congrats to Cuomo for making this a priority, even if it came about eight weeks after it would have been useful. De Blasio would have thought of it but he was too busy ranting about Jews online. Here’s the governor at today’s briefing. Exit question: In worrying about new outbreaks, should we maybe focus less on people hanging out at the beach and more on whether major mass-transit arteries are being allowed to become viral petri dishes?


hotair--2020-04-30--Politico: The media has done a pretty solid job covering this Tara Reade story

This piece by Jack Shafer at Politico today was always inevitable .
The only real surprise here is that CNN ’ s Brian Stelter didn ’ t write it first .
But no matter , you can be sure that this vague and pathetic defense of the media ’ s credibility will be widely admired and imitated by other “ media reporters ” and a whole phalanx of column writers who want to defend the honor of journalism even if it makes no sense to do so .
About a month ago , Tara Reade , a former Senate staffer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , appeared on Katie Halper ’ s podcast and accused Biden of having sexually assaulted her in 1993 .
Through a spokesman , Biden has denied the charges .
( This isn ’ t the first time Reade has made Biden news .
A year ago , she told a California newspaper that Biden touched her neck and shoulders without permission . )
But within days , left , right , and libertarian critics were lining up to ask why the mainstream media was ignoring the accusation .
Why weren ’ t reporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ latest charge ?
Reporters hadn ’ t hesitated to chase the sexual assault charges against Brett Kavanaugh after he was nominated to the Supreme Court .
Was a double standard dictating that the press must sleuth after accused Republicans but cover up for Democrats ?
This next line may be my favorite in the entire piece : Wow , six whole reporters !
Notice he doesn ’ t spell out that it took nearly three weeks for that torpedo to hit the bow .
That ’ s pretty important since that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about .
Where was the urgency the media had shown with Judge Kavanaugh ?
Shafer has an answer for that : “ Journalistically sound cases could be made both to chase the allegation or to slow-walk it , so don ’ t look to me to damn outlets that haven ’ t gone full-tilt on it.
” Journalistically sound cases could have been made to slow-walk Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick too , but that didn ’ t happen .
The NY Times jumped on Swetnick ’ s story the same day and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here I have to once again credit Ben Smith who put that point to NY Times executive editor Dean Baquet about why Reade was being treated so differently .
Baquet ’ s repsonse was a confused word salad : Kavanaugh was already in a public forum in a large way .
Kavanaugh ’ s status as a Supreme Court justice was in question because of a very serious allegation .
And when I say in a public way , I don ’ t mean in the public way of Tara Reade ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person in America , they didn ’ t know about the Tara Reade case .
So I thought in that case , if The New York Times was going to introduce this to readers , we needed to introduce it with some reporting and perspective .
Kavanaugh was in a very different situation .
It was a live , ongoing story that had become the biggest political story in the country .
It was just a different news judgment moment .
He ’ s totally reversed the parties here .
Julie Swetnick wasn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s the point .
The Times helped make her one .
Meanwhile , Joe Biden is a household name and his nomination is a big deal .
But Jack Shafer just skips over all of that even as he admits that the big TV networks do seem strangely allergic to Tara Reade even now .
But Shafer has an answer for that too and , wow , is it pathetic .
It ’ s so pathetic that he apologizes for it as soon as he offers it : I might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the fix is in for Biden at “ liberal ” TV news networks if not for Jake Tapper ’ s interview one year ago on his Sunday show , CNN ’ s State of the Union , where he interviewed former Nevada state Assemblywoman Lucy Flores for 12 minutes about Biden inappropriately touching her and kissing the back of her head in 2014 .
( Here ’ s the video of the interview , which CNN titled “ First TV interview with Lucy Flores on Biden accusation.
” ) I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year ago should give the mainstream press a permanent pass from all Biden criticism , but it does argue against the notion that the press has formed a phalanx in front of the candidate .
I want to ridicule this but I think it may be beyond ridicule .
The best I can do is to restate his argument , which goes like this : The fact that one reporter at one network interviewed a different person about a less serious allegation 13 months ago , shows the media is okay .
Up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ straw man argument : For a guy who does this for a living and gets paid for it , Shafer doesn ’ t seem to know much about conservative media criticism .
And make no mistake , that ’ s what he really cares about here .
That ’ s why he ’ s creating this stupid strawman argument about “ libs ” breaking someone ’ s fingers as if conservatives imagine that ’ s how this works .
And for the record , this isn ’ t the only time Beinart has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the progressive groupthink .
Again , pointing out one author or one person at CNN who maybe shows some willingness to break from the herd does not prove all is well .
The press might not have reacted as swiftly or as aggressively as some would have liked in reporting out a 27-year-old allegation it first learned about from a March 25 podcast .
We can—and should—criticize broadcasters for not putting the question directly to Biden .
But as coverage from the Post , Times , Business Insider , the Intercept , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ press avert its glance .
Over the past week , the press has accelerated its pace from a cruise to a sprint , which is a good thing .
If you ’ re keeping score at home , ding the broadcasters for their meekness at confronting Biden but award a gold star to print and digital outlets that have reported the story out giving the accuser her say without giving Biden a dose of vigilante justice .
Business Insider and the Intercept have carried this story when no one else wanted to touch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slow-walkers at the NY Times is an insult .
If you ’ re keeping score at home the score that matters is the hundreds of reporters who generated saturation coverage of the Kavanaugh allegations versus the handful of timid stories we ’ ve seen about Joe Biden so far .
And yes , the fact that most networks haven ’ t touched this and Biden himself hasn ’ t been asked proves the same point : The media and the activists and women ’ s groups are all treating this allegation very , @ @ @

This piece by Jack Shafer at Politico today was always inevitable. The only real surprise here is that CNN’s Brian Stelter didn’t write it first. But no matter, you can be sure that this vague and pathetic defense of the media’s credibility will be widely admired and imitated by other “media reporters” and a whole phalanx of column writers who want to defend the honor of journalism even if it makes no sense to do so.
About a month ago, Tara Reade, a former Senate staffer for Joe Biden in the early 1990s, appeared on Katie Halper’s podcast and accused Biden of having sexually assaulted her in 1993. Through a spokesman, Biden has denied the charges. (This isn’t the first time Reade has made Biden news. A year ago, she told a California newspaper that Biden touched her neck and shoulders without permission.) But within days, left, right, and libertarian critics were lining up to ask why the mainstream media was ignoring the accusation. Why weren’t reporters asking Biden directly about Reade’s latest charge? Reporters hadn’t hesitated to chase the sexual assault charges against Brett Kavanaugh after he was nominated to the Supreme Court. Was a double standard dictating that the press must sleuth after accused Republicans but cover up for Democrats?
This next line may be my favorite in the entire piece:
The double-standard theory took a torpedo to the bow on April 12, when the Washington Post and the New York Times published accounts of Reade’s charges. The Associated Press published its own investigation on April 13…It’s an ironclad rule of journalism that it’s exceedingly hard to complain something isn’t getting covered once the Post and Times assign a combined six credited reporters to the story.
Wow, six whole reporters! Notice he doesn’t spell out that it took nearly three weeks for that torpedo to hit the bow. That’s pretty important since that’s exactly what the critics had been complaining about. Where was the urgency the media had shown with Judge Kavanaugh? Shafer has an answer for that: “Journalistically sound cases could be made both to chase the allegation or to slow-walk it, so don’t look to me to damn outlets that haven’t gone full-tilt on it.”
Journalistically sound cases could have been made to slow-walk Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick too, but that didn’t happen. The NY Times jumped on Swetnick’s story the same day and repeated everything she claimed without checking it. Here I have to once again credit Ben Smith who put that point to NY Times executive editor Dean Baquet about why Reade was being treated so differently. Baquet’s repsonse was a confused word salad:
Kavanaugh was already in a public forum in a large way. Kavanaugh’s status as a Supreme Court justice was in question because of a very serious allegation. And when I say in a public way, I don’t mean in the public way of Tara Reade’s. If you ask the average person in America, they didn’t know about the Tara Reade case. So I thought in that case, if The New York Times was going to introduce this to readers, we needed to introduce it with some reporting and perspective. Kavanaugh was in a very different situation. It was a live, ongoing story that had become the biggest political story in the country. It was just a different news judgment moment.
He’s totally reversed the parties here. Julie Swetnick wasn’t a household name either. That’s the point. The Times helped make her one. Meanwhile, Joe Biden is a household name and his nomination is a big deal. But Jack Shafer just skips over all of that even as he admits that the big TV networks do seem strangely allergic to Tara Reade even now.
On Tuesday, the media critics at NewsBusters charted the slim coverage of the Biden charges on CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, and PBS. (It should go without saying that Fox News Channel has run hot on the story.) According to NewsBuster’s calculations, ABC, NBC, CNN and MSNBC have all interviewed Biden recently but not one of 77 questions they asked of him between March 25 and April 27 has been about Reade’s charges. There can be no finessing around this line score: The broadcasters deferred to Biden.
But Shafer has an answer for that too and, wow, is it pathetic. It’s so pathetic that he apologizes for it as soon as he offers it:
I might be tempted to second NewsBuster’s view that the fix is in for Biden at “liberal” TV news networks if not for Jake Tapper’s interview one year ago on his Sunday show, CNN’s State of the Union, where he interviewed former Nevada state Assemblywoman Lucy Flores for 12 minutes about Biden inappropriately touching her and kissing the back of her head in 2014. (Here’s the video of the interview, which CNN titled “First TV interview with Lucy Flores on Biden accusation.”) I’m not suggesting that one interview from a year ago should give the mainstream press a permanent pass from all Biden criticism, but it does argue against the notion that the press has formed a phalanx in front of the candidate.
I want to ridicule this but I think it may be beyond ridicule. The best I can do is to restate his argument, which goes like this: The fact that one reporter at one network interviewed a different person about a less serious allegation 13 months ago, shows the media is okay. Up next, the world’s biggest straw man argument:
On Tuesday, Atlantic contributor Peter Beinart called on Biden to release his senatorial papers, now being held at the University of Delaware, to help sort out Reade’s claims. (She says a sexual harassment claim she filed against Biden in 1993 might be in his papers. She did not keep a copy for herself.) The Atlantic’s status as one of the glittery jewels in the liberal media crown cannot be denied. If the libs were so determined to silence this story, wouldn’t Beinart’s editors have broken his typing fingers?
For a guy who does this for a living and gets paid for it, Shafer doesn’t seem to know much about conservative media criticism. And make no mistake, that’s what he really cares about here. That’s why he’s creating this stupid strawman argument about “libs” breaking someone’s fingers as if conservatives imagine that’s how this works. And for the record, this isn’t the only time Beinart has written something for the Atlantic which cut against the progressive groupthink. Again, pointing out one author or one person at CNN who maybe shows some willingness to break from the herd does not prove all is well.
The press might not have reacted as swiftly or as aggressively as some would have liked in reporting out a 27-year-old allegation it first learned about from a March 25 podcast. We can—and should—criticize broadcasters for not putting the question directly to Biden. But as coverage from the Post, Times, Business Insider, the Intercept, and others show, neither did the press avert its glance. Over the past week, the press has accelerated its pace from a cruise to a sprint, which is a good thing. If you’re keeping score at home, ding the broadcasters for their meekness at confronting Biden but award a gold star to print and digital outlets that have reported the story out giving the accuser her say without giving Biden a dose of vigilante justice.
Business Insider and the Intercept have carried this story when no one else wanted to touch it. Lumping them in with the slow-walkers at the NY Times is an insult. If you’re keeping score at home the score that matters is the hundreds of reporters who generated saturation coverage of the Kavanaugh allegations versus the handful of timid stories we’ve seen about Joe Biden so far. And yes, the fact that most networks haven’t touched this and Biden himself hasn’t been asked proves the same point: The media and the activists and women’s groups are all treating this allegation very, very differently.


hotair--2020-04-30--Today's hot topics on #TEMS: FBI's Flynn flam, Pelosi's Biden scam, COVID-19 program, earmark exam,

Today's hot topics on #TEMS: FBI's Flynn flam, Pelosi's Biden scam, COVID-19 program, earmark exam, and more!

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show ( 4 pm ET ) , we have another great lineup for the news of the day !
The show will be streamed on Hot Air ’ s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook .
Join us as we welcome : • Duane “ Generalissimo ” Patterson brings us up to date on the week ’ s top stories and gives us a preview of tomorrow ’ s Hugh Hewitt show .
We ’ ll talk about the newest developments in the Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credibility on # MeToo in their Joe Biden defense , Biden ’ s appointment of “ waitress sandwich ” bro Chris Dodd to his VP vetting team , and more !
• Is it time to rethink earmarks — and anonymous sourcing ?
SiriusXM ’ s chief DC correspondent Olivier Knox joins us to discuss both issues — so don ’ t miss it !
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page .
Be sure to join us , and don ’ t forget @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my Facebook page , too !
How can Republicans and conservatives keep winning after 2016 ?
Find out in GOING RED , published in April from Crown Forum !

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have another great lineup for the news of the day! The show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook.
Join us as we welcome:
Duane “Generalissimo” Patterson brings us up to date on the week’s top stories and gives us a preview of tomorrow’s Hugh Hewitt show. We’ll talk about the newest developments in the Michael Flynn case, the collapse of Democratic credibility on #MeToo in their Joe Biden defense, Biden’s appointment of “waitress sandwich” bro Chris Dodd to his VP vetting team, and more!
Is it time to rethink earmarks — and anonymous sourcing? SiriusXM’s chief DC correspondent Olivier Knox joins us to discuss both issues — so don’t miss it!
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, and don’t forget to keep up with the debate on my Facebook page, too!
How can Republicans and conservatives keep winning after 2016? Find out in GOING RED, published in April from Crown Forum!