hotair--2020-12-01--Buckeye brawl: Articles of impeachment filed against Ohio governor

It ’ s official .
Articles of impeachment have been filed against Ohio Governor Mike DeWine .
Four fellow Republicans filed twelve articles of impeachment against the governor citing abuse of power over coronavirus orders .
Cincinnati State Representative John Becker filed the paperwork Monday .
Representatives Candice Keller , Nino Vitale , and Paul Zeltwanger joined him .
This effort began back in August .
Becker wants to “ restore the rule of law ” to the state .
At the time , he asked all 98 of his House colleagues to join him in the effort .
According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after DeWine vetoed a Senate bill while threatening to veto other legislation on the coronavirus pandemic .
The legislation addressed DeWine ’ s power as governor during a pandemic .
Becker reasoned that DeWine violated the Ohio and United States Constitutions by issuing orders to mitigate the virus .
Becker pointed to numerous cases of abuse of power , such as a statewide mask mandate .
The mask mandate led to hostile work environments when the mask requirement became a condition of employment .
He also pointed to the mask mandate applying during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State Constitution , the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeachment .
A majority of members in the house ( 50 votes ) must concur .
The state senate tries the impeachment .
A two-thirds vote ( 22 votes ) is needed to convict a governor of impeachment .
Articles of impeachment can not be vetoed .
Becker says the voices of the people opposing lockdowns and mandates to mitigate the virus are being “ muffled ” .
In a release sent to the media , Rep. Becker ’ s office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mismanagement , malfeasance , misfeasance , abuse of power , and other crimes include , but are not limited to , meddling in the conduct of a presidential primary election , arbitrarily closing and placing curfews on certain businesses , while allowing other businesses to remain open .
He weaponized the Ohio Bureau of Workers ’ Compensation to bully and harass businesses and the people ; to enforce a statewide mask mandate and other controversial measures of dubious “ value , ” making Ohio a hostile work environment.
” The statement goes on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of places of worship during shutdown orders and the mask mandate which has been in effect in one state or another since the summer .
“ Rather than hearing the cries of Ohioans , Governor DeWine continues to stifle those cries by finding more inventive ways to use masks to muffle the voices of the people , ” said Representative Becker in the statement .
“ He continues to have callous disregard for the fact that his isolation policies have led to a shockingly high number of suicides , alarming rates of drug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the forced abandonment of the elderly by their loved ones.
” The mask mandate seems to be a real point of contention between the Republican lawmakers and the governor .
The Republicans have argued that masks “ promote fear , turn neighbors against neighbors , and contract the economy by making people fearful to leave their homes.
” In August when Becker began drafting the articles of impeachment , DeWine brushed off any concerns over the effort .
Governor DeWine isn ’ t the only governor facing angry lawmakers and state residents over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ county in Michigan approved a resolution to support the impeachment of Governor Whitmer .
The county in Northern Michigan supports a resolution put forward by three Republican members of Michigan ’ s House of Representatives .
Governor Whitmer is a Democrat and was on Joe Biden ’ s shortlist of women under consideration as his running mate .
Whitmer issued a three-week order limiting indoor social gatherings that seems to have spurred on the vote of support for the resolution .
Michigan Speaker of the House Rep. Lee Chatfield , a Republican , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Board of Commissioners voted four to two in favor of supporting .
He said that impeachment is what Democrats do , as they did to President Trump .
He doesn ’ t see the effort to impeach Whitmer going anywhere .
“ We ’ re not the party that impeaches someone because we ’ re upset with policies that they ’ ve enacted , ” said Chatfield .
“ I thought it was shameful what the Democrats did to President Trump last year , and I would assume that any attempt by Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of facts that we have to impeach the governor , would be on the same level.
” Coronavirus fatigue is real .
The stress caused by government mandates and orders is weighing on everyone .
Businesses are struggling and need to re-open .
School children need to get back into classroom instruction .
Mental health issues have to be addressed after nine months of living under lockdowns and isolated from family and friends .
I doubt the impeachment efforts in Ohio and Michigan will go anywhere but it ’ s easy to understand @ @ @

It’s official. Articles of impeachment have been filed against Ohio Governor Mike DeWine. Four fellow Republicans filed twelve articles of impeachment against the governor citing abuse of power over coronavirus orders.
Cincinnati State Representative John Becker filed the paperwork Monday. Representatives Candice Keller, Nino Vitale, and Paul Zeltwanger joined him. This effort began back in August. Becker wants to “restore the rule of law” to the state. At the time, he asked all 98 of his House colleagues to join him in the effort. According to Becker, the move was necessary after DeWine vetoed a Senate bill while threatening to veto other legislation on the coronavirus pandemic. The legislation addressed DeWine’s power as governor during a pandemic. Becker reasoned that DeWine violated the Ohio and United States Constitutions by issuing orders to mitigate the virus. Becker pointed to numerous cases of abuse of power, such as a statewide mask mandate. The mask mandate led to hostile work environments when the mask requirement became a condition of employment. He also pointed to the mask mandate applying during church services.
According to the Ohio State Constitution, the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeachment. A majority of members in the house (50 votes) must concur. The state senate tries the impeachment. A two-thirds vote (22 votes) is needed to convict a governor of impeachment. Articles of impeachment cannot be vetoed. Becker says the voices of the people opposing lockdowns and mandates to mitigate the virus are being “muffled”.
In a release sent to the media, Rep. Becker’s office said, “Governor DeWine’s mismanagement, malfeasance, misfeasance, abuse of power, and other crimes include, but are not limited to, meddling in the conduct of a presidential primary election, arbitrarily closing and placing curfews on certain businesses, while allowing other businesses to remain open. He weaponized the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation to bully and harass businesses and the people; to enforce a statewide mask mandate and other controversial measures of dubious “value,” making Ohio a hostile work environment.” The statement goes on to mention the governor’s inclusion of places of worship during shutdown orders and the mask mandate which has been in effect in one state or another since the summer. “Rather than hearing the cries of Ohioans, Governor DeWine continues to stifle those cries by finding more inventive ways to use masks to muffle the voices of the people,” said Representative Becker in the statement. “He continues to have callous disregard for the fact that his isolation policies have led to a shockingly high number of suicides, alarming rates of drug abuse, persistently high unemployment, and the forced abandonment of the elderly by their loved ones.”
The mask mandate seems to be a real point of contention between the Republican lawmakers and the governor. The Republicans have argued that masks “promote fear, turn neighbors against neighbors, and contract the economy by making people fearful to leave their homes.”
In August when Becker began drafting the articles of impeachment, DeWine brushed off any concerns over the effort.
“As governor, my priorities are to keep people safe and to get our economy moving faster,” DeWine said at the time. “If there are others in the legislature who want to spend their time drawing up resolutions and filing articles … I’d just say to them, ‘Have at it.'”
Governor DeWine isn’t the only governor facing angry lawmakers and state residents over stringent coronavirus orders. Last week a county in Michigan approved a resolution to support the impeachment of Governor Whitmer. The county in Northern Michigan supports a resolution put forward by three Republican members of Michigan’s House of Representatives. Governor Whitmer is a Democrat and was on Joe Biden’s shortlist of women under consideration as his running mate. Whitmer issued a three-week order limiting indoor social gatherings that seems to have spurred on the vote of support for the resolution.
Today I introduced Articles of Impeachment against Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. The four articles of impeachment against Gov. Whitmer include failing to respect the separation of powers by exercising power granted to the legislative branch, violating the constitutional pic.twitter.com/tCr2KUZb3E — Beau M. LaFave (@BeauMattLaFave) November 18, 2020
Michigan Speaker of the House Rep. Lee Chatfield, a Republican, condemned the resolution that the Kalkaska County Board of Commissioners voted four to two in favor of supporting. He said that impeachment is what Democrats do, as they did to President Trump. He doesn’t see the effort to impeach Whitmer going anywhere.
“We’re not the party that impeaches someone because we’re upset with policies that they’ve enacted,” said Chatfield. “I thought it was shameful what the Democrats did to President Trump last year, and I would assume that any attempt by Republicans right now, with the current set of facts that we have to impeach the governor, would be on the same level.”
Coronavirus fatigue is real. The stress caused by government mandates and orders is weighing on everyone. Businesses are struggling and need to re-open. School children need to get back into classroom instruction. Mental health issues have to be addressed after nine months of living under lockdowns and isolated from family and friends. I doubt the impeachment efforts in Ohio and Michigan will go anywhere but it’s easy to understand the frustration.


hotair--2020-12-01--Merriam-Webster: The 2020 Word of the Year is 'pandemic'

A year ago when Merriam-Webster announced the 2019 Word of the Year , the choice was “ they ” .
That idiotic choice was a sop to the woke among us who do not identify as either male or female .
Previous winners in recent years include “ justice ” in 2018 , “ feminism ” in 2017 , and “ surreal ” in 2016 .
Little did anyone know what was about to happen in 2020 .
‘ They ’ seems as trivial of a choice as it should be viewed .
Merriam-Webster bases its choice on a statistical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in extremely high numbers in its online dictionary , showing a significant year-over-year increase in traffic .
‘ Pandemic ’ seems to be the most fitting of word choices this year .
The first big spike in dictionary lookups for pandemic took place on February 3rd , the same day that the first COVID-19 patient in the U.S. was released from a Seattle hospital .
That day , pandemic was looked up 1,621 % more than it had been a year previous , but close inspection of the dictionary data shows that searches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up consistently starting on January 20th , the date of the first positive case in the U.S. People were clearly paying attention to the news and to early descriptions of the nature of this disease .
That initial February spike in lookups didn ’ t fall off—it grew .
By early March , the word was being looked up an average of 4,000 % over 2019 levels .
As news coverage continued , alarm among the public was rising .
On March 11th , the World Health Organization officially declared “ that COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and this is the day that pandemic saw the single largest spike in dictionary traffic in 2020 , showing an increase of 115,806 % over lookups on that day in 2019 .
What is most striking about this word is that it has remained high in our lookups ever since , staying near the top of our word list for the past ten months—even as searches for other related terms , such as coronavirus and COVID-19 , have waned .
In the announcement , Merriam-Webster defines the word .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large area and population .
In this case , the virus originated in China and then traveled to Europe and the United States , and so on .
an outbreak of a disease that occurs over a wide geographic area ( such as multiple countries or continents ) and typically affects a significant proportion of the population The Greek roots of this word tell a clear story : pan means “ all ” or “ every , ” and dēmos means “ people ” ; its literal meaning is “ of all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from roots that mean “ on or upon the people.
” The two words are used in ways that overlap , but in general usage a pandemic is an epidemic that has escalated to affect a large area and population .
The dēmos of these words is also the etymological root of democracy .
There were many words that fall into the runner-up category .
My favorite is ‘ malarkey ’ .
It ’ s an old-school slam that I remember hearing from my grandmother .
Sleepy Joe aptly used the slogan “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his campaign tour bus , back when he apparently planned to actually campaign for his job .
Instead , the tour bus got very little use and Joe hunkered down in his basement for most of the presidential campaign .
Joe Biden is malarkey personified .
Dictionary.com also named pandemic as the Word of the Year .
The website calls it “ the defining context of 2020.
” Specialized language such as “ social distancing , ” “ flatten the curve ” and “ herd immunity ” has moved from being used by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public as everyone learns about the coronavirus pandemic .
The website ’ s top words searched also include “ Karen ” ( ahem ! )
and “ doomscrolling.
” I was not familiar with “ doomscrolling ” .
One of the most relatable experiences in 2020 established its popular name this year : doomscrolling , a term popularized by journalist Karen Ho for the act of compulsively checking social media for more bad news .
While we had been watching doomscrolling since the spring in the context of COVID-19 , the term really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in August as people gawked at image after image of the apocalyptically orange skies over the Bay Area due to another year of record-breaking , climate-intensified wildfires in the region .
I guess in my area of the world , hurricane storm coverage would produce an increase in doomscrolling .
For reference , in 2019 , the Word of the Year was ‘ existential ’ .
At least it wasn ’ t “ they ” .

A year ago when Merriam-Webster announced the 2019 Word of the Year, the choice was “they”. That idiotic choice was a sop to the woke among us who do not identify as either male or female. Previous winners in recent years include “justice” in 2018, “feminism” in 2017, and “surreal” in 2016.
Little did anyone know what was about to happen in 2020. ‘They’ seems as trivial of a choice as it should be viewed. Merriam-Webster bases its choice on a statistical analysis of words that are looked up in extremely high numbers in its online dictionary, showing a significant year-over-year increase in traffic. ‘Pandemic’ seems to be the most fitting of word choices this year.
The first big spike in dictionary lookups for pandemic took place on February 3rd, the same day that the first COVID-19 patient in the U.S. was released from a Seattle hospital. That day, pandemic was looked up 1,621% more than it had been a year previous, but close inspection of the dictionary data shows that searches for the word had begun to tick up consistently starting on January 20th, the date of the first positive case in the U.S. People were clearly paying attention to the news and to early descriptions of the nature of this disease. That initial February spike in lookups didn’t fall off—it grew. By early March, the word was being looked up an average of 4,000% over 2019 levels. As news coverage continued, alarm among the public was rising. On March 11th, the World Health Organization officially declared “that COVID-19 can be characterized as a pandemic,” and this is the day that pandemic saw the single largest spike in dictionary traffic in 2020, showing an increase of 115,806% over lookups on that day in 2019. What is most striking about this word is that it has remained high in our lookups ever since, staying near the top of our word list for the past ten months—even as searches for other related terms, such as coronavirus and COVID-19, have waned.
In the announcement, Merriam-Webster defines the word. It’s an epidemic that has spread to a large area and population. In this case, the virus originated in China and then traveled to Europe and the United States, and so on.
Pandemic is defined as: an outbreak of a disease that occurs over a wide geographic area (such as multiple countries or continents) and typically affects a significant proportion of the population The Greek roots of this word tell a clear story: pan means “all” or “every,” and dēmos means “people”; its literal meaning is “of all the people.” The related word epidemic comes from roots that mean “on or upon the people.” The two words are used in ways that overlap, but in general usage a pandemic is an epidemic that has escalated to affect a large area and population.
The dēmos of these words is also the etymological root of democracy.
There were many words that fall into the runner-up category. My favorite is ‘malarkey’. It’s an old-school slam that I remember hearing from my grandmother. Sleepy Joe aptly used the slogan “No Malarkey” on the side of his campaign tour bus, back when he apparently planned to actually campaign for his job. Instead, the tour bus got very little use and Joe hunkered down in his basement for most of the presidential campaign. Joe Biden is malarkey personified.
The other words in the top 10 were coronavirus, defund, mamba — which saw a surge after the death of Kobe Bryant, kraken, quarantine, antebellum, schadenfreude, asymptomatic, irregardless, icon — which spiked after the deaths of John Lewis in July and Ruth Bader Ginsburg in September, and — last but not least — malarkey.
Dictionary.com also named pandemic as the Word of the Year. The website calls it “the defining context of 2020.” Specialized language such as “social distancing,” “flatten the curve” and “herd immunity” has moved from being used by health professionals to use by the general public as everyone learns about the coronavirus pandemic. The website’s top words searched also include “Karen” (ahem!) and “doomscrolling.” I was not familiar with “doomscrolling”.
One of the most relatable experiences in 2020 established its popular name this year: doomscrolling, a term popularized by journalist Karen Ho for the act of compulsively checking social media for more bad news. While we had been watching doomscrolling since the spring in the context of COVID-19, the term really asserted its staying power in the lexicon in August as people gawked at image after image of the apocalyptically orange skies over the Bay Area due to another year of record-breaking, climate-intensified wildfires in the region.
I guess in my area of the world, hurricane storm coverage would produce an increase in doomscrolling. For reference, in 2019, the Word of the Year was ‘existential’. At least it wasn’t “they”.


hotair--2020-12-01--CDC panel recommends: Health-care workers, nursing-home residents should be first in line for COVID

CDC panel recommends: Health-care workers, nursing-home residents should be first in line for COVID vaccine

A follow-up to yesterday ’ s post .
Today was the big meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to formalize the recommendations they ’ ve been mulling on how to prioritize the first doses of vaccines .
The feds are hoping/expecting FDA approval of Pfizer ’ s and Moderna ’ s products within the next few weeks ; states want to hit the ground running on distributing it and needed to submit their plans to the feds by this weekend .
That ’ s where ACIP comes in .
Logically enough , they ended up recommending sending the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most .
That means hospitals and doctors ’ offices , where workers are most likely to encounter the virus , and nursing homes , where residents are most likely to die from it .
[ B ] ecause of the limited doses , the panel ’ s work group suggested that health-care systems prioritize their personnel even further .
They might do that by staggering vaccinations by individual units , such as emergency departments ; giving vaccine first to those with direct patient contact and those who handle infectious material , and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their families .
CDC officials said they anticipate most of the estimated 40 million doses will be distributed by the end of December .
After that , five to 10 million doses of vaccine are expected to be sent out each week… The advisory committee has expressed support for , but not yet voted on , the likely order for three groups who should get the shots next : essential workers ( about 87 million people , not including health-care personnel ) in phase 1b ; people 65 and older ( about 53 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conditions that put them at higher risk of getting very sick with covid-19 ( about 100 million ) in phase 1c .
The groups overlap .
Many health-care and essential workers also have underlying conditions , and some are over 65 .
Deborah Birx and HHS chief Alex Azar reportedly wanted to start rolling it out to senior citizens ASAP but that seemed hard to justify in light of the limited supply of vaccine and enormous population of seniors in the U.S .
The way it ’ ll work instead , apparently , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I guess , given the numbers — medical professionals and nursing-home patients will be fully vaccinated by late December or early January depending upon how efficient local officials are in getting this done .
And according to the CDC , they expect to be *very* efficient : Even with 40 million doses available initially , there ’ ll be a shortage since there are 21 million health-care workers and three million nursing-home residents and everyone needs two doses .
Presumably , as the excerpt says , certain medical workers who don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be deprioritized .
I ’ m also surprised to learn that they ’ re expecting to crank out 10 million doses per week in 2021 , as that rate would push us well into summer by the time there ’ s enough for the entire population .
Yesterday an official at Operation Warp Speed suggested a similar timeline : An open question right now is whether , after essential workers , seniors , and people with comorbidities get their shots in the next batch , the rest of the population will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll be further prioritization within the group of healthy Americans .
Do the middle-aged go before young adults ?
Do kids go last ?
Today ’ s vote wasn ’ t unanimous , by the way .
It was 13-1 .
Why the lone dissenter ?
Because , she said , we just don ’ t know how safe the vaccine might be for frail elderly people .
Seems like something we should find out before injecting three million of them , no ?
Not really , said the other 13 members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote against the recommendation was Dr. Helen Talbot , an infectious-disease specialist at Vanderbilt University , who expressed discomfort with putting long-term-care residents in the first priority group because the vaccines ’ safety had not been studied in that particular population .
“ We enter this realm of ‘ we hope it works and we hope it ’ s safe , ’ and that concerns me on many levels , ” she said before the vote .
But most panel members who offered opinions said they thought the high death rate among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Dr. José Romero , the chairman of the panel , said that he felt strongly that its process had adhered to its core principles : “ maximizing benefit and minimizing harm , ” promoting justice and addressing health inequities .
Dr. Beth Bell , the co-chair , acknowledged that all of the members would have liked more data from clinical trials but said that because of the pandemic emergency , “ we need to act.
” Ideally the FDA would slow down the approval process and wait for more data on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subjects .
But they ’ re under intense public and political pressure to greenlight the vaccines ASAP , with the White House reportedly set to hold a “ vaccine summit ” next Tuesday that ’ s being viewed by attendees “ as an opportunity for the White House to pressure the FDA to quickly issue emergency authorizations for the first two vaccines candidates to be reviewed.
” The White House is also working the FDA behind the scenes , with Mark Meadows hauling in FDA chief Stephen Hahn for a meeting this morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a vacation to North Carolina when the rest of the country is urgently awaiting FDA vaccine approval .
( Hahn says it wasn ’ t a vacation , rather that he was forced to quarantine . )
Time is of the essence — but the more rushed the process is , the more reluctant people who are ambivalent about getting vaccinated will be to take a chance on the vaccine once it ’ s available .
For a million different reasons , let ’ s hope nursing-home residents tolerate their vaccinations well .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ only do we risk a Cuomo-scale humanitarian catastrophe but the general public ’ s willingness to get the shot will fall off a cliff .
In lieu of an exit question , here ’ s a slide from a CDC powerpoint on how to prioritize groups for vaccination .
These are the considerations they ’ re weighing for the next round of vaccinations , after medical personnel and nursing-home patients are all immunized .

A follow-up to yesterday’s post. Today was the big meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to formalize the recommendations they’ve been mulling on how to prioritize the first doses of vaccines. The feds are hoping/expecting FDA approval of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s products within the next few weeks; states want to hit the ground running on distributing it and needed to submit their plans to the feds by this weekend. That’s where ACIP comes in.
Logically enough, they ended up recommending sending the vaccines where it’s needed the most. That means hospitals and doctors’ offices, where workers are most likely to encounter the virus, and nursing homes, where residents are most likely to die from it.
[B]ecause of the limited doses, the panel’s work group suggested that health-care systems prioritize their personnel even further. They might do that by staggering vaccinations by individual units, such as emergency departments; giving vaccine first to those with direct patient contact and those who handle infectious material, and to personnel who provide services to patients or their families. CDC officials said they anticipate most of the estimated 40 million doses will be distributed by the end of December. After that, five to 10 million doses of vaccine are expected to be sent out each week… The advisory committee has expressed support for, but not yet voted on, the likely order for three groups who should get the shots next: essential workers (about 87 million people, not including health-care personnel) in phase 1b; people 65 and older (about 53 million) and adults with underlying medical conditions that put them at higher risk of getting very sick with covid-19 (about 100 million) in phase 1c. The groups overlap. Many health-care and essential workers also have underlying conditions, and some are over 65.
Deborah Birx and HHS chief Alex Azar reportedly wanted to start rolling it out to senior citizens ASAP but that seemed hard to justify in light of the limited supply of vaccine and enormous population of seniors in the U.S. The way it’ll work instead, apparently, is that all — or most, I guess, given the numbers — medical professionals and nursing-home patients will be fully vaccinated by late December or early January depending upon how efficient local officials are in getting this done. And according to the CDC, they expect to be *very* efficient:
‼ great news from CDC official Nancy Messonnier: most states say they can vaccinate all health care workers within 3 weeks (remember it’s a two dose vaccine with ~one month in between though) — Emily Kopp (@emilyakopp) December 1, 2020
Even with 40 million doses available initially, there’ll be a shortage since there are 21 million health-care workers and three million nursing-home residents and everyone needs two doses. Presumably, as the excerpt says, certain medical workers who don’t have much direct contact with the community will be deprioritized. I’m also surprised to learn that they’re expecting to crank out 10 million doses per week in 2021, as that rate would push us well into summer by the time there’s enough for the entire population. Yesterday an official at Operation Warp Speed suggested a similar timeline:
“100% of Americans that want the vaccine will have had the vaccine” by June. — Lt. Gen. Paul Ostrowski (Ret.), Operation Warp Speed Supply, Production & Distribution Director pic.twitter.com/3UFGYJNBWI — The Recount (@therecount) November 30, 2020
An open question right now is whether, after essential workers, seniors, and people with comorbidities get their shots in the next batch, the rest of the population will be invited to queue up or if there’ll be further prioritization within the group of healthy Americans. Do the middle-aged go before young adults? Do kids go last?
Today’s vote wasn’t unanimous, by the way. It was 13-1. Why the lone dissenter? Because, she said, we just don’t know how safe the vaccine might be for frail elderly people. Seems like something we should find out before injecting three million of them, no? Not really, said the other 13 members:
The only member of the committee to vote against the recommendation was Dr. Helen Talbot, an infectious-disease specialist at Vanderbilt University, who expressed discomfort with putting long-term-care residents in the first priority group because the vaccines’ safety had not been studied in that particular population. “We enter this realm of ‘we hope it works and we hope it’s safe,’ and that concerns me on many levels,” she said before the vote. But most panel members who offered opinions said they thought the high death rate among that group made it imperative to include it. Dr. José Romero, the chairman of the panel, said that he felt strongly that its process had adhered to its core principles: “maximizing benefit and minimizing harm,” promoting justice and addressing health inequities. Dr. Beth Bell, the co-chair, acknowledged that all of the members would have liked more data from clinical trials but said that because of the pandemic emergency, “we need to act.”
Ideally the FDA would slow down the approval process and wait for more data on potential adverse effects to very old trial subjects. But they’re under intense public and political pressure to greenlight the vaccines ASAP, with the White House reportedly set to hold a “vaccine summit” next Tuesday that’s being viewed by attendees “as an opportunity for the White House to pressure the FDA to quickly issue emergency authorizations for the first two vaccines candidates to be reviewed.” The White House is also working the FDA behind the scenes, with Mark Meadows hauling in FDA chief Stephen Hahn for a meeting this morning to ask him why he recently took a vacation to North Carolina when the rest of the country is urgently awaiting FDA vaccine approval. (Hahn says it wasn’t a vacation, rather that he was forced to quarantine.) Time is of the essence — but the more rushed the process is, the more reluctant people who are ambivalent about getting vaccinated will be to take a chance on the vaccine once it’s available.
For a million different reasons, let’s hope nursing-home residents tolerate their vaccinations well. If they don’t, not only do we risk a Cuomo-scale humanitarian catastrophe but the general public’s willingness to get the shot will fall off a cliff.
In lieu of an exit question, here’s a slide from a CDC powerpoint on how to prioritize groups for vaccination. These are the considerations they’re weighing for the next round of vaccinations, after medical personnel and nursing-home patients are all immunized.


hotair--2020-12-01--New Purdue ad: Save Georgia, save America

Call this David Perdue ’ s Heroes Act .
No , this isn ’ t a reference to Nancy Pelosi ’ s bloated state-government-bailout-disguised-as-relief bill .
Remember “ Save the cheerleader , save the world ” ?
Think of Georgia as the cheerleader in this case , although Perdue had better hope the payoff is better than it was with the superhero series .
In his new ad launched this morning , Perdue looks right into the camera and tells Georgia voters that they can save America by saving their two Senate seats from Chuck Schumer ’ s clutches ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Nancy Pelosi , and Jon Ossoff want total control .
They win Georgia , they ’ ll have it.
” The Republican senator and former businessman goes on to highlight a list of radical policy goals that a Democratic Senate likely would champion .
“ Police defunded .
Taxes sky-high .
Our proud military gutted , ” Perdue says .
“ Your private health insurance taken away .
Small businesses out of business .
The Supreme Court packed .
Is any of that really what you want ?
” “ We ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop them , ” the ad concludes .
“ We win Georgia , we save America.
” It ’ s a good argument , but one has to wonder why Perdue chose to make it in this kind of ad .
The folksy , direct approach is normally reserved for positive campaigning — talking about the candidate ’ s own values , achievements , and policy goals .
Usually , these kind of attacks are done with a harder tone and through the third person , nearly exclusively .
The tone doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s missing the Bernie Sanders connection .
Ossoff practically handed Team Perdue the ball for an easy lay-up on Sunday with his embrace of Sanders , especially on health care .
That would have strengthened the “ private insurance taken away ” argument .
How tough would it have been to add Sanders to the graphic , anyway ?
At least they still have time to work Sanders into the mix .
They have plenty of cash and boots on the ground , too .
Now all they have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can save Georgia and save America .
Boycott organizers have been showing up to campaign events to disparage the campaigns : It ’ s tough to gauge how much of an issue this is for Republicans .
Are these just a small group of voters showing up at campaign rallies , feeling disenfranchised because Joe Biden won the state and Trump lost reelection ?
Or are they indicative of a more widespread sentiment of disgust with the Republican Party after Trump ’ s loss ?
The latter is certainly worse than the former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Whichever side wins these two runoff races will have turned out its base in higher numbers .
November ’ s results revealed there are voters who supported Republicans in the Senate races and Biden for president who aren ’ t as amenable to Trump ’ s baseless conspiracy theories .
But to win , Republicans are also going to need Trump voters .
At some point , Perdue and Kelly Loeffler will have to counter Trump ’ s stolen-election rhetoric forcefully to convince their supporters that their votes will count — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cheerleader ain ’ t gon na cut it .
Update : A non-partisan political observer whose instincts I trust says this is more effective than I think .
Perdue gets to endorse both negotiations with moderates and a hard line against extremists while coming across as the most reasonable person in the room .
I ’ m happy to be convinced …

Call this David Perdue’s Heroes Act. No, this isn’t a reference to Nancy Pelosi’s bloated state-government-bailout-disguised-as-relief bill. Remember “Save the cheerleader, save the world”? Think of Georgia as the cheerleader in this case, although Perdue had better hope the payoff is better than it was with the superhero series.
In his new ad launched this morning, Perdue looks right into the camera and tells Georgia voters that they can save America by saving their two Senate seats from Chuck Schumer’s clutches (via NRO):
“Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, and Jon Ossoff want total control. They win Georgia, they’ll have it.” The Republican senator and former businessman goes on to highlight a list of radical policy goals that a Democratic Senate likely would champion. “Police defunded. Taxes sky-high. Our proud military gutted,” Perdue says. “Your private health insurance taken away. Small businesses out of business. The Supreme Court packed. Is any of that really what you want?” “We’re the only ones left who can stop them,” the ad concludes. “We win Georgia, we save America.”
It’s a good argument, but one has to wonder why Perdue chose to make it in this kind of ad. The folksy, direct approach is normally reserved for positive campaigning — talking about the candidate’s own values, achievements, and policy goals. Usually, these kind of attacks are done with a harder tone and through the third person, nearly exclusively. The tone doesn’t really match the message.
Besides, it’s missing the Bernie Sanders connection. Ossoff practically handed Team Perdue the ball for an easy lay-up on Sunday with his embrace of Sanders, especially on health care. That would have strengthened the “private insurance taken away” argument. How tough would it have been to add Sanders to the graphic, anyway?
At least they still have time to work Sanders into the mix. They have plenty of cash and boots on the ground, too. Now all they have to do is convince Georgia Republicans that they can save Georgia and save America. Boycott organizers have been showing up to campaign events to disparage the campaigns:
It’s tough to gauge how much of an issue this is for Republicans. Are these just a small group of voters showing up at campaign rallies, feeling disenfranchised because Joe Biden won the state and Trump lost reelection? Or are they indicative of a more widespread sentiment of disgust with the Republican Party after Trump’s loss? The latter is certainly worse than the former for Republicans, but both are bad. Whichever side wins these two runoff races will have turned out its base in higher numbers. November’s results revealed there are voters who supported Republicans in the Senate races and Biden for president who aren’t as amenable to Trump’s baseless conspiracy theories. But to win, Republicans are also going to need Trump voters.
At some point, Perdue and Kelly Loeffler will have to counter Trump’s stolen-election rhetoric forcefully to convince their supporters that their votes will count — and did count, too. Save the cheerleader ain’t gonna cut it.
Update: A non-partisan political observer whose instincts I trust says this is more effective than I think. Perdue gets to endorse both negotiations with moderates and a hard line against extremists while coming across as the most reasonable person in the room. I’m happy to be convinced …


hotair--2020-12-01--WI Republican: I never agreed to be party to Powell's suit

The good news : Sidney Powell has finally filed her long-anticipated legal challenge to the election in Wisconsin .
Alleging fraud and illegal voting practices , Powell demands that elections be thrown out involving two plaintiffs she represents .
One , obviously , is Donald Trump , while the other is erstwhile congressional candidate Derrick Van Orden : There ’ s only one problem with the complaint … A Republican candidate for Congress who lost his election on Nov. 3 says his name is being used without permission as a plaintiff in a federal lawsuit to make President Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election , despite receiving fewer votes than President-elect Joe Biden .
Derrick Van Orden , who narrowly lost to U.S. Rep. Ron Kind , said Tuesday he learned through social media posts about the lawsuit that his name was being used .
That ’ s … a pretty big problem .
This isn ’ t on the same level as , say , demanding that Wisconsin provide all of the security video from the TCF Center , where ballots were counted .
And that is where they were counted — in Michigan : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand is on Page 50 , part of the final paragraph in the claim .
It ’ s pretty clear that Powell used her Michigan complaint as a template or boilerplate for the Wisconsin complaint .
It ’ s incredibly sloppy work , especially for someone whose work in Georgia in a nearly identical complaint had already been held up to some ridicule .
Speaking of Michigan , Powell has a problem with her complaint there too : There ’ s apparently no Edison County anywhere in the US .
That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Kraken team .
By filing a complaint listing Van Orden without his permission , though , this goes from sloppy to potentially sanctionable .
Attorneys are required to submit documents on good faith .
If Powell claims Van Orden as a client without his permission , that ’ s hardly a good-faith representation .
Although it ’ s not without precedent , as it turns out .
In 2014 , a federal lawsuit got instantly dismissed when the judge found out that an attorney had never gotten permission to file a suit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class-action lawsuit was closed Thursday , hours after a Salt Lake City attorney insisted he had the right to use the names of a married lesbian couple without their permission in the complaint .
… Three attorneys — one a former federal judge — say Smay was out of line in filing the complaint in the first place .
“ To name someone as a plaintiff without their permission is not what the rules of procedure allow , ” said Paul Cassell , a University of Utah law professor and former federal judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action , but the way that is done is you have named plaintiffs whom you represent and have permission to represent .
You can ’ t drag someone into a lawsuit without their permission claiming to represent them.
” … “ A lawyer should not act on behalf of a person without having been engaged by that person or authorized by a court ” to represent him or her , said Burke , who is general counsel at Ray Quinney & Nebeker and handles professional ethics for the law firm .
“ He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He needs actual consent and authority to act on their behalf.
” Cliff Rosky , a University of Utah law professor and an Equality Utah board member , said Smay was “ flagrantly in violation of ethical rules.
” No word on whether Smay got smacked by the judge or by the Utah bar for his actions , but it ’ s hardly a commendable action .
In this case , Powell ’ s suit is in state court rather than federal , but it ’ s probably a safe bet that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem , too .
What ’ s more , it ’ s a foolish one ; why add Van Orden at all if she hadn ’ t contacted him , except for political cover ?
The rest of this is pretty much boilerplate too , right down to the Russel Ramsland analysis of voting patterns .
Ramsland , recall , is the expert that signed an affidavit about Michigan voting patterns but cited cities and towns in Minnesota after apparently getting MI and MN confused .
It also includes claims of massive vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr debunked earlier today .
As in Georgia , though , at least this is coming to court rather than the conference room of a local Wyndham Hotel .
By the looks of things , it won ’ t stay in court long , but at least it ’ s using the proper process .

The good news: Sidney Powell has finally filed her long-anticipated legal challenge to the election in Wisconsin. Alleging fraud and illegal voting practices, Powell demands that elections be thrown out involving two plaintiffs she represents. One, obviously, is Donald Trump, while the other is erstwhile congressional candidate Derrick Van Orden:
Former Trump attorney Sidney Powell filed a lawsuit in federal court on Tuesday on behalf of Van Orden and La Crosse County Republican Party chairman Bill Feehan. The suit seeks, among other relief, a new election for Van Orden and wants Gov. Tony Evers to certify the election for Trump instead of Biden.
There’s only one problem with the complaint …
A Republican candidate for Congress who lost his election on Nov. 3 says his name is being used without permission as a plaintiff in a federal lawsuit to make President Donald Trump the winner of Wisconsin’s presidential election, despite receiving fewer votes than President-elect Joe Biden. Derrick Van Orden, who narrowly lost to U.S. Rep. Ron Kind, said Tuesday he learned through social media posts about the lawsuit that his name was being used.
I learned through social media today that my name was included in a lawsuit without my permission. To be clear, I am not involved in the lawsuit seeking to overturn the election in Wisconsin. — Derrick Van Orden (@derrickvanorden) December 1, 2020
That’s … a pretty big problem. This isn’t on the same level as, say, demanding that Wisconsin provide all of the security video from the TCF Center, where ballots were counted. And that is where they were counted — in Michigan:
I wish I was kidding! pic.twitter.com/AP76GUYTI2 — Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) December 1, 2020
He’s not kidding. That demand is on Page 50, part of the final paragraph in the claim. It’s pretty clear that Powell used her Michigan complaint as a template or boilerplate for the Wisconsin complaint. It’s incredibly sloppy work, especially for someone whose work in Georgia in a nearly identical complaint had already been held up to some ridicule.
Speaking of Michigan, Powell has a problem with her complaint there too:
One of the witnesses in Sidney Powell’s new Michigan lawsuit says in a declaration he thinks there’s something fishy about election returns in Edison County, MI. Thing is, there is no Edison County in Michigan. pic.twitter.com/yZfDWMAFSP — Jonathan Oosting (@jonathanoosting) November 30, 2020
There’s apparently no Edison County anywhere in the US. That’s some fine researching done by Powell’s Kraken team.
By filing a complaint listing Van Orden without his permission, though, this goes from sloppy to potentially sanctionable. Attorneys are required to submit documents on good faith. If Powell claims Van Orden as a client without his permission, that’s hardly a good-faith representation. Although it’s not without precedent, as it turns out. In 2014, a federal lawsuit got instantly dismissed when the judge found out that an attorney had never gotten permission to file a suit on someone’s behalf:
A class-action lawsuit was closed Thursday, hours after a Salt Lake City attorney insisted he had the right to use the names of a married lesbian couple without their permission in the complaint. … Three attorneys — one a former federal judge — say Smay was out of line in filing the complaint in the first place. “To name someone as a plaintiff without their permission is not what the rules of procedure allow,” said Paul Cassell, a University of Utah law professor and former federal judge. “You can file a class action, but the way that is done is you have named plaintiffs whom you represent and have permission to represent. You can’t drag someone into a lawsuit without their permission claiming to represent them.” … “A lawyer should not act on behalf of a person without having been engaged by that person or authorized by a court” to represent him or her, said Burke, who is general counsel at Ray Quinney & Nebeker and handles professional ethics for the law firm. “He can’t just assume consent. He needs actual consent and authority to act on their behalf.” Cliff Rosky, a University of Utah law professor and an Equality Utah board member, said Smay was “flagrantly in violation of ethical rules.”
No word on whether Smay got smacked by the judge or by the Utah bar for his actions, but it’s hardly a commendable action. In this case, Powell’s suit is in state court rather than federal, but it’s probably a safe bet that the Wisconsin bar sees this as an ethical problem, too. What’s more, it’s a foolish one; why add Van Orden at all if she hadn’t contacted him, except for political cover?
The rest of this is pretty much boilerplate too, right down to the Russel Ramsland analysis of voting patterns. Ramsland, recall, is the expert that signed an affidavit about Michigan voting patterns but cited cities and towns in Minnesota after apparently getting MI and MN confused. It also includes claims of massive vote switching by Dominion voting machines that William Barr debunked earlier today.
As in Georgia, though, at least this is coming to court rather than the conference room of a local Wyndham Hotel. By the looks of things, it won’t stay in court long, but at least it’s using the proper process.


hotair--2020-12-01--Atlantic: How a Nazi jurist inspired 'statists' in China

If you followed the situation in Hong Kong over the past year then you already know that China ’ s new national security law essentially put an end to civil rights there , at least the right to say or do anything in opposition to the mainland .
That crackdown had a foundation in a growing consensus within China that the state has the right to use whatever means are necessary to protect itself from outside threats .
And as it happens those are exactly the kind of threats many Chinese intellectuals claimed were present in Hong Kong : This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for mainland China but it does not come out of the ether .
As author Chang Che points out in the Atlantic , it is a growing movement within Chinese academic circles .
The group are referred to as “ statists ” and their fundamental belief is that “ Stability overrides all else.
” This view of the state didn ’ t coalesce out of the ether .
It was picked up from a German jurist named Carl Schmitt : Known as Hitler ’ s “ Crown Jurist , ” Schmitt joined the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though he was only officially a Nazi Party member for three years , his anti-liberal jurisprudence had a lasting impact—at the time , by helping to justify Hitler ’ s extrajudicial killings of Jews and political opponents , and then long afterward .
Whereas liberal scholars view the rule of law as the final authority on value conflicts , Schmitt believed that the sovereign should always have the final say .
Commitments to the rule for law would only undercut a community ’ s decision-making power , and “ deprive state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hamstrung state , according to Schmitt , could not protect its own citizens from external enemies .
There ’ s a detailed biography of Schmitt available at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy .
Here ’ s a sample of his views on the power of a sovereign to suspend the law in a “ state of exception , ” i.e .
an abnormal situation .
No legal norm , in Schmitt ’ s view , can govern an extreme case of emergency or an absolute state of exception .
In a completely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the law through the normal administrative and judiciary channels is going to lead to haphazard and unpredictable results , while preventing effective action to end the emergency ( PT 13 ; GU 44–114 ; Scheuerman 1996 ; Hofmann 2002 , 17–33 ) .
If the applicability of material legal norms presupposes a condition of normality , Schmitt assumes , a polity must be entitled to decide whether to suspend the application of its law on the ground that the situation is abnormal .
Hence Schmitt ’ s famous definition of sovereignty , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decides on the state of exception : If there is some person or institution , in a given polity , capable of bringing about a total suspension of the law and then to use extra-legal force to normalize the situation , then that person or institution is the sovereign in that polity ( PT 5 ) .
Any legal order , Schmitt bluntly concludes , is based on a sovereign decision and not on a legal norm ( PT 10 , 12–3 ) .
While this view obviously seems to lend itself to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in fact based upon a kind of democracy , albeit one in which the sovereign would act according to the supposed will of the people : …the relation between sovereignty and dictatorship changed in the French revolution .
The revolutionary governments relied heavily on dictatorial action to create a new situation of normality that would allow a new constitution to come into force .
The revolutionary governments , like the absolutist sovereign , claimed the power to decide on the exception , but they did not claim to be sovereign .
Rather , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decide on the exception in the name of the French people , even while they were ruling the French people by the use of dictatorial methods ( D 132–47 ) .
Sovereignty and dictatorship had become fused in the novel institution of sovereign dictatorship : A sovereign dictator is a dictator who does not defend an already existing constitution but attempts to create a new one and who does so not by his own authority but in the name of the people ( D 112–31 ) .
Schmitt ’ s work was translated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was praised by a law professor at Peking University named Chen Duanhong .
Chen wrote about Hong Kong and became and adviser to the government on the topic .
In 2018 , Chen wrote a piece applying Schmitt ’ s thinking to Hong Kong ’ s situation : The statism of Carl Schmitt is gaining legitimacy in China and the treatment of Hong Kong is an example of how it matters .
Perhaps if it wasn ’ t Schmitt the statists would find something else to ground their views in .
A one-party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a one-party tyranny whether it has a good reason or not .
But Schmitt helps give the whole thing an air of academic legitimacy .
Chang Che concludes that even if China would have behaved illiberally anyway , the new statist impulse represents an important shift : “ It marks a move from what had been an illiberal government in Beijing—one that flouts liberal norms as a matter of convenience—to an anti-liberal government—one that repudiates liberal norms as a matter of principle .
”

If you followed the situation in Hong Kong over the past year then you already know that China’s new national security law essentially put an end to civil rights there, at least the right to say or do anything in opposition to the mainland. That crackdown had a foundation in a growing consensus within China that the state has the right to use whatever means are necessary to protect itself from outside threats. And as it happens those are exactly the kind of threats many Chinese intellectuals claimed were present in Hong Kong:
“Since Hong Kong’s handover,” Wang Zhenmin, a law professor at Tsinghua University, one of China’s most prestigious institutions, wrote in People’s Daily, “numerous incidents have posed serious threats to Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability.” The city, Wang was effectively arguing, was in no position to discuss civil liberties when its basic survival was on the line. Qi Pengfei, a specialist on Hong Kong at Renmin University, echoed those sentiments, insisting that the security law was meant to protect the island from the “infiltration of foreign forces.” In articles, interviews, and news conferences throughout the summer, scores of academics made a similar case.
This view of Hong Kong is extremely convenient for mainland China but it does not come out of the ether. As author Chang Che points out in the Atlantic, it is a growing movement within Chinese academic circles. The group are referred to as “statists” and their fundamental belief is that “Stability overrides all else.” This view of the state didn’t coalesce out of the ether. It was picked up from a German jurist named Carl Schmitt:
Known as Hitler’s “Crown Jurist,” Schmitt joined the National Socialist Party in 1933, and, though he was only officially a Nazi Party member for three years, his anti-liberal jurisprudence had a lasting impact—at the time, by helping to justify Hitler’s extrajudicial killings of Jews and political opponents, and then long afterward. Whereas liberal scholars view the rule of law as the final authority on value conflicts, Schmitt believed that the sovereign should always have the final say. Commitments to the rule for law would only undercut a community’s decision-making power, and “deprive state and politics of their specific meaning.” Such a hamstrung state, according to Schmitt, could not protect its own citizens from external enemies.
There’s a detailed biography of Schmitt available at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Here’s a sample of his views on the power of a sovereign to suspend the law in a “state of exception,” i.e. an abnormal situation.
No legal norm, in Schmitt’s view, can govern an extreme case of emergency or an absolute state of exception. In a completely abnormal situation, the continued application of the law through the normal administrative and judiciary channels is going to lead to haphazard and unpredictable results, while preventing effective action to end the emergency (PT 13; GU 44–114; Scheuerman 1996; Hofmann 2002, 17–33). If the applicability of material legal norms presupposes a condition of normality, Schmitt assumes, a polity must be entitled to decide whether to suspend the application of its law on the ground that the situation is abnormal. Hence Schmitt’s famous definition of sovereignty, according to which the sovereign is he who decides on the state of exception: If there is some person or institution, in a given polity, capable of bringing about a total suspension of the law and then to use extra-legal force to normalize the situation, then that person or institution is the sovereign in that polity (PT 5). Any legal order, Schmitt bluntly concludes, is based on a sovereign decision and not on a legal norm (PT 10, 12–3).
While this view obviously seems to lend itself to tyranny, Schmitt believed that it was in fact based upon a kind of democracy, albeit one in which the sovereign would act according to the supposed will of the people:
…the relation between sovereignty and dictatorship changed in the French revolution. The revolutionary governments relied heavily on dictatorial action to create a new situation of normality that would allow a new constitution to come into force. The revolutionary governments, like the absolutist sovereign, claimed the power to decide on the exception, but they did not claim to be sovereign. Rather, they claimed to exercise the authority to decide on the exception in the name of the French people, even while they were ruling the French people by the use of dictatorial methods (D 132–47). Sovereignty and dictatorship had become fused in the novel institution of sovereign dictatorship: A sovereign dictator is a dictator who does not defend an already existing constitution but attempts to create a new one and who does so not by his own authority but in the name of the people (D 112–31).
Schmitt’s work was translated into Chinese in the early 2000s and was praised by a law professor at Peking University named Chen Duanhong. Chen wrote about Hong Kong and became and adviser to the government on the topic. In 2018, Chen wrote a piece applying Schmitt’s thinking to Hong Kong’s situation:
“The German jurist Carl Schmitt,” he argued in an article, distinguishes between state norms and constitutional norms. “When the state is in dire peril,” Chen wrote, citing Schmitt, state leaders have the right to suspend constitutional norms, “especially provisions for civil rights.”
And Chen wasn’t alone:
Jiang Shigong, also a law professor at Peking University, has made a similar case. Jiang, who worked as a researcher in Beijing’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong from 2004 to 2008, employs Schmitt’s ideas extensively in his 2017 book, China’s Hong Kong, to resolve tensions between sovereignty and the rule of law in favor of the Communist Party.
The statism of Carl Schmitt is gaining legitimacy in China and the treatment of Hong Kong is an example of how it matters. Perhaps if it wasn’t Schmitt the statists would find something else to ground their views in. A one-party tyranny is probably going to act like a one-party tyranny whether it has a good reason or not. But Schmitt helps give the whole thing an air of academic legitimacy.
Chang Che concludes that even if China would have behaved illiberally anyway, the new statist impulse represents an important shift: “It marks a move from what had been an illiberal government in Beijing—one that flouts liberal norms as a matter of convenience—to an anti-liberal government—one that repudiates liberal norms as a matter of principle.”


hotair--2020-12-01--Update: Wreaths Across America will continue at Arlington National Cemetery this year with some big

Update: Wreaths Across America will continue at Arlington National Cemetery this year with some big changes

President Trump intervened when Arlington National Cemetery canceled the annual wreath-laying event , Wreaths Across America , this year due to the coronavirus pandemic .
The event will take place this year and some changes have been made to accommodate public health orders .
Soldiers based at Fort Myer will place almost a quarter-million wreaths on graves at Arlington National Cemetery ( ANC ) and then remove the wreaths after Christmas .
The cemetery will be closed to the general public from December 13 to 19 .
Arlington National Cemetery ( ANC ) and Wreaths Across America ( WAA ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Army Military District of Washington ( MDW ) and the 3d U.S. Infantry Regiment , “ The Old Guard ” ( TOG ) , will safely lay and recover approximately 267,000 wreaths to honor our nation ’ s heroes and their family members this December .
We developed this plan to balance our security posture and health and safety requirements with the desire to allow limited in-person participation .
Therefore , family pass holders of those interred at ANC and Soldiers ’ and Airmen ’ s Home National Cemetery ( SAHNC ) will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at designated times .
Members of the general public can take part in this year ’ s National Wreath Day in a virtual setting .
This plan enables us to preserve our capability to execute our primary mission to bury our nation ’ s service members and their eligible family members with the honor and dignity the American people have come to expect from Arlington National Cemetery .
The press release states that ANC is abiding by the “ Force Health Protection Guidance for the Novel Coronavirus Outbreak , ” and with current @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the coronavirus .
Though the general public is not allowed to be volunteers and participate in the annual event in order to protect the health of the workforce , the cemetery ’ s commitment to honor veterans remains a priority .
A multi-day , phased plan involving family pass holders will allow them to help lay 267,000 wreaths .
On Sunday , December 13 , family pass holders will be allowed to place wreaths from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m .
The cemetery will be closed to the public .
Monday through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the military will lay the wreaths while ANC simultaneously conducts over 100 funerals that week .
Family pass holders are welcome to place private wreaths from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and the cemetery will be closed to the public .
On Sunday , December 20 , ANC will reopen to the public .
Visitors are welcome to place privately purchased wreaths or flowers in accordance with our floral policy at gravesides .
This is a much-needed good story at a time when current events are focused on the horrors of the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives .
Public health officials and elected officials did their best to dissuade Americans from coming together to celebrate Thanksgiving and now they have begun to do so about the Christmas holiday season .
This decision to alter the annual event at Arlington National Cemetery instead of canceling it provides a little bit of normalcy to a very abnormal year .
I hope other cemeteries around the country continue the yearly tradition , too .
It all takes place outdoors and social distancing is easy to maintain as volunteers fan out and work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can do to recognize and honor the memories of our veterans .

President Trump intervened when Arlington National Cemetery canceled the annual wreath-laying event, Wreaths Across America, this year due to the coronavirus pandemic. The event will take place this year and some changes have been made to accommodate public health orders.
Soldiers based at Fort Myer will place almost a quarter-million wreaths on graves at Arlington National Cemetery (ANC) and then remove the wreaths after Christmas. The cemetery will be closed to the general public from December 13 to 19.
Arlington National Cemetery (ANC) and Wreaths Across America (WAA), along with our partners the U.S. Army Military District of Washington (MDW) and the 3d U.S. Infantry Regiment, “The Old Guard” (TOG), will safely lay and recover approximately 267,000 wreaths to honor our nation’s heroes and their family members this December. We developed this plan to balance our security posture and health and safety requirements with the desire to allow limited in-person participation. Therefore, family pass holders of those interred at ANC and Soldiers’ and Airmen’s Home National Cemetery (SAHNC) will be able to lay wreaths in person at designated times. Members of the general public can take part in this year’s National Wreath Day in a virtual setting. This plan enables us to preserve our capability to execute our primary mission to bury our nation’s service members and their eligible family members with the honor and dignity the American people have come to expect from Arlington National Cemetery.
The press release states that ANC is abiding by the “Force Health Protection Guidance for the Novel Coronavirus Outbreak,” and with current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance for the coronavirus. Though the general public is not allowed to be volunteers and participate in the annual event in order to protect the health of the workforce, the cemetery’s commitment to honor veterans remains a priority. A multi-day, phased plan involving family pass holders will allow them to help lay 267,000 wreaths. On Sunday, December 13, family pass holders will be allowed to place wreaths from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The cemetery will be closed to the public.
Monday through Friday, December 14-18, members of the military will lay the wreaths while ANC simultaneously conducts over 100 funerals that week. Family pass holders are welcome to place private wreaths from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and the cemetery will be closed to the public.
On Sunday, December 20, ANC will reopen to the public. Visitors are welcome to place privately purchased wreaths or flowers in accordance with our floral policy at gravesides.
This is a much-needed good story at a time when current events are focused on the horrors of the pandemic and the havoc it bestows on our lives. Public health officials and elected officials did their best to dissuade Americans from coming together to celebrate Thanksgiving and now they have begun to do so about the Christmas holiday season. This decision to alter the annual event at Arlington National Cemetery instead of canceling it provides a little bit of normalcy to a very abnormal year. I hope other cemeteries around the country continue the yearly tradition, too. It all takes place outdoors and social distancing is easy to maintain as volunteers fan out and work individually. It’s the least we can do to recognize and honor the memories of our veterans.


hotair--2020-12-01--Irate Georgia voting systems official: Why aren't Trump, Loeffler, and Perdue condemning the harassm

Irate Georgia voting systems official: Why aren't Trump, Loeffler, and Perdue condemning the harassment we're facing?

I ’ m trying to think of the last time I watched a Republican official evince moral outrage at Trump in terms as hot as this and all I can come up with is a press conference Ted Cruz gave on the day of the Indiana primary in 2016 .
Not once since then in my memory has someone stood in front of a mic and really unloaded .
There are Republicans who have criticized the president sharply , notably Romney and occasionally Ben Sasse , but they haven ’ t flashed any temper about it .
This dude ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough .
It ’ s not the viciousness directed at him or his boss , Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger , that pushed him over the edge .
It ’ s the threats now being made to a 20-year-old employee of Dominion .
And for what ?
For a bunch of lawsuits that increasingly play like an amateurish joke : I wonder if this guy really expects a forceful denunciation by any of the people he called out or if he ’ s just venting knowing that nothing will change .
Loeffler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for him , like put out a statement .
And Trump can probably be maneuvered by reporters during a Q & A into one of those half-hearted “ I disavow ” comments he makes when he ’ s pressured to denounce a group that admires him , like the Proud Boys .
But he ’ s not going to make a serious effort to discourage the harassment .
All of the stuff happening right now — wild claims of fraud , incendiary rhetoric by influencers , intimidation by supporters — is of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bully state officials into overturning an election then the more bullying the “ better.
” Trump ’ s spent the last month trying to convince people that a key element of American civic culture is a sham , so go figure that other elements of that culture , like the idea that one shouldn ’ t settle political disputes with threats , would weaken too .
If I ’ m not mistaken , Gabriel Sterling is a civil servant , not an elected official .
That might explain why he managed a show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couldn ’ t .
He ’ s not worried about voters costing him his job .
He ’ s just worried about being murdered .

I’m trying to think of the last time I watched a Republican official evince moral outrage at Trump in terms as hot as this and all I can come up with is a press conference Ted Cruz gave on the day of the Indiana primary in 2016. Not once since then in my memory has someone stood in front of a mic and really unloaded. There are Republicans who have criticized the president sharply, notably Romney and occasionally Ben Sasse, but they haven’t flashed any temper about it.
This dude’s had enough, and I mean enough. It’s not the viciousness directed at him or his boss, Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, that pushed him over the edge. It’s the threats now being made to a 20-year-old employee of Dominion.
And for what? For a bunch of lawsuits that increasingly play like an amateurish joke:
One of the witnesses in Sidney Powell’s new Michigan lawsuit says in a declaration he thinks there’s something fishy about election returns in Edison County, MI. Thing is, there is no Edison County in Michigan. pic.twitter.com/yZfDWMAFSP — Jonathan Oosting (@jonathanoosting) November 30, 2020
Omg. Powell asked the court in her WISCONSIN lawsuit to get her security camera footage from the location where they processed Detroit (Michigan) ballots. #HeadDesk https://t.co/UK5UizLnsh — (((AG))) (@AGHamilton29) December 1, 2020
https://twitter.com/beyondreasdoubt/status/1333887042099556352
I wonder if this guy really expects a forceful denunciation by any of the people he called out or if he’s just venting knowing that nothing will change. Loeffler and Perdue might do something pro forma for him, like put out a statement. And Trump can probably be maneuvered by reporters during a Q&A into one of those half-hearted “I disavow” comments he makes when he’s pressured to denounce a group that admires him, like the Proud Boys. But he’s not going to make a serious effort to discourage the harassment. All of the stuff happening right now — wild claims of fraud, incendiary rhetoric by influencers, intimidation by supporters — is of a piece. If the goal is to bully state officials into overturning an election then the more bullying the “better.” Trump’s spent the last month trying to convince people that a key element of American civic culture is a sham, so go figure that other elements of that culture, like the idea that one shouldn’t settle political disputes with threats, would weaken too.
If I’m not mistaken, Gabriel Sterling is a civil servant, not an elected official. That might explain why he managed a show of spine where so many others GOPers couldn’t. He’s not worried about voters costing him his job. He’s just worried about being murdered.


hotair--2020-12-01--County attorney announces discovery of 55 ballots in NY-22 race separated by 12 votes

Earlier today I mentioned that the last race to be decided in the country was NY-22 where Republican Claudia Tenney is currently leading incumbent Rep. Anthony Brindisi by a dozen votes .
Claudia Tenney leads Rep. Anthony Brindisi by 12 votes in the 22nd Congressional District election , according to the first official tallies that all eight counties in the district submitted to a judge today .
State Supreme Court Justice Scott J. DelConte ordered the counties to provide final counts by 4 p.m. of votes cast on Election Day , during early voting at polling sites , and by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With 12 votes separating the two , the discovery of 55 uncounted ballots in Chenango County could be decisive .
But according to a letter from the County attorney , that ’ s what was just discovered .
The letter reads in part : “ Those ballots were apparently mislaid and never counted .
Of those 55 ballots , I am advised that 44 are countable and 11 are not ( voters not registered ) .
” Syracuse.com has a bit more on these unounted ballots : So what does this mean ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this cycle has been that Democrats won the early vote and Republicans won the election-day vote .
So if these ballots are part of the early vote they are more likely to lean toward the Democrat .
However , looking at the NY Times results page , Claudia Tenney won Chenago County by 12 points .
Given that advantage it ’ s very possible these votes could add to her narrow margin .
For now we ’ ll have to wait and see what state Supreme Court Justice Scott J. DelConte decided to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already had one race ( Iowa-2 ) this cycle decided by six votes .
This one could be just as close .

Earlier today I mentioned that the last race to be decided in the country was NY-22 where Republican Claudia Tenney is currently leading incumbent Rep. Anthony Brindisi by a dozen votes.
Claudia Tenney leads Rep. Anthony Brindisi by 12 votes in the 22nd Congressional District election, according to the first official tallies that all eight counties in the district submitted to a judge today. State Supreme Court Justice Scott J. DelConte ordered the counties to provide final counts by 4 p.m. of votes cast on Election Day, during early voting at polling sites, and by absentee, military and affidavit ballots.
With 12 votes separating the two, the discovery of 55 uncounted ballots in Chenango County could be decisive. But according to a letter from the County attorney, that’s what was just discovered. The letter reads in part: “Those ballots were apparently mislaid and never counted. Of those 55 ballots, I am advised that 44 are countable and 11 are not (voters not registered).”
WOW: An attorney from Chenango County drops a bombshell with the court– 55 uncounted early votes were just found, having never been seen before. In a congressional race separated by just 12 votes, these newly discovered early votes could make the difference #NY22 @WBNG12News pic.twitter.com/SVDwXo8tgL — Josh Rosenblatt (@JRosenblattTV) December 1, 2020
Syracuse.com has a bit more on these unounted ballots:
Chenango County Elections Commissioner Carol Franklin told syracuse.com said all of the newly discovered ballots were affidavit ballots submitted during the state’s nine-day early voting period.
So what does this mean? Well, the pattern in most elections this cycle has been that Democrats won the early vote and Republicans won the election-day vote. So if these ballots are part of the early vote they are more likely to lean toward the Democrat.
However, looking at the NY Times results page, Claudia Tenney won Chenago County by 12 points. Given that advantage it’s very possible these votes could add to her narrow margin.
For now we’ll have to wait and see what state Supreme Court Justice Scott J. DelConte decided to do about them. We’ve already had one race (Iowa-2) this cycle decided by six votes. This one could be just as close.


hotair--2020-12-01--Today's hot topics on #TEMS: China lies, media surprise, Barr crosswise, election-challenge apprise,

Today's hot topics on #TEMS: China lies, media surprise, Barr crosswise, election-challenge apprise, and more!

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show ( 4 pm ET ) , we have another great lineup for the news of the day !
The show will be streamed on Hot Air ’ s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook .
Join us as we welcome : • Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew !
The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day .
We ’ ll talk about CNN ’ s big scoop that China lied about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll also discuss the state of media in a Biden administration , and more !
• NRO ’ s Andrew McCarthy joins us to discuss the status of the various legal — and PR — efforts at challenging the election .
Plus , we ’ ll talk about William Barr ’ s announcements today !
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and conservatives keep the momentum going ?
Find out in GOING RED , published in April from Crown Forum !

Today on The Ed Morrissey Show (4 pm ET), we have another great lineup for the news of the day! The show will be streamed on Hot Air’s Facebook page and embedded here and on the show page for those who are not on Facebook.
Join us as we welcome:
Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew! The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day. We’ll talk about CNN’s big scoop that China lied about COVID — and everything else. We’ll also discuss the state of media in a Biden administration, and more!
NRO’s Andrew McCarthy joins us to discuss the status of the various legal — and PR — efforts at challenging the election. Plus, we’ll talk about William Barr’s announcements today!
The Ed Morrissey Show and its dynamic chatroom can be seen on the permanent TEMS page. Be sure to join us, and don’t forget to keep up with the debate on my Facebook page, too!
How can Republicans and conservatives keep the momentum going? Find out in GOING RED, published in April from Crown Forum!


hotair--2020-12-01--Bill Barr: Why no, the DOJ hasn't uncovered any widespread voter fraud or detected any software chic

Bill Barr: Why no, the DOJ hasn't uncovered any widespread voter fraud or detected any software chicanery; Update: Trump lawyers fire back

In this final act of the Trump presidency , even the most loyal deputies are guilty of “ disloyalty ” because they won ’ t take a last fateful step into pure fantasy .
Rudy will do it .
Sidney Powell will do it .
True-blue populists will do it .
But the Attorney General of the United States , who served Trump so faithfully so many times ?
There are some lines he won ’ t cross .
He wouldn ’ t order the arrest of Hunter Biden or whatever the hell Trump wanted him and Chris Wray to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He wouldn ’ t force John Durham to issue a report on his Russiagate investigation prematurely so that Trump might benefit on Election Day .
And he won ’ t lend credence to wild claims of voter fraud just because it would make the president feel better .
In that sense , this is the perfect sequel to the last post about Doug Ducey .
So many Republican officials have shown an alarming , corrosive degree of loyalty to Trump over the past four years but that loyalty still isn ’ t as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Brian Kemp won ’ t obstruct the election certification process for him .
Barr won ’ t lie about voter fraud for him .
The difference between Barr and the two governors is that they ’ re in no danger of being fired before the day is out and Barr now is .
At the very least , he ’ ll end up as a whipping boy for Trump on Twitter .
Imagine that .
Bill Barr , the upgrade at AG from Jeff Sessions , is going to end up getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having committed the same sin , really , insisting on behaving ethically when doing so would undermine the president ’ s interests .
In an interview with The Associated Press , Barr said U.S. attorneys and FBI agents have been working to follow up specific complaints and information they ’ ve received , but they ’ ve uncovered no evidence that would change the outcome of the election .
“ To date , we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t name Powell specifically but said : “ There ’ s been one assertion that would be systemic fraud and that would be the claim that machines were programmed essentially to skew the election results .
And the DHS and DOJ have looked into that , and so far , we haven ’ t seen anything to substantiate that , ” Barr said… He said people were confusing the use of the federal criminal justice system with allegations that should be made in civil lawsuits .
He said such a remedy for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conducted by state or local officials , not the U.S. Justice Department .
“ There ’ s a growing tendency to use the criminal justice system as sort of a default fix-all , and people don ’ t like something they want the Department of Justice to come in and ‘ investigate , ’ ” Barr said .
“ People ” want to use the DOJ as a solution to all of their problems , even when criminal investigations aren ’ t warranted ?
I wonder if he had any particular “ people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What ’ s interesting about the quotes in the excerpt is that they came from an interview , not from testimony before Congress .
Barr didn ’ t have to speak to the Associated Press about the state of the DOJ ’ s voter-fraud investigations .
He chose to .
The question is why .
Why get himself into trouble with his boss by making a comment which he knew would infuriate Trump ?
Perhaps … the president made a comment of his own recently that infuriated Barr ?
Maybe Barr ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interview debunking his voter-fraud conspiracy was his parting shot .
In fact… There was no Trump/Barr meeting on Trump ’ s public calendar today .
Is Barr resigning ?
Is he being fired ?
Are he and Trump just yelling at each other ?
If Barr is out , which crony will be installed as “ acting ” Attorney General to do the president ’ s bidding by dropping dark hints about a stolen election ?
Only two possibilities right now .
One : The Chavistas in Venezuela who rigged the vote got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was no voter fraud in the election , there ’ s never been any voter fraud in the election , and Barr ’ s reached his limit on how willing he is to sit by and let this mass gaslighting operation continue when he knows better .
Either way , he must pay .
Stand by for updates on how their meeting went .
Update : The “ elite legal strike force ” that ’ s sitting on a mountain of fraud evidence but somehow still hasn ’ t been able to prove @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after Election Day has something to say .
Barr ’ s never been a fan of Giuliani , now Giuliani ’ s repaying the kindness .
Update : This is the correct lesson : If you ’ re going to sign up with Trump and he asks for “ loyalty , ” he means loyalty with respect to an-y-thing he needs .
You don ’ t get to draw a “ red line.
” And you don ’ t get to say “ no ” just because you said “ yes ” to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Either you ’ re in all the way or you ’ ll be the villain eventually .
Update : This should make Trump happy , at least :

In this final act of the Trump presidency, even the most loyal deputies are guilty of “disloyalty” because they won’t take a last fateful step into pure fantasy. Rudy will do it. Sidney Powell will do it. True-blue populists will do it. But the Attorney General of the United States, who served Trump so faithfully so many times?
There are some lines he won’t cross. He wouldn’t order the arrest of Hunter Biden or whatever the hell Trump wanted him and Chris Wray to do as an “October surprise.” He wouldn’t force John Durham to issue a report on his Russiagate investigation prematurely so that Trump might benefit on Election Day. And he won’t lend credence to wild claims of voter fraud just because it would make the president feel better.
In that sense, this is the perfect sequel to the last post about Doug Ducey. So many Republican officials have shown an alarming, corrosive degree of loyalty to Trump over the past four years but that loyalty still isn’t as absolute as the president demands. Ducey and Brian Kemp won’t obstruct the election certification process for him. Barr won’t lie about voter fraud for him. The difference between Barr and the two governors is that they’re in no danger of being fired before the day is out and Barr now is. At the very least, he’ll end up as a whipping boy for Trump on Twitter.
Imagine that. Bill Barr, the upgrade at AG from Jeff Sessions, is going to end up getting the Sessions treatment himself. And for having committed the same sin, really, insisting on behaving ethically when doing so would undermine the president’s interests.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Barr said U.S. attorneys and FBI agents have been working to follow up specific complaints and information they’ve received, but they’ve uncovered no evidence that would change the outcome of the election. “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the AP. Barr didn’t name Powell specifically but said: “There’s been one assertion that would be systemic fraud and that would be the claim that machines were programmed essentially to skew the election results. And the DHS and DOJ have looked into that, and so far, we haven’t seen anything to substantiate that,” Barr said… He said people were confusing the use of the federal criminal justice system with allegations that should be made in civil lawsuits. He said such a remedy for those complaints would be a top-down audit conducted by state or local officials, not the U.S. Justice Department. “There’s a growing tendency to use the criminal justice system as sort of a default fix-all, and people don’t like something they want the Department of Justice to come in and ‘investigate,’” Barr said.
“People” want to use the DOJ as a solution to all of their problems, even when criminal investigations aren’t warranted?
I wonder if he had any particular “people” in mind when he said that.
What’s interesting about the quotes in the excerpt is that they came from an interview, not from testimony before Congress. Barr didn’t have to speak to the Associated Press about the state of the DOJ’s voter-fraud investigations. He chose to. The question is why. Why get himself into trouble with his boss by making a comment which he knew would infuriate Trump?
Perhaps … the president made a comment of his own recently that infuriated Barr?
Trump here suggests the FBI and the DOJ are involved in the giant conspiracy to steal the election from him. Alrighty, then. https://t.co/3Cg80ptXQZ — S.V. Dáte (@svdate) November 29, 2020
Maybe Barr’s done with Trump and this AP interview debunking his voter-fraud conspiracy was his parting shot. In fact…
After telling the Associated Press there is no evidence of fraud that would change the outcome of the election, Attorney General Bill Barr just arrived at the White House. — Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) December 1, 2020
There was no Trump/Barr meeting on Trump’s public calendar today. Is Barr resigning? Is he being fired? Are he and Trump just yelling at each other? If Barr is out, which crony will be installed as “acting” Attorney General to do the president’s bidding by dropping dark hints about a stolen election?
Only two possibilities right now. One: The Chavistas in Venezuela who rigged the vote got to Barr somehow. Two: There was no voter fraud in the election, there’s never been any voter fraud in the election, and Barr’s reached his limit on how willing he is to sit by and let this mass gaslighting operation continue when he knows better. Either way, he must pay. Stand by for updates on how their meeting went.
Update: The “elite legal strike force” that’s sitting on a mountain of fraud evidence but somehow still hasn’t been able to prove its case in court nearly a month after Election Day has something to say.
Barr’s never been a fan of Giuliani, now Giuliani’s repaying the kindness.
Update: This is the correct lesson:
If Trump fires Barr for failing to stoke baseless conspiracy theories, it will be perhaps the defining proof that embracing Trumpism ultimately leads to ruin if you aspire to ever be your own person. Barr threw away his entire legacy to defend Trump—only to have it end like this. https://t.co/iVUdrJHx2I — Heath Mayo (@HeathMayo) December 1, 2020
If you’re going to sign up with Trump and he asks for “loyalty,” he means loyalty with respect to an-y-thing he needs. You don’t get to draw a “red line.” And you don’t get to say “no” just because you said “yes” to the last 100 favors he asked for. Either you’re in all the way or you’ll be the villain eventually.
Update: This should make Trump happy, at least:
AP: AG Barr appoints Durham special counsel to keep investigating Russia probe origins under new administration. — Jesse Rodriguez (@JesseRodriguez) December 1, 2020
Update: Schumer’s enjoying this:


hotair--2020-12-01--Democrat concedes to Mike Garcia in California's 25th district (Update: AP finally calls it)

There has been a lot of drama in California ’ s 25th district but the seat will remain in the GOP ’ s hands for the next two years .
This is the seat that Democrat and throuple-enthusiast Katie Hill won in 2018 .
After she resigned from office last October a special election was held this May and Republican Mike Garcia won it , defeating Democrat Christy Smith by about 12 points .
The 2020 election was essentially a rematch but this time the outcome was much , much closer .
Last night Smith conceded the race to Garcia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat Christy Smith conceded Monday in a knife-edged loss to Republican rival Mike Garcia , who retained his Congressional seat in the 25th District north of Los Angeles .
“ With final votes counted in this race , it ’ s clear we will not be able to close the 339-vote gap , ” Smith said in a statement .
“ This is not the end result we fought for , but I am proud of the strong , grassroots campaign we ran.
” “ We exhausted every possible option , and did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every voice in this election was heard .
Nonetheless , we came up short , ” Smith said .
Rep. Garcia issued a statement saying in part , “ It ’ s been a tough election , but the fight has been worth it.
” This morning he appeared on Fox & Friends and said he hoped the U.S. as a whole could avoid some of what he has seen happen to California under Democratic control .
“ I don ’ t want my country to become what California ’ s become and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we don ’ t have to hit rock bottom , ” he said , adding , “ the politicians of Sacramento have absolutely killed our state and I don ’ t want that to happen to our country.
” On that note , Garcia also predicted the GOP would take control of the House in two years .
And even before that , he said he believed the Democrats ’ narrow majority would mean Speaker Pelosi will have to negotiate : Garcia said it ’ s been a “ red recovery ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” saying the GOP is within “ striking distance ” of getting the House majority in 2022 .
“ This means that Nancy Pelosi , while she ’ ll be able to run the agenda on the floor , she won ’ t be actually running the floor .
She ’ s going to have to negotiate in good faith , ” he said .
“ There ’ ll be moderates from the left side of the aisle that will come to our side and break our way and we ’ ll actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” With Garcia holding on to his seat in CA-25 , the GOP has won back four seats that it lost to Democrats in 2018 .
Young Kim won in CA-39 .
Michelle Steel won in CA-48 and David Valadao won in CA-21 .
Republicans are now at +11 in the House and could be +12 if Claudia Tenney holds on in New York ’ s 22nd district to a lead of just 13 votes .

There has been a lot of drama in California’s 25th district but the seat will remain in the GOP’s hands for the next two years. This is the seat that Democrat and throuple-enthusiast Katie Hill won in 2018. After she resigned from office last October a special election was held this May and Republican Mike Garcia won it, defeating Democrat Christy Smith by about 12 points. The 2020 election was essentially a rematch but this time the outcome was much, much closer. Last night Smith conceded the race to Garcia for the second time this year:
Democrat Christy Smith conceded Monday in a knife-edged loss to Republican rival Mike Garcia, who retained his Congressional seat in the 25th District north of Los Angeles. “With final votes counted in this race, it’s clear we will not be able to close the 339-vote gap,” Smith said in a statement. “This is not the end result we fought for, but I am proud of the strong, grassroots campaign we ran.” “We exhausted every possible option, and did everything within our power to ensure that every voice in this election was heard. Nonetheless, we came up short,” Smith said.
Rep. Garcia issued a statement saying in part, “It’s been a tough election, but the fight has been worth it.” This morning he appeared on Fox & Friends and said he hoped the U.S. as a whole could avoid some of what he has seen happen to California under Democratic control.
“I don’t want my country to become what California’s become and I do believe that especially in California we don’t have to hit rock bottom,” he said, adding, “the politicians of Sacramento have absolutely killed our state and I don’t want that to happen to our country.”
On that note, Garcia also predicted the GOP would take control of the House in two years. And even before that, he said he believed the Democrats’ narrow majority would mean Speaker Pelosi will have to negotiate:
Garcia said it’s been a “red recovery” and a “renaissance of conservative values,” saying the GOP is within “striking distance” of getting the House majority in 2022. “This means that Nancy Pelosi, while she’ll be able to run the agenda on the floor, she won’t be actually running the floor. She’s going to have to negotiate in good faith,” he said. “There’ll be moderates from the left side of the aisle that will come to our side and break our way and we’ll actually be able to get meaningful legislation done.”
With Garcia holding on to his seat in CA-25, the GOP has won back four seats that it lost to Democrats in 2018. Young Kim won in CA-39. Michelle Steel won in CA-48 and David Valadao won in CA-21. Republicans are now at +11 in the House and could be +12 if Claudia Tenney holds on in New York’s 22nd district to a lead of just 13 votes.
Here’s Garcia’s appearance on Fox & Friends this morning:
https://youtu.be/y6282GvBaD0?t=557
Update: Finally: