hotair--2020-05-01--Mika to Biden: So we're supposed to believe all women -- "unless it pertains to you?"

Many of us will owe an apology after this interview — to Morning Joe , not to Joe Biden , and more specifically to Mika Brzezinski .
Everyone assumed that their big get of having Biden finally address the Tara Reade allegations had come about because of Morning Joe ’ s track record of less-than-harrowing treatment of major political candidates in campaign mode .
Team Biden must have assumed that Biden would get some softball set-ups for his denials .
Big .
Mistake .
Instead , Brzezinski shredded Biden over his double standards and demanded access to Biden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s archive .
Biden was clearly taken aback , and at one point querulously exclaimed , “ I don ’ t know what else I can say to you !
” It started off with the same abject personal denial that Biden finally issued right before going on the air : As in his statement , Biden denied that his records at the University of Delaware had any mention of Reade .
Brzezinski didn ’ t let that go , however , and asked why Biden ’ s not making the records @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s claim .
Biden sounded confused by the question as well as how a search could be performed , and ended up refusing flat-out to make the records available even for a limited search : We ’ ll have more on Biden ’ s “ open book ” claim in a later post .
Brzezinski then demanded that Biden address the double standard on # MeToo claims , asking Biden whether he regretted his comments during the Kavanaugh hearings .
“ Are women to be believed , unless it pertains to you ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 comments in response : That ’ s not what Biden said during the Kavanaugh hearings .
This is what Biden set as the new standard for accusations : “ For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus , nationally , you ’ ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she ’ s talking about is real , whether or not she forgets facts , whether or not it ’ s been made worse or better over time .
But nobody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jumping into a cauldron.
” In fact , Biden is saying that the standard should be changed to fit his own circumstance .
He went so far as to say that the woman has to prove her allegations are true before people should presume them to be so .
We used to call that due process back before Democrats set up a Salem witchcraft trial for Brett Kavanaugh — and indeed before Biden set one up for Clarence Thomas , too .
About the only disaster that didn ’ t happen for Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He did manage to keep up with Brzezinski , for the most part , even if he couldn ’ t come up with defensible answers to her tough questioning .
Brzezinski made Biden look defensive , secretive , contradictory , and completely dishonest , especially when it came to his records .
Kudos to the Morning Joe team , and our condolences to the Team Biden staffer about to get fired for setting up this interview in the first place .

Many of us will owe an apology after this interview — to Morning Joe, not to Joe Biden, and more specifically to Mika Brzezinski. Everyone assumed that their big get of having Biden finally address the Tara Reade allegations had come about because of Morning Joe’s track record of less-than-harrowing treatment of major political candidates in campaign mode. Team Biden must have assumed that Biden would get some softball set-ups for his denials.
Big. Mistake. Instead, Brzezinski shredded Biden over his double standards and demanded access to Biden’s official papers at the University of Delaware’s archive. Biden was clearly taken aback, and at one point querulously exclaimed, “I don’t know what else I can say to you!”
It started off with the same abject personal denial that Biden finally issued right before going on the air:
As in his statement, Biden denied that his records at the University of Delaware had any mention of Reade. Brzezinski didn’t let that go, however, and asked why Biden’s not making the records available for others to verify Biden’s claim. Biden sounded confused by the question as well as how a search could be performed, and ended up refusing flat-out to make the records available even for a limited search:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z41rMNaA7X8
We’ll have more on Biden’s “open book” claim in a later post. Brzezinski then demanded that Biden address the double standard on #MeToo claims, asking Biden whether he regretted his comments during the Kavanaugh hearings. “Are women to be believed, unless it pertains to you?”
Biden flat-out lied about his September 2018 comments in response:
"Do you regret what you said during the Kavanaugh hearing?" Joe Biden: "What I said during the Kavanaugh hearings was that she had a right to be heard. The fact that she came forward, the presumption would be that she was telling the truth unless she wasn't telling the truth." pic.twitter.com/ZkG6rf281b — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) May 1, 2020
That’s not what Biden said during the Kavanaugh hearings. This is what Biden set as the new standard for accusations:
“For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real, whether or not she forgets facts, whether or not it’s been made worse or better over time. But nobody fails to understand that this is like jumping into a cauldron.”
In fact, Biden is saying that the standard should be changed to fit his own circumstance. He went so far as to say that the woman has to prove her allegations are true before people should presume them to be so. We used to call that due process back before Democrats set up a Salem witchcraft trial for Brett Kavanaugh — and indeed before Biden set one up for Clarence Thomas, too.
About the only disaster that didn’t happen for Biden in this interview was becoming incoherent. He did manage to keep up with Brzezinski, for the most part, even if he couldn’t come up with defensible answers to her tough questioning. Brzezinski made Biden look defensive, secretive, contradictory, and completely dishonest, especially when it came to his records. Kudos to the Morning Joe team, and our condolences to the Team Biden staffer about to get fired for setting up this interview in the first place.
Here’s the full interview:


hotair--2020-05-01--Gallup: Trump's now above water in approval ratings

Keeping in mind that Gallup tends to always grade President Trump a bit better than some other national surveys , this news will still likely brighten the President ’ s mood on Friday morning .
Their latest approval survey shows that Trump ’ s overall approval rating has his head above water at 49/47 , tying the highest rating of his presidency and almost exactly matching the public ’ s approval of how he ’ s handling the novel coronavirus pandemic .
But while it represents a significant bump in overall approval ratings , it ’ s a ten-point dip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Given the dominance of the coronavirus situation in Americans ’ minds , it is not surprising that the president ’ s overall job approval rating nearly matches his approval rating on COVID-19 .
Gallup ’ s April 14-28 poll finds Trump ’ s overall job approval at 49 % , the same as in a March 13-22 poll but higher than his reading of 43 % in an April 1-14 survey .
To the extent that these variations are not a function of sampling error , they could be tied to Americans ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general and Americans ’ increasingly evaluating Trump on the COVID issue alone .
The poll was conducted as the number of new daily COVID-19 cases in the U.S. declined from its peak on April 5 .
The large majority of interviews were completed before the backlash over Trump ’ s remarks questioning whether injecting household disinfectant into people with the virus could be an effective treatment .
Digging into the crosstabs , there are signs that Trump is slowly winning over some portions of the public who aren ’ t part of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strongly approve ” is at 33 % , a mark he hasn ’ t seen since this time last year .
But his “ moderately approve ” number has climbed up to 16 % .
That group represents more of the persuadable voters who aren ’ t tied to Trump at the hip but are willing to give him a chance .
Conversely , the “ moderately disapprove ” figure remains at 11 % , the same as it was last summer .
But the “ strongly disapprove ” figure has dropped from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month .
That “ strongly disapprove ” figure is a surprise because it had been fairly steady over the past two years and I ’ d assumed it represented the hardcore liberals who wouldn ’ t have a nice thing to say about Trump if he suddenly demonstrated the ability to raise the dead and walk across the reflecting pool out on the mall .
The President is still having trouble winning back the women ’ s vote , however .
He still does well among men ( 53/44 ) but that number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 44/51 ) .
He ’ s also holding fairly steady on the racial front , with white voters supporting him 58/40 , but non-white voters still come up considerably short at 31/61 .
Given how much media coverage is focused on the pandemic pretty much 24/7 , it probably shouldn ’ t be a surprise that the President ’ s general approval rating is now marching in lockstep with how the public perceives his ability to guide us through this crisis .
And give the timing of this healthcare disaster , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factor in how the President fares in November .
If the nation is back up and running by September or October with the economy climbing back up toward something resembling the old normal , I ’ d expect the majority of voters to decide that he handled things well enough to give him a second term .
But if we ’ re still in freefall and pandemic deaths still dominate the news , 2020 will likely turn out to be another change election and Trump could be in trouble .
Unfortunately for Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factors will remain entirely beyond his control .
Will an effective vaccine be created and widely available ?
Or , failing that , a functional antiviral drug to save people with the worst symptoms ?
The President is already channeling plenty of money and resources into efforts to solve the vaccine riddle , but beyond that , there ’ s nothing he can do .
The medical community will either find one or they won ’ t , and it ’ s far from guaranteed .
The same goes for antiviral drugs .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , if they don ’ t arrive before the end of the year , they may well be too late to save Donald Trump ’ s presidency .

Keeping in mind that Gallup tends to always grade President Trump a bit better than some other national surveys, this news will still likely brighten the President’s mood on Friday morning. Their latest approval survey shows that Trump’s overall approval rating has his head above water at 49/47, tying the highest rating of his presidency and almost exactly matching the public’s approval of how he’s handling the novel coronavirus pandemic. But while it represents a significant bump in overall approval ratings, it’s a ten-point dip in his handling of the epidemic.
Given the dominance of the coronavirus situation in Americans’ minds, it is not surprising that the president’s overall job approval rating nearly matches his approval rating on COVID-19. Gallup’s April 14-28 poll finds Trump’s overall job approval at 49%, the same as in a March 13-22 poll but higher than his reading of 43% in an April 1-14 survey. To the extent that these variations are not a function of sampling error, they could be tied to Americans’ changing outlook on the coronavirus situation in general and Americans’ increasingly evaluating Trump on the COVID issue alone. The poll was conducted as the number of new daily COVID-19 cases in the U.S. declined from its peak on April 5. The large majority of interviews were completed before the backlash over Trump’s remarks questioning whether injecting household disinfectant into people with the virus could be an effective treatment.
Digging into the crosstabs, there are signs that Trump is slowly winning over some portions of the public who aren’t part of his diehard base. The number who “strongly approve” is at 33%, a mark he hasn’t seen since this time last year. But his “moderately approve” number has climbed up to 16%. That group represents more of the persuadable voters who aren’t tied to Trump at the hip but are willing to give him a chance.
Conversely, the “moderately disapprove” figure remains at 11%, the same as it was last summer. But the “strongly disapprove” figure has dropped from 44 last June to 36% this month. That “strongly disapprove” figure is a surprise because it had been fairly steady over the past two years and I’d assumed it represented the hardcore liberals who wouldn’t have a nice thing to say about Trump if he suddenly demonstrated the ability to raise the dead and walk across the reflecting pool out on the mall.
The President is still having trouble winning back the women’s vote, however. He still does well among men (53/44) but that number flips on its head among the ladies (44/51). He’s also holding fairly steady on the racial front, with white voters supporting him 58/40, but non-white voters still come up considerably short at 31/61.
Given how much media coverage is focused on the pandemic pretty much 24/7, it probably shouldn’t be a surprise that the President’s general approval rating is now marching in lockstep with how the public perceives his ability to guide us through this crisis. And give the timing of this healthcare disaster, it will likely be the only significant driving factor in how the President fares in November. If the nation is back up and running by September or October with the economy climbing back up toward something resembling the old normal, I’d expect the majority of voters to decide that he handled things well enough to give him a second term. But if we’re still in freefall and pandemic deaths still dominate the news, 2020 will likely turn out to be another change election and Trump could be in trouble.
Unfortunately for Donald Trump, some of the biggest deciding factors will remain entirely beyond his control. Will an effective vaccine be created and widely available? Or, failing that, a functional antiviral drug to save people with the worst symptoms? The President is already channeling plenty of money and resources into efforts to solve the vaccine riddle, but beyond that, there’s nothing he can do. The medical community will either find one or they won’t, and it’s far from guaranteed. The same goes for antiviral drugs. And even if both efforts are successful, if they don’t arrive before the end of the year, they may well be too late to save Donald Trump’s presidency.


hotair--2020-05-01--<span class='red'>Breaking: Biden statement declares Reade allegations "aren't true. This never happ

Breaking: Biden statement declares Reade allegations "aren't true. This never happened."

Flat-out denial was always Joe Biden ’ s only politically viable response .
The curiosity is what took him so long to get around to it .
Prior to a much-heralded appearance on MSNBC ’ s Morning Joe to address Tara Reade ’ s allegation of sexual assault , Biden issued a statement declaring that the accusations “ aren ’ t true ” and that “ this never happened.
” Biden also scolded news organizations for , well … adopting the Biden standard : Note the haughty tone toward media outlets in Biden ’ s third paragraph , in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” would scrutinize such claims .
Most of them have , in fact , but that ’ s not what Biden said when Brett Kavanaugh was getting crucified : “ For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus , nationally , you ’ ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she ’ s talking about is real , whether or not she forgets facts , whether or not it ’ s been made worse or better over time .
But nobody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jumping into a cauldron.
” Bear in mind too that Christine Blasey Ford ’ s allegation against Kavanaugh was far more ambiguous , with no date , place , or time , and accompanied by denials from the very people she cited as fact witnesses in her statement .
At that time , Biden demanded that people presume that the “ essence ” of Blasey Ford ’ s allegation — or any woman ’ s — was “ real ” anyway .
In this statement , Biden suddenly wants a whole other process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ stories ” get “ appropriate inquiry and scrutiny.
” What should we call this process ?
Maybe , oh , perhaps , due process ?
Of the type Kavanaugh and his defenders demanded in September and October of 2018 and ever since , for that matter ?
That ’ s not what Biden wanted at that time , and it ’ s not what his womens ’ rights activists want to this day .
One other point comes up in this statement — Biden ’ s papers .
Reade wanted them opened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s leadership team at the time of the alleged assault .
“ The papers from my Senate years , ” Biden declares in his statement , “ do not contain personnel files.
” Instead , Biden says , any such complaint should be stored in the National Archives and is calling for them to “ make available to the press any such document.
” Senate and House offices do not have the same requirement as presidents to retain such records , however , and usually only contain records from official Senate proceedings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Employment Practices might not be covered by that , and it ’ s a pretty fair bet that Biden ’ s office wouldn ’ t have sent any such complaint on its own to anywhere else .
Either Biden knows his papers are a dry hole for investigators , or he ’ s attempting a clever misdirection .
This still leaves us with nothing more than a Biden denial , with Reade and several contemporaneous indirect corroborating witnesses .
The length of the time it took to get this denial makes Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end we still don ’ t know .
Maybe some of that due process could help — starting with subpoenas .

Flat-out denial was always Joe Biden’s only politically viable response. The curiosity is what took him so long to get around to it. Prior to a much-heralded appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe to address Tara Reade’s allegation of sexual assault, Biden issued a statement declaring that the accusations “aren’t true” and that “this never happened.”
Biden also scolded news organizations for, well … adopting the Biden standard:
In statement, Biden denies sexual assault allegation and says his papers at the University of Delaware don’t include any such record. Said accuser’s story has been inconsistent. “This never happened.” pic.twitter.com/ifFZ6nJV1m — Manu Raju (@mkraju) May 1, 2020
Note the haughty tone toward media outlets in Biden’s third paragraph, in which he advises that “responsible news organizations” would scrutinize such claims. Most of them have, in fact, but that’s not what Biden said when Brett Kavanaugh was getting crucified:
“For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real, whether or not she forgets facts, whether or not it’s been made worse or better over time. But nobody fails to understand that this is like jumping into a cauldron.”
Bear in mind too that Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation against Kavanaugh was far more ambiguous, with no date, place, or time, and accompanied by denials from the very people she cited as fact witnesses in her statement. At that time, Biden demanded that people presume that the “essence” of Blasey Ford’s allegation — or any woman’s — was “real” anyway. In this statement, Biden suddenly wants a whole other process, one in which women’s “stories” get “appropriate inquiry and scrutiny.”
What should we call this process? Maybe, oh, perhaps, due process? Of the type Kavanaugh and his defenders demanded in September and October of 2018 and ever since, for that matter? That’s not what Biden wanted at that time, and it’s not what his womens’ rights activists want to this day.
One other point comes up in this statement — Biden’s papers. Reade wanted them opened to find her original complaint to Biden’s leadership team at the time of the alleged assault. “The papers from my Senate years,” Biden declares in his statement, “do not contain personnel files.” Instead, Biden says, any such complaint should be stored in the National Archives and is calling for them to “make available to the press any such document.” Senate and House offices do not have the same requirement as presidents to retain such records, however, and usually only contain records from official Senate proceedings and committees. The Office of Fair Employment Practices might not be covered by that, and it’s a pretty fair bet that Biden’s office wouldn’t have sent any such complaint on its own to anywhere else. Either Biden knows his papers are a dry hole for investigators, or he’s attempting a clever misdirection.
This still leaves us with nothing more than a Biden denial, with Reade and several contemporaneous indirect corroborating witnesses. The length of the time it took to get this denial makes Biden’s credibility suspect, but in the end we still don’t know. Maybe some of that due process could help — starting with subpoenas.


hotair--2020-05-02--NY Times: Tara Reade's allegations are too serious to be handled by the media, the DNC should invest

NY Times: Tara Reade's allegations are too serious to be handled by the media, the DNC should investigate

The NY Times editorial board came up with an interesting proposition yesterday .
Instead of having an open source look into Tara Reade ’ s allegations by multiple media outlets , the Times thinks we ’ d get a better result by having the Democratic National Committee conduct an investigation .
This sounds like something that should have been written by The Onion but apparently they really think this could work : As is so often the case in such situations , it is all but impossible to be certain of the truth .
But the stakes are too high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leave it to be investigated by and adjudicated in the media .
Mr. Biden is seeking the nation ’ s highest office .
In 2018 , this board advocated strongly for a vigorous inquiry into accusations of sexual misconduct raised against Brett Kavanaugh when he was nominated to a seat on the Supreme Court .
Mr. Biden ’ s pursuit of the presidency requires no less .
His campaign , and his party , have a duty to assure the public that the accusations are being taken seriously .
The Democratic National Committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and thoroughly , with the full cooperation of the Biden campaign .
That sounds a bit crazy to me .
Would the Times ’ editorial board ever recommend that Donald Trump could be fairly investigated by the RNC months before an election ?
Isn ’ t there a pretty obvious conflict of interest there ?
The Times brings up its past support for an investigation of Brett Kavanaugh .
But in that case it was primarily by the media and , secondarily , the FBI doing the investigation .
In fact , if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times ’ editorials about Kavanaugh , we see them pushing for the FBI to investigate , not the RNC : There is no reason the committee needs to hold this vote before the F.B.I .
can do a proper investigation , and Mr. Judge and possibly other witnesses can be called to testify under oath .
The Senate , and the American people , need to know the truth , or as close an approximation as possible , before deciding whether Judge Kavanaugh should get a lifetime seat on the nation ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not make a more serious effort , the only choice for senators seeking to protect the credibility of the Supreme Court will be to vote no .
Getting back to the editorial on investigating Biden , the editorial board gets more specific about what the DNC could do in this situation .
The Times wants the DNC to create an “ apolitical ” panel to search Biden ’ s Delaware records : The Times ’ faith in the DNC ’ s ability to be apolitical is touching .
It ’ s also absurd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fairly serious scandal in 2016 in which top people at the DNC were fired for trying to favor one candidate ( Hillary ) over the other ( Sanders ) ?
Yes , we did .
The idea that the DNC can play it straight in an election year is , shall we say , not confirmed by recent evidence .
In fact , the DNC has already proved it has no interest in any investigation of Biden , the party ’ s presumptive nominee .
According to the DNC even suggesting it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been fully vetted in 2008 .
So there you have it .
The Times wants the DNC to investigate their own candidate .
And of course the DNC has no interest in doing this because even agreeing to it hurts their candidate by suggesting he could be guilty of something .
It ’ s such a weird suggestion that I wonder if the Times is throwing this out there just to make it look like they care about the truth while insuring this goes nowhere .
If they really care , why not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did with Kavanaugh ?
But the most embarrassing part of this silly editorial is probably the part where the Times admits this is too important to left to the media .
The Times ’ own editorial board is basically saying the paper ’ s reporters aren ’ t capable of getting this right .
I wonder how reporter in newsrooms around the country feel about that vote of no confidence .

The NY Times editorial board came up with an interesting proposition yesterday. Instead of having an open source look into Tara Reade’s allegations by multiple media outlets, the Times thinks we’d get a better result by having the Democratic National Committee conduct an investigation. This sounds like something that should have been written by The Onion but apparently they really think this could work:
As is so often the case in such situations, it is all but impossible to be certain of the truth. But the stakes are too high to let the matter fester — or leave it to be investigated by and adjudicated in the media. Mr. Biden is seeking the nation’s highest office. In 2018, this board advocated strongly for a vigorous inquiry into accusations of sexual misconduct raised against Brett Kavanaugh when he was nominated to a seat on the Supreme Court. Mr. Biden’s pursuit of the presidency requires no less. His campaign, and his party, have a duty to assure the public that the accusations are being taken seriously. The Democratic National Committee should move to investigate the matter swiftly and thoroughly, with the full cooperation of the Biden campaign.
That sounds a bit crazy to me. Would the Times’ editorial board ever recommend that Donald Trump could be fairly investigated by the RNC months before an election? Isn’t there a pretty obvious conflict of interest there?
The Times brings up its past support for an investigation of Brett Kavanaugh. But in that case it was primarily by the media and, secondarily, the FBI doing the investigation. In fact, if we look back at one of the Times’ editorials about Kavanaugh, we see them pushing for the FBI to investigate, not the RNC:
There is no reason the committee needs to hold this vote before the F.B.I. can do a proper investigation, and Mr. Judge and possibly other witnesses can be called to testify under oath. The Senate, and the American people, need to know the truth, or as close an approximation as possible, before deciding whether Judge Kavanaugh should get a lifetime seat on the nation’s highest court. If the committee will not make a more serious effort, the only choice for senators seeking to protect the credibility of the Supreme Court will be to vote no.
Getting back to the editorial on investigating Biden, the editorial board gets more specific about what the DNC could do in this situation. The Times wants the DNC to create an “apolitical” panel to search Biden’s Delaware records:
Mr. Biden’s word is insufficient to dispel the cloud. Any inventory should be strictly limited to information about Ms. Reade and conducted by an unbiased, apolitical panel, put together by the D.N.C. and chosen to foster as much trust in its findings as possible.
The Times’ faith in the DNC’s ability to be apolitical is touching. It’s also absurd. Didn’t we have a fairly serious scandal in 2016 in which top people at the DNC were fired for trying to favor one candidate (Hillary) over the other (Sanders)? Yes, we did. The idea that the DNC can play it straight in an election year is, shall we say, not confirmed by recent evidence.
In fact, the DNC has already proved it has no interest in any investigation of Biden, the party’s presumptive nominee. According to the DNC even suggesting it is “absurd” because Biden has already been fully vetted in 2008.
In response to the NYT editorial board’s suggestion that the DNC assemble an “unbiased, apolitical panel” to inventory Biden’s Senate papers, DNC communications director @XochitlHinojosa calls this an “absurd suggestion on its face” and argues Biden has already been fully vetted. pic.twitter.com/QgrPJT6svh — Ruby Cramer (@rubycramer) May 2, 2020
She also told me there’s no precedent for the kind of independent DNC panel proposed by the NYT ed board. — Ruby Cramer (@rubycramer) May 2, 2020
So there you have it. The Times wants the DNC to investigate their own candidate. And of course the DNC has no interest in doing this because even agreeing to it hurts their candidate by suggesting he could be guilty of something. It’s such a weird suggestion that I wonder if the Times is throwing this out there just to make it look like they care about the truth while insuring this goes nowhere. If they really care, why not call for an FBI investigation like they did with Kavanaugh?
But the most embarrassing part of this silly editorial is probably the part where the Times admits this is too important to left to the media. The Times’ own editorial board is basically saying the paper’s reporters aren’t capable of getting this right. I wonder how reporter in newsrooms around the country feel about that vote of no confidence.


hotair--2020-05-02--Cancel culture warriors still trying to cancel Masterpiece Cakeshop

It ’ s now been eight years since liberal activists began their campaign to attempt to drive Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips out of business for the sin of refusing to decorate cakes with messages that conflicted with his religious values .
Thus far , his antagonists have managed to tie him up in court endlessly , but after the Supreme Court sided with him it sounded as if the brouhaha might be over .
No such luck , sadly .
One of the usual suspects immediately tried to order a cake from Jack to celebrate his “ transition ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and was promptly sued again .
This week , a court in Colorado refused to throw the suit out and ruled that the plaintiff could move forward .
( Washington Examiner ) The newest case against Jack Phillips , the infamous owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop , can not be dismissed , a Colorado district court decided Wednesday .
Autumn Scardina , a transgender woman , filed a complaint against Phillips in 2017 with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission , unsuccessfully .
Scardina filed the suit after Phillips declined , due to his religious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the transition Scardina made from male to female .
Scardina , an attorney , then filed a new lawsuit in state court that seeks monetary damages of more than $ 100,000 against Phillips .
Although attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom had requested that the case be dismissed , the court has decided to let it continue .
The person attempting to drive Phillips from the market is one we ’ ve heard from before .
Autumn Scardina is the same transgender lawyer who previously attempted to force Jack to create a case showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Phillips is once again being represented by Alliance Defending Freedom .
They ’ re pointing out something that should have been obvious to everyone long before now .
Scardina has no interest in purchasing a cake .
There are any number of bakers who would jump at the opportunity to pick up some business .
What Scardina is trying to do is bankrupt Phillips with nuisance lawsuits and drive him out of business .
Sadly , Phillips is hardly the only business owner to be targeted in this fashion and the tactics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ identifies a perceived “ enemy ” of progressive values and tries to drive them out of business .
And sometimes there isn ’ t even an aggrieved party to claim damages .
Here ’ s one great example I always come back to .
Do you remember a small business in Indiana named Memories Pizzaria ?
It ’ s the joint that was nearly hounded out of existence after they refused to cater a wedding for a lesbian couple , or at least that ’ s the legend that you still hear on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you rarely hear people discussing is that there never was a lesbian couple .
There never was a wedding reception .
The entire scenario was fictional .
What really happened was that a local reporter was supposed to do a story on businesses that don ’ t participate in gay weddings .
But after calling around to every caterer in the area , nobody refused .
They all wanted the business .
So the reporter started calling every place that serves food of any kind and asking if they would be willing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dialed up Memories and the phone was answered by the family ’ s grandmother who was opposed to gay marriage .
( And honestly… who asks a pizza parlor to cater their wedding anyway ? )
But the shop was instantly “ famous ” and the mob came to try to shut them down .
That ’ s what ’ s happening with Jack Phillips now .
And it ’ s a shame .
This entire situation should have been resolved after the Supreme Court ruling , but some agitators will never be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business .

It’s now been eight years since liberal activists began their campaign to attempt to drive Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips out of business for the sin of refusing to decorate cakes with messages that conflicted with his religious values. Thus far, his antagonists have managed to tie him up in court endlessly, but after the Supreme Court sided with him it sounded as if the brouhaha might be over. No such luck, sadly. One of the usual suspects immediately tried to order a cake from Jack to celebrate his “transition” from male to female. Phillips declined and was promptly sued again. This week, a court in Colorado refused to throw the suit out and ruled that the plaintiff could move forward. (Washington Examiner)
The newest case against Jack Phillips, the infamous owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, cannot be dismissed, a Colorado district court decided Wednesday. Autumn Scardina, a transgender woman, filed a complaint against Phillips in 2017 with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, unsuccessfully. Scardina filed the suit after Phillips declined, due to his religious beliefs, to make a cake celebrating the transition Scardina made from male to female. Scardina, an attorney, then filed a new lawsuit in state court that seeks monetary damages of more than $100,000 against Phillips. Although attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom had requested that the case be dismissed, the court has decided to let it continue.
The person attempting to drive Phillips from the market is one we’ve heard from before. Autumn Scardina is the same transgender lawyer who previously attempted to force Jack to create a case showing Satan smoking marijuana under an upside-down crucifix.
Phillips is once again being represented by Alliance Defending Freedom. They’re pointing out something that should have been obvious to everyone long before now. Scardina has no interest in purchasing a cake. There are any number of bakers who would jump at the opportunity to pick up some business. What Scardina is trying to do is bankrupt Phillips with nuisance lawsuits and drive him out of business.
Sadly, Phillips is hardly the only business owner to be targeted in this fashion and the tactics are almost always identical. The left identifies a perceived “enemy” of progressive values and tries to drive them out of business. And sometimes there isn’t even an aggrieved party to claim damages.
Here’s one great example I always come back to. Do you remember a small business in Indiana named Memories Pizzaria? It’s the joint that was nearly hounded out of existence after they refused to cater a wedding for a lesbian couple, or at least that’s the legend that you still hear on the left. But the minor detail you rarely hear people discussing is that there never was a lesbian couple. There never was a wedding reception. The entire scenario was fictional.
What really happened was that a local reporter was supposed to do a story on businesses that don’t participate in gay weddings. But after calling around to every caterer in the area, nobody refused. They all wanted the business. So the reporter started calling every place that serves food of any kind and asking if they would be willing to cater a gay wedding until they finally dialed up Memories and the phone was answered by the family’s grandmother who was opposed to gay marriage. (And honestly… who asks a pizza parlor to cater their wedding anyway?) But the shop was instantly “famous” and the mob came to try to shut them down.
That’s what’s happening with Jack Phillips now. And it’s a shame. This entire situation should have been resolved after the Supreme Court ruling, but some agitators will never be satisfied until Jack is driven out of business.


hotair--2020-05-02--Coronavirus delays prison term for heiress in admissions scandal

The coronavirus pandemic is causing adjustments to be made in all aspects of our lives , including the justice system .
Some people who have been convicted of crimes and are now waiting to enter prison to serve their sentences find themselves waiting longer .
Thanks to the pandemic outbreak , Hot Pockets heiress Michelle Janavs does not have to surrender Thursday as she was previously ordered to do .
Janavs was sentenced to five months behind bars for paying Rick Singer , a college admissions counselor , $ 300,000 to provide phony college qualifications for her two daughters .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
She pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud .
Those frozen sandwiches made Janavs and her family very wealthy .
She asked for home confinement but was denied by U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton .
Who wouldn ’ t want to remain in a fabulous home in Newport Beach instead of in a concrete cubicle for however long she ends up serving ?
She probably won ’ t serve the whole five months as others have been let out early , using time good behavior or overcrowding as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Felicity Huffman was sentenced to 14 days and served 11 days .
The judge isn ’ t planning to let her off completely , mind you , he ’ s just postponing her sentence because of the coronavirus .
“ The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented and continually evolving cause of concern and the Court is cognizant of the particular transmission risk in penitentiary facilities , ” Gorton wrote in a ruling handed down Thursday .
However , “ this judge will not forfeit his obligation to impose a sentence that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conduct.
” Gorton left the door open for another delay if the outbreak hasn ’ t improved by this summer .
“ If the public health crisis has not abated by the time of the extended report date , the court will entertain further motions , ” the federal judge in Boston wrote .
Another parent caught up in the FBI ’ s undercover operation who lucks out due to the pandemic outbreak is Douglas Hodge , the ex-CEO of Pacific Investment Management Co .
He is sentenced to nine months , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sentenced to five months in prison after admitting to paying the consultant at the center of the scheme $ 100,000 to have a proctor correct her two daughters ’ ACT exam answers .
She also agreed to pay $ 200,000 to have one of her daughters labeled as a fake beach volleyball recruit at USC but was arrested before she was formally admitted , prosecutors said .
Hodge paid bribes totaling $ 850,000 — from 2008 until 2012 — to get four of his children into USC and Georgetown University as fake athletic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appealing his nine-month sentence , which is the harshest punishment handed out so far in the case .
Both parents had their lawyers argue that it is too dangerous to send them to prison .
The coronavirus is running rampant in prisons and jails .
Attorney General Barr has advised officials to consider moving non-violent prisoners to home confinement when possible to help limit the spread of the virus .
Is it a big deal that these two parents are delaying their time in prison ?
No .
They fall into the non-violent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ privileged parents who felt entitled and wanted to give their kids a leg up with college admissions .
Unfortunately , bribing coaches and admissions directors and doctoring their kids ’ resumes isn ’ t the legal way to go .
And , since it is unlikely that their kids would have been accepted on their true qualifications , their acceptance into the schools denied a slot to a qualified applicant .
Some people who were serving time for other non-violent offenses have been let out of prison due to the coronavirus .
Stormy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in April but must return to prison in 90 days .
Michael Cohen , Trump ’ s former attorney , was told two weeks ago by the Federal Bureau of Prisons that he ’ d be let out of prison early but that order has now been rescinded .
Other prisoners had their privilege of early release rescinded , too .
No reason has been given .

The coronavirus pandemic is causing adjustments to be made in all aspects of our lives, including the justice system. Some people who have been convicted of crimes and are now waiting to enter prison to serve their sentences find themselves waiting longer.
Thanks to the pandemic outbreak, Hot Pockets heiress Michelle Janavs does not have to surrender Thursday as she was previously ordered to do. Janavs was sentenced to five months behind bars for paying Rick Singer, a college admissions counselor, $300,000 to provide phony college qualifications for her two daughters. She lives in Newport Beach, California. She pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud.
Those frozen sandwiches made Janavs and her family very wealthy. She asked for home confinement but was denied by U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton. Who wouldn’t want to remain in a fabulous home in Newport Beach instead of in a concrete cubicle for however long she ends up serving? She probably won’t serve the whole five months as others have been let out early, using time good behavior or overcrowding as a reason for early releases. For example, Felicity Huffman was sentenced to 14 days and served 11 days.
The judge isn’t planning to let her off completely, mind you, he’s just postponing her sentence because of the coronavirus.
“The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented and continually evolving cause of concern and the Court is cognizant of the particular transmission risk in penitentiary facilities,” Gorton wrote in a ruling handed down Thursday. However, “this judge will not forfeit his obligation to impose a sentence that is warranted by a defendant’s criminal conduct.” Gorton left the door open for another delay if the outbreak hasn’t improved by this summer. “If the public health crisis has not abated by the time of the extended report date, the court will entertain further motions,” the federal judge in Boston wrote.
Another parent caught up in the FBI’s undercover operation who lucks out due to the pandemic outbreak is Douglas Hodge, the ex-CEO of Pacific Investment Management Co. He is sentenced to nine months, the longest sentence to date.
Janavs was sentenced to five months in prison after admitting to paying the consultant at the center of the scheme $100,000 to have a proctor correct her two daughters’ ACT exam answers. She also agreed to pay $200,000 to have one of her daughters labeled as a fake beach volleyball recruit at USC but was arrested before she was formally admitted, prosecutors said. Hodge paid bribes totaling $850,000 — from 2008 until 2012 — to get four of his children into USC and Georgetown University as fake athletic recruits, prosecutors said. Hodge is appealing his nine-month sentence, which is the harshest punishment handed out so far in the case.
Both parents had their lawyers argue that it is too dangerous to send them to prison. The coronavirus is running rampant in prisons and jails. Attorney General Barr has advised officials to consider moving non-violent prisoners to home confinement when possible to help limit the spread of the virus.
Is it a big deal that these two parents are delaying their time in prison? No. They fall into the non-violent category. They are just wealthy and privileged parents who felt entitled and wanted to give their kids a leg up with college admissions. Unfortunately, bribing coaches and admissions directors and doctoring their kids’ resumes isn’t the legal way to go. And, since it is unlikely that their kids would have been accepted on their true qualifications, their acceptance into the schools denied a slot to a qualified applicant.
Some people who were serving time for other non-violent offenses have been let out of prison due to the coronavirus. Stormy Daniels’ lawyer Michael Avenatti was released in April but must return to prison in 90 days. Michael Cohen, Trump’s former attorney, was told two weeks ago by the Federal Bureau of Prisons that he’d be let out of prison early but that order has now been rescinded. Other prisoners had their privilege of early release rescinded, too. No reason has been given.


hotair--2020-05-02--Data: Americans might be starting to relax on social distancing

Note the phrasing in the headline : “ Might be.
” There ’ s plenty of data that Americans are getting out of the house more , lockdown orders or no lockdown orders .
But there ’ s little evidence that they ’ re not observing basic good social-distancing practices when they do so .
For instance , here ’ s NPR ’ s visualization of data provided by SafeGraph , a company that tracks mobile phone locations .
NPR describes this as a “ decline in social distancing in late April ” but all it really confirms is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There ’ s been a decline in compliance with stay-at-home orders , perhaps , but not necessarily a decline in social distancing .
“ Regardless of what the orders say or the governors say , we ’ re seeing the whole country softening up , ” said one SafeGraph staffer .
But different regions are softening up at different degrees .
As you ’ d expect , a much greater share of people in the borough of Queens in New York City is spending time at home than the share in rural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s mobility data also suggests an uptick in walking and driving over the last few weeks .
Does that mean people are getting lax about social distancing ?
Maybe ?
Here again there are meaningful differences by region .
Compare NYC , the eye of the storm , where businesses remain shuttered… …to Atlanta , Georgia , where the governor has allowed some businesses to reopen : There ’ s no evidence here that Atlantans are being irresponsible about social distancing .
In fact , notes Forbes , Apple ’ s data doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ *actually* walking and driving more .
It ’ s based on searches for directions on Apple Maps , not confirmed movement of people .
For that we turn to Foursquare , which *is* tracking actual foot traffic .
Spend some time with their post , as they have the most granular data of any tech outfit I ’ ve seen on where people are going when they leave home .
That ’ ll give us more of a clue of whether social distancing is being observed .
Are people defying stay-at-home orders to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ movie theaters , or are they going to parks and other safe outdoor areas ?
Here ’ s a telltale pair of graphs .
Foot traffic to fast-food chains , which specialize in take-out , is rising and almost back to pre-COVID levels in some regions… Traffic to gas stations and auto shops is also up lately , further evidence that people are driving more .
Traffic to hardware stores , where many people buy their gardening supplies , and hiking trails is waaaaay up .
Traffic to , er , liquor stores @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the stress and ennui of lockdown America .
Traffic to restaurants , bars , offices , gyms , clothing stores , and movie theaters — indoor businesses where customers spend extended time , and where they ’ d logically be most at risk of infection — is still a long ways down , as you ’ d expect given the orders in many states to shutter those businesses .
( Traffic to bars has ticked up lately , which isn ’ t surprising . )
The Apple data I posted above shows people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shunning mass transit too , which is wise .
Looking at all of that , it ’ s hard to say conclusively that Americans are relaxing on social distancing .
They ’ re getting out more , but really only to the places you ’ d expect people to go when they ’ re worried about a contagious disease .
They ’ re getting groceries , they ’ re grabbing pizza and booze , they ’ re buying stuff for home projects , but they ’ re not hanging out .
And if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t in any of these numbers .
I think the most confident thing we can say about social distancing right now is that there ’ s *probably* been some backsliding simply by dint of the fact that people are moving around .
Some Americans will congregate when they ’ re out , no matter how bad of an idea that is .
But are enough of them doing so to trigger a second wave ?
No evidence of that yet .
Remember , thoughtful lockdown skeptics have made the case that lockdown orders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Americans had already begun avoiding vectors of transmission like restaurants before stay-at-home orders started being issued last month .
( Scroll through the graphs in NPR ’ s post and you ’ ll see that the shift towards staying at home began in Virginia , Texas , and New York long before governors started handing down orders . )
Go figure that as the orders lift now , or are increasingly ignored by people still subject to them , that smart social distancing would continue to be practiced anyway .
By most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yesterday in Huntington Beach , California , where people turned out to protest Gavin Newsom ’ s continuing lockdown order , wasn ’ t a model example of social distancing , as you ’ ll see below .
Right , right , they were outdoors , which minimized the risk of transmission , but crowd density matters .
If it didn ’ t , scientists would be A-OK with people packing into outdoor stadiums to watch sports and concerts , which they aren ’ t .
In lieu of an exit question , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kinsa “ health weather map ” for you to bookmark in case you haven ’ t already .
We haven ’ t discussed their data much lately since there hasn ’ t been much to say : Virtually the entire country has been holed up at home so fever rates are at rock-bottom levels .
Now that people are beginning to reemerge , that should gradually change .
Keep an eye on their “ trends ” map as an early clue to where new hotspots are developing .

Note the phrasing in the headline: “Might be.”
There’s plenty of data that Americans are getting out of the house more, lockdown orders or no lockdown orders. But there’s little evidence that they’re not observing basic good social-distancing practices when they do so.
For instance, here’s NPR’s visualization of data provided by SafeGraph, a company that tracks mobile phone locations. NPR describes this as a “decline in social distancing in late April” but all it really confirms is that people are spending less time at home. There’s been a decline in compliance with stay-at-home orders, perhaps, but not necessarily a decline in social distancing.
“Regardless of what the orders say or the governors say, we’re seeing the whole country softening up,” said one SafeGraph staffer. But different regions are softening up at different degrees. As you’d expect, a much greater share of people in the borough of Queens in New York City is spending time at home than the share in rural Texas.
Via Forbes, Apple’s mobility data also suggests an uptick in walking and driving over the last few weeks. Does that mean people are getting lax about social distancing? Maybe?
Here again there are meaningful differences by region. Compare NYC, the eye of the storm, where businesses remain shuttered…
…to Atlanta, Georgia, where the governor has allowed some businesses to reopen:
There’s no evidence here that Atlantans are being irresponsible about social distancing. In fact, notes Forbes, Apple’s data doesn’t even prove that people are *actually* walking and driving more. It’s based on searches for directions on Apple Maps, not confirmed movement of people.
For that we turn to Foursquare, which *is* tracking actual foot traffic. Spend some time with their post, as they have the most granular data of any tech outfit I’ve seen on where people are going when they leave home. That’ll give us more of a clue of whether social distancing is being observed. Are people defying stay-at-home orders to linger in enclosed indoor spaces, like movie theaters, or are they going to parks and other safe outdoor areas?
Here’s a telltale pair of graphs. Foot traffic to fast-food chains, which specialize in take-out, is rising and almost back to pre-COVID levels in some regions…
…but foot traffic to dine-in restaurants? Still basically flatlined:
Traffic to gas stations and auto shops is also up lately, further evidence that people are driving more. Traffic to hardware stores, where many people buy their gardening supplies, and hiking trails is waaaaay up. Traffic to, er, liquor stores has also increased as people cope with the stress and ennui of lockdown America. Traffic to restaurants, bars, offices, gyms, clothing stores, and movie theaters — indoor businesses where customers spend extended time, and where they’d logically be most at risk of infection — is still a long ways down, as you’d expect given the orders in many states to shutter those businesses. (Traffic to bars has ticked up lately, which isn’t surprising.) The Apple data I posted above shows people in New York and Atlanta alike still shunning mass transit too, which is wise.
Looking at all of that, it’s hard to say conclusively that Americans are relaxing on social distancing. They’re getting out more, but really only to the places you’d expect people to go when they’re worried about a contagious disease. They’re getting groceries, they’re grabbing pizza and booze, they’re buying stuff for home projects, but they’re not hanging out. And if they are, the proof isn’t in any of these numbers. I think the most confident thing we can say about social distancing right now is that there’s *probably* been some backsliding simply by dint of the fact that people are moving around. Some Americans will congregate when they’re out, no matter how bad of an idea that is. But are enough of them doing so to trigger a second wave? No evidence of that yet.
Remember, thoughtful lockdown skeptics have made the case that lockdown orders are mostly incidental to how people behave. Americans had already begun avoiding vectors of transmission like restaurants before stay-at-home orders started being issued last month. (Scroll through the graphs in NPR’s post and you’ll see that the shift towards staying at home began in Virginia, Texas, and New York long before governors started handing down orders.) Go figure that as the orders lift now, or are increasingly ignored by people still subject to them, that smart social distancing would continue to be practiced anyway.
By most people, I mean. The scene yesterday in Huntington Beach, California, where people turned out to protest Gavin Newsom’s continuing lockdown order, wasn’t a model example of social distancing, as you’ll see below. Right, right, they were outdoors, which minimized the risk of transmission, but crowd density matters. If it didn’t, scientists would be A-OK with people packing into outdoor stadiums to watch sports and concerts, which they aren’t. In lieu of an exit question, here’s a link to the Kinsa “health weather map” for you to bookmark in case you haven’t already. We haven’t discussed their data much lately since there hasn’t been much to say: Virtually the entire country has been holed up at home so fever rates are at rock-bottom levels. Now that people are beginning to reemerge, that should gradually change. Keep an eye on their “trends” map as an early clue to where new hotspots are developing.


hotair--2020-05-02--Pearl's parents file appeal to reverse Pakistani Supreme Court decision

In 2002 Daniel Pearl , a Jewish American correspondent for the Wall Street Journal working in Pakistan , was kidnapped by Muslim terrorists and brutally murdered .
At the time of his kidnapping , he was working on a story in Karachi about Muslim religious extremists in Pakistan in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 , 2001 , attacks .
The shock of Pearl ’ s beheading at the hands of terrorists created an international story that brought pressure to the Pakistani government to find his murderers and bring them to justice .
Omar Saeed Sheikh , a British national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three accomplices were apprehended and convicted in court .
Sheikh , the ringleader of the bunch , was convicted of three separate charges of being the mastermind behind the kidnapping and murder .
All of the charges carry a death sentence .
The other three men , Salman Saqib , Fahad Naseem , and Sheik Adil , were sentenced to life in prison .
The Pakistani court heard Sheikh ’ s appeal and has overturned the convictions for murder and terrorism .
The court also downgraded the kidnapping charge to simple kidnapping .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to seven years .
He ’ s been behind bars since 2002 .
The convictions against the accomplices were overturned .
The court found discrepancies in much of the evidence used to convict Mr. Sheikh and others , including questions over who owned a computer from which ransom emails were supposed to have been sent and the circumstances of Mr. Sheikh ’ s arrest .
The court also said it didn ’ t find any evidence linking Mr. Sheikh or the others to the actual murder .
“ There are many missing links @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abduction of Pearl to his ultimate murder , ” the court ruled .
Three accomplices who were sentenced to life in prison at the same 2002 trial had their convictions completely overturned Thursday .
At the time of the latest court ruling , the state prosecutor based in Karachi said an appeal would be filed to the Pakistani Supreme Court .
A request was submitted for a stay order from the Supreme Court .
That order would keep Sheikh in jail until the appeal was heard .
Daniel Pearl ’ s parents , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since their son ’ s murder to bring his killers to justice .
They have now filed an appeal to stop the April 2 ruling by the Sindh High Court men that would free all four men .
Currently , the men are under a 90-day detention order .
“ We are standing up for justice for not only our son , Daniel Pearl , but for all of our dear friends in Pakistan , so they can know a society free of violence and terror , raising their children in peace and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pearl , cofounders of the Daniel Pearl Foundation , dedicated to honoring the legacy of their son .
The Pearl parents said , “ Since Daniel ’ s tragic murder 18 years ago , we have missed our son each and every moment of each and every day .
Nonetheless , in our grief , we have dedicated ourselves to building bridges with Pakistan , hosting Pakistani journalists in our home , sponsoring music concerts throughout Pakistan and nurturing friendships .
Like our son , we believe in the values of peace , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to make sure we do everything we can do to keep Pakistan safe for her citizens .
The men behind Daniel ’ s murder represent an extremism that we must challenge , and the world is watching how the courts in Pakistan keeps her citizens safe from terrorism and creates a future of peace .
” The Pearls have thrown themselves into working with groups promoting goodwill between cultures and for the safety of journalists in the world .
I feel for them as they continue to grieve the loss of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be cynical about how much good will come from their overtures .
Muslim terrorists are animals .
That kind of mindset is nearly impossible to overcome , it is culturally ingrained from birth in most cases .
The murders of journalists and other Americans overseas continues .
The Committee to Protect Journalists released a statement in support of the Pearls ’ appeal .
According to news reports , Sindh prosecutors filed an appeal to the Supreme Court on April 22 .
On April 28 prosecutors asked for an early hearing .
Others are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daniel Pearl ’ s murderers , including Reporters Without Borders and the publisher of the Wall Street Journal .
Reporters Without Borders , an international watchdog group for journalists , called the decision “ incoherent ” and a “ shocking denial of justice.
” “ It recognizes Sheikh ’ s guilt while in effect overturning his conviction , ” said Daniel Bastard , the head of the group ’ s Asia division .
In a statement , Dow Jones , the Journal ’ s publisher , said , “ We continue to seek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Danny was a cherished colleague and we will always honor his memory and service.
” “ The overturning of the convictions for Daniel Pearl ’ s murder is an affront to victims of terrorism everywhere , ” said Alice Wells , a senior State Department official .
“ Those responsible for Daniel ’ s heinous kidnapping and murder must face the full measure of justice.
” Though Pakistan did provide technical help to the United States after the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks and helped with the Pearl investigation , the country remains a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provide a safe haven while talking out the other side of their mouth about working for justice after brutal attacks .
Daniel Pearl ’ s parents are elderly and his mom looks to be in poor health .
Perhaps they can find peace and comfort if their son ’ s killers are held to their original convictions .

In 2002 Daniel Pearl, a Jewish American correspondent for the Wall Street Journal working in Pakistan, was kidnapped by Muslim terrorists and brutally murdered. At the time of his kidnapping, he was working on a story in Karachi about Muslim religious extremists in Pakistan in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The shock of Pearl’s beheading at the hands of terrorists created an international story that brought pressure to the Pakistani government to find his murderers and bring them to justice.
Omar Saeed Sheikh, a British national with a history of extremism, and three accomplices were apprehended and convicted in court. Sheikh, the ringleader of the bunch, was convicted of three separate charges of being the mastermind behind the kidnapping and murder. All of the charges carry a death sentence. The other three men, Salman Saqib, Fahad Naseem, and Sheik Adil, were sentenced to life in prison.
The Pakistani court heard Sheikh’s appeal and has overturned the convictions for murder and terrorism. The court also downgraded the kidnapping charge to simple kidnapping. In total, his sentence was reduced to seven years. He’s been behind bars since 2002. The convictions against the accomplices were overturned.
The court found discrepancies in much of the evidence used to convict Mr. Sheikh and others, including questions over who owned a computer from which ransom emails were supposed to have been sent and the circumstances of Mr. Sheikh’s arrest. The court also said it didn’t find any evidence linking Mr. Sheikh or the others to the actual murder. “There are many missing links in the chain of evidence from the abduction of Pearl to his ultimate murder,” the court ruled. Three accomplices who were sentenced to life in prison at the same 2002 trial had their convictions completely overturned Thursday.
At the time of the latest court ruling, the state prosecutor based in Karachi said an appeal would be filed to the Pakistani Supreme Court. A request was submitted for a stay order from the Supreme Court. That order would keep Sheikh in jail until the appeal was heard.
Daniel Pearl’s parents, Ruth and Judea Pearl have worked tirelessly since their son’s murder to bring his killers to justice. They have now filed an appeal to stop the April 2 ruling by the Sindh High Court men that would free all four men. Currently, the men are under a 90-day detention order.
“We are standing up for justice for not only our son, Daniel Pearl, but for all of our dear friends in Pakistan, so they can know a society free of violence and terror, raising their children in peace and harmony,” said Ruth and Judea Pearl, cofounders of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, dedicated to honoring the legacy of their son. The Pearl parents said, “Since Daniel’s tragic murder 18 years ago, we have missed our son each and every moment of each and every day. Nonetheless, in our grief, we have dedicated ourselves to building bridges with Pakistan, hosting Pakistani journalists in our home, sponsoring music concerts throughout Pakistan and nurturing friendships. Like our son, we believe in the values of peace, friendship, love and justice, and want to make sure we do everything we can do to keep Pakistan safe for her citizens. The men behind Daniel’s murder represent an extremism that we must challenge, and the world is watching how the courts in Pakistan keeps her citizens safe from terrorism and creates a future of peace. ”
The Pearls have thrown themselves into working with groups promoting goodwill between cultures and for the safety of journalists in the world. I feel for them as they continue to grieve the loss of their son yet it’s easy to be cynical about how much good will come from their overtures. Muslim terrorists are animals. That kind of mindset is nearly impossible to overcome, it is culturally ingrained from birth in most cases. The murders of journalists and other Americans overseas continues.
The Committee to Protect Journalists released a statement in support of the Pearls’ appeal.
“The Committee to Protect Journalists strongly supports the Pearl family’s pursuit of justice in the 2002 kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl in Karachi,” said Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “The release of Omar Saeed Sheikh and his accomplices would only add to the threats facing journalists in Pakistan and deepen Pakistan’s reputation as a haven for terrorists.”
According to news reports, Sindh prosecutors filed an appeal to the Supreme Court on April 22. On April 28 prosecutors asked for an early hearing.
Others are speaking out against the travesty of releasing Daniel Pearl’s murderers, including Reporters Without Borders and the publisher of the Wall Street Journal.
Reporters Without Borders, an international watchdog group for journalists, called the decision “incoherent” and a “shocking denial of justice.” “It recognizes Sheikh’s guilt while in effect overturning his conviction,” said Daniel Bastard, the head of the group’s Asia division. In a statement, Dow Jones, the Journal’s publisher, said, “We continue to seek justice for the murder of Daniel Pearl. Danny was a cherished colleague and we will always honor his memory and service.” Washington welcomed Pakistan’s decision to appeal the court’s decision. “The overturning of the convictions for Daniel Pearl’s murder is an affront to victims of terrorism everywhere,” said Alice Wells, a senior State Department official. “Those responsible for Daniel’s heinous kidnapping and murder must face the full measure of justice.”
Though Pakistan did provide technical help to the United States after the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks and helped with the Pearl investigation, the country remains a hotbed for terrorists. It continues to provide a safe haven while talking out the other side of their mouth about working for justice after brutal attacks. Daniel Pearl’s parents are elderly and his mom looks to be in poor health. Perhaps they can find peace and comfort if their son’s killers are held to their original convictions.


hotair--2020-05-02--Five Eyes intel report: China engaged in a mission of lies and suppression about origin of COVID-19;

Five Eyes intel report: China engaged in a mission of lies and suppression about origin of COVID-19; Update: "Confidence is high" on lab accident theory?

This shocking , shocking revelation might as well have originated with Five Billion Eyes .
Australia ’ s Daily Telegraph has published findings in an intel assessment from Five Eyes that China has not told the truth about the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic .
The intelligence cooperative that includes the US , UK , Canada , New Zealand and Australia has concluded that Beijing has engaged in a cover-up , although all of its motives may not yet be clear .
China deliberately suppressed or destroyed evidence of the coronavirus outbreak in an “ assault on international transparency ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives , according to a dossier prepared by concerned Western governments on the COVID-19 contagion .
The 15-page research document , obtained by The Saturday Telegraph , lays the foundation for the case of negligence being mounted against China .
It states that to the “ endangerment of other countries ” the Chinese government covered-up news of the virus by silencing or “ disappearing ” doctors who spoke out , destroying evidence of it in laboratories and refusing to provide live samples to international scientists who were working on a vaccine .
Pssst @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that already .
What else ya got ?
Actually , this looks rather disturbing , but is apparently unconnected to the current coronavirus sweeping the globe : Perhaps this might not be pertinent to this outbreak , but it certainly sounds like an origin story for a future pandemic .
What ’ s the point of this work ?
Is it to stop such viruses , or amplify them ?
Either way , it sounds like a Pandora ’ s Box , which is why the State Department has sent up warning flares @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years now .
The main value of this new assessment appears to be a concise summation of everything we already know about China ’ s malign attempts to cover its tracks on COVID-19 : The New York Post calls this a “ bombshell , ” but the only real news here might just be the leak : The ADT article does not claim that Five Eyes have concluded it leaked from a laboratory .
It does note that the US position is that a laboratory accident is more likely than the wet-market transmission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the opposite .
No one knows for sure , but the US bases its leaning in large part on China ’ s robust and continuing efforts to cover their tracks and obfuscate the origins of COVID-19 .
It seems like an unusual effort if this was just another case of cross-over .
So why is this Five Eyes report leaking now ?
Presumably , it ’ s an intel-community response to the demand from Bill Gates and others that everyone needs to cooperate more with China , even though China keeps lying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacks as distractions .
On Thursday , Washington Post reporter Josh Rogin — who broke the story on the State Department memos on the Wuhan Institute of Virology — scolded Gates and other such activists for ignoring the plain truth that China ’ s not cooperating at all , nor does it plan to cooperate to any end except its cover-up : Gates ’ s comments are simply wrong , and dangerously so .
Beijing ’ s bad behavior is neither past nor benign .
In fact , it continues to put us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government misled the world about the virus early on .
It manipulated statistics to downplay the outbreak ’ s severity , silenced whistleblowers , spread misinformation and disinformation , and censored science that didn ’ t fit the official narrative .
These are not academic points .
Beijing continues to do all these things today .
Just in the past week , Beijing pressured the European Union to censor a report addressing China ’ s responsibility , threatened Australia with economic pressure if it conducted an inquiry of its own , and arrested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posting covid-19 articles on GitHub ( which is , incidentally , owned by Microsoft ) .
It ’ s not just about blame .
The Chinese government ’ s refusal to allow international experts to investigate what happened in the city of Wuhan impedes efforts to find treatments and cures .
Unless the source is located , the true path of the outbreak can ’ t be traced and critical scientific information can ’ t be known .
Whether you believe it came from a market , a lab or a random bat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t allow any of these scenarios to be examined .
We have to solve the origin question to beat the outbreak and prevent the next pandemic .
And that ’ s not the only problem .
China still won ’ t share original virus samples , which many international researchers are asking for .
The statistics issued by China are used in models that inform our response .
China didn ’ t report asymptomatic positive cases in its tallies until this month .
That information would have been extremely useful months ago .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ show , none of this is new .
All of this has been sufficiently reported and just plain observed over the last five months .
These are not the acts of a cooperative partner — they are the acts of a secretive and dangerous adversary that places its own power far ahead of global health risks .
This intelligence leak likely has a primary intent of sending a shot across Beijing ’ s bow about just how much we could humiliate China unless they stop acting malevolently .
However , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligence to plug up the gullibility gaps among elites and China apologists in the West .
Update : In separate reporting this morning , Fox ’ s John Roberts reports that “ confidence is high ” among US intel agencies that COVID-19 broke out of one of the Wuhan labs accidentally : That certainly would explain why China ’ s working so hard to cover it up .

This shocking, shocking revelation might as well have originated with Five Billion Eyes. Australia’s Daily Telegraph has published findings in an intel assessment from Five Eyes that China has not told the truth about the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. The intelligence cooperative that includes the US, UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia has concluded that Beijing has engaged in a cover-up, although all of its motives may not yet be clear.
Get ready for a major, er … Captain Obvious moment:
China deliberately suppressed or destroyed evidence of the coronavirus outbreak in an “assault on international transparency’’ that cost tens of thousands of lives, according to a dossier prepared by concerned Western governments on the COVID-19 contagion. The 15-page research document, obtained by The Saturday Telegraph, lays the foundation for the case of negligence being mounted against China. It states that to the “endangerment of other countries” the Chinese government covered-up news of the virus by silencing or “disappearing” doctors who spoke out, destroying evidence of it in laboratories and refusing to provide live samples to international scientists who were working on a vaccine.
Pssst … intel dudes: We kinda knew that already. What else ya got? Actually, this looks rather disturbing, but is apparently unconnected to the current coronavirus sweeping the globe:
It can also be revealed the Australian government trained and funded a team of Chinese scientists who belong to a laboratory which went on to genetically modify deadly coronaviruses that could be transmitted from bats to humans and had no cure, and is not the subject of a probe into the origins of COVID-19.
Perhaps this might not be pertinent to this outbreak, but it certainly sounds like an origin story for a future pandemic. What’s the point of this work? Is it to stop such viruses, or amplify them? Either way, it sounds like a Pandora’s Box, which is why the State Department has sent up warning flares about the Wuhan Institute of Virology for years now.
The main value of this new assessment appears to be a concise summation of everything we already know about China’s malign attempts to cover its tracks on COVID-19:
Its major themes include the “deadly denial of human-to-human transmission”, the silencing or “disappearing” of doctors and scientists who spoke out, the destruction of evidence of the virus from genomic studies laboratories, and “bleaching of wildlife market stalls”, along with the refusal to provide live virus samples to international scientists working on a vaccine.
The New York Post calls this a “bombshell,” but the only real news here might just be the leak:
The bombshell 15-page research document also indicated that the virus was leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a claim initially dismissed as a conspiracy theory because Chinese officials insisted the virus came from the local wet markets, according to the Australian Daily Telegraph. … The paper described how China downplayed the outbreak around the world while wildly scrambling to bury all traces of the disease at home, including bleaching wet market stalls, censoring the growing evidence of asymptomatic carriers of the virus and stonewalling sample requests from other countries.
The ADT article does not claim that Five Eyes have concluded it leaked from a laboratory. It does note that the US position is that a laboratory accident is more likely than the wet-market transmission theory, but Australia’s position is the opposite. No one knows for sure, but the US bases its leaning in large part on China’s robust and continuing efforts to cover their tracks and obfuscate the origins of COVID-19. It seems like an unusual effort if this was just another case of cross-over.
So why is this Five Eyes report leaking now? Presumably, it’s an intel-community response to the demand from Bill Gates and others that everyone needs to cooperate more with China, even though China keeps lying through its teeth and issuing nonsensical propaganda attacks as distractions. On Thursday, Washington Post reporter Josh Rogin — who broke the story on the State Department memos on the Wuhan Institute of Virology — scolded Gates and other such activists for ignoring the plain truth that China’s not cooperating at all, nor does it plan to cooperate to any end except its cover-up:
Gates’s comments are simply wrong, and dangerously so. Beijing’s bad behavior is neither past nor benign. In fact, it continues to put us at increased risk. … The Chinese government misled the world about the virus early on. It manipulated statistics to downplay the outbreak’s severity, silenced whistleblowers, spread misinformation and disinformation, and censored science that didn’t fit the official narrative. These are not academic points. Beijing continues to do all these things today. Just in the past week, Beijing pressured the European Union to censor a report addressing China’s responsibility, threatened Australia with economic pressure if it conducted an inquiry of its own, and arrested three more journalists for the crime of posting covid-19 articles on GitHub (which is, incidentally, owned by Microsoft). It’s not just about blame. The Chinese government’s refusal to allow international experts to investigate what happened in the city of Wuhan impedes efforts to find treatments and cures. Unless the source is located, the true path of the outbreak can’t be traced and critical scientific information can’t be known. Whether you believe it came from a market, a lab or a random bat flying around Wuhan, Beijing won’t allow any of these scenarios to be examined. We have to solve the origin question to beat the outbreak and prevent the next pandemic. And that’s not the only problem. China still won’t share original virus samples, which many international researchers are asking for. The statistics issued by China are used in models that inform our response. China didn’t report asymptomatic positive cases in its tallies until this month. That information would have been extremely useful months ago.
Again, as Rogin’s links show, none of this is new. All of this has been sufficiently reported and just plain observed over the last five months. These are not the acts of a cooperative partner — they are the acts of a secretive and dangerous adversary that places its own power far ahead of global health risks.
This intelligence leak likely has a primary intent of sending a shot across Beijing’s bow about just how much we could humiliate China unless they stop acting malevolently. However, it’s at least a secondary mission for this intelligence to plug up the gullibility gaps among elites and China apologists in the West.
Update: In separate reporting this morning, Fox’s John Roberts reports that “confidence is high” among US intel agencies that COVID-19 broke out of one of the Wuhan labs accidentally:
A Senior Intelligence Source tells me there is agreement among most of the 17 Intelligence agencies that COVID-19 originated in the Wuhan lab. The source stressed that the release is believed to be a MISTAKE, and was not intentional. — John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) May 2, 2020
Sources say not all 17 intelligence agencies agree that the lab was the source of the virus because there is not yet a definitive “smoking gun”. But confidence is high among 70-75% of the agencies. — John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) May 2, 2020
That certainly would explain why China’s working so hard to cover it up.


hotair--2020-05-02--Weekend Report: Top headlines and hot stories around the Townhall universe

Get ready for a 30-minute roundup of all all the top headlines of the morning , plus what ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Group websites today !
This special version of The Ed Morrissey Show will air live @ @ @ @ @ on Hot Air ’ s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page @ @ @ @ @ on Facebook .
• Going around the horn of TMG sites • NYT calls on @ @ @ @ @ and Tara Reade • New intel from Five Eyes on China ’ s COVID-19 lies @ @ @ @ @ comments in the Facebook comments The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be @ @ @ @ @ page .
Be sure to join us , and don ’ t forget to keep @ @ @ @ @ my Facebook page , too !
How can Republicans and conservatives keep winning after 2016 @ @ @ @ @ RED , published in April from Crown Forum !

Get ready for a 30-minute roundup of all all the top headlines of the morning, plus what’s happening at the Townhall Media Group websites today! This special version of The Ed Morrissey Show will air live at noon ET, streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook.
Today’s top headlines:
A preview of posts upcoming at Hot Air
Going around the horn of TMG sites
NYT calls on DNC to investigate Joe Biden and Tara Reade
New intel from Five Eyes on China’s COVID-19 lies
Plus your questions and comments in the Facebook comments
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!


hotair--2020-05-02--US women's soccer equal pay lawsuit tossed

This story dropped off the radar for quite a while , primarily because the court proceedings have dragged on endlessly , but now we have an initial determination from the judge .
The U.S. Soccer Federation was sued last year by the United States women ’ s soccer team over demands that they be paid the same as the men ’ s team .
As you may recall , after winning the World Cup and returning home to a heroin ’ s welcome , complete with ticker-tape parades , the team turned the celebrations into public calls for pay equity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court Judge R. Gary Klausner ( a Bush 43 appointee ) didn ’ t see it that way , however , and dismissed most of the suit .
( NBC News ) A federal judge in Los Angeles on Friday dismissed demands by the United States women ’ s soccer team for pay equal to that of men ’ s .
Molly Levinson , spokeswoman for the defending World Cup champions , said the plaintiffs would appeal .
“ We are shocked and disappointed with today ’ s decision , but we will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equal pay , ” she said in a statement .
“ We are confident in our case and steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that girls and women who play this sport will not be valued as lesser just because of their gender .
We will appeal and press on.
” The team ’ s “ shocked and disappointed ” spokesperson is still focusing on the claim that the women are valued less because of their gender .
But that ’ s unrelated to anything the judge had to say about the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case .
He wasn ’ t denying that the women made less money than their male counterparts .
Nor was he arguing about gender equity when it comes to pay scales .
He simply pointed out that the women ’ s team went through extensive negotiations when setting up this arrangement and they ’ re being paid precisely what they negotiated for .
In his ruling , the judge noted that “ they specifically asked for and negotiated a completely different contract than the men ’ s national team , despite being offered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreement during the past negotiations.
” The men ’ s team worked out a deal where they would receive less guaranteed pay in exchange for larger bonuses based on performance .
By contrast , the women ’ s team wanted more guaranteed pay upfront with less bonus money on the back end .
Had they negotiated for the same deal the men arranged , they would have made considerably more money after winning the championship .
It wasn ’ t a total loss , however .
Judge Klausner did find that the women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accommodations .
Apparently , the men ’ s team got to fly by private jets more often while the women took commercial flights .
With that in mind , he ’ s allowing the suit to move forward if it focuses solely on those aspects of their compensation .
None of these questions appear to address the actual underlying inequality in soccer and most sports .
The fact is that women ’ s soccer , much like the WNBA , generally draws far lower ratings than the men ’ s league .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is generally always going to be lower so there is less money to spread around .
If you want to “ fix ” the system you need to find a way to get more people to tune in and watch the games .
And they might want to take a different approach when it ’ s time to renegotiate their contract .
This really doesn ’ t seem all that complicated .

This story dropped off the radar for quite a while, primarily because the court proceedings have dragged on endlessly, but now we have an initial determination from the judge. The U.S. Soccer Federation was sued last year by the United States women’s soccer team over demands that they be paid the same as the men’s team. As you may recall, after winning the World Cup and returning home to a heroin’s welcome, complete with ticker-tape parades, the team turned the celebrations into public calls for pay equity between the genders. California Central District Court Judge R. Gary Klausner (a Bush 43 appointee) didn’t see it that way, however, and dismissed most of the suit. (NBC News)
A federal judge in Los Angeles on Friday dismissed demands by the United States women’s soccer team for pay equal to that of men’s. Molly Levinson, spokeswoman for the defending World Cup champions, said the plaintiffs would appeal. “We are shocked and disappointed with today’s decision, but we will not give up our hard work for equal pay,” she said in a statement. “We are confident in our case and steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that girls and women who play this sport will not be valued as lesser just because of their gender. We will appeal and press on.”
The team’s “shocked and disappointed” spokesperson is still focusing on the claim that the women are valued less because of their gender. But that’s unrelated to anything the judge had to say about the majority of the claims being made in this case. He wasn’t denying that the women made less money than their male counterparts. Nor was he arguing about gender equity when it comes to pay scales. He simply pointed out that the women’s team went through extensive negotiations when setting up this arrangement and they’re being paid precisely what they negotiated for.
In his ruling, the judge noted that “they specifically asked for and negotiated a completely different contract than the men’s national team, despite being offered, and rejecting, a similar pay-to-play agreement during the past negotiations.” The men’s team worked out a deal where they would receive less guaranteed pay in exchange for larger bonuses based on performance. By contrast, the women’s team wanted more guaranteed pay upfront with less bonus money on the back end. Had they negotiated for the same deal the men arranged, they would have made considerably more money after winning the championship.
It wasn’t a total loss, however. Judge Klausner did find that the women’s team received unequal travel and accommodations. Apparently, the men’s team got to fly by private jets more often while the women took commercial flights. With that in mind, he’s allowing the suit to move forward if it focuses solely on those aspects of their compensation.
None of these questions appear to address the actual underlying inequality in soccer and most sports. The fact is that women’s soccer, much like the WNBA, generally draws far lower ratings than the men’s league. That means that the league’s revenue is generally always going to be lower so there is less money to spread around. If you want to “fix” the system you need to find a way to get more people to tune in and watch the games. And they might want to take a different approach when it’s time to renegotiate their contract. This really doesn’t seem all that complicated.


hotair--2020-05-02--Breaking: Kim Jong-un still not dead

Breaking: Kim Jong-un still not dead

Generalissimo Francisco Franco may still be dead , but apparently not so for North Korean tyrant Kim Jong-un .
After weeks of complete silence and rumors of his failing health or even death , the diminutive dictator showed up at the ribbon-cutting ceremony for a fertilizer plant ( of all things ) , acting for all the world as if nothing had happened and it was just another day at the office .
Interestingly , he brought his sister , Kim Yo Jong with him after officially appointing her to the political bureau of the Worker ’ s Party central @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Korean leader Kim Jong Un made his first public appearance in 20 days as he celebrated the completion of a fertilizer factory near Pyongyang , state media said Saturday , ending an absence that had triggered global rumors that he was seriously ill .
The North ’ s official Korean Central News Agency said Kim attended the ceremony Friday in Suncheon with other senior officials , including his sister Kim Yo Jong , who many analysts predict would take over if her brother is suddenly unable to rule .
Neither the KCNA nor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ photos online from the ceremony .
So what ’ s been going on for the past few weeks ?
We have no idea because Kim isn ’ t saying and the reporters at the country ’ s state-run media outlets know better than to bring up sensitive topics like that .
( Angering Kim Jong-un can famously be bad for your career as well as your health . )
It seems quite likely that he was battling some sort of health issue , but Kim doesn ’ t like to see any headlines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He was reportedly walking around fairly normally without the use of a walking stick .
But part of the time , he was also seen riding a small electric cart of some sort .
If he really did have some sort of heart surgery , there ’ s probably been enough time for him to recover by now .
Alternately , he might have come down with COVID-19 .
Given his weight , smoking habits and generally poor health , that would have been a touchy situation .
We ’ re still not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ official succession plan in place against his eventual demise .
Perhaps he fears that discussing such things will provoke rumors about his failing health .
But that brings us back to the fact that Kim Yo Jong joined him for this public ceremony .
When we previously discussed what might happen if the Dear Leader suddenly showed up at room temperature , one possibility on the table was that his sister might take power .
But if too many of the warlords from the various factions around the country aren ’ t willing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that could lead to massive civil unrest and perhaps even a collapse of the central government .
For the time being , however , we appear to have returned to the status quo .
Negotiations with Washington are still stalled , North Korea is back to working on missiles and tactical weapons and China is growing increasingly nervous .
At this point , all we ’ re really waiting for is to see Godzilla rising up from the ocean and smiting a few cities .

Generalissimo Francisco Franco may still be dead, but apparently not so for North Korean tyrant Kim Jong-un. After weeks of complete silence and rumors of his failing health or even death, the diminutive dictator showed up at the ribbon-cutting ceremony for a fertilizer plant (of all things), acting for all the world as if nothing had happened and it was just another day at the office. Interestingly, he brought his sister, Kim Yo Jong with him after officially appointing her to the political bureau of the Worker’s Party central committee. (Associated Press)
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un made his first public appearance in 20 days as he celebrated the completion of a fertilizer factory near Pyongyang, state media said Saturday, ending an absence that had triggered global rumors that he was seriously ill. The North’s official Korean Central News Agency said Kim attended the ceremony Friday in Suncheon with other senior officials, including his sister Kim Yo Jong, who many analysts predict would take over if her brother is suddenly unable to rule. Neither the KCNA nor the official Rodong Sinmun newspaper immediately released photos online from the ceremony.
So what’s been going on for the past few weeks? We have no idea because Kim isn’t saying and the reporters at the country’s state-run media outlets know better than to bring up sensitive topics like that. (Angering Kim Jong-un can famously be bad for your career as well as your health.)
It seems quite likely that he was battling some sort of health issue, but Kim doesn’t like to see any headlines that might make him appear weak. He was reportedly walking around fairly normally without the use of a walking stick. But part of the time, he was also seen riding a small electric cart of some sort. If he really did have some sort of heart surgery, there’s probably been enough time for him to recover by now. Alternately, he might have come down with COVID-19. Given his weight, smoking habits and generally poor health, that would have been a touchy situation.
We’re still not hearing anything about Kim having put an official succession plan in place against his eventual demise. Perhaps he fears that discussing such things will provoke rumors about his failing health. But that brings us back to the fact that Kim Yo Jong joined him for this public ceremony. When we previously discussed what might happen if the Dear Leader suddenly showed up at room temperature, one possibility on the table was that his sister might take power. But if too many of the warlords from the various factions around the country aren’t willing to have a woman in charge, that could lead to massive civil unrest and perhaps even a collapse of the central government.
For the time being, however, we appear to have returned to the status quo. Negotiations with Washington are still stalled, North Korea is back to working on missiles and tactical weapons and China is growing increasingly nervous. At this point, all we’re really waiting for is to see Godzilla rising up from the ocean and smiting a few cities.