hotair--2020-02-28--Ninth Circuit Court: Trump administration must stop returning asylum seekers to Mexico

It ’ s probably one of the most successful policies to reduce the number of migrants showing up at the southern US border .
Today a 3-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the remain in Mexico policy is illegal : Since the new restrictions were rolled out early in 2019 , more than 59,000 asylum seekers have been turned back by American authorities into Mexican border cities , where kidnappings and violence have surged .
Because shelters in Mexico are scant and overrun , many of the migrants are living in vast tent encampments exposed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have moved in to exploit them… The policy the court reviewed is known formally as “ migrant protection protocols ” — though the lawyers who challenged it argued that it did just the opposite by placing vulnerable people in harm ’ s way .
Instead of safeguarding people fleeing persecution abroad , as is required under federal law , the policy merely banished them to perilous conditions in a different place , the lawyers argued .
In their opinion on Friday , the judges said the policy is “ invalid in its entirety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that initially enjoined its implementation was “ not an abuse of discretion.
” … “ On every level , it ’ s the opposite of protecting people , ” said Karen Musalo , a lawyer and professor at the University of California , Hastings law school who helped to argue the case , along with the American Civil Liberties Union and several other advocacy groups .
“ It ’ s really putting them at such great risk.
” Things really are terrible in Mexico right now .
President Obrador ’ s “ hugs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been a disaster .
Last year there were more than 35,000 murders in Mexico , the highest level of violent crime ever recorded .
But the fact remains that the caravans of migrants making their way to the US in order to claim asylum are overwhelmingly economic migrants looking for better jobs or a better life .
That ’ s certainly understandable but those aren ’ t grounds for an asylum claim in the US , which is why the claims of most of these migrants will eventually be denied .
Most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( and in some cases bringing along kids ) are doing so because they know it ’ s the best way to game the system .
They get released into the country to await a court date .
Some will never show up and some will be deported and return illegally .
Claiming asylum has become a shortcut , a way to bypass the line .
The remain in Mexico policy was a way to successfully discourage that .
And it needed to be discouraged because last May , more than 3,000 people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ border , completely overwhelming the system to the point that even the NY Times admitted there was a crisis .
Overall the number of apprehensions at the border in FY 2019 , just over 850,000 , was the highest tally since 2007 .
As you may recall , some Democrats saw the crisis as an opportunity to attack overwhelmed detention centers as “ concentration camps.
” The reason you don ’ t hear about that anymore is because , thanks in part to the Remain in Mexico policy , border apprehensions have dropped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this court ruling mean we ’ ll see a return to last summer ’ s border crisis ?
Not necessarily .
As the Washington Post pointed out last week , fewer and fewer migrants are being returned to Mexico no because of other policies the administration has put in place : Of course , those policies are also being challenged in court .
But even with today ’ s win , it ’ s not clear what the immediate result of this decision will be .
Will the tens of thousands of migrants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US and if so how ?
The political aspect to this is obvious .
Democratic opponents of the current policy will celebrate the policy ’ s demise and then , if the migrants awaiting asylum hearings are moved to American detention centers , they will start up their attacks on “ concentration camps ” all over again .
It ’ s a perfect issue for them in the 2020 election .
Apart from the politics , there ’ s a real risk that this reversal could encourage more economic migrants to make the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We don ’ t want a return to the crisis of last summer even if some Democrats think it ’ s in their partisan interest .
I ’ ll close this out with some of the reactions on Twitter :

It’s probably one of the most successful policies to reduce the number of migrants showing up at the southern US border. Today a 3-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the remain in Mexico policy is illegal:
Since the new restrictions were rolled out early in 2019, more than 59,000 asylum seekers have been turned back by American authorities into Mexican border cities, where kidnappings and violence have surged. Because shelters in Mexico are scant and overrun, many of the migrants are living in vast tent encampments exposed to the elements. Powerful Mexican drug cartels have moved in to exploit them… The policy the court reviewed is known formally as “migrant protection protocols” — though the lawyers who challenged it argued that it did just the opposite by placing vulnerable people in harm’s way. Instead of safeguarding people fleeing persecution abroad, as is required under federal law, the policy merely banished them to perilous conditions in a different place, the lawyers argued. In their opinion on Friday, the judges said the policy is “invalid in its entirety” and concluded that a lower-court ruling that initially enjoined its implementation was “not an abuse of discretion.”… “On every level, it’s the opposite of protecting people,” said Karen Musalo, a lawyer and professor at the University of California, Hastings law school who helped to argue the case, along with the American Civil Liberties Union and several other advocacy groups. “It’s really putting them at such great risk.”
Things really are terrible in Mexico right now. President Obrador’s “hugs not bullets” campaign against cartel violence has been a disaster. Last year there were more than 35,000 murders in Mexico, the highest level of violent crime ever recorded.
But the fact remains that the caravans of migrants making their way to the US in order to claim asylum are overwhelmingly economic migrants looking for better jobs or a better life. That’s certainly understandable but those aren’t grounds for an asylum claim in the US, which is why the claims of most of these migrants will eventually be denied. Most of the Central American migrants claiming asylum (and in some cases bringing along kids) are doing so because they know it’s the best way to game the system. They get released into the country to await a court date. Some will never show up and some will be deported and return illegally. Claiming asylum has become a shortcut, a way to bypass the line.
The remain in Mexico policy was a way to successfully discourage that. And it needed to be discouraged because last May, more than 3,000 people per day were turning up at the border, completely overwhelming the system to the point that even the NY Times admitted there was a crisis. Overall the number of apprehensions at the border in FY 2019, just over 850,000, was the highest tally since 2007.
As you may recall, some Democrats saw the crisis as an opportunity to attack overwhelmed detention centers as “concentration camps.” The reason you don’t hear about that anymore is because, thanks in part to the Remain in Mexico policy, border apprehensions have dropped for eight straight months.
So does this court ruling mean we’ll see a return to last summer’s border crisis? Not necessarily. As the Washington Post pointed out last week, fewer and fewer migrants are being returned to Mexico no because of other policies the administration has put in place:
Instead of allowing Central American migrants access to U.S. courts and having them wait in Mexican border towns, the government instead is quickly sending them to Guatemala to pursue asylum claims there. Instead of allowing Mexicans to stay in the United States to follow a lengthy court process, the Trump administration is fast-tracking deportation proceedings and pushing people out of the country within days.
Of course, those policies are also being challenged in court. But even with today’s win, it’s not clear what the immediate result of this decision will be. Will the tens of thousands of migrants awaiting asylum hearings be moved to the US and if so how?
The political aspect to this is obvious. Democratic opponents of the current policy will celebrate the policy’s demise and then, if the migrants awaiting asylum hearings are moved to American detention centers, they will start up their attacks on “concentration camps” all over again. It’s a perfect issue for them in the 2020 election.
Apart from the politics, there’s a real risk that this reversal could encourage more economic migrants to make the long, dangerous journey to the border. We don’t want a return to the crisis of last summer even if some Democrats think it’s in their partisan interest. I’ll close this out with some of the reactions on Twitter:
The so-called Migrant Protection Protocols were designed to shut our doors to asylum seekers. It’s sent thousands, including pregnant women & disabled persons, into dangerous & even deadly conditions. The 9th Circuit is right to halt this program as “invalid in its entirety.” https://t.co/RTptpyCjPT — Sen. Patrick Leahy (@SenatorLeahy) February 28, 2020
From day one, @HouseJudiciary has said the "Remain in Mexico" policy was illegal and violated due process, which is why we launched a comprehensive investigation into its origins. Proud to see the 9th Circuit put a halt to this fatally flawed program. https://t.co/GjrbZ1UUtK — Rep. Nadler (@RepJerryNadler) February 28, 2020
The courts agree the Trump admin’s remain in Mexico policy is cruel & inhumane. As a country we should not banish people fleeing persecution to continue to wait in unsafe uncertainty. A clear violation of the law. https://t.co/g1Dq3TRI8i — Richard Blumenthal (@SenBlumenthal) February 28, 2020
As one of the 1st members of Congress to see the results of Trump's #RemaininMexico policy–in Tijuana–I'm heartened to see the 9th circuit court of appeals lead the way as a check on Trump’s abuses of power. We can't continue to force this cruelty on people seeking a better life. https://t.co/c1I9Afal6D — Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) February 28, 2020
Trump’s war on immigrants is an affront to our values and ideals. I’m glad that this heartless and unlawful policy is suspended. We must treat all people with dignity and respect. Period.https://t.co/tzRrsWawFB — Sen. Cory Booker (@SenBooker) February 28, 2020
This is excellent news. Donald Trump's cruel "Remain in Mexico" policy put asylum seekers in danger. As president, I will reverse the Trump administration's cruel immigration policies and ensure that asylum seekers are welcomed at our borders. https://t.co/K0M9eWIQjd — Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) February 28, 2020
No response from President Trump…yet.


hotair--2020-02-28--Survey puzzles over decline in intended new car purchases

A potentially ominous sign for the economy that plays such a major role in the outcomes of U.S. presidential elections : Purchasers ’ demand for new vehicles this month experienced the largest monthly drop in eight years .
The unexpected decline came after two consecutive months of double-digit gains .
The Auto Demand Index survey is conducted by TechnoMetrica , a leading market research company in the financial and automotive industries .
The index plunged by 32 points , or 26 percent in February , to a reading of 93 .
That ’ s the lowest level in 10 months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intent and a marked contrast to the robust sales intentions late last year .
“ We expect auto sales to moderate in the months ahead , ” the report noted .
Purchases of new cars , a reflection of economic confidence and optimism , play a major role in the U.S. economy , totaling just under four percent of the Gross Domestic Product .
If actual sales do continue to decline in coming months , that would have ripple effects down through the ranks of the immense automotive industry with its nearly 10 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suppliers and dealers .
That ’ s a little more than five percent of total private sector employment .
A slowdown in the nation ’ s robust job growth or , worse , a reduction from layoffs would be ideal for political candidates and a party challenging any incumbent , such as President Donald Trump , who has been enjoying strong monthly job gains .
Only two elected presidents in the modern era — Jimmy Carter and George H.W .
Bush — have lost campaigns for a second term .
And both defeats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decline .
Recall “ It ’ s the economy , stupid ” from the 1992 campaign of Bill Clinton .
Sudden uncertainty in financial markets and supply chains from China due to fears over the coronavirus could be contributing factors .
The current decline is also based on a familiar culprit , sticker shock at record high prices for new vehicles and on a glut in so-called gently-used used cars .
Thousands are coming off leases and others are flowing into the used car market by car rental companies culling their fleets .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ranked as the most desired of intended new vehicle purchases at 28 percent , up from 16 in January .
Second among likely new vehicle purchases were SUVs at 16 percent , followed by midsize cars at 12 percent , down from 21 percent last month .
Last among the top five choices were compact cars , at 11 percent .

A potentially ominous sign for the economy that plays such a major role in the outcomes of U.S. presidential elections:
Purchasers’ demand for new vehicles this month experienced the largest monthly drop in eight years. The unexpected decline came after two consecutive months of double-digit gains.
The Auto Demand Index survey is conducted by TechnoMetrica, a leading market research company in the financial and automotive industries. The index plunged by 32 points, or 26 percent in February, to a reading of 93.
That’s the lowest level in 10 months, indicating a drop in vehicle purchase intent and a marked contrast to the robust sales intentions late last year. “We expect auto sales to moderate in the months ahead,” the report noted.
Purchases of new cars, a reflection of economic confidence and optimism, play a major role in the U.S. economy, totaling just under four percent of the Gross Domestic Product.
If actual sales do continue to decline in coming months, that would have ripple effects down through the ranks of the immense automotive industry with its nearly 10 million workers, including makers, parts suppliers and dealers. That’s a little more than five percent of total private sector employment.
A slowdown in the nation’s robust job growth or, worse, a reduction from layoffs would be ideal for political candidates and a party challenging any incumbent, such as President Donald Trump, who has been enjoying strong monthly job gains.
Only two elected presidents in the modern era — Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush — have lost campaigns for a second term. And both defeats came during times of economic stress and decline. Recall “It’s the economy, stupid” from the 1992 campaign of Bill Clinton.
Sudden uncertainty in financial markets and supply chains from China due to fears over the coronavirus could be contributing factors.
The current decline is also based on a familiar culprit, sticker shock at record high prices for new vehicles and on a glut in so-called gently-used used cars. Thousands are coming off leases and others are flowing into the used car market by car rental companies culling their fleets.
The survey also found that pickup trucks ranked as the most desired of intended new vehicle purchases at 28 percent, up from 16 in January.
Second among likely new vehicle purchases were SUVs at 16 percent, followed by midsize cars at 12 percent, down from 21 percent last month. Last among the top five choices were compact cars, at 11 percent.


hotair--2020-02-28--California Dem: I'd be tempted to kick Trump Jr's ass for saying Democrats want coronavirus to sprea

California Dem: I'd be tempted to kick Trump Jr's ass for saying Democrats want coronavirus to spread

Via the Free Beacon , it ’ s heartening to see both sides keeping their cool as we face this unprecedented crisis together .
“ I can assure you that there ’ s not a Democrat or Republican in Congress that wants anybody to be sick , ” Garamendi said in the part of the clip that was clipped out .
“ It would be extremely reassuring if a temporary armistice were called in the cold war between the White House and congressional Democrats , ” Peggy Noonan wrote today .
“ If the virus is as serious as I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look back kindly on anyone who acted small.
” Is she kidding ?
In this era ?
A few months from now we ’ ll all be debating whether red states or blue states are more awesome based on which have the lower death toll from COVID-19 .
Can we not at least join hands As A People and lament the incompetence of our CDC ?
They seem to have missed an early opportunity to detect and possibly arrest community spread of the disease while it ’ s gaining momentum : As the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country after country in January and February , the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lost valuable weeks that could have been used to track its possible spread in the United States because it insisted upon devising its own test .
The federal agency shunned the World Health Organization test guidelines used by other countries and set out to create a more complicated test of its own that could identify a range of similar viruses .
But when it was sent to labs across the country in the first week of February @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expected .
The CDC test correctly identified COVID-19 , the disease caused by the virus .
But in all but a handful of state labs , it falsely flagged the presence of the other viruses in harmless samples… “ We ’ re weeks behind because we had this problem , ” said Scott Becker , chief executive officer of the Association of Public Health Laboratories , which represents 100 state and local public laboratories .
“ We ’ re usually up-front and center and ready.
” The CDC updated its directions on how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — but labs in New York are reportedly still seeing some false positives .
They ’ re so desperate that they sought and received permission from the FDA to develop their own genetic tests for COVID-19 , an unprecedented step according to BuzzFeed .
Meanwhile , elsewhere in New York : At JFK Airport , jetlagged passengers typically in a rush to clear immigration are now appalled by a lack of screening , especially compared to procedures in the countries they just left .
Yet , the students [ returning from Florence , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fan they weren ’ t asked a single question about potential symptoms once they landed in New York City .
“ We didn ’ t even get checked .
Like we ’ re used to being in Florence where you get your temperature checked .
Here they didn ’ t do anything , which is kind of crazy , ” Ferrara said .
“ Considering , like , how much the cases have spread so fast , like , they should definitely be taking more precautions here.
” Right now the U.S. is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mind that the news has been overflowing this week with stories of the virus spreading in Italy and Iran .
It might not even matter , said one doctor to CBS : If the virus can be transmitted while people are asymptomatic , which appears to be the case , screening passengers won ’ t prevent infected people from entering the U.S .
Which is true .
But certainly it would prevent some from entering , the ones who are symptomatic .
Why the hell haven ’ t the screening guidelines been updated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wallace claimed that the stock market dive of the past two days means Trump ’ s attempt to calm people with Wednesday night ’ s press briefing didn ’ t do the trick .
That ’ s true , but that ’ s due less to Trump — for the moment — than to the cold reality that any reassuring talk was destined to be overwhelmed by dire reports like this .
The market ’ s down partly due to panic selling but partly too because of legitimate fears of supply-chain disruptions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people potentially having to miss work , a steep decline in demand for businesses that depend on large public gatherings , and so on .
Evidence that there ’ s a “ Trump effect ” would be if there ’ d been good news lately in containing the disease but no one outside his own base believed him when he announced it because he ’ s too prone to happy talk to serve his own selfish political interests .
But there is no good news right now .
All we ’ ve learned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as successful as Trump can ’ t convince the public to remain optimistic during the scariest pandemic in decades .
The latest news this afternoon is that the White House is huddling to discuss emergency measures to combat coronavirus .
Wait , sorry — I mean emergency measures to combat the economic fallout from coronavirus , like a rate cut or a tax cut .
If there ’ s a “ Trump effect ” to this week ’ s panic I think it stems from things like that : He positively radiates the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is propping up the market , seemingly not realizing ( a ) how callous that seems to the average person under the circumstances and ( b ) that by focusing on the economy so intently it creates a suspicion that he ’ s not focusing intently enough on stopping the virus .
Which , ironically , will spook the markets even further , creating a downward spiral in which he grows increasingly frantic for economic stimulus before Election Day while investors grow increasingly frantic that he doesn ’ t have his priorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be even worse than feared .
He ’ s always been obsessed with ratings and he ’ s treated the Dow as his ultimate validation throughout his presidency , the supreme proof that he ’ s a success no matter what his critics say .
I don ’ t know how he ’ ll cope with it tanking .
Probably he ’ ll rant about Jerome Powell on Twitter a lot while the coronavirus death toll climbs .
Here ’ s a … not great clip from Fox this morning for the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Via the Free Beacon, it’s heartening to see both sides keeping their cool as we face this unprecedented crisis together.
Don. Jr was just on Fox & Friends accusing Democrats of hoping coronavirus "comes here and kills millions of people so that they can end Donald Trump's streak of winning." Absolutely insane. pic.twitter.com/Fq5eAUIsnq — Lis Power (@LisPower1) February 28, 2020
UNHINGED: Democrat John Garamendi threatens President Trump's son @DonaldJTrumpJr with physical violence: "He should not be near me when he says that. There would be a serious altercation… Don Jr. had better not get any place close to me. It would not be a healthy situation." pic.twitter.com/s8Tba2Oogw — Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) February 28, 2020
“I can assure you that there’s not a Democrat or Republican in Congress that wants anybody to be sick,” Garamendi said in the part of the clip that was clipped out. “It would be extremely reassuring if a temporary armistice were called in the cold war between the White House and congressional Democrats,” Peggy Noonan wrote today. “If the virus is as serious as I think it is, no one will look back kindly on anyone who acted small.” Is she kidding? In this era? A few months from now we’ll all be debating whether red states or blue states are more awesome based on which have the lower death toll from COVID-19.
Can we not at least join hands As A People and lament the incompetence of our CDC? They seem to have missed an early opportunity to detect and possibly arrest community spread of the disease while it’s gaining momentum:
As the highly infectious coronavirus jumped from China to country after country in January and February, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lost valuable weeks that could have been used to track its possible spread in the United States because it insisted upon devising its own test. The federal agency shunned the World Health Organization test guidelines used by other countries and set out to create a more complicated test of its own that could identify a range of similar viruses. But when it was sent to labs across the country in the first week of February, it didn’t work as expected. The CDC test correctly identified COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus. But in all but a handful of state labs, it falsely flagged the presence of the other viruses in harmless samples… “We’re weeks behind because we had this problem,” said Scott Becker, chief executive officer of the Association of Public Health Laboratories, which represents 100 state and local public laboratories. “We’re usually up-front and center and ready.”
The CDC updated its directions on how to use the test two days ago — but labs in New York are reportedly still seeing some false positives. They’re so desperate that they sought and received permission from the FDA to develop their own genetic tests for COVID-19, an unprecedented step according to BuzzFeed. Meanwhile, elsewhere in New York:
At JFK Airport, jetlagged passengers typically in a rush to clear immigration are now appalled by a lack of screening, especially compared to procedures in the countries they just left. Yet, the students [returning from Florence, Italy] told CBS2’s Christina Fan they weren’t asked a single question about potential symptoms once they landed in New York City. “We didn’t even get checked. Like we’re used to being in Florence where you get your temperature checked. Here they didn’t do anything, which is kind of crazy,” Ferrara said. “Considering, like, how much the cases have spread so fast, like, they should definitely be taking more precautions here.”
Right now the U.S. is only screening passengers from China, never mind that the news has been overflowing this week with stories of the virus spreading in Italy and Iran. It might not even matter, said one doctor to CBS: If the virus can be transmitted while people are asymptomatic, which appears to be the case, screening passengers won’t prevent infected people from entering the U.S.
Which is true. But certainly it would prevent some from entering, the ones who are symptomatic. Why the hell haven’t the screening guidelines been updated?
This morning on Fox, Chris Wallace claimed that the stock market dive of the past two days means Trump’s attempt to calm people with Wednesday night’s press briefing didn’t do the trick. That’s true, but that’s due less to Trump — for the moment — than to the cold reality that any reassuring talk was destined to be overwhelmed by dire reports like this. The market’s down partly due to panic selling but partly too because of legitimate fears of supply-chain disruptions, the knock-on effects of many thousands of people potentially having to miss work, a steep decline in demand for businesses that depend on large public gatherings, and so on. Evidence that there’s a “Trump effect” would be if there’d been good news lately in containing the disease but no one outside his own base believed him when he announced it because he’s too prone to happy talk to serve his own selfish political interests.
But there is no good news right now. All we’ve learned this week is that even a salesman as successful as Trump can’t convince the public to remain optimistic during the scariest pandemic in decades.
A senior U.S. health official told lawmakers that the coronavirus that is spreading globally is unlikely to disappear next year and that many more cases should be expected in the United States, according to a source who attended a briefing on Friday. Anthony Fauci, who heads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious diseases, also told House of Representatives members in a closed briefing that the United States currently does not have enough coronavirus testing resources.
The latest news this afternoon is that the White House is huddling to discuss emergency measures to combat coronavirus. Wait, sorry — I mean emergency measures to combat the economic fallout from coronavirus, like a rate cut or a tax cut. If there’s a “Trump effect” to this week’s panic I think it stems from things like that: He positively radiates the sense that his primary concern in all this is propping up the market, seemingly not realizing (a) how callous that seems to the average person under the circumstances and (b) that by focusing on the economy so intently it creates a suspicion that he’s not focusing intently enough on stopping the virus. Which, ironically, will spook the markets even further, creating a downward spiral in which he grows increasingly frantic for economic stimulus before Election Day while investors grow increasingly frantic that he doesn’t have his priorities in order and thus the contagion will be even worse than feared. He’s always been obsessed with ratings and he’s treated the Dow as his ultimate validation throughout his presidency, the supreme proof that he’s a success no matter what his critics say. I don’t know how he’ll cope with it tanking. Probably he’ll rant about Jerome Powell on Twitter a lot while the coronavirus death toll climbs.
Here’s a … not great clip from Fox this morning for the “laugh or cry?” file.


hotair--2020-02-28--Woman who sued Sanders' Our Revolution group has NDA to prevent her from talking

Non-disclosure agreements have become a thing in the Democratic primaries .
Just last week , Mike Bloomberg was asked about complaints he had made sexual comments in the workplace to some women who had later been asked to sign non-disclosure agreements .
Elizabeth Warren hammered Bloomberg over it .
“ What we need to know is exactly what ’ s lurking out there , Warren said .
She continued , “ He has gotten some number of women—dozens , who knows— to sign non-disclosure agreements both for sexual harassment and for gender discrimination in the workplace.
” Warren then asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NDAs so they could come forward .
Today the Associated Press points out that an organization called Our Revolution , created to support Bernie Sanders run for office , forced a woman who sued the organization to sign an NDA to prevent her from talking .
The consultant , Tezlyn Figaro , confirmed the existence of the nondisclosure agreement to The Associated Press without providing additional details .
The deal is tied to a 2019 lawsuit in which Figaro said she was fired from the Sanders-created political group Our Revolution a year earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retaliation for complaining about the organization ’ s treatment towards her and African-Americans.
” The lawsuit was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of money .
Though the lawsuit was aimed at Our Revolution , it included broad criticism of Sanders ’ campaign , arguing an all-white leadership staff “ was accused of racism ” by black staffers and failed to engage black voters… Figaro was the director of racial justice for Sanders ’ 2016 campaign , then worked on black outreach issues for Our Revolution… A spokesman for Our Revolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comment .
The Sanders campaign said it couldn ’ t comment on the specifics of the case , arguing the campaign can ’ t legally have insight into the activities of Our Revolution .
In a statement , Sanders campaign spokeswoman Sarah Ford said , “ We oppose using NDAs to silence the victims of toxic workplace issues.
” The backstory to all of this is pretty interesting .
Figaro is good friends with Nina Turner who is currently a co-chair of Sanders campaign .
Back in 2018 , Turner was the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ install her friend Figaro as the Chief of Staff but the board rejected her effort .
Part of the rejection was apparently because Figaro had no experience in such work but there was another reason : Figaro had appeared on Fox News and had even praised President Trump on occasion .
In particular , she had once said something positive about his crackdown on illegal immigration : That was in May of 2018 .
Figaro apologized on Twitter for her comments but Our Revolution ’ s former political director said in a post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And within a few days , she was fired .
That seemed to be the end of it until May of 2019 , when Figaro sued Our Revolution demanding back pay and damages .
The lawsuit framed the board ’ s refusal to promote her to Chief of Staff as a case of racial discrimination : The lawsuit makes broad claims about the nature of the alleged discrimination at the Sanders-linked group : namely , that its leadership “ did not share ” Figaro ’ s goal of “ providing African-Americans equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Figaro made numerous internal complaints about the workplace culture there ; that she received “ tremendous pushback ” from the board in response to her efforts to “ address issues important to the African American community ” ; and that , in May 2018 , despite a recommendation from Turner , she was denied a promotion “ due to [ her ] race and in retaliation for [ her ] complaints regarding Our Revolution ’ s treatment towards her and African-Americans.
” “ She was personally attacked for raising concerns about issues affecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of African-American issues from its agenda , ” the lawsuit reads .
Figaro details one incident in particular : an April 2018 presentation to Our Revolution bird members where she says she outlined her strategic outreach efforts .
At one point in the meeting , Figaro claims , one board member , Catalina Velasquez , asked why Turner had been scheduled to speak at “ so many African-American events and not more Latino events.
” In the suit , Figaro accuses Velasquez of privately and publicly calling for her termination on or about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before Politico published its story .
Velasquez , the person Figaro singled out in the lawsuit , had been quoted in the 2018 Politico story saying the following about Figaro ’ s appearance on Fox News : So it really does sound as if Nina Turner wanted Figaro to advance at Our Revolution but Velasquez wanted her cancelled .
Velasquez won in the short term but last July , Our Revolution settled the lawsuit brought by Figaro for an undisclosed sum and forced her to sign an NDA preventing her from talking about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates are being asked to release people from , will Bernie Sanders call for Figaro to be released from her NDA ?
Will Bloomberg or Warren might put pressure on Sanders to do so ?
Personally , I don ’ t think either will say a peep .
Bloomberg probably doesn ’ t want to bring up the issue of his own NDAs again and Warren simply does not want to risk the wrath of the Bernie Bros.
Here ’ s Tezlyn Figaro talking about her lawsuit last year , back when she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sounds like she is not a fan of cancel culture .

Non-disclosure agreements have become a thing in the Democratic primaries. Just last week, Mike Bloomberg was asked about complaints he had made sexual comments in the workplace to some women who had later been asked to sign non-disclosure agreements. Elizabeth Warren hammered Bloomberg over it. “What we need to know is exactly what’s lurking out there, Warren said. She continued, “He has gotten some number of women—dozens, who knows— to sign non-disclosure agreements both for sexual harassment and for gender discrimination in the workplace.” Warren then asked Bloomberg to release those women from their NDAs so they could come forward.
Today the Associated Press points out that an organization called Our Revolution, created to support Bernie Sanders run for office, forced a woman who sued the organization to sign an NDA to prevent her from talking.
The consultant, Tezlyn Figaro, confirmed the existence of the nondisclosure agreement to The Associated Press without providing additional details. The deal is tied to a 2019 lawsuit in which Figaro said she was fired from the Sanders-created political group Our Revolution a year earlier due to her race and in “retaliation for complaining about the organization’s treatment towards her and African-Americans.” The lawsuit was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of money. Though the lawsuit was aimed at Our Revolution, it included broad criticism of Sanders’ campaign, arguing an all-white leadership staff “was accused of racism” by black staffers and failed to engage black voters… Figaro was the director of racial justice for Sanders’ 2016 campaign, then worked on black outreach issues for Our Revolution… A spokesman for Our Revolution did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The Sanders campaign said it couldn’t comment on the specifics of the case, arguing the campaign can’t legally have insight into the activities of Our Revolution. In a statement, Sanders campaign spokeswoman Sarah Ford said, “We oppose using NDAs to silence the victims of toxic workplace issues.”
The backstory to all of this is pretty interesting. Figaro is good friends with Nina Turner who is currently a co-chair of Sanders campaign. Back in 2018, Turner was the president of Our Revolution and she attempted to install her friend Figaro as the Chief of Staff but the board rejected her effort. Part of the rejection was apparently because Figaro had no experience in such work but there was another reason: Figaro had appeared on Fox News and had even praised President Trump on occasion. In particular, she had once said something positive about his crackdown on illegal immigration:
Board members flagged Figaro’s frequent appearances on Fox News praising Trump. She has said on the network as recently as the end of April that the president’s critics mostly don’t like that he’s shaking up the system. And last year she said immigrants are “coming into the country and getting benefits that Americans do not get,” and getting away with crimes while African-Americans go to prison.
That was in May of 2018. Figaro apologized on Twitter for her comments but Our Revolution’s former political director said in a post on Facebook that Figaro should be ousted. And within a few days, she was fired. That seemed to be the end of it until May of 2019, when Figaro sued Our Revolution demanding back pay and damages. The lawsuit framed the board’s refusal to promote her to Chief of Staff as a case of racial discrimination:
The lawsuit makes broad claims about the nature of the alleged discrimination at the Sanders-linked group: namely, that its leadership “did not share” Figaro’s goal of “providing African-Americans equal access to Our Revolution”; that Figaro made numerous internal complaints about the workplace culture there; that she received “tremendous pushback” from the board in response to her efforts to “address issues important to the African American community”; and that, in May 2018, despite a recommendation from Turner, she was denied a promotion “due to [her] race and in retaliation for [her] complaints regarding Our Revolution’s treatment towards her and African-Americans.” “She was personally attacked for raising concerns about issues affecting African-Americans and Our Revolution’s exclusion of African-American issues from its agenda,” the lawsuit reads. Figaro details one incident in particular: an April 2018 presentation to Our Revolution bird members where she says she outlined her strategic outreach efforts. At one point in the meeting, Figaro claims, one board member, Catalina Velasquez, asked why Turner had been scheduled to speak at “so many African-American events and not more Latino events.” In the suit, Figaro accuses Velasquez of privately and publicly calling for her termination on or about May 17, 2018, four days before Politico published its story.
Velasquez, the person Figaro singled out in the lawsuit, had been quoted in the 2018 Politico story saying the following about Figaro’s appearance on Fox News:
“It’s a red flag,” said founding board member Catalina Velasquez. “If I know someone is inflammatory, using hate speech at a time when all oppressed people need to come together, it puts me in a very difficult position.”… Velasquez, a co-vice chair, said she has considered resigning herself. “It deeply saddens me because I am an undocumented immigrant, and [Figaro’s] comments were very harsh,” Velasquez said.
So it really does sound as if Nina Turner wanted Figaro to advance at Our Revolution but Velasquez wanted her cancelled. Velasquez won in the short term but last July, Our Revolution settled the lawsuit brought by Figaro for an undisclosed sum and forced her to sign an NDA preventing her from talking about it.
Now that NDAs are something candidates are being asked to release people from, will Bernie Sanders call for Figaro to be released from her NDA? Will Bloomberg or Warren might put pressure on Sanders to do so? Personally, I don’t think either will say a peep. Bloomberg probably doesn’t want to bring up the issue of his own NDAs again and Warren simply does not want to risk the wrath of the Bernie Bros.
Here’s Tezlyn Figaro talking about her lawsuit last year, back when she could still talk about it. It sounds like she is not a fan of cancel culture.
Part two:


hotair--2020-02-28--Both 78, Bloomberg challenges Sanders on his heart health

It ’ s a classic political move : Do something you know an opponent doesn ’ t want to do and challenge him to match you .
That ’ s what Mike Bloomberg did Thursday to Bernie Sanders , the front-runner in the Democratic primary contests .
Thirty-six hours before the South Carolina primary Bloomberg is trying to raise renewed concerns about the health of Sanders , who suffered a heart attack in October .
The New Yorker ’ s campaign released detailed blood flow numbers from Bloomberg ’ s latest physical exam last summer .
Both men are 78 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exiting the White House .
That ’ s one year older than Joe Biden , five years older than Donald Trump , eight years older than Elizabeth Warren , 16 years older than Tom Steyer , 18 years older than Amy Klobuchar and 40 years older than Pete Buttigieg .
In their chests both Sanders and Bloomberg have stents , tiny plastic or metal tubes placed inside an artery to enable full blood flow to and from the heart .
Bloomberg ’ s clogged artery was discovered 20 years ago during a routine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then , he has served three terms as mayor of the nation ’ s largest city .
Sanders , on the other hand , had no symptoms until experiencing chest pains at a Nevada campaign event in October and was rushed to a hospital .
There , he was diagnosed as having suffered angina and a myocardial infarction , or heart attack , in which some of the heart tissue died .
At the time Sanders pledged to release his full medical records before primary voting began , saying : After two weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three states have voted , a fourth on Saturday and 14 more next Tuesday .
Sanders says there won ’ t be any more information coming beyond his doctors ’ letters saying he is now in good health and able to fulfill presidential duties .
Thursday night a Sanders spokesman said , “ The ( doctors ’ ) letters that we ’ ve released are very thorough.
” Sanders dodges further inquiries by challenging any questioner to follow his demanding schedule .
Primary and general election campaigns are indeed brutally demanding physically and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s the point , to test wannabe commanders-in-chief before what feels like an endless stream of voter audiences , night flights and hotel rooms that could be anywhere .
It ’ s a nice try by the Bloomberg campaign , at least a public relations gambit to raise questions in voters ’ minds about Sanders ’ health and what he might be hiding .
But with Sanders in so deep on refusals , it seems unlikely to prompt any real change beyond one or two day ’ s worth of negative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Once not so long ago , a barrage of demands for transparency on personal health or tax records would have forced disclosure , typically copies of a detailed medical report and the appearance of a doctor authorized to disregard confidentiality and discuss personal health issues .
But traditional media , their powers weakened by savage online competition , crippling financial conditions and widespread public distrust , no longer seem to possess the clout to confront the stubborn refusals of emboldened public figures .

It’s a classic political move: Do something you know an opponent doesn’t want to do and challenge him to match you.
That’s what Mike Bloomberg did Thursday to Bernie Sanders, the front-runner in the Democratic primary contests.
Thirty-six hours before the South Carolina primary Bloomberg is trying to raise renewed concerns about the health of Sanders, who suffered a heart attack in October. The New Yorker’s campaign released detailed blood flow numbers from Bloomberg’s latest physical exam last summer.
Both men are 78, older than anyone ever entering or exiting the White House.
That’s one year older than Joe Biden, five years older than Donald Trump, eight years older than Elizabeth Warren, 16 years older than Tom Steyer, 18 years older than Amy Klobuchar and 40 years older than Pete Buttigieg.
In their chests both Sanders and Bloomberg have stents, tiny plastic or metal tubes placed inside an artery to enable full blood flow to and from the heart.
Bloomberg’s clogged artery was discovered 20 years ago during a routine physical exam and stress test. Since then, he has served three terms as mayor of the nation’s largest city.
Sanders, on the other hand, had no symptoms until experiencing chest pains at a Nevada campaign event in October and was rushed to a hospital. There, he was diagnosed as having suffered angina and a myocardial infarction, or heart attack, in which some of the heart tissue died.
At the time Sanders pledged to release his full medical records before primary voting began, saying:
The people do have a right to know about the health of a senator, somebody who’s running for president of the United States. Full disclosure…It will certainly be before the first votes are cast.
After two weeks, Sanders resumed campaigning. Now, three states have voted, a fourth on Saturday and 14 more next Tuesday. Sanders says there won’t be any more information coming beyond his doctors’ letters saying he is now in good health and able to fulfill presidential duties.
Thursday night a Sanders spokesman said, “The (doctors’) letters that we’ve released are very thorough.”
Sanders dodges further inquiries by challenging any questioner to follow his demanding schedule. Primary and general election campaigns are indeed brutally demanding physically and mentally, even for younger candidates.
That’s the point, to test wannabe commanders-in-chief before what feels like an endless stream of voter audiences, night flights and hotel rooms that could be anywhere.
It’s a nice try by the Bloomberg campaign, at least a public relations gambit to raise questions in voters’ minds about Sanders’ health and what he might be hiding.
But with Sanders in so deep on refusals, it seems unlikely to prompt any real change beyond one or two day’s worth of negative media coverage, like this post.
Once not so long ago, a barrage of demands for transparency on personal health or tax records would have forced disclosure, typically copies of a detailed medical report and the appearance of a doctor authorized to disregard confidentiality and discuss personal health issues.
But traditional media, their powers weakened by savage online competition, crippling financial conditions and widespread public distrust, no longer seem to possess the clout to confront the stubborn refusals of emboldened public figures.


hotair--2020-02-28--Did you hear who Obama endorsed in the Dem primaries?

It may come as something of a surprise to Barack Obama that he has already endorsed a fellow Democrat for their party ’ s presidential nomination in Milwaukee come mid-July .
According to a new Morning Consult poll , most Democrats know that the former president has announced his pick to oust that usurper Donald Trump from the White House .
In fact , 60 percent of likely Democratic primary voters know that he has .
These folks are less certain who is the lucky candidate to get Obama ’ s political blessing out of the eight surviving wannabe ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chance .
You know , those Chicago pols can be shifty .
Maybe Obama even gave his primary endorsement to more than one Democrat , like the New York Times .
Anyway , the largest number of respondents said Obama had endorsed Michael Bloomberg ( 26 percent ) .
Or maybe it was Joe Biden ( 25 percent ) .
Others ( 10 percent ) said it was Bernie Sanders .
He is , after all , the front-runner , and what pol wants to choose a loser ?
Biden would make the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closely together , they said , for eight years .
Biden opposed killing Osama bin Laden .
But Barack gave Biden several big assignments — he was to mastermind the complete congressional gun control effort after Sandy Hook .
That didn ’ t lead to any legislative results , actually .
But it did produce numerous meetings and photo-ops .
Obama named Biden to oversee the administration ’ s entire transparency effort .
Biden called a special meeting and closed it to the media .
Obama also assigned Biden to drive the massive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start producing hundreds of thousands of new “ shovel-ready jobs ” each month to crush the recession that wasn ’ t Obama ’ s fault .
That Biden assignment didn ’ t work out either , actually .
The country had to wait on all those new jobs to get a new president , whose deregulation and tax cuts helped drive the current economic growth and millions of new jobs to create the largest workforce in U.S. history .
That president was Donald Trump , who happens to be Republican .
But every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ produced such success without the critical spade work of Joe Biden with Obama ’ s help .
In fact , Joe did such a great job as No .
2 that Obama called him the best VP ever , gave Biden the highest award available , the Presidential Medal of Freedom , .
To be honest , Americans have never been all that taken with electing vice presidents to move up .
Ask Hubert Humphrey , Walter Mondale or what ’ s-his-name the global warming guy , Gore .
Sure , Ronald Reagan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bush , did win one presidential term .
But as a Republican , he doesn ’ t count .
As it turns out , Barack Obama can ’ t make up his mind .
There are so many great candidates , as this week ’ s disputatious debate revealed .
Bloomberg , the sometime Democrat , has run millions of dollars in ads making it appear Obama wants him as the nominee .
And there have been rumors that in private Obama has disparaged the VP he gave the presidential medal to .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ love these kind of polls because they reveal a ) how inattentive and stupid many Americans are and b ) laughing is good for your health .
Remember in 2008 , Howard Stern sent a street reporter to gauge voters ’ reaction to Obama ’ s choice of Sarah Palin as running mate .
To a person , they loved it , thought she ’ d be a great vice president , in part because she ’ s such a proponent of abortion .
Oh , so we don ’ t forget , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respondents also knew that Obama has endorsed Elizabeth Warren .
Which should be great news for her .

It may come as something of a surprise to Barack Obama that he has already endorsed a fellow Democrat for their party’s presidential nomination in Milwaukee come mid-July.
According to a new Morning Consult poll, most Democrats know that the former president has announced his pick to oust that usurper Donald Trump from the White House.
In fact, 60 percent of likely Democratic primary voters know that he has. These folks are less certain who is the lucky candidate to get Obama’s political blessing out of the eight surviving wannabe’s who still claim to have a chance.
You know, those Chicago pols can be shifty. Maybe Obama even gave his primary endorsement to more than one Democrat, like the New York Times.
Anyway, the largest number of respondents said Obama had endorsed Michael Bloomberg (26 percent). Or maybe it was Joe Biden (25 percent). Others (10 percent) said it was Bernie Sanders. He is, after all, the front-runner, and what pol wants to choose a loser?
Biden would make the most sense. He and Barack worked closely together, they said, for eight years. Biden opposed killing Osama bin Laden. But Barack gave Biden several big assignments — he was to mastermind the complete congressional gun control effort after Sandy Hook.
That didn’t lead to any legislative results, actually. But it did produce numerous meetings and photo-ops.
Obama named Biden to oversee the administration’s entire transparency effort. Biden called a special meeting and closed it to the media.
Obama also assigned Biden to drive the massive, trillion-dollar economic stimulus package that would start producing hundreds of thousands of new “shovel-ready jobs” each month to crush the recession that wasn’t Obama’s fault. That Biden assignment didn’t work out either, actually.
The country had to wait on all those new jobs to get a new president, whose deregulation and tax cuts helped drive the current economic growth and millions of new jobs to create the largest workforce in U.S. history.
That president was Donald Trump, who happens to be Republican. But every Democrat knows that Trump could never have produced such success without the critical spade work of Joe Biden with Obama’s help.
In fact, Joe did such a great job as No. 2 that Obama called him the best VP ever, gave Biden the highest award available, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, .
To be honest, Americans have never been all that taken with electing vice presidents to move up. Ask Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale or what’s-his-name the global warming guy, Gore. Sure, Ronald Reagan’s VP, George H.W. Bush, did win one presidential term. But as a Republican, he doesn’t count.
As it turns out, Barack Obama can’t make up his mind. There are so many great candidates, as this week’s disputatious debate revealed. Bloomberg, the sometime Democrat, has run millions of dollars in ads making it appear Obama wants him as the nominee.
And there have been rumors that in private Obama has disparaged the VP he gave the presidential medal to. But still no BO endorsement.
I love these kind of polls because they reveal a) how inattentive and stupid many Americans are and b) laughing is good for your health.
Remember in 2008, Howard Stern sent a street reporter to gauge voters’ reaction to Obama’s choice of Sarah Palin as running mate. To a person, they loved it, thought she’d be a great vice president, in part because she’s such a proponent of abortion.
Oh, so we don’t forget, five percent of Morning Consult’s respondents also knew that Obama has endorsed Elizabeth Warren. Which should be great news for her.


hotair--2020-02-28--Biden: All right, so maybe I didn't get "arrested" in South Africa while trying to visit Nelson Mand

Biden: All right, so maybe I didn't get "arrested" in South Africa while trying to visit Nelson Mandela

You need to read this post from last weekend to fully appreciate this walkback , but it ’ s worth it .
The story Biden ’ s been telling on the trail lately is verrrry specific : One time , during a trip to South Africa with America ’ s ambassador to the UN , he was arrested in Soweto en route to trying to visit Nelson Mandela while Mandela was imprisoned on Robben Island .
That seemed unlikely for many reasons — the ambassador at the time didn ’ t recall it , Soweto is nowhere near Robben Island @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hauled in by local officials while traveling abroad .
Biden recalled it to audiences no fewer than three times , though .
He even added an impressive extra flourish .
Supposedly Mandela himself found out about the arrest at some point and thanked him for it years later , while visiting Washington as South Africa ’ s first black president .
CNN asked him about it today .
How come no record exists of this episode ?
Why had Biden himself never thought to tell this stirring tale in the many decades since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month ?
Somehow he saved it until he was 77 years old , coincidentally at the very moment that he needs a tidal wave of support from black Democrats in South Carolina and beyond to rescue his campaign .
Simple misunderstanding , says Biden : So “ arrested ” was more like “ momentarily detained.
” What about the ambassador and Soweto and Robben Island and Mandela supposedly hearing about the “ arrest ” ?
CNN seemed uninterested in the finer points of Joe ’ s yarn , and in trying to tease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a politician grossly embellishing a story to pander to a group of voters .
Hmmm .
Most indications in polling are that Biden ’ s going to win big tomorrow in South Carolina , which will at least give him a fighting chance next week on Super Tuesday .
I stress : Most indications .
Not all .
A four-point win following a round of polling that predicted victory by 12 points or better wouldn ’ t be a ringing endorsement of Joementum .
And four points is within this poll ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be a pure toss-up between Biden and Sanders right now .
The polling in Texas , where the race had been neck-and-neck 10 days ago , isn ’ t looking great for him today either .
You can see starkly from those numbers that Bloomberg is just killing him , taking what might otherwise be a sizable Biden plurality win and turning it into a narrow Sanders victory by splitting moderates .
Same story in Virginia , where Bernie ’ s at 28 percent in the latest poll while Biden and Bloomberg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respectively .
( Josh Kraushaar compares Bloomberg ’ s campaign to a pro-Bernie Super PAC at this point . )
Biden rolled out Tim Kaine ’ s endorsement today to try to shake loose some of those Bloomberg votes but I continue to think he might be on a Gingrich 2012 trajectory in South Carolina — a big win that supposedly reinvigorates his campaign followed by underperformance in the next election that all but finishes him .
Does this sound like a formidable Super Tuesday candidate to you ?
[ Biden ] has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in most of the Super Tuesday states , where he ’ ll also face opposition from Michael Bloomberg in addition to Sanders… Biden ’ s operations in Super Tuesday states have been described even by his own aides as “ scrappy , ” with staffing and ad spending well below the rest of the top candidates .
His money deficit is evident on the airwaves and on the ground across the states with upcoming contests .
The campaign didn ’ t make its first buys for Super Tuesday until Wednesday of this week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been open for weeks in a few states .
The purchase had been in the six-figures but , after days of strong online fundraising , was upped to $ 2.2 million on Thursday , his campaign said… By late February , Sanders had close to two dozen offices in California and Biden had one , though his campaign began scaling up its operation after the Iowa caucuses .
“ Biden ’ s team says it will rely on the strategy it used in Iowa , ” the report claims at one point , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leverage Biden ’ s sheer name recognition to overcome other candidates ’ advantages in money and organization .
Um , he finished fourth in Iowa .
Behind even Elizabeth Warren .
Here ’ s Mike Bloomberg insisting that he ’ ll continue to campaign unless and until Bernie has a majority of delegates , which means all but certain doom for Biden ’ s chances if he means it .
I ’ m starting to think that after this is over Bloomy ’ s going to reveal that he became a convert to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mission was to make Bernie Sanders president .

You need to read this post from last weekend to fully appreciate this walkback, but it’s worth it. The story Biden’s been telling on the trail lately is verrrry specific: One time, during a trip to South Africa with America’s ambassador to the UN, he was arrested in Soweto en route to trying to visit Nelson Mandela while Mandela was imprisoned on Robben Island. That seemed unlikely for many reasons — the ambassador at the time didn’t recall it, Soweto is nowhere near Robben Island, American dignitaries aren’t typically hauled in by local officials while traveling abroad.
Biden recalled it to audiences no fewer than three times, though. He even added an impressive extra flourish. Supposedly Mandela himself found out about the arrest at some point and thanked him for it years later, while visiting Washington as South Africa’s first black president.
CNN asked him about it today. How come no record exists of this episode? Why had Biden himself never thought to tell this stirring tale in the many decades since the events took place until this past month? Somehow he saved it until he was 77 years old, coincidentally at the very moment that he needs a tidal wave of support from black Democrats in South Carolina and beyond to rescue his campaign. Simple misunderstanding, says Biden:
In a shameful exchange, @cnn finally asks @JoeBiden about lying several times about being arrested in South Africa on way to meet Nelson Mandela. -Biden says he meant "he was not able to move" and he was "stopped"
–@JohnBerman doesn't challenge him, pivots to Trump question pic.twitter.com/ubREcy4boS — Jordan (@JordanChariton) February 28, 2020
So “arrested” was more like “momentarily detained.” What about the ambassador and Soweto and Robben Island and Mandela supposedly hearing about the “arrest”?
CNN seemed uninterested in the finer points of Joe’s yarn, and in trying to tease out whether this was faulty memory or a politician grossly embellishing a story to pander to a group of voters. Hmmm.
Most indications in polling are that Biden’s going to win big tomorrow in South Carolina, which will at least give him a fighting chance next week on Super Tuesday. I stress: Most indications. Not all.
Joe Biden leads the Democratic primary with 28%. He is followed by Bernie Sanders (24%), Tom Steyer (16%), Elizabeth Warren (12%) and Pete Buttigieg (11%). All other candidates poll at 5% or less. Biden (36%) leads among black Democratic primary voters in South Carolina, followed by Steyer (24%) and Sanders (22%). Sanders leads among white voters with 27% of the vote, followed by Biden (19%) and Buttigieg (18%).
A four-point win following a round of polling that predicted victory by 12 points or better wouldn’t be a ringing endorsement of Joementum. And four points is within this poll’s margin of error, meaning that it could be a pure toss-up between Biden and Sanders right now. The polling in Texas, where the race had been neck-and-neck 10 days ago, isn’t looking great for him today either.
New CNN/SSRS poll CA
Sanders 35%
Warren 14%
Biden 13%
Bloomberg 12%
Buttigieg 7%
Klobuchar 6% TX
Sanders 29%
Biden 20%
Bloomberg 18%
Warren 15%
Buttigieg 8%
Klobuchar 3%https://t.co/sRGz7zeC8bhttps://t.co/vzrsumJhK9 — Steve Kornacki (@SteveKornacki) February 28, 2020
NEW @UnivisionNews University of Houston TEXAS poll: Sanders 26%
Biden 20%
Bloomberg 20%
Warren 11%https://t.co/RIEZjtyYS5 — Adrian Carrasquillo (@Carrasquillo) February 28, 2020
You can see starkly from those numbers that Bloomberg is just killing him, taking what might otherwise be a sizable Biden plurality win and turning it into a narrow Sanders victory by splitting moderates. Same story in Virginia, where Bernie’s at 28 percent in the latest poll while Biden and Bloomberg stand at 19 and 17 percent, respectively. (Josh Kraushaar compares Bloomberg’s campaign to a pro-Bernie Super PAC at this point.) Biden rolled out Tim Kaine’s endorsement today to try to shake loose some of those Bloomberg votes but I continue to think he might be on a Gingrich 2012 trajectory in South Carolina — a big win that supposedly reinvigorates his campaign followed by underperformance in the next election that all but finishes him.
Does this sound like a formidable Super Tuesday candidate to you?
[Biden] has no real organization, staffing or advertising in most of the Super Tuesday states, where he’ll also face opposition from Michael Bloomberg in addition to Sanders… Biden’s operations in Super Tuesday states have been described even by his own aides as “scrappy,” with staffing and ad spending well below the rest of the top candidates. His money deficit is evident on the airwaves and on the ground across the states with upcoming contests. The campaign didn’t make its first buys for Super Tuesday until Wednesday of this week, and after early voting periods had been open for weeks in a few states. The purchase had been in the six-figures but, after days of strong online fundraising, was upped to $2.2 million on Thursday, his campaign said… By late February, Sanders had close to two dozen offices in California and Biden had one, though his campaign began scaling up its operation after the Iowa caucuses.
“Biden’s team says it will rely on the strategy it used in Iowa,” the report claims at one point, i.e. they’ll try to leverage Biden’s sheer name recognition to overcome other candidates’ advantages in money and organization. Um, he finished fourth in Iowa. Behind even Elizabeth Warren.
Here’s Mike Bloomberg insisting that he’ll continue to campaign unless and until Bernie has a majority of delegates, which means all but certain doom for Biden’s chances if he means it. I’m starting to think that after this is over Bloomy’s going to reveal that he became a convert to socialism sometime last year and decided his mission was to make Bernie Sanders president.


hotair--2020-02-28--House Democrats nervous about Sanders, part 17

I haven ’ t quite written 16 other posts about this topic but I have written quite a few in the past several weeks and I ’ m not the only one writing them .
If I were curating an anthology of such pieces I would title it ‘ Scenes from an Electoral Train Wreck.
’ Personally , I ’ ll never get tired of this particular sub-genre .
But there ’ s a very good reason every major news outlet has written some version of this story at least once : Democrats are well and truly terrified .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not an irrational fear but a very rational one .
So let ’ s savor the heady brew of Democrats ’ incipient panic once more , shall we ?
This particular piece focuses on Sanders ’ potential impact in South Carolina : In conversations with down-ballot Democratic candidates and strategists here , many said they were crossing their fingers in hope that Sanders ’ momentum would come to a halt in South Carolina ’ s primary this weekend .
“ It is certainly a conversation that is happening regularly among Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I think it ’ s influencing who some folks will vote for on Saturday , ” said Brady Quirk-Garvan , the former chairman of the Charleston County Democratic Party .
“ There is a deep concern about what a Sanders nomination would mean not just for congressional districts , but down-ballot.
” Richard Hricik , a Charleston-based lawyer running to unseat a Republican state senator , said : “ I am not going to even speculate about a Bernie Sanders win.
” Hricik is a supporter of former Vice President Joe Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic strategist , said “ there ’ s always a concern when you ’ re from the South ” when asked how democratic socialism would play out in state and local races here .
“ And there ’ s always the concern that people will try and over-intensify whatever messages will come from the top and try and pinpoint it to the bottom.
” … “ The surest way to flip those seats back to red is for Sanders to be at the top of the ticket , ” a freshman Democratic lawmaker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Cunningham , who is one of the moderate House freshmen Democrats are worried about losing , has already tried to distance himself from Sanders .
Two weeks ago he told the Post and Courier , “ South Carolinians don ’ t want socialism.
” Asked if he ’ d support Sanders if he became the nominee , Cunningham replied , “ Bernie Sanders will not be the nominee.
” The panic is certainly enjoyable but as I pointed out here , it doesn ’ t necessarily guarantee Democrats will lose the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact is that a lot of politics is still local and voters can split their tickets , choosing not to vote for Sanders for President and still voting for a more moderate Democrat they like in their own district .
What we can say with some certainty at this point is that having Sanders as the nominee increases the likelihood that Democrats will lose seats in the House .
Because unless there is a surge of young socialists at the polls greater than the surge of black voters who supported Barack Obama in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sanders is going down like a boat anchor .
Wiser heads in the party keep warning and warning this is going to happen but the 25-year-old Sandernistas aren ’ t listening .

I haven’t quite written 16 other posts about this topic but I have written quite a few in the past several weeks and I’m not the only one writing them. If I were curating an anthology of such pieces I would title it ‘Scenes from an Electoral Train Wreck.’ Personally, I’ll never get tired of this particular sub-genre. But there’s a very good reason every major news outlet has written some version of this story at least once: Democrats are well and truly terrified. And as Vox pointed out recently, it’s not an irrational fear but a very rational one. So let’s savor the heady brew of Democrats’ incipient panic once more, shall we? This particular piece focuses on Sanders’ potential impact in South Carolina:
In conversations with down-ballot Democratic candidates and strategists here, many said they were crossing their fingers in hope that Sanders’ momentum would come to a halt in South Carolina’s primary this weekend. “It is certainly a conversation that is happening regularly among Democrats. It’s to the point that I think it’s influencing who some folks will vote for on Saturday,” said Brady Quirk-Garvan, the former chairman of the Charleston County Democratic Party. “There is a deep concern about what a Sanders nomination would mean not just for congressional districts, but down-ballot.” Richard Hricik, a Charleston-based lawyer running to unseat a Republican state senator, said: “I am not going to even speculate about a Bernie Sanders win.” Hricik is a supporter of former Vice President Joe Biden. Antjuan Seawright, a South Carolina Democratic strategist, said “there’s always a concern when you’re from the South” when asked how democratic socialism would play out in state and local races here. “And there’s always the concern that people will try and over-intensify whatever messages will come from the top and try and pinpoint it to the bottom.”… “The surest way to flip those seats back to red is for Sanders to be at the top of the ticket,” a freshman Democratic lawmaker said in a telephone interview.
Rep. Joe Cunningham, who is one of the moderate House freshmen Democrats are worried about losing, has already tried to distance himself from Sanders. Two weeks ago he told the Post and Courier, “South Carolinians don’t want socialism.” Asked if he’d support Sanders if he became the nominee, Cunningham replied, “Bernie Sanders will not be the nominee.”
The panic is certainly enjoyable but as I pointed out here, it doesn’t necessarily guarantee Democrats will lose the House if Sanders is the nominee. The fact is that a lot of politics is still local and voters can split their tickets, choosing not to vote for Sanders for President and still voting for a more moderate Democrat they like in their own district.
What we can say with some certainty at this point is that having Sanders as the nominee increases the likelihood that Democrats will lose seats in the House. Because unless there is a surge of young socialists at the polls greater than the surge of black voters who supported Barack Obama in 2008 (a very high bar), Sanders is going down like a boat anchor. Wiser heads in the party keep warning and warning this is going to happen but the 25-year-old Sandernistas aren’t listening.


hotair--2020-02-28--Rahm's brother: Trump is incoherent, ignorant about coronavirus

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is the smartest man in the room when it comes to the coronavirus , at least in his own mind .
During an appearance on MSNBC Wednesday following President Trump ’ s press conference with the CDC , Rahm Emanuel ’ s brother ridiculed the president ’ s level of knowledge of the emerging pandemic .
Just in case you didn ’ t believe that absolutely everything is political these days , look at the narratives that are developing around a deadly serious public health issue .
Democrats spent much of Wednesday criticizing the Trump administration ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lobbing personal insults .
Having only arrived back in the U.S. from a trip to India a matter of hours before , he participated in a press conference surrounded by the key figures in dealing with the virus .
Anne Schuchat , the Principal Deputy Director of CDC and Alex Azar , Secretary of Health and Human Services , along with Vice-President Mike Pence were among the officials present .
The president did a good job , in my opinion , delivering some information to quell growing fear among Americans over the spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States is preparing for a larger outbreak , should it happen .
The long knives came out , as usual , and his critics in the media almost universally criticized his words .
President Trump is known for punching back and he showed some restraint as he answered questions from the press .
When they pursued his reactions to divisive and ugly statements from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( cryin ’ Chuck ) , he defended his administration ’ s work to date and did his best to reassure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Emanuel is a special adviser to the Director-General of the World Health Organization ( WHO ) .
He is a former White House health advisor to President Obama .
He was on MSNBC ’ s Hardball and was only too happy to trash the president ’ s remarks .
“ I found most of what he said a little incoherent , ” Emanuel said , pointing to Trump ’ s admission that he was shocked by the number of people who die from the common flu annually .
“ You know , [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ admitted that he ’ s surprised that 25,000 to 69,000 people each year die of the flu .
That just tells you how little he actually knows about public health and about the health of the American public , ” he added .
“ He just revealed how ignorant he is about the situation .
We don ’ t know how similar or dissimilar this is to the flu .
“ We know one thing .
It is actually more communicable than the flu .
It passes between people very , very easily.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is totally prepared to handle a respirary disease spread through airborne germs .
The U.S. has the infrastructure and resources available to contain it and treat the symptons better than most other countries .
That is the message President Trump was delivering yesterday .
He was acting to calm fears and deliver hope that a widespread outbreak can be avoided .
No one has any way of knowing what will happen in the next days or weeks but the point is that the government is using all available resources to keep on top @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is working with China and other countries as well as state governments here at home .
While the CDC has said an outbreak is inevitable , the actual magnitude of it has not been determined .
The president sounded a more optimistic note than the CDC has but that is to be expected from the president .
His role is to keep people calm while encouraging vigilence and preparation .
The press sees that as a sign of weakness and/or ignorance .
I have to say , I don ’ t know what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He has named Mike Pence as the person to oversee the COVID-19 operations .
Pence has experience from the days of the MERS outbreak in Indiana during his time as governor of that state .
It was also a viral respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus .
The message is that everyone should refrain from panicking but stay prepared and exercise caution .
The basic precautions that we take for colds and the flu apply here – wash your hands frequently , cover your coughs and sneezes , seek medical help if symptoms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no vaccine .
Some vaccines are in developmental stages and some are awaiting funding to carry out testing on humans .
Dr. Emanuel had a strikingly different tone just a few weeks ago .
At the end of January he was downplaying the seriousness of a potential pandemic and insisting that everyone should take a breath and remain calm .
“ Everyone in America should take a very big breath , slow down , and stop panicking and being hysterical , ” said Emanuel , who served during Barack Obama ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little too much histrionics on this.
” “ I ’ m actually pretty confident that we ’ re going to restrict the spread in the United States and people should remember not to panic , ” said Emanuel , vice provost for global initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania .
“ We need to be a little sober about it , even in China.
” “ I think we need to put it into context , the death rate is much lower than for SARS , ” Emanuel said .
Emanuel didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the intelligence of President Trump or his administration ’ s ability to handle the situation .
That was then , though , before it became politically expediant for Democrats to make it political .

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is the smartest man in the room when it comes to the coronavirus, at least in his own mind. During an appearance on MSNBC Wednesday following President Trump’s press conference with the CDC, Rahm Emanuel’s brother ridiculed the president’s level of knowledge of the emerging pandemic.
Just in case you didn’t believe that absolutely everything is political these days, look at the narratives that are developing around a deadly serious public health issue. Democrats spent much of Wednesday criticizing the Trump administration’s efforts in dealing with COVID-19 and lobbing personal insults. Having only arrived back in the U.S. from a trip to India a matter of hours before, he participated in a press conference surrounded by the key figures in dealing with the virus. Anne Schuchat, the Principal Deputy Director of CDC and Alex Azar, Secretary of Health and Human Services, along with Vice-President Mike Pence were among the officials present.
The president did a good job, in my opinion, delivering some information to quell growing fear among Americans over the spread of the disease and how the United States is preparing for a larger outbreak, should it happen. The long knives came out, as usual, and his critics in the media almost universally criticized his words. President Trump is known for punching back and he showed some restraint as he answered questions from the press. When they pursued his reactions to divisive and ugly statements from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (cryin’ Chuck), he defended his administration’s work to date and did his best to reassure that they are being pro-active.
Ezekiel Emanuel is a special adviser to the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO). He is a former White House health advisor to President Obama. He was on MSNBC’s Hardball and was only too happy to trash the president’s remarks.
“I found most of what he said a little incoherent,” Emanuel said, pointing to Trump’s admission that he was shocked by the number of people who die from the common flu annually. “You know, [Trump’s] a guy that admitted that he’s surprised that 25,000 to 69,000 people each year die of the flu. That just tells you how little he actually knows about public health and about the health of the American public,” he added. “He just revealed how ignorant he is about the situation. We don’t know how similar or dissimilar this is to the flu. “We know one thing. It is actually more communicable than the flu. It passes between people very, very easily.”
"I found most of what he said incoherent." — Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel on Trump's press conference regarding the coronavirus. #Hardball pic.twitter.com/HIHxYLS1E5 — The ReidOut (@thereidout) February 27, 2020
No single country in the world is totally prepared to handle a respirary disease spread through airborne germs. The U.S. has the infrastructure and resources available to contain it and treat the symptons better than most other countries. That is the message President Trump was delivering yesterday. He was acting to calm fears and deliver hope that a widespread outbreak can be avoided. No one has any way of knowing what will happen in the next days or weeks but the point is that the government is using all available resources to keep on top of it. Trump said the adminstration is working with China and other countries as well as state governments here at home. While the CDC has said an outbreak is inevitable, the actual magnitude of it has not been determined. The president sounded a more optimistic note than the CDC has but that is to be expected from the president. His role is to keep people calm while encouraging vigilence and preparation. The press sees that as a sign of weakness and/or ignorance.
I have to say, I don’t know what else the president could have said. He has named Mike Pence as the person to oversee the COVID-19 operations. Pence has experience from the days of the MERS outbreak in Indiana during his time as governor of that state. It was also a viral respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus. The message is that everyone should refrain from panicking but stay prepared and exercise caution. The basic precautions that we take for colds and the flu apply here – wash your hands frequently, cover your coughs and sneezes, seek medical help if symptoms develop.
Unlike the flu, there is no vaccine. Some vaccines are in developmental stages and some are awaiting funding to carry out testing on humans.
Dr. Emanuel had a strikingly different tone just a few weeks ago. At the end of January he was downplaying the seriousness of a potential pandemic and insisting that everyone should take a breath and remain calm.
“Everyone in America should take a very big breath, slow down, and stop panicking and being hysterical,” said Emanuel, who served during Barack Obama’s presidency. “We are having a little too much histrionics on this.” “I’m actually pretty confident that we’re going to restrict the spread in the United States and people should remember not to panic,” said Emanuel, vice provost for global initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania. “We need to be a little sober about it, even in China.” “I think we need to put it into context, the death rate is much lower than for SARS,” Emanuel said.
Emanuel didn’t sound like a medical professional worried about the intelligence of President Trump or his administration’s ability to handle the situation. That was then, though, before it became politically expediant for Democrats to make it political.


hotair--2020-02-28--FISA reform advocates unhappy with vote delay

FISA and Patriot Act reform advocates vowed to not quit despite yesterday ’ s shenanigans involving the House Judiciary Committee .
“ The job of the intelligence committees was always supposed to be to hold our nation ’ s intelligence agencies accountable to their legal and constitutional boundaries , ” FreedomWorks Vice President of Legislative Affairs Jason Pye fumed after Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler called off the hearing at the behest of Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff .
“ Yet even after a litany of disclosures that have shown millions of innocent Americans being subject to surveillance , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ produce a bill that would address some of these problems was apparently too much for Chairman Schiff… ” Schiff ’ s involvement has to do with several amendments put forth by Democrat California Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren to the USA Freedom Reauthorization Act .
Nadler and Schiff made some sort of deal that banned amendments to the bill ; an agreement Lofgren found untenable .
“ I reject that categorization of what we ’ re doing here , ” Lofgren told POLITICO yesterday .
“ We ’ re making policy .
This isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done in secret without the concurrence of the committees of jurisdiction is somehow binding on the members of the committee.
” “ Current law subjects millions of Americans to warrantless surveillance and allows federal agencies to regularly violate our Constitutional rights , ” Due Process Institute Founder and President Shana-Tara O ’ Toole said in a statement while noting there were ways to improve the reforms .
“ We can not allow Congressional leadership to stand in the way of the current bipartisan momentum to reform our surveillance policies in a manner that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without harming our national security .
The American people are calling on Congress to act and these reforms deserve good faith deliberation without partisan games.
” Progressive surveillance reform advocates also vented their rage at Schiff , who ’ s issued nary a peep about what happened yesterday .
“ Judiciary Committee members were expected to offer amendments to the USA FREEDOM Act that would have protected Americans ’ civil liberties… ” said Demand Progress Policy Director Daniel Schuman .
“ Instead , Rep. Schiff told Chairman Nadler that if he allowed any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill .
( He has done this before . )
” The USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act appeared to be a step in the right direction on solving the problem : mass surveillance and the collection of data .
Yes , the NSA stopped the call details program last year , but the reforms would have kept the agency from re-starting the program .
Defenders of the program still have plenty of questions to answer about its usefulness .
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board issued a report to Congress this week noting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times over its four-year period of operation .
Unique information was found twice , with the FBI deciding once no further action was needed .
The results of the second case are still classified but the board reported U.S. authorities already knew about the suspected phone number .
The cost of this program ?
$ 100M according to The New York Times .
Talk about not getting your bang for your buck .
What happens next is a bit hazy , but reforms still need to be considered .
“ Our Fourth Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bargaining chip , ” Pye declared yesterday .
“ If Chairman Schiff wants to pull serious reform off the table , then maybe it ’ s finally time that we let these problematic portions of the Patriot Act expire.
” Pye has a point although the fear is whether or not the NSA will go ahead and restart the program surreptitiously or come up with a new way to collect phone data .
It ’ s not a bad idea to make sure there are restraints on government activities .
Reforms are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act without changes is a bad idea .
Do your job , Nadler !
Hold the hearing and allow amendments .

FISA and Patriot Act reform advocates vowed to not quit despite yesterday’s shenanigans involving the House Judiciary Committee.
“The job of the intelligence committees was always supposed to be to hold our nation’s intelligence agencies accountable to their legal and constitutional boundaries,” FreedomWorks Vice President of Legislative Affairs Jason Pye fumed after Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler called off the hearing at the behest of Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff. “Yet even after a litany of disclosures that have shown millions of innocent Americans being subject to surveillance, the very idea that the Judiciary Committee might produce a bill that would address some of these problems was apparently too much for Chairman Schiff…”
Schiff’s involvement has to do with several amendments put forth by Democrat California Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren to the USA Freedom Reauthorization Act. Nadler and Schiff made some sort of deal that banned amendments to the bill; an agreement Lofgren found untenable.
“I reject that categorization of what we’re doing here,” Lofgren told POLITICO yesterday. “We’re making policy. This isn’t some game where side-deals that are done in secret without the concurrence of the committees of jurisdiction is somehow binding on the members of the committee.”
Reformers agree.
“Current law subjects millions of Americans to warrantless surveillance and allows federal agencies to regularly violate our Constitutional rights,” Due Process Institute Founder and President Shana-Tara O’Toole said in a statement while noting there were ways to improve the reforms. “We cannot allow Congressional leadership to stand in the way of the current bipartisan momentum to reform our surveillance policies in a manner that protects the Constitutional rights of all Americans without harming our national security. The American people are calling on Congress to act and these reforms deserve good faith deliberation without partisan games.”
Progressive surveillance reform advocates also vented their rage at Schiff, who’s issued nary a peep about what happened yesterday.
“Judiciary Committee members were expected to offer amendments to the USA FREEDOM Act that would have protected Americans’ civil liberties…” said Demand Progress Policy Director Daniel Schuman. “Instead, Rep. Schiff told Chairman Nadler that if he allowed any substantive amendments, he would kill the bill. (He has done this before.)”
The USA FREEDOM Reauthorization Act appeared to be a step in the right direction on solving the problem: mass surveillance and the collection of data. Yes, the NSA stopped the call details program last year, but the reforms would have kept the agency from re-starting the program.
Defenders of the program still have plenty of questions to answer about its usefulness. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board issued a report to Congress this week noting the call details program was cited 15 times over its four-year period of operation. Unique information was found twice, with the FBI deciding once no further action was needed. The results of the second case are still classified but the board reported U.S. authorities already knew about the suspected phone number.
The cost of this program? $100M according to The New York Times. Talk about not getting your bang for your buck.
What happens next is a bit hazy, but reforms still need to be considered.
“Our Fourth Amendment protections against unwarranted government intrusion are not a bargaining chip,” Pye declared yesterday. “If Chairman Schiff wants to pull serious reform off the table, then maybe it’s finally time that we let these problematic portions of the Patriot Act expire.”
Pye has a point although the fear is whether or not the NSA will go ahead and restart the program surreptitiously or come up with a new way to collect phone data. It’s not a bad idea to make sure there are restraints on government activities.
Reforms are needed and renewing FISA and the Patriot Act without changes is a bad idea. Do your job, Nadler! Hold the hearing and allow amendments.