hotair--2020-08-19--DNC video: Democrat asks "why can’t folks imagine a world without the cops?"

This is one portion of the Democrats ’ convention proceedings that the cable news networks and major newspapers seem to be desperately trying to keep a lid on .
It took place on Monday during the DNC LGBTQ caucus roundtable .
One of their speakers began venting her frustration at much of society , and not just their political opponents .
She even had harsh words for the mainstream Democrats .
The topic on her mind was the failure of everyone else to be able to “ imagine a world without the cops.
” She also pictures a world without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law enforcement .
She also wants to know when we can expect real abolition .
( ?
! )
Here ’ s the video .
You ’ ll want to turn on the sound for this one .
Here ’ s the transcript of the key portion of the commentary from Grabien .
I enjoyed this response from one Twitter account after the Trump War Room tweeted out the video .
It sort of says it all .
As I mentioned above , this has been getting essentially zero air time outside of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I did a search for this story on the websites of both CNN and MSNBC along with the New York Times and the WaPo .
It doesn ’ t appear to show up anywhere , but I ’ ve also yet to see anyone claiming it ’ s a hoax .
So this young woman wants to rid us of not just police officers , but prisons .
She would also do away with ICE ( naturally ) .
I ’ ll confess to being a bit confused when she claimed that America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( And not just the “ watered-down DNC version ” of it . )
Traditionally , when invoking this word , people are referring to the abolitionist movement which led to the end of slavery .
I ’ m not sure if anyone has mentioned this to her , but slavery – in all its forms – has been illegal in the United States for ages .
Anyone found enslaving or falsely imprisoning anyone else is sent to jail for a serious stretch of time .
Of course , in the world she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be any jails , so I ’ m not sure what we ’ d do about it then .
But it ’ s possible the speaker is addressing some new , woke definition of “ abolition.
” This apparently encompasses “ abolishing ” anything you disagree with , including all law enforcement or people who don ’ t share your beliefs and opinions .
Of course , the basic ideology of Black Lives Matter and many of the other groups currently demonstrating in the streets and tearing down the cities once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all that far off from the song Imagine by John Lennon .
If you ’ ve ever stopped and considered that tune , it ’ s really one of the most socialist anthems in history .
Lennon “ imagined ” a world without Heaven , religion , individual nations or private property .
Sounds like a good fit for today ’ s Democratic Socialist movement .
But let ’ s get back to this video .
Unfortunately for the clueless speaker ( whose name I still haven ’ t been able to locate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already getting a good look at what a world without the cops looks like .
You need look no further than Portland , Oregon , the Seattle Chop Zone or the Miracle Mile in Chicago .
That ’ s what a world without the cops looks like , madam .
Fire , pillaging , riots and assaults .
But as we ’ ve discussed here previously , it will only look like that for a little while .
The police are there to protect the criminals every bit as much as they protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that law enforcement is no longer available to protect them , they have traditionally taken matters into their own hands and it generally doesn ’ t end well for the criminals .
In fact , it usually ends far more brutally than any sort of outcome you ’ ll see during use-of-force incidents with the police .

This is one portion of the Democrats’ convention proceedings that the cable news networks and major newspapers seem to be desperately trying to keep a lid on. It took place on Monday during the DNC LGBTQ caucus roundtable. One of their speakers began venting her frustration at much of society, and not just their political opponents. She even had harsh words for the mainstream Democrats. The topic on her mind was the failure of everyone else to be able to “imagine a world without the cops.” She also pictures a world without prisons, and ICE and basically any law enforcement. She also wants to know when we can expect real abolition. (?!) Here’s the video. You’ll want to turn on the sound for this one.
Here’s the transcript of the key portion of the commentary from Grabien.
PANELIST: “Why can’t — why can’t folks imagine a world without the cops? Why can’t folks imagine a world without prisons? Why can’t people expand their imaginations to include community care, to include an abolitionist future? I’m talking about, like, for real abolition, not just watered-down DNC version of abolition. We’re talking about abolishing the police, we’re talking about abolishing ICE, we’re talking about abolishing prisons.”
I enjoyed this response from one Twitter account after the Trump War Room tweeted out the video. It sort of says it all.
https://twitter.com/Robbelah/status/1295826691994992640
As I mentioned above, this has been getting essentially zero air time outside of conservative media outlets and social media. I did a search for this story on the websites of both CNN and MSNBC along with the New York Times and the WaPo. It doesn’t appear to show up anywhere, but I’ve also yet to see anyone claiming it’s a hoax.
So this young woman wants to rid us of not just police officers, but prisons. She would also do away with ICE (naturally). I’ll confess to being a bit confused when she claimed that America is still waiting for “abolition.” (And not just the “watered-down DNC version” of it.) Traditionally, when invoking this word, people are referring to the abolitionist movement which led to the end of slavery. I’m not sure if anyone has mentioned this to her, but slavery – in all its forms – has been illegal in the United States for ages. Anyone found enslaving or falsely imprisoning anyone else is sent to jail for a serious stretch of time. Of course, in the world she’s “imagining” there wouldn’t be any jails, so I’m not sure what we’d do about it then.
But it’s possible the speaker is addressing some new, woke definition of “abolition.” This apparently encompasses “abolishing” anything you disagree with, including all law enforcement or people who don’t share your beliefs and opinions. Of course, the basic ideology of Black Lives Matter and many of the other groups currently demonstrating in the streets and tearing down the cities once the sun sets really isn’t all that far off from the song Imagine by John Lennon. If you’ve ever stopped and considered that tune, it’s really one of the most socialist anthems in history. Lennon “imagined” a world without Heaven, religion, individual nations or private property. Sounds like a good fit for today’s Democratic Socialist movement. But let’s get back to this video.
Unfortunately for the clueless speaker (whose name I still haven’t been able to locate, sorry), we’re already getting a good look at what a world without the cops looks like. You need look no further than Portland, Oregon, the Seattle Chop Zone or the Miracle Mile in Chicago. That’s what a world without the cops looks like, madam. Fire, pillaging, riots and assaults. But as we’ve discussed here previously, it will only look like that for a little while. The police are there to protect the criminals every bit as much as they protect law-abiding citizens. Because when society realizes that law enforcement is no longer available to protect them, they have traditionally taken matters into their own hands and it generally doesn’t end well for the criminals. In fact, it usually ends far more brutally than any sort of outcome you’ll see during use-of-force incidents with the police.


hotair--2020-08-19--This is why television networks are only carrying limited coverage of the conventions

Like everything else in 2020 , due to the coronavirus pandemic , political conventions are different .
This summer both the Democrat and Republican presidential conventions are mostly virtual events .
Television news networks had to make a decision about how much time to devote to coverage each night .
Cable news networks are giving the Democrat convention two hours in primetime while alphabet broadcast networks are only giving it one hour ’ s coverage .
Fox News Channel isn ’ t running live coverage like CNN .
Actually , the alphabet broadcast networks aren ’ t really giving true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parts of it and concentrating on commentators delivering opinions on what is being shown .
I watched CNN for about an hour of its coverage and that network carried the convention as well as can be expected , using commentators during breaks .
FNC stopped its discussion panel to carry John Kerry ’ s speech .
So , you get the point – instead of constant coverage for a solid three hours in primetime television like in the old days , coverage is much less this year .
It ’ s just as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ snore .
How much arrogant virtue-signaling is a person expected to take ?
I watched AOC ’ s speech which was used to second the nomination for Bernie Sanders .
I watched Bill Clinton ’ s speech which was used to bludgeon Trump for a lack of leadership and for having a chaotic administration .
I ’ m old enough to remember reading all the stories of a very chaotic Clinton administration , especially in the first term , so that was ironic .
And , John Kerry criticizing Trump for his handling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. military was beyond the pale .
Winter Soldier Kerry is a nasty , clueless man .
The Obama-Biden administration watched ISIS develop and strengthen .
They led from behind while Trump does not .
I watched Colin Powell announce his support of Biden .
That wasn ’ t so unusual since Powell has endorsed the Democrat candidate for president in the last four elections .
And , listening to Cindy McCain speaking about her late husband ’ s friendship with Biden wasn ’ t a surprise as she said she supports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
She narrated a warm and fuzzy clip about Joe ’ s ability to work across the aisle .
Jill Biden ’ s speech was good .
She kept to an inspirational kind of script and didn ’ t mention Trump .
Her background was a classroom and she focused on kids , her life with Joe , and her work as a teacher .
It was a sharp contrast to the ugly speech Michelle Obama gave .
When Joe joined her at the end of her time , he made a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ I ’ m Jill Biden ’ s husband ” but it came out garbled and sounded like Joe instead of Jill .
Whatever .
Viewers get a flavor of the convention but it is a strange experience .
It turns out , according to a piece in the Daily Beast , the networks were sweating covering this year ’ s conventions because they don ’ t really want to cover the GOP convention because of Trump .
I know , we ’ re all shocked about that confession .
Nonetheless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , at least to the Daily Beast reporters .
Broadcast networks haven ’ t covered political conventions as much as in years past because of the lack of viewership numbers and ad revenues .
One hour per night was all that was provided during the last conventions .
This year they worry about what will happen during the Republican convention coverage because of Trump .
If networks gave Joe Biden ’ s convention two hours , they would have to give Donald Trump ’ s convention the same amount of time .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ when Democratic officials met with various broadcast network executives about their convention coverage plans , the executives stressed that they could not broadcast two hours each night in part because they then would have to give the same airtime to Trump , and all the wild unpredictability that might entail from an editorial perspective .
“ We don ’ t know what that content is going to be , ” was the line offered up , according to one source .
Of course , they know what the Democrats ’ “ content ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same as their own thoughts and opinions .
They support Joe , too .
The networks justify their contempt for covering Trump and the Republicans because they still don ’ t have final plans and schedules of speakers .
Also , you know , the president lies and spreads propaganda .
You knew that was coming .
Never mind that Joe Biden plagiarizes and embellishes stories all the time .
For years he even described the driver who was in a car crash with his first wife and daughter , ending in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The driver was not a drunk driver .
The man ’ s family asked Biden for an apology for years and were denied it while the man was still alive .
The president has complicated editorial decisions for TV executives in part because of his penchant for peddling lies , misinformation , and conspiracy theories .
Networks have come under intense scrutiny from media critics and Democrats for giving Trump unfiltered air time to spread propaganda and/or failing to fact-check some of his more dangerous claims in real-time .
That has been especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which the president has routinely downplayed the severity of the pandemic , pushed unproven therapies , and attempted to discredit public-health experts that contradict his preferred policies .
The RNC also promises to be a hodgepodge of Trump sycophants , coronavirus skeptics , and alleged victims of “ cancel culture.
” In addition to a slate of expected speakers , including former UN ambassador Nikki Haley , Sens .
Tim Scott and Joni Ernst , and Alice Johnson , the criminal-justice reform activist whose life sentence was commuted by Trump , others reportedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ St. Louis couple who were charged with unlawful use of a weapon after pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters earlier this year , and Nick Sandmann , a high-school graduate who became a conservative cause célèbre after he sued media outlets for defamation following video of his face-to-face encounter with a Native American activist in D.C .
The line-up sounds pretty good to me so far .
What really concerns the networks is that Trump is a performer and knows how to stage an event .
He delivers higher rating numbers to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone else does .
Record numbers .
And millions of people tune in online to watch his events .
That doesn ’ t happen with Sleepy Joe .
How are the networks going to do their part to get Joe elected in November if Trump is getting the higher ratings ?
That is their real concern .
Funny how the speakers for Biden aren ’ t labeled as “ sycophants ” , right ?
No .
Not really .
It ’ s expected at this point .
The networks should want Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broadcasts .
The ratings for the first night of the DNC convention were down 25 % from 2016 .
Too bad they are so Trump deranged , like the other Democrats .
The networks and Biden campaign have little more than Orange Man bad and Biden is good and compassionate .
That ’ s all the two nights of the Democrat convention have boiled down to so far .
It sure isn ’ t good tv .

Like everything else in 2020, due to the coronavirus pandemic, political conventions are different. This summer both the Democrat and Republican presidential conventions are mostly virtual events. Television news networks had to make a decision about how much time to devote to coverage each night. Cable news networks are giving the Democrat convention two hours in primetime while alphabet broadcast networks are only giving it one hour’s coverage. Fox News Channel isn’t running live coverage like CNN.
Actually, the alphabet broadcast networks aren’t really giving true, traditional coverage. They are showing parts of it and concentrating on commentators delivering opinions on what is being shown. I watched CNN for about an hour of its coverage and that network carried the convention as well as can be expected, using commentators during breaks. FNC stopped its discussion panel to carry John Kerry’s speech. So, you get the point – instead of constant coverage for a solid three hours in primetime television like in the old days, coverage is much less this year. It’s just as well because the Democrat convention is a snore. How much arrogant virtue-signaling is a person expected to take?
I watched AOC’s speech which was used to second the nomination for Bernie Sanders. I watched Bill Clinton’s speech which was used to bludgeon Trump for a lack of leadership and for having a chaotic administration. I’m old enough to remember reading all the stories of a very chaotic Clinton administration, especially in the first term, so that was ironic. And, John Kerry criticizing Trump for his handling of Iran and his alleged mishandling of the U.S. military was beyond the pale. Winter Soldier Kerry is a nasty, clueless man. The Obama-Biden administration watched ISIS develop and strengthen. They led from behind while Trump does not. I watched Colin Powell announce his support of Biden. That wasn’t so unusual since Powell has endorsed the Democrat candidate for president in the last four elections. And, listening to Cindy McCain speaking about her late husband’s friendship with Biden wasn’t a surprise as she said she supports his candidacy but stopped short of endorsing him. She narrated a warm and fuzzy clip about Joe’s ability to work across the aisle. Jill Biden’s speech was good. She kept to an inspirational kind of script and didn’t mention Trump. Her background was a classroom and she focused on kids, her life with Joe, and her work as a teacher. It was a sharp contrast to the ugly speech Michelle Obama gave. When Joe joined her at the end of her time, he made a little slip when he tried to say, “I’m Jill Biden’s husband” but it came out garbled and sounded like Joe instead of Jill. Whatever.
Viewers get a flavor of the convention but it is a strange experience. It turns out, according to a piece in the Daily Beast, the networks were sweating covering this year’s conventions because they don’t really want to cover the GOP convention because of Trump. I know, we’re all shocked about that confession. Nonetheless, it is interesting that they cop to it, at least to the Daily Beast reporters. Broadcast networks haven’t covered political conventions as much as in years past because of the lack of viewership numbers and ad revenues. One hour per night was all that was provided during the last conventions. This year they worry about what will happen during the Republican convention coverage because of Trump. If networks gave Joe Biden’s convention two hours, they would have to give Donald Trump’s convention the same amount of time.
Multiple sources told The Daily Beast that when Democratic officials met with various broadcast network executives about their convention coverage plans, the executives stressed that they could not broadcast two hours each night in part because they then would have to give the same airtime to Trump, and all the wild unpredictability that might entail from an editorial perspective. “We don’t know what that content is going to be,” was the line offered up, according to one source.
Of course, they know what the Democrats’ “content” will be. It is exactly the same as their own thoughts and opinions. They support Joe, too. The networks justify their contempt for covering Trump and the Republicans because they still don’t have final plans and schedules of speakers. Also, you know, the president lies and spreads propaganda. You knew that was coming. Never mind that Joe Biden plagiarizes and embellishes stories all the time. For years he even described the driver who was in a car crash with his first wife and daughter, ending in their deaths, as a drunk driver. The driver was not a drunk driver. The man’s family asked Biden for an apology for years and were denied it while the man was still alive.
The president has complicated editorial decisions for TV executives in part because of his penchant for peddling lies, misinformation, and conspiracy theories. Networks have come under intense scrutiny from media critics and Democrats for giving Trump unfiltered air time to spread propaganda and/or failing to fact-check some of his more dangerous claims in real-time. That has been especially true during the coronavirus era, during which the president has routinely downplayed the severity of the pandemic, pushed unproven therapies, and attempted to discredit public-health experts that contradict his preferred policies. The RNC also promises to be a hodgepodge of Trump sycophants, coronavirus skeptics, and alleged victims of “cancel culture.” In addition to a slate of expected speakers, including former UN ambassador Nikki Haley, Sens. Tim Scott and Joni Ernst, and Alice Johnson, the criminal-justice reform activist whose life sentence was commuted by Trump, others reportedly set to address the crowd include the St. Louis couple who were charged with unlawful use of a weapon after pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters earlier this year, and Nick Sandmann, a high-school graduate who became a conservative cause célèbre after he sued media outlets for defamation following video of his face-to-face encounter with a Native American activist in D.C.
The line-up sounds pretty good to me so far. What really concerns the networks is that Trump is a performer and knows how to stage an event. He delivers higher rating numbers to FNC when they cover his events than anyone else does. Record numbers. And millions of people tune in online to watch his events. That doesn’t happen with Sleepy Joe. How are the networks going to do their part to get Joe elected in November if Trump is getting the higher ratings? That is their real concern. Funny how the speakers for Biden aren’t labeled as “sycophants”, right? No. Not really. It’s expected at this point.
The networks should want Trump’s ability to bring eyes to their broadcasts. The ratings for the first night of the DNC convention were down 25% from 2016. Too bad they are so Trump deranged, like the other Democrats. The networks and Biden campaign have little more than Orange Man bad and Biden is good and compassionate. That’s all the two nights of the Democrat convention have boiled down to so far. It sure isn’t good tv.


hotair--2020-08-20--Putin critic mysteriously falls ill. Just kidding... he was poisoned ("allegedly")

In case the name isn ’ t familiar , Alexei Navalny was once described by the Wall Street Journal as “ the man Vladimir Putin fears most.
” He ’ s made a career out of battling corruption in Russia with a particular focus on the shady dealings of both Putin and Dmitry Medvedev .
And if you know anything about Vladimir Putin , you know that landing on his enemies list doesn ’ t tend to be good for one ’ s health .
From all indications , that phenomenon is playing out yet again .
Navalny boarded a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the plane was forced to make an emergency landing so he could be taken to the hospital .
He has suddenly fallen into a coma and is listed in grave condition .
According to his spokesperson , he was poisoned .
( Associated Press ) Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny is in a coma and on a ventilator in a hospital intensive care unit in Siberia after falling ill from suspected poisoning during a flight , his spokeswoman said Thursday morning .
The 44-year-old foe of Russia ’ s President Vladimir @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Moscow from Tomsk , a city in Siberia , Kira Yarmysh said on Twitter .
She said the plane made an emergency landing in Omsk , Siberia , and that Navalny was suffering from “ toxic poisoning.
” “ He is in a coma in grave condition , ” she said on Twitter .
In case there ’ s any doubt about the seriousness of Navalny ’ s condition , someone in Russia posted a video allegedly recorded on the plane of flight attendants trying to reach the activist in the plane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moaning in pain quite loudly .
Needless to say , consider this your advance warning that some may find the audio from this clip disturbing .
Assuming that the spokesperson ’ s facts and timeline are accurate , it might not be too difficult to solve this one .
She claims that Navalny felt fine the previous evening and this morning and the only thing he had to eat or drink was some tea on the plane .
If the poison was in the tea , who besides the cabin attendant would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s what I ’ d conclude if we were talking about a flight in the United States , anyway .
In Russia ?
I doubt it ’ s that much of an open and shut case .
The Russians have a long history of poisoning people and they ’ ve gotten pretty good at it .
They supposedly perfected the infamous poison umbrella that took out Georgi Markov .
They ’ ve also allegedly developed some poisons such as ricin that can have a lengthy delay between ingestion and the onset of symptoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long before he ever left for the airport , even the day before .
Of course , all of this still technically falls under the category of an alleged poisoning .
I suppose it ’ s still possible that Navalny just at something dodgy before bed and succumbed to a severe allergic reaction the next morning .
But… come on , man .
This guy has been a thorn in Putin ’ s side for years and the strongman doesn ’ t tolerate dissent very well .
In retrospect , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to stay alive and ( mostly ) out of jail for this long .
We should recall that Navalny ran to be Mayor of Moscow some years ago against one of Putin ’ s hand-picked cronies .
The results of that election were dubious to say the least , with widespread allegations of election fraud surfacing .
He later tried to run for President , but before he could get his campaign fully underway the Central Electoral Commission ( stocked with Putin allies ) declared him ineligible .
The courts upheld that decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could try to make the argument that Putin wouldn ’ t dare to take him out because he ’ s such an obvious target that everyone would immediately know what had happened .
But since when has that slowed Vladimir Putin down ?
He ’ s a graduate of the KGB and he pretty much epitomizes the image of a person who is a hammer and sees every problem as a nail .
Putin will likely pull his usual routine of righteously denying that he would ever do such a thing and launch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real killers ( assuming Navalny doesn ’ t recover ) .
Then the matter will either fall down the memory hole or some patsy will be found ( probably another Putin critic ) and “ convicted ” of the attack .
Then again , they may just do nothing .
Tass is already citing one law enforcement official who said the police are “ not considering deliberate poisoning ” at this time .
They claimed that Navalny probably “ drank or consumed something yesterday himself.
” I wish Mr. Navalny the best and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if this is what it looks like I doubt Putin ’ s people were that sloppy .
Of course , the other possibility is that he was deliberately under-dosed and this was just a warning to remind him he should probably keep his mouth shut .

In case the name isn’t familiar, Alexei Navalny was once described by the Wall Street Journal as “the man Vladimir Putin fears most.” He’s made a career out of battling corruption in Russia with a particular focus on the shady dealings of both Putin and Dmitry Medvedev. And if you know anything about Vladimir Putin, you know that landing on his enemies list doesn’t tend to be good for one’s health.
From all indications, that phenomenon is playing out yet again. Navalny boarded a flight from Siberia to Moscow earlier today, but the plane was forced to make an emergency landing so he could be taken to the hospital. He has suddenly fallen into a coma and is listed in grave condition. According to his spokesperson, he was poisoned. (Associated Press)
Russian opposition politician Alexei Navalny is in a coma and on a ventilator in a hospital intensive care unit in Siberia after falling ill from suspected poisoning during a flight, his spokeswoman said Thursday morning. The 44-year-old foe of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin felt unwell on a flight back to Moscow from Tomsk, a city in Siberia, Kira Yarmysh said on Twitter. She said the plane made an emergency landing in Omsk, Siberia, and that Navalny was suffering from “toxic poisoning.” “He is in a coma in grave condition,” she said on Twitter.
In case there’s any doubt about the seriousness of Navalny’s condition, someone in Russia posted a video allegedly recorded on the plane of flight attendants trying to reach the activist in the plane’s restroom. You hear Navalny moaning in pain quite loudly. Needless to say, consider this your advance warning that some may find the audio from this clip disturbing.
My god. A publication with connections to the Russian security services published video from the plane where opposition leader Alexey Navalny fell ill. Emergency personnel walk toward the bathroom, where Navalny is said to have collapsed. You can hear him howling for help. https://t.co/6FWvpnsJUz — Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) August 20, 2020
Assuming that the spokesperson’s facts and timeline are accurate, it might not be too difficult to solve this one. She claims that Navalny felt fine the previous evening and this morning and the only thing he had to eat or drink was some tea on the plane. If the poison was in the tea, who besides the cabin attendant would have had access to it? That’s what I’d conclude if we were talking about a flight in the United States, anyway. In Russia? I doubt it’s that much of an open and shut case.
The Russians have a long history of poisoning people and they’ve gotten pretty good at it. They supposedly perfected the infamous poison umbrella that took out Georgi Markov. They’ve also allegedly developed some poisons such as ricin that can have a lengthy delay between ingestion and the onset of symptoms, so Navalny could have been poisoned long before he ever left for the airport, even the day before.
Of course, all of this still technically falls under the category of an alleged poisoning. I suppose it’s still possible that Navalny just at something dodgy before bed and succumbed to a severe allergic reaction the next morning. But… come on, man. This guy has been a thorn in Putin’s side for years and the strongman doesn’t tolerate dissent very well. In retrospect, it’s amazing that the anti-corruption activist has managed to stay alive and (mostly) out of jail for this long.
We should recall that Navalny ran to be Mayor of Moscow some years ago against one of Putin’s hand-picked cronies. The results of that election were dubious to say the least, with widespread allegations of election fraud surfacing. He later tried to run for President, but before he could get his campaign fully underway the Central Electoral Commission (stocked with Putin allies) declared him ineligible. The courts upheld that decision when he appealed.
I suppose you could try to make the argument that Putin wouldn’t dare to take him out because he’s such an obvious target that everyone would immediately know what had happened. But since when has that slowed Vladimir Putin down? He’s a graduate of the KGB and he pretty much epitomizes the image of a person who is a hammer and sees every problem as a nail. Putin will likely pull his usual routine of righteously denying that he would ever do such a thing and launch an “investigation” to find the real killers (assuming Navalny doesn’t recover). Then the matter will either fall down the memory hole or some patsy will be found (probably another Putin critic) and “convicted” of the attack.
Then again, they may just do nothing. Tass is already citing one law enforcement official who said the police are “not considering deliberate poisoning” at this time. They claimed that Navalny probably “drank or consumed something yesterday himself.”
I wish Mr. Navalny the best and hope he manages to recover, but if this is what it looks like I doubt Putin’s people were that sloppy. Of course, the other possibility is that he was deliberately under-dosed and this was just a warning to remind him he should probably keep his mouth shut.


hotair--2020-08-20--Netflix apologizes for 'Cuties' ads but still plans to release the film about twerking pre-teens

Have you heard about “ Cuties , ” the new movie about to be released on Netflix ?
Cuties is the English name given to a French film about a group of four young girls who are part of a twerking dance group .
Yes , you heard that right .
This is a movie about 11-year-olds twerking .
Netflix put out some promotional materials for the film this week and well…Here ’ s a poster Netflix created for this : Perhaps not surprisingly , a petition was launched asking Netflix not to release the film .
It has already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today Netflix admitted fault , at least as far as the promotional materials go : The new description for them film reads : “ Amy , 11 years old , tries to escape family dysfunction by joining a free-spirited dance clique named ‘ Cuties , ’ as they build their self confidence through dance.
” In other words , Netflix is downplaying the sexual angle now , but was the original art and description really “ not representative ” of the film ?
A review of this film published back in January said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ twerking , to the point that the reviewer wondered whether the director was hoping to provoke outrage : Doucoure ’ s screenplay requires Amy ’ s behaviour to escalate radically ( and often hysterically ) in the absence of any real-world consequence .
She steals a phone from a family friend and money from her distracted mother ; her brother floods the bathroom ; she goes to school wearing a tank top and PVC trousers and has screeching fights with rival gangs .
Yet nobody in this close-knit community raises an alarm .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ out in some style , and pretty soon she wins a place in the Cuties troop despite her “ flat ass ” .
We then move to outrageous musical montages involving close-up crotch shots of pouting pre-teens .
Doucoure seems to want to provoke censure , but fails precisely because she ’ s trying so hard .
Ultimately , that ’ s the fate that also befalls Amy as she learns the perils of the internet and the limits of the selfie .
Another review at the Hollywood Reporter says the film tries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that sexualizes young girls but doesn ’ t quite pull it off : The bigger issue is that once the film establishes its critical view of a culture that steers impressionable young girls toward the hypersexualization of their bodies , it sets up a clash against traditional values that should provide a sturdy third act — particularly given the rich contextual potential to explore African identity in a Western European country .
The elements are put in place , from Amy ’ s defiance , dishonesty and ruthless determination to participate in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s glowering condemnation and Mariam ’ s emotional crossroads as the wedding approaches .
But Doucouré doesn ’ t quite thread those strands into a satisfying conclusion .
I haven ’ t seen the film but it ’ s hard to imagine how you could weave that into a satisfying conclusion .
Making a coming of age film about pre-teens twerking which is also a criticism of the sexualization of young girls seems like a bad idea from the outset .
Yes , it ’ s possible to make a war movie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t glamorize war but makes it ugly and pointless .
But looking at the original poster for Cuties ( that ’ s it above ) or looking at the trailer , the film seems to be sending the opposite message , i.e .
twerking as a path to personal liberation or as the new ad copy put it , building “ confidence through dance.
” Yes , I ’ m aware that there are some pre-teen years for both boys and girls when efforts to transition from child to adult are painfully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or is a parent has probably experienced some of this .
And yes , that ’ s potentially a fine subject for a movie .
But the fact remains that this is a piece of light entertainment featuring young girls twerking .
Not all of the people who see this will be teens who relate sympathetically to the characters .
I ’ ve heard feminists talk a lot about “ the male gaze ” but in this case shouldn ’ t there be some concern for the pedophile gaze ?
Apparently Netflix isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it should be .
The fact that it ’ s first effort at marketing this film resulted in sexualized images they had to apologize for should be a hint that there ’ s a deeper problem here .
Here ’ s the trailer if you want to see it .
It looks like The Full Monty with pre-teens to me .
I like the Full Monty a lot but I think that film worked because it was about adults , not children .

Have you heard about “Cuties,” the new movie about to be released on Netflix? Cuties is the English name given to a French film about a group of four young girls who are part of a twerking dance group. Yes, you heard that right. This is a movie about 11-year-olds twerking. Netflix put out some promotional materials for the film this week and well…Here’s a poster Netflix created for this:
Here’s the description.
Perhaps not surprisingly, a petition was launched asking Netflix not to release the film. It has already received more than 90,000 signatures. And today Netflix admitted fault, at least as far as the promotional materials go:
We're deeply sorry for the inappropriate artwork that we used for Mignonnes/Cuties. It was not OK, nor was it representative of this French film which won an award at Sundance. We’ve now updated the pictures and description. — Netflix (@netflix) August 20, 2020
The new description for them film reads: “Amy, 11 years old, tries to escape family dysfunction by joining a free-spirited dance clique named ‘Cuties,’ as they build their self confidence through dance.” In other words, Netflix is downplaying the sexual angle now, but was the original art and description really “not representative” of the film?
A review of this film published back in January said it contained plenty of close-ups of pre-teen twerking, to the point that the reviewer wondered whether the director was hoping to provoke outrage:
Doucoure’s screenplay requires Amy’s behaviour to escalate radically (and often hysterically) in the absence of any real-world consequence. She steals a phone from a family friend and money from her distracted mother; her brother floods the bathroom; she goes to school wearing a tank top and PVC trousers and has screeching fights with rival gangs. Yet nobody in this close-knit community raises an alarm. In short, she’s acting out in some style, and pretty soon she wins a place in the Cuties troop despite her “flat ass”. We then move to outrageous musical montages involving close-up crotch shots of pouting pre-teens. Doucoure seems to want to provoke censure, but fails precisely because she’s trying so hard. Ultimately, that’s the fate that also befalls Amy as she learns the perils of the internet and the limits of the selfie.
Another review at the Hollywood Reporter says the film tries to make a criticism of a culture that sexualizes young girls but doesn’t quite pull it off:
The bigger issue is that once the film establishes its critical view of a culture that steers impressionable young girls toward the hypersexualization of their bodies, it sets up a clash against traditional values that should provide a sturdy third act — particularly given the rich contextual potential to explore African identity in a Western European country. The elements are put in place, from Amy’s defiance, dishonesty and ruthless determination to participate in the contest at any price, to Aunty’s glowering condemnation and Mariam’s emotional crossroads as the wedding approaches. But Doucouré doesn’t quite thread those strands into a satisfying conclusion.
I haven’t seen the film but it’s hard to imagine how you could weave that into a satisfying conclusion. Making a coming of age film about pre-teens twerking which is also a criticism of the sexualization of young girls seems like a bad idea from the outset. Yes, it’s possible to make a war movie that is anti-war, one that doesn’t glamorize war but makes it ugly and pointless. But looking at the original poster for Cuties (that’s it above) or looking at the trailer, the film seems to be sending the opposite message, i.e. twerking as a path to personal liberation or as the new ad copy put it, building “confidence through dance.”
Yes, I’m aware that there are some pre-teen years for both boys and girls when efforts to transition from child to adult are painfully awkward. Anyone who remembers these years or is a parent has probably experienced some of this. And yes, that’s potentially a fine subject for a movie. But the fact remains that this is a piece of light entertainment featuring young girls twerking. Not all of the people who see this will be teens who relate sympathetically to the characters. I’ve heard feminists talk a lot about “the male gaze” but in this case shouldn’t there be some concern for the pedophile gaze?
Apparently Netflix isn’t worried about that but maybe it should be. The fact that its first effort at marketing this film resulted in sexualized images they had to apologize for should be a hint that there’s a deeper problem here. Here’s the trailer if you want to see it. It looks like The Full Monty with pre-teens to me. I like the Full Monty a lot but I think that film worked because it was about adults, not children.


hotair--2020-08-20--Dem convention, night four: The Joe show -- featuring Hunter Biden

Here ’ s the live feed for those watching on their laptop .
Read on .
We begin with another useful recap of the previous evening from the Reagan Battalion : There ’ s good news and bad news for Democrats tonight .
The bad news is that there ’ s nearly zero chance Biden will deliver a memorable speech , especially if he ends up seduced by the temptation to be rousing .
He ’ s more effective in his quieter moments , talking about family .
They should stick with that , as policy and the challenges facing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at this convention anyway .
( After 8,000 years as a senator and VP , does Biden need to articulate his brand of liberalism yet again for voters ? )
The entire message has been that Trump is indecent and that Joe is a , well , swell Joe .
They might as well hammer that theme in the nominee ’ s own acceptance speech .
It ’ s their best chance to connect with voters .
The good news for Dems is that Biden doesn ’ t need to deliver a memorable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ memorable speech , really .
All he needs to do is achieve two things .
First , be energetic .
I don ’ t mean “ rousing , ” necessarily , just engaged with the moment at all times and emotional as the message warrants .
The only way he can hurt himself is if he ’ s listless , as that ’ ll leave voters asking the question Trump ’ s campaign keeps pushing them to ask .
Second , don ’ t get overshadowed .
The risk of that is small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him tonight are low key — Pete Buttigieg , Mike Bloomberg , Andrew Yang , Tammy Baldwin , various party functionaries .
But Cory Booker gets a shot tonight , and Booker is an ambitious young pol with his eye on 2024 .
He went nowhere in the primaries but his candidacy was well received .
Without a doubt , he ’ ll be looking to make an impression tonight a la Obama in 2004 , especially since Harris ’ s VP speech was underwhelming .
There ’ s an unexpected speaker tonight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
” Trump occasionally asks .
Well , this evening he ’ s on your TV screen : Hunter Biden , the son of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and a favorite punching bag of Republicans , plans to speak on Thursday during the last night of the Democratic National Convention… Hunter will be joined by his sister Ashley , who has largely kept out of the public spotlight .
Ashley Biden appeared in an intimate video during the second night of the convention , diving into Joe Biden ’ s family life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden .
The video also touched on the family ’ s loss following the death of Joe Biden ’ s first wife and daughter in a car crash , as well as his son Beau Biden ’ s death from cancer in 2015 .
The convention will also air a video tribute to Beau Biden ’ s life shortly before Joe Biden formally accepts the party ’ s nomination at the evening ’ s close .
Biden is sufficiently family-oriented that you can imagine him saying “ to hell with it ” when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the spotlight would invite the GOP to revisit the Ukraine business .
Or maybe that ’ s the point : Biden has never trailed Trump in the national polls , even when Republicans were working hard to get the Burisma stuff off the ground this past winter , so maybe dangling Hunter in front of them is a way of baiting them .
If Trump spends the next two weeks wasting time tweeting about Biden ’ s kid , that ’ s two weeks he ’ s not tweeting about Biden himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that putting Hunter Biden onstage as part of a tribute to his father and late brother would make it too risky for Republicans to attack .
People might feel sympathy for him .
There are more Republican endorsements of Joe Biden today but no one very notable as I write this at 4 p.m .
ET .
Unless there ’ s a big surprise tonight , all of the veterans of the Trump administration who ’ ve criticized the president after leaving have nonetheless refrained from supporting his Democratic opponent — at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had the most impact .
Here ’ s the handy Twitter widget for live commentary during the show .
The comment thread is open .

Here’s the live feed for those watching on their laptop. Read on.
We begin with another useful recap of the previous evening from the Reagan Battalion:
DNC convention recap: [Night 3] Barack Obama spoke to us about the importance of the constitution and its limits on Presidential powers, Hillary told us how a spouse is a testament to ones character, and Kamala reminded us of how unfair the justice system is to young minorities. — Reagan Battalion (@ReaganBattalion) August 20, 2020
There’s good news and bad news for Democrats tonight. The bad news is that there’s nearly zero chance Biden will deliver a memorable speech, especially if he ends up seduced by the temptation to be rousing. He’s more effective in his quieter moments, talking about family. They should stick with that, as policy and the challenges facing the country have been practically an afterthought at this convention anyway. (After 8,000 years as a senator and VP, does Biden need to articulate his brand of liberalism yet again for voters?) The entire message has been that Trump is indecent and that Joe is a, well, swell Joe. They might as well hammer that theme in the nominee’s own acceptance speech. It’s their best chance to connect with voters.
The good news for Dems is that Biden doesn’t need to deliver a memorable speech, or anything close to a memorable speech, really. All he needs to do is achieve two things. First, be energetic. I don’t mean “rousing,” necessarily, just engaged with the moment at all times and emotional as the message warrants. The only way he can hurt himself is if he’s listless, as that’ll leave voters asking the question Trump’s campaign keeps pushing them to ask. Second, don’t get overshadowed. The risk of that is small since most of the people speaking before him tonight are low key — Pete Buttigieg, Mike Bloomberg, Andrew Yang, Tammy Baldwin, various party functionaries. But Cory Booker gets a shot tonight, and Booker is an ambitious young pol with his eye on 2024. He went nowhere in the primaries but his candidacy was well received. Without a doubt, he’ll be looking to make an impression tonight a la Obama in 2004, especially since Harris’s VP speech was underwhelming.
There’s an unexpected speaker tonight too. “Where’s Hunter?” Trump occasionally asks. Well, this evening he’s on your TV screen:
Hunter Biden, the son of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and a favorite punching bag of Republicans, plans to speak on Thursday during the last night of the Democratic National Convention… Hunter will be joined by his sister Ashley, who has largely kept out of the public spotlight. Ashley Biden appeared in an intimate video during the second night of the convention, diving into Joe Biden’s family life and relationship with his wife, Jill Biden. The video also touched on the family’s loss following the death of Joe Biden’s first wife and daughter in a car crash, as well as his son Beau Biden’s death from cancer in 2015. The convention will also air a video tribute to Beau Biden’s life shortly before Joe Biden formally accepts the party’s nomination at the evening’s close.
Biden is sufficiently family-oriented that you can imagine him saying “to hell with it” when his aides reminded him that putting Hunter in the spotlight would invite the GOP to revisit the Ukraine business. Or maybe that’s the point: Biden has never trailed Trump in the national polls, even when Republicans were working hard to get the Burisma stuff off the ground this past winter, so maybe dangling Hunter in front of them is a way of baiting them. If Trump spends the next two weeks wasting time tweeting about Biden’s kid, that’s two weeks he’s not tweeting about Biden himself.
Probably, though, they figure that putting Hunter Biden onstage as part of a tribute to his father and late brother would make it too risky for Republicans to attack. People might feel sympathy for him.
There are more Republican endorsements of Joe Biden today but no one very notable as I write this at 4 p.m. ET. Unless there’s a big surprise tonight, all of the veterans of the Trump administration who’ve criticized the president after leaving have nonetheless refrained from supporting his Democratic opponent — at least before the convention when endorsing might have had the most impact. Here’s the handy Twitter widget for live commentary during the show. The comment thread is open.
A Twitter List by allahpundit


hotair--2020-08-20--New polls: Trump tied with Biden in Minnesota, statistically tied in Pennsylvania

For two reasons these polls are hard to compute , at least at first glance .
One is that Trump famously won Pennsylvania in 2016 but couldn ’ t quite get over the hump in Minnesota .
Logically you ’ d assume that if he ’ s poised to swipe MN this year , he ’ d have a reasonably solid lead in PA right now .
That ’ s not what we ’ re seeing at the moment .
In fact , in RCP ’ s polling averages of the two states , Biden ’ s margin in Minnesota @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than it is in Pennsylvania ( 5.7 ) .
How did that happen ?
The other reason is that Biden continues to enjoy a gaudy national lead , topping Trump by an average of 7.6 points .
Some polls , most notably CNN ’ s , have had the race tightening lately but YouGov ’ s newest has Biden comfortably ahead , 50/40 .
Echelon Insights , a polling firm co-founded by Republicans Kristen Soltis Anderson and Patrick Ruffini , has Biden up 53/39 in its latest .
How the hell could he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be tied with him in the bluish state of Minnesota ?
Someone ’ s clearly wrong .
By a lot .
Lay all of that aside for a second and let ’ s look at the numbers .
The Minnesota data comes from Trafalgar , the pollster that nailed Trump ’ s upsets in the Rust Belt four years ago .
Trafalgar is a Republican firm as well and consistently produces rosier numbers for the president than nearly anyone else .
Is that because they have special insight into how “ shy Trumpers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s a Republican lean to their polling that ’ s distorting the true picture of the race ?
We ’ ll know in about 80 days .
You ’ re left staring at that graph , wondering which candidate would benefit if all of the third-party voters sucked it up and decided to vote for either Trump or Biden .
The fate of the state ’ s election and maybe the presidency depends on the answer .
Biden drew support from 49 % percent of likely state voters and 45 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a particular candidate were included .
That four-point gap is within the poll ’ s margin of error… Trump is buoyed in the key swing state by voters who say the economy is their top concern and overwhelmingly perceive their personal economic situation as the same or better than it was when he took office , said Chris Borick , director of the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion… Voters ’ views of Trump have remained largely consistent throughout his campaign and presidency .
In the latest matchup , only 4 % said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pick Biden or Trump .
When those undecided voters were asked if they are leaning toward a candidate , 26 % said Biden , 9 % said Trump , and the remainder were still unsure .
Trump ’ s in Scranton today , where Biden was born but which happens to be Trump Country in Pennsylvania .
He leads in the northerneastern part of the state , 61/28 .
That last bit from the excerpt suggests that the race might not be as close as it seems , though .
There may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Biden among undecideds .
Anyway , back to the first mystery described up top .
How is Trump faring better in Minnesota right now than in Pennsylvania ?
For starters , remember that even though the two states went to different candidates in 2016 , the margins in each were exceptionally tight .
Trump won PA by less than a point , Clinton won MN by a point and a half .
They were both coin-flips , basically , so it ’ s not that weird that his position in the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the state that he won .
One possible explanation for why he has less traction in Pennsylvania at the moment is because it is , after all , the state in which Biden was born .
That might not be worth much in Scranton itself but a connection to the nominee may mean a little something across PA. Another possibility , though , is that Democrats are facing a special challenge in Minnesota due to the riots after George Floyd ’ s death and the inane efforts to defund the Minneapolis police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and order ” message may have unusually strong appeal to Minnesotans under the circumstances , enough so to momentarily make the state more competitive than Pennsylvania is .
Which is a big , big , big deal potentially for the election .
Amateurs like me who watch the race casually tend to assume that if Biden rebuilds the blue wall in the Rust Belt , it ’ ll necessarily mean that he ’ s overperformed Hillary and won ’ t lose any of the states she won in 2016 .
Hitting the trifecta @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Wisconsin — would give Joe 278 electoral votes , enough to win even if Trump holds every state he took in 2016 .
But what if that assumption about Biden holding all of Hillary states is wrong ?
What if Minnesota , the most competitive blue state this year , actually slips from Biden ’ s grasp ?
In that case , we ’ d end up with a ( gulp ) 270/268 election , with Donald J. Trump the winner .
It ’ s unlikely .
If you were gambling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden ’ s doing well enough to flip multiple red states on November 3 , he ’ s on his way to victory .
But anything can happen in 2020 .
And enough has already happened this year in Minnesota to maybe make the state go its own way this fall .
Imagine 270/268 .
There aren ’ t enough drugs in the world .
As for the second mystery , how Minnesota could be tied when Biden ’ s leading many national polls by 10 points or better , I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s not a case of a logical circle needing to be squared , it ’ s a case of someone ’ s numbers being off .
Either Trafalgar ’ s overestimating Trump ’ s support in MN or various pollsters like YouGov and Echelon are grossly overestimating Biden ’ s support nationally .
Polling experts seem pretty confident this year that huge numbers of “ shy Trump voters ” aren ’ t being overlooked in samples .
Stay tuned .

For two reasons these polls are hard to compute, at least at first glance. One is that Trump famously won Pennsylvania in 2016 but couldn’t quite get over the hump in Minnesota. Logically you’d assume that if he’s poised to swipe MN this year, he’d have a reasonably solid lead in PA right now. That’s not what we’re seeing at the moment. In fact, in RCP’s polling averages of the two states, Biden’s margin in Minnesota (5.3 points) is slightly smaller than it is in Pennsylvania (5.7). How did that happen?
The other reason is that Biden continues to enjoy a gaudy national lead, topping Trump by an average of 7.6 points. Some polls, most notably CNN’s, have had the race tightening lately but YouGov’s newest has Biden comfortably ahead, 50/40. Echelon Insights, a polling firm co-founded by Republicans Kristen Soltis Anderson and Patrick Ruffini, has Biden up 53/39 in its latest.
How the hell could he lead Trump by 14 points nationally and be tied with him in the bluish state of Minnesota? Someone’s clearly wrong. By a lot.
Lay all of that aside for a second and let’s look at the numbers. The Minnesota data comes from Trafalgar, the pollster that nailed Trump’s upsets in the Rust Belt four years ago. Trafalgar is a Republican firm as well and consistently produces rosier numbers for the president than nearly anyone else. Is that because they have special insight into how “shy Trumpers” are voting or is it because there’s a Republican lean to their polling that’s distorting the true picture of the race? We’ll know in about 80 days.
You’re left staring at that graph, wondering which candidate would benefit if all of the third-party voters sucked it up and decided to vote for either Trump or Biden. The fate of the state’s election and maybe the presidency depends on the answer.
Meanwhile in Pennsylvania:
Biden drew support from 49% percent of likely state voters and 45% backed Trump, when those leaning toward a particular candidate were included. That four-point gap is within the poll’s margin of error… Trump is buoyed in the key swing state by voters who say the economy is their top concern and overwhelmingly perceive their personal economic situation as the same or better than it was when he took office, said Chris Borick, director of the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion… Voters’ views of Trump have remained largely consistent throughout his campaign and presidency. In the latest matchup, only 4% said they were undecided on whether they would pick Biden or Trump. When those undecided voters were asked if they are leaning toward a candidate, 26% said Biden, 9% said Trump, and the remainder were still unsure.
Trump’s in Scranton today, where Biden was born but which happens to be Trump Country in Pennsylvania. He leads in the northerneastern part of the state, 61/28. That last bit from the excerpt suggests that the race might not be as close as it seems, though. There may be a net one or two points left for Biden among undecideds.
Anyway, back to the first mystery described up top. How is Trump faring better in Minnesota right now than in Pennsylvania? For starters, remember that even though the two states went to different candidates in 2016, the margins in each were exceptionally tight. Trump won PA by less than a point, Clinton won MN by a point and a half. They were both coin-flips, basically, so it’s not that weird that his position in the state he lost would be better now than in the state that he won.
One possible explanation for why he has less traction in Pennsylvania at the moment is because it is, after all, the state in which Biden was born. That might not be worth much in Scranton itself but a connection to the nominee may mean a little something across PA. Another possibility, though, is that Democrats are facing a special challenge in Minnesota due to the riots after George Floyd’s death and the inane efforts to defund the Minneapolis police department. Trump’s “law and order” message may have unusually strong appeal to Minnesotans under the circumstances, enough so to momentarily make the state more competitive than Pennsylvania is.
Which is a big, big, big deal potentially for the election. Amateurs like me who watch the race casually tend to assume that if Biden rebuilds the blue wall in the Rust Belt, it’ll necessarily mean that he’s overperformed Hillary and won’t lose any of the states she won in 2016. Hitting the trifecta in the midwest — Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin — would give Joe 278 electoral votes, enough to win even if Trump holds every state he took in 2016.
But what if that assumption about Biden holding all of Hillary states is wrong? What if Minnesota, the most competitive blue state this year, actually slips from Biden’s grasp? In that case, we’d end up with a (gulp) 270/268 election, with Donald J. Trump the winner.
It’s unlikely. If you were gambling, you’d bet that if Biden’s doing well enough to flip multiple red states on November 3, he’s on his way to victory. But anything can happen in 2020. And enough has already happened this year in Minnesota to maybe make the state go its own way this fall.
Imagine 270/268. There aren’t enough drugs in the world.
As for the second mystery, how Minnesota could be tied when Biden’s leading many national polls by 10 points or better, I don’t think there’s an answer. That’s not a case of a logical circle needing to be squared, it’s a case of someone’s numbers being off. Either Trafalgar’s overestimating Trump’s support in MN or various pollsters like YouGov and Echelon are grossly overestimating Biden’s support nationally. Polling experts seem pretty confident this year that huge numbers of “shy Trump voters” aren’t being overlooked in samples. Stay tuned.


hotair--2020-08-20--Fort Lori: Police directive banned protesters on Mayor Lightfoot's block

As Jazz pointed out earlier today , progressive mayors seem to suddenly have a change of heart about protesters when they show up at their own homes .
That appears to be the case in Chicago as well .
The Chicago Tribune got hold of a police directive preventing protesters from gathering outside Mayor Lori Lightfoot ’ s home or , in fact , anywhere on her street .
Police have literally been checking ID ’ s for anyone who tries to enter the street where the mayor lives .
One neighbor dubbed it “ Fort Lori.
” The Chicago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demonstrating on Mayor Lori Lightfoot ’ s block in the Logan Square neighborhood , ordering officers to arrest anyone who refuses to leave , the Tribune has learned… Some neighbors in the Logan Square area have complained about the city ’ s approach to protests around Lightfoot ’ s house , which at times has included checking residents ’ IDs before letting them close .
Ron Kaminecki , a 69-year old patent attorney and bike shop owner who lives on Bernard Street a few houses from Lightfoot , said some neighbors have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I came up with the name ‘ Fort Lori ’ because it ’ s so hard to get in and out , ” Kaminecki said .
Another neighbor told the Tribune that as many as 50 officers stationed within a few blocks of the Mayor ’ s house on some occasions this summer .
In addition to the police who are guarding the entire block , Mayor Lightfoot also has a personal police security detail : Lightfoot already receives 24/7 protection from cops including officers stationed at the residence .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the area ’ s police district , some sources with knowledge of the situation said , leading to quiet grumbling… As mayor , Lightfoot has been especially security conscious .
She broke with tradition by hiring former Deputy U.S .
Marshal Jim Smith to lead her detail instead of using someone from the Police Department .
Then , earlier this summer , Lightfoot gave him leadership control over the Chicago police officers assigned to guard City Hall and her home .
Think for a moment about the McCloskeys who have been charged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weapons when a large crowd of protesters showed up .
How is what Mayor Lightfoot is doing different ?
Other than the fact that she ’ s having the police carry the guns for her the outcome doesn ’ t seem that different , i.e .
armed people telling protesters to go away or else .
Asked about the security arrangements during a press conference today , Mayor Lightfoot said they were justified because of the threats she receives on a daily basis .
How does the protection of Lightfoot ’ s home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lightfoot said it wasn ’ t a fair comparison because , “ this is a different time like no other.
” I ’ m sure the mayor does get plenty of threats just as I ’ m sure previous mayors of the city did also .
What ’ s galling about this is that the entire city really is struggling with rising violent crime rates , riots and the pandemic .
But it seems Mayor Lightfoot is first and foremost concerned about using the city ’ s police for her own safety .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ come in a distant second .

As Jazz pointed out earlier today, progressive mayors seem to suddenly have a change of heart about protesters when they show up at their own homes. That appears to be the case in Chicago as well. The Chicago Tribune got hold of a police directive preventing protesters from gathering outside Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s home or, in fact, anywhere on her street. Police have literally been checking ID’s for anyone who tries to enter the street where the mayor lives. One neighbor dubbed it “Fort Lori.”
The Chicago Police Department has effectively banned protesters from demonstrating on Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s block in the Logan Square neighborhood, ordering officers to arrest anyone who refuses to leave, the Tribune has learned… Some neighbors in the Logan Square area have complained about the city’s approach to protests around Lightfoot’s house, which at times has included checking residents’ IDs before letting them close. Ron Kaminecki, a 69-year old patent attorney and bike shop owner who lives on Bernard Street a few houses from Lightfoot, said some neighbors have been frustrated by the police presence and barricades. “I came up with the name ‘Fort Lori’ because it’s so hard to get in and out,” Kaminecki said.
Another neighbor told the Tribune that as many as 50 officers stationed within a few blocks of the Mayor’s house on some occasions this summer. In addition to the police who are guarding the entire block, Mayor Lightfoot also has a personal police security detail:
Lightfoot already receives 24/7 protection from cops including officers stationed at the residence. The aggressive policing has sometimes siphoned away resources from the area’s police district, some sources with knowledge of the situation said, leading to quiet grumbling… As mayor, Lightfoot has been especially security conscious. She broke with tradition by hiring former Deputy U.S. Marshal Jim Smith to lead her detail instead of using someone from the Police Department. Then, earlier this summer, Lightfoot gave him leadership control over the Chicago police officers assigned to guard City Hall and her home.
Think for a moment about the McCloskeys who have been charged for stepping outside their own home with weapons when a large crowd of protesters showed up. How is what Mayor Lightfoot is doing different? Other than the fact that she’s having the police carry the guns for her the outcome doesn’t seem that different, i.e. armed people telling protesters to go away or else.
Asked about the security arrangements during a press conference today, Mayor Lightfoot said they were justified because of the threats she receives on a daily basis.
“I think that residents of this city, understanding the nature of the threats that we are receiving on a daily basis, on a daily basis, understand I have a right to make sure that my home is secure,” Lightfoot said.
How does the protection of Lightfoot’s home compare to that of previous mayors? Lightfoot said it wasn’t a fair comparison because, “this is a different time like no other.”
I’m sure the mayor does get plenty of threats just as I’m sure previous mayors of the city did also. What’s galling about this is that the entire city really is struggling with rising violent crime rates, riots and the pandemic. But it seems Mayor Lightfoot is first and foremost concerned about using the city’s police for her own safety. Everyone else’s safety appears to come in a distant second.


hotair--2020-08-20--The Duchess of Sussex is helping Michelle Obama register women to vote

The Duchess of Sussex , a.k.a .
American D-list actress Meghan Markle , is joining up with former First Lady Michelle Obama in an effort to encourage women to register to vote .
The event is a “ couch party ” promoted by When We All Vote which has a goal to reach 300,000 eligible female voters in honor of the passage of the 19th Amendment .
It takes place tonight so Michelle will be fresh off her dark and ugly speech delivered at the Democrat convention .
Other guests scheduled are Valerie Jarrett , Glamour editor-in-chief Samantha Barry , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ board chair , and actress Yvette Nicole Brown .
Thursday is the final day of the When All Women Vote Week of Action ( I guess it ’ s a four-day workweek ) .
When We All Vote has partnered with The United State of Women for the event .
The virtual couch party with the celebrities and public figures is the week ’ s grand finale .
The United State of Women is a national organization dedicated to convening , connecting , and amplifying voices in the fight for full gender equity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came from the Obama Administration ’ s White House Council on Women and Girls .
So , all the insistence that both When We Vote and The United State of Women are nonpartisan organizations is not likely , especially since we know the political leanings of the headliners of their events .
They ain ’ t conservative .
We know that the Obama administration was highly divisive and partisan so the prissy claims of nonpartisanship ( probably mostly for non-profit tax code reasons ) warrant a word Biden uses – malarkey .
Meghan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now that she has convinced her husband to leave the world of his royal family and move to southern California , the royal couple finds themselves friends with the Obamas .
Meghan has been vocal in the past about her opposition to President Trump and Trump ended up telling a reporter that she sounds like a nasty person over her remarks about him .
In August she told Marie Claire magazine that she plans to vote in the presidential election , which is a bit awkward , given that the members of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involve themselves in politics .
“ I know what it ’ s like to have a voice , and also what it ’ s like to feel voiceless , ” she said .
“ I also know that so many men and women have put their lives on the line for us to be heard .
And that opportunity , that fundamental right , is in our ability to exercise our right to vote and to make all of our voices heard.
” While Markle did not say in the interview whom she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to President Trump before joining the royal family in 2016 .
She called him “ divisive ’ and “ misogynistic.
” Meghan ’ s spokesperson told Newsweek , “ The duchess is excited and honored to be able to speak briefly to the group about the value of women being civically engaged .
The gathering is not partisan in nature and will focus on empowering women and strengthening democracy.
” Insert laugh track .
She has been busy appearing at virtual political events .
For example , last week I wrote about a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news organization where Hillary was a big name speaker .
Meghan participated , too .
Though Meghan and her husband , Prince Harry , have stepped back from royal duties , they still retain their titles and are members of the royal family .
Royal family members are traditionally expected to remain politically neutral , but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex stepped down as senior royals in March .
The Duchess of Sussex was said to be “ frustrated ” by the strictly apolitical stance she had to take after marrying Prince @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak freely after the pair quit as working royals .
According to the Daily Mail , friends say the actress “ has strong political opinions and will now take advantage of the greater freedom she has to express them publicly ” .
Meghan is an American and also a woke Royal .
She and Prince Harry , also woke , are “ pro–having it and pro–eating it , with one foot in the royal family and the other in an American lifestyle in California .
In Britain , royalty and politics are not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a defined constitutional role as the “ dignified ” branch , symbolizing the state through ceremony and duty ; the government as the “ efficient ” branch , running the country by passing laws through Parliament , which is elected .
The two can not mix .
One is apolitical and unifying , the other political and inherently divisive .
The royal family ’ s website puts it succinctly : “ As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters.
” Harry and Meghan ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to this unifying neutrality .
Choosing to intervene politically might give them a quick hit of satisfaction but erodes the basis of their popularity .
Once they start to behave like ordinary people , giving ordinary opinions , then people will treat them as ordinary .
Certainly , anyone can understand Harry and Meghan ’ s desire to be independent , to say what they believe , to give themselves something to do and stand for .
But ask any politician : That is not cost free .
The cost for these two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Meghan .
They see her for what she is – an opportunist who is living large now due to her place in the royal family .
Brits don ’ t appreciate her using the title to reap celebrity and personal gain .
One Twitter user said : “ She wants to delve into American politics she should give up her royal titles , tell Harry ’ s daddy they don ’ t need his money anymore and Harry and his son should abdicate from the line of succession.
” Another added : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to drop the title !
” And one wrote : “ But as an American , she shouldn ’ t be voting w/ a royal title .
“ It ’ s not rocket science .
She can be Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor .
”

The Duchess of Sussex, a.k.a. American D-list actress Meghan Markle, is joining up with former First Lady Michelle Obama in an effort to encourage women to register to vote. The event is a “couch party” promoted by When We All Vote which has a goal to reach 300,000 eligible female voters in honor of the passage of the 19th Amendment. It takes place tonight so Michelle will be fresh off her dark and ugly speech delivered at the Democrat convention. Other guests scheduled are Valerie Jarrett, Glamour editor-in-chief Samantha Barry, who is a When We All Vote board chair, and actress Yvette Nicole Brown.
Thursday is the final day of the When All Women Vote Week of Action (I guess it’s a four-day workweek). When We All Vote has partnered with The United State of Women for the event. The virtual couch party with the celebrities and public figures is the week’s grand finale. The United State of Women is a national organization dedicated to convening, connecting, and amplifying voices in the fight for full gender equity, according to its website. It came from the Obama Administration’s White House Council on Women and Girls. So, all the insistence that both When We Vote and The United State of Women are nonpartisan organizations is not likely, especially since we know the political leanings of the headliners of their events. They ain’t conservative. We know that the Obama administration was highly divisive and partisan so the prissy claims of nonpartisanship (probably mostly for non-profit tax code reasons) warrant a word Biden uses – malarkey.
Meghan Markle is a far-left political activist. Now that she has convinced her husband to leave the world of his royal family and move to southern California, the royal couple finds themselves friends with the Obamas. Meghan has been vocal in the past about her opposition to President Trump and Trump ended up telling a reporter that she sounds like a nasty person over her remarks about him. In August she told Marie Claire magazine that she plans to vote in the presidential election, which is a bit awkward, given that the members of the royal family aren’t supposed to involve themselves in politics.
“I know what it’s like to have a voice, and also what it’s like to feel voiceless,” she said. “I also know that so many men and women have put their lives on the line for us to be heard. And that opportunity, that fundamental right, is in our ability to exercise our right to vote and to make all of our voices heard.” While Markle did not say in the interview whom she will support, she publicly voiced opposition to President Trump before joining the royal family in 2016. She called him “divisive’ and “misogynistic.”
Meghan’s spokesperson told Newsweek, “The duchess is excited and honored to be able to speak briefly to the group about the value of women being civically engaged. The gathering is not partisan in nature and will focus on empowering women and strengthening democracy.” Insert laugh track. She has been busy appearing at virtual political events. For example, last week I wrote about a virtual event with a recently launched nonprofit news organization where Hillary was a big name speaker. Meghan participated, too.
Though Meghan and her husband, Prince Harry, have stepped back from royal duties, they still retain their titles and are members of the royal family.
Royal family members are traditionally expected to remain politically neutral, but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex stepped down as senior royals in March. The Duchess of Sussex was said to be “frustrated” by the strictly apolitical stance she had to take after marrying Prince Harry, but believes she can now speak freely after the pair quit as working royals. According to the Daily Mail, friends say the actress “has strong political opinions and will now take advantage of the greater freedom she has to express them publicly”.
Meghan is an American and also a woke Royal. She and Prince Harry, also woke, are “pro–having it and pro–eating it, with one foot in the royal family and the other in an American lifestyle in California.
In Britain, royalty and politics are not supposed to mix. The monarchy has a defined constitutional role as the “dignified” branch, symbolizing the state through ceremony and duty; the government as the “efficient” branch, running the country by passing laws through Parliament, which is elected. The two cannot mix. One is apolitical and unifying, the other political and inherently divisive. The royal family’s website puts it succinctly: “As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters.” Harry and Meghan’s popularity is, in part, tied to this unifying neutrality. Choosing to intervene politically might give them a quick hit of satisfaction but erodes the basis of their popularity. Once they start to behave like ordinary people, giving ordinary opinions, then people will treat them as ordinary. Certainly, anyone can understand Harry and Meghan’s desire to be independent, to say what they believe, to give themselves something to do and stand for. But ask any politician: That is not cost free.
The cost for these two is that the Brits are not enamored with Meghan. They see her for what she is – an opportunist who is living large now due to her place in the royal family. Brits don’t appreciate her using the title to reap celebrity and personal gain.
One Twitter user said: “She wants to delve into American politics she should give up her royal titles, tell Harry’s daddy they don’t need his money anymore and Harry and his son should abdicate from the line of succession.” Another added: “It’s bizarre. She needs to drop the title!” And one wrote: “But as an American, she shouldn’t be voting w/ a royal title. “It’s not rocket science. She can be Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor.”
The struggle is real.


hotair--2020-08-20--Adam Haner: 'Their whole chaos came right at me'

Adam Haner , the man who was beaten unconscious in Portland this week , gave a couple of interviews to local news outlets .
Speaking to KATU , Haner showed the camera two places on his scalp where he had a line of stitches plus various bruised on his arms and legs as well as under both eyes .
The most serious concern is that he could lose vision in one eye .
A doctor told him there was concern the retina in his left eye might detach .
Asked what provoked the attack , Haner said , “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up for someone…I just seen something going on there and I tried to get in the middle of it .
And it just directed the fire towards me .
Their whole chaos came right at me instead of the person they were trying to aim it at.
” “ Quite frankly I ’ m glad it came to me because if it was directed at the other person I don ’ t think they would have withstood what I went through , ” he said .
He added , “ I wan ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a drink , but there was a confrontation going on there and I ended up in the middle of it.
” At one point he was asked about something in the videos of the attack and his girlfriend Tammie Martin interjected , “ He hasn ’ t seen the videos.
” Asked how he feels toward Marquise Love , the person police have identified as the suspect in his assault , Haner replied , “ I ’ m sure karma will take care of him…If that has to come through the courts then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come .
If not then it ’ ll happen in its own .
“ I ’ m not seeking vengeance .
I hope he learns something from what happened .
I wasn ’ t the enemy , I ’ ll tell you that .
I was just the guy standing there and I was white , evidently.
” The reporter didn ’ t pick up on the mention of race at that moment in the interview .
Both Haner and his girlfriend said they were accused of being white supremacists throughout the attack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , “ I didn ’ t really pick a side .
I wasn ’ t trying to I just seen the person getting hurt…I didn ’ t see a color .
I didn ’ t see a color when I got kicked either .
I just got kicked by someone .
I don ’ t know why they kicked me , why they thought they needed to.
” Later in the interview , Martin ( Haner ’ s girlfriend ) made clear she didn ’ t share his philosophical view of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the guy .
Like I said because I ’ ve seen the video , I ’ m just upset about it.
” She added , “ He has to have a consequence .
I don ’ t want him sitting in jail for life but I ’ m pretty sure whatever happens to him… ” At this point she shrugged as if to say , he has it coming .
So far , police still haven ’ t apprehended Marquise Love .
The full interview with Haner hasn ’ t been added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll have to click here to watch it .

Adam Haner, the man who was beaten unconscious in Portland this week, gave a couple of interviews to local news outlets. Speaking to KATU, Haner showed the camera two places on his scalp where he had a line of stitches plus various bruised on his arms and legs as well as under both eyes. The most serious concern is that he could lose vision in one eye. A doctor told him there was concern the retina in his left eye might detach.
Asked what provoked the attack, Haner said, “I think because I was trying to stand up for someone…I just seen something going on there and I tried to get in the middle of it. And it just directed the fire towards me. Their whole chaos came right at me instead of the person they were trying to aim it at.”
“Quite frankly I’m glad it came to me because if it was directed at the other person I don’t think they would have withstood what I went through,” he said. He added, “I wan’t trying to do anything but get a drink, but there was a confrontation going on there and I ended up in the middle of it.”
At one point he was asked about something in the videos of the attack and his girlfriend Tammie Martin interjected, “He hasn’t seen the videos.”
Asked how he feels toward Marquise Love, the person police have identified as the suspect in his assault, Haner replied, “I’m sure karma will take care of him…If that has to come through the courts then that’s the way it will come. If not then it’ll happen in its own.
“I’m not seeking vengeance. I hope he learns something from what happened. I wasn’t the enemy, I’ll tell you that. I was just the guy standing there and I was white, evidently.”
The reporter didn’t pick up on the mention of race at that moment in the interview. Both Haner and his girlfriend said they were accused of being white supremacists throughout the attack. Later in the interview, Haner said, “I didn’t really pick a side. I wasn’t trying to I just seen the person getting hurt…I didn’t see a color. I didn’t see a color when I got kicked either. I just got kicked by someone. I don’t know why they kicked me, why they thought they needed to.”
Later in the interview, Martin (Haner’s girlfriend) made clear she didn’t share his philosophical view of the situation. “I’m angry at the guy. Like I said because I’ve seen the video, I’m just upset about it.” She added, “He has to have a consequence. I don’t want him sitting in jail for life but I’m pretty sure whatever happens to him…” At this point she shrugged as if to say, he has it coming.
So far, police still haven’t apprehended Marquise Love. The full interview with Haner hasn’t been added to YouTube yet so for now you’ll have to click here to watch it.


hotair--2020-08-20--Pompeo trolls Pelosi with 'The Simpsons' character meme during her DNC speech

No , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo didn ’ t use his official State Department Twitter account , he used his personal account to troll the Speaker of the House during her speech at the Democrat National Convention .
He posted a gif of a well-known animated television character – Lisa Simpson – in response to Pelosi ’ s overwrought speech .
Here it is , a perfect troll .
Pelosi was busy blasting President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as responsible for every injustice and tragedy known to man ( or woman ) .
She blames them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Democratic policy reform .
Remember when San Fran Gran dramatically tore up her copy of President Trump ’ s State of the Union address for the television cameras ?
Back at ya , Nancy .
This gif is especially timely now because Speaker Pelosi has walked away from negotiations for the coronavirus relief package and insists to Republican leadership that it is her way or the highway .
So , while she blames everyone else for the brakes put on the House ’ s far-left legislative agenda by the president and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capable of working with the other side of the aisle .
Remember when we were told what a shrewd and able negotiator she is ?
Good times .
Now she just walks away and tells Mark Meadows and Steve Mnuchen to call her when they are ready to agree to her money grab .
While I have not seen a response from the woman who is the voice of Lisa Simpson , actress Yeardley Smith , The Simpsons showrunner Bill Oakley chimed in .
The progressives in Hollywood hate it when their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the second time Pompeo has posted that gif to mock Pelosi .
He first used it after the State of the Union speech .
That time Yeardley Smith clapped back at him .
That response is pretty weak sauce , right ?
She dropped an F-bomb but it is really a feckless tweet .
Maybe the second time will be the charm for her if she chooses to respond to Pompeo .
Either way , it ’ s an amusing distraction from Pelosi ’ s very nondescript speech .
I mean , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is just another day ending in ‘ y ’ .
In case you are interested , or don ’ t remember the origin of the gif , it is a reference to a scene in an episode from Season 3 .
At the time of the first use of the gif by Pompeo , the showrunner dramatically posted a tweet asking him not to use material from the show .
He was so shaken up that he told Pompeo to not even watch the show .
Poor guy , I hope he can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As I mentioned above , Pelosi ’ s speech was not anything special .
She was all about acknowledging Democrat women since this is the 100th anniversary of women being given the right to vote and she was busy checking off all the usual identity boxes .
After starting off with recapping the women ’ s suffrage movement , she finally got around to singing the praises of the Obama-Biden years .
She ’ s pretty good at re-writing history , but she is unable to praise Obama and Biden without slamming Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years ago , when we came together , President Obama and Vice President Biden were in the White House .
They made us proud—and their leadership made our country great .
In that spirit , we come together again , not to decry the darkness , but to light a way forward for our country .
That is the guiding purpose of House Democrats .
We are fighting for the people .
We have sent the GOP Senate landmark bills for : ● Cleaner government by saving voting rights in the name of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ George Floyd Justice in Policing Act .
We have sent the Senate bills to protect our dreamers , to advance LGBTQ equality , to prevent gun violence , to preserve our planet for future generations , and even more .
All of this is possible for America .
Who is standing in the way ?
Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump .
Sounds like McConnell is doing a terrific job to me .
Plus , maybe she missed out on noticing that Trump has made inroads into lowering prescription drug prices , brought the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of working Americans before the pandemic , has announced plans to sort out the status of DACA recipients , he was the first GOP presidential nominee to ever mention supporting LGBTQ rights at the Republican convention in 2016 , and , as Pelosi says , “ even more ” .
What stands out about the Democrat convention is the fact that it is dark , depressing , and not inspirational .
How do they plan to get out the vote if no one is inspired and motivated to get out and support the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no mention of any policy ideas to fix all the alleged wrongs that have occurred under the Trump administration .
Simply pointing a finger at the other party isn ’ t how elections are won .
Pelosi ’ s speech was lightly fact-checked by the Houston CBS affiliate this morning .
As for her claim that “ more than 5 million Americans are infected by the coronavirus ” , it is false .
There are more than 3 million infected but her number was quite exaggerated as she tried to blame the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Simpsons seem to be a popular reference by Team Trump this year .
About a week ago , the character Marge Simpson was used by a legal adviser to the Trump campaign to take a dig at Kamala Harris .

No, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo didn’t use his official State Department Twitter account, he used his personal account to troll the Speaker of the House during her speech at the Democrat National Convention. He posted a gif of a well-known animated television character – Lisa Simpson – in response to Pelosi’s overwrought speech.
Here it is, a perfect troll. Pelosi was busy blasting President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as responsible for every injustice and tragedy known to man (or woman). She blames them for “standing in the way” of Democratic policy reform. Remember when San Fran Gran dramatically tore up her copy of President Trump’s State of the Union address for the television cameras? Back at ya, Nancy.
This gif is especially timely now because Speaker Pelosi has walked away from negotiations for the coronavirus relief package and insists to Republican leadership that it is her way or the highway. So, while she blames everyone else for the brakes put on the House’s far-left legislative agenda by the president and the Senate leader, she isn’t capable of working with the other side of the aisle. Remember when we were told what a shrewd and able negotiator she is? Good times. Now she just walks away and tells Mark Meadows and Steve Mnuchen to call her when they are ready to agree to her money grab.
While I have not seen a response from the woman who is the voice of Lisa Simpson, actress Yeardley Smith, The Simpsons showrunner Bill Oakley chimed in. The progressives in Hollywood hate it when their own work is used against them.
Simpsons showrunner Bill Oakley retweeted a response to Pompeo’s gif from another user with the caption “Denigrating Simpsons fans didn’t work well for the incumbents back in 1992, you smarmy little bastard,” a reference to then-President George H.W. Bush saying America’s families should be “a little bit more like the Waltons and a little bit less like the Simpsons.” Bush, who was lauding a Depression-era family depicted in a 1970’s TV show, went on to lose his reelection bid, ceding the White House to Democrat Bill Clinton.
This is the second time Pompeo has posted that gif to mock Pelosi. He first used it after the State of the Union speech. That time Yeardley Smith clapped back at him.
“I might just add f*ck you @mikepompeo for co-opting my character to troll @SpeakerPelosi. Be a leader and fight [your] own fight! Oh, wait I forgot, you’re a follower,” she tweeted at Pompeo in February.
That response is pretty weak sauce, right? She dropped an F-bomb but it is really a feckless tweet. Maybe the second time will be the charm for her if she chooses to respond to Pompeo. Either way, it’s an amusing distraction from Pelosi’s very nondescript speech. I mean, Pelosi blaming Trump and McConnell for everything is just another day ending in ‘y’. In case you are interested, or don’t remember the origin of the gif, it is a reference to a scene in an episode from Season 3.
The gif is a scene from a Season 3 episode of “The Simpsons” titled “Mr. Lisa Goes to Washington,” a play on the 1939 Jimmy Stewart film “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” about a new senator fighting corruption. In the episode, Lisa travels to the nation’s capital for a contest, then becomes disillusioned when she discovers a congressman’s illicit activities. The meme shows her crying and ripping up a copy of her essay, which she later rewrites to expose the congressman’s corruption.
At the time of the first use of the gif by Pompeo, the showrunner dramatically posted a tweet asking him not to use material from the show. He was so shaken up that he told Pompeo to not even watch the show. Poor guy, I hope he can make it through the second post.
“Mr. Secretary of State please do not ever ever ever use Simpsons material in your twitter or watch the show or refer to it in any way,” he said, adding he made the request as a fan.
As I mentioned above, Pelosi’s speech was not anything special. She was all about acknowledging Democrat women since this is the 100th anniversary of women being given the right to vote and she was busy checking off all the usual identity boxes. After starting off with recapping the women’s suffrage movement, she finally got around to singing the praises of the Obama-Biden years. She’s pretty good at re-writing history, but she is unable to praise Obama and Biden without slamming Trump and McConnell. Hoo boy.
Four years ago, when we came together, President Obama and Vice President Biden were in the White House. They made us proud—and their leadership made our country great. In that spirit, we come together again, not to decry the darkness, but to light a way forward for our country. That is the guiding purpose of House Democrats. We are fighting for the people. We have sent the GOP Senate landmark bills for: ● Lower health costs by lowering prescription drug prices ● Bigger paychecks by rebuilding America’s infrastructure ● Cleaner government by saving voting rights in the name of John Lewis—and saving lives by enacting the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. We have sent the Senate bills to protect our dreamers, to advance LGBTQ equality, to prevent gun violence, to preserve our planet for future generations, and even more. All of this is possible for America. Who is standing in the way? Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump.
Sounds like McConnell is doing a terrific job to me. Plus, maybe she missed out on noticing that Trump has made inroads into lowering prescription drug prices, brought the highest employment numbers ever for every category of working Americans before the pandemic, has announced plans to sort out the status of DACA recipients, he was the first GOP presidential nominee to ever mention supporting LGBTQ rights at the Republican convention in 2016, and, as Pelosi says, “even more”.
What stands out about the Democrat convention is the fact that it is dark, depressing, and not inspirational. How do they plan to get out the vote if no one is inspired and motivated to get out and support the Democrat ticket? And, there is no mention of any policy ideas to fix all the alleged wrongs that have occurred under the Trump administration. Simply pointing a finger at the other party isn’t how elections are won.
Pelosi’s speech was lightly fact-checked by the Houston CBS affiliate this morning. As for her claim that “more than 5 million Americans are infected by the coronavirus”, it is false. There are more than 3 million infected but her number was quite exaggerated as she tried to blame the coronavirus on Trump, not China.
The Simpsons seem to be a popular reference by Team Trump this year. About a week ago, the character Marge Simpson was used by a legal adviser to the Trump campaign to take a dig at Kamala Harris.