hotair--2020-08-03--Trump: If we squeeze TikTok into selling to Microsoft, the U.S. Treasury deserves a "very substantia

Trump: If we squeeze TikTok into selling to Microsoft, the U.S. Treasury deserves a "very substantial portion" of the sales price

On the one hand , I always appreciate creative ideas to reduce the national debt .
On the other hand , Axios has a point .
Demanding some sort of bonus for strongarming ByteDance into selling TikTok to an American company on national-security grounds is “ skating very close to announcing extortion , ” come to think of it .
“ The U.S. Treasury is not an investment bank collecting deal advisory fees , ” sniffed Ben White of Politico about this clip .
Well , not yet .
Not yet , it isn ’ t .
Watch , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were left wondering what sort of legal mechanism might entitle Treasury to take a cut of the sales price .
“ While the Treasury Department has in the past received financial compensation from companies , it is highly unusual and typically happens amid a financial crisis , ” the Wall Street Journal noted , pointing to federal bailouts .
“ It was unclear how the president would require TikTok to pay a portion of its sale into the U.S. Treasury , beyond the normal collection of tax revenue by the Internal Revenue Service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Treasury for comment and , not surprisingly , got no reply .
What Trump ’ s describing in the clip sounds like a tax , but a tax unilaterally imposed on a transaction at the president ’ s whim , without the involvement of Congress .
He ’ s not conceptualizing it that way , though , as a public official ; to him , this is more like a real-estate deal in which the “ landlord , ” who I guess is the U.S. government in this analogy , gets “ key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lessee .
Think of it as a commission , or a finder ’ s fee .
Or , on the seedier side , a kickback .
How does he imagine America ’ s cut affecting the final sales price ?
Would Microsoft pay extra to cover Treasury ’ s “ share ” of the deal or would the U.S. simply expropriate a certain percentage of whatever ByteDance receives from Microsoft ?
Do we plan on telling either party up front what we think Treasury ’ s fair share would be , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ amount once Trump settles on it ?
Libertarians are rubbing their temples imagining what sort of message it ’ ll send to foreign companies about operating in the U.S. if the president gets the idea that he can use his natsec powers to squeeze them into selling and then taking a cut of their sales price .
Others are wondering , a la Trump ’ s trade war , how foreign governments are apt to treat American companies operating overseas once they see their own native firms being subjected to this squeeze-and-steal tactic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s interest in banning TikTok as a security risk is legitimate , but the public interest in forcing ByteDance to sell to a U.S. company is the improvement in national security that would come from having users ’ data controlled by an American firm instead of having it within the grasp of the Chinese government .
The fact that Trump would resort to tacking on some petty pecuniary interest to U.S. action , as if the natsec benefits weren ’ t enough in and of themselves , is indeed a window onto how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s the public ’ s pocketbook he ’ s looking out for in this case , not his own .
But yes , “ What ’ s in it for me ?
” is very much part of his bedrock psychology , which is why it was always easy to believe that he wanted a quid pro quo from Ukraine ’ s president in dangling military aid in return for reopening the Burisma probe into the Bidens .
A guy who approaches government like a real-estate deal , expecting a certain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things work , isn ’ t going to just hand over something of value to another party when that party is in a position to do him an important favor — even if handing it over was in the public interest by advancing Congress ’ s foreign-policy goals .
As a general rule , I don ’ t think Trump has much regard for the idea of the “ public interest ” unless it can be expressed in dollars-and-cents terms , such as , for instance , reducing trade deficits .
Wanting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another aspect of that .
National security is nice , but where ’ s the money ?
In all likelihood this ’ ll end up as one of many comments that everyone just sort of forgets about .
His lawyers and advisors will explain to him why it won ’ t work and the public will write it off as something new for the Stuff Trump Says file .
It ’ s actually to his advantage if everyone forgets it , as a sale here would be an elegant way to extricate him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election looming .
If he ’ s forced to ban TikTok instead , it ’ s unclear how things would go in court and it would leave him at risk of a backlash at the polls among the app ’ s many young users .
To the extent that he ’ s complicating a sale between Microsoft and ByteDance with this weird ask for a cut of the sales price , he ’ s putting himself in a position where a ban is his only option .

On the one hand, I always appreciate creative ideas to reduce the national debt.
On the other hand, Axios has a point. Demanding some sort of bonus for strongarming ByteDance into selling TikTok to an American company on national-security grounds is “skating very close to announcing extortion,” come to think of it.
“The U.S. Treasury is not an investment bank collecting deal advisory fees,” sniffed Ben White of Politico about this clip. Well, not yet. Not yet, it isn’t. Watch, then read on.
President Trump on TikTok @tiktok_us: "It'll close down on September 15th unless Microsoft or somebody else is able to buy it." pic.twitter.com/GVn1yZeJ2W — CSPAN (@cspan) August 3, 2020
Reporters who watched that were left wondering what sort of legal mechanism might entitle Treasury to take a cut of the sales price. “While the Treasury Department has in the past received financial compensation from companies, it is highly unusual and typically happens amid a financial crisis,” the Wall Street Journal noted, pointing to federal bailouts. “It was unclear how the president would require TikTok to pay a portion of its sale into the U.S. Treasury, beyond the normal collection of tax revenue by the Internal Revenue Service,” added WaPo, which contacted Treasury for comment and, not surprisingly, got no reply.
What Trump’s describing in the clip sounds like a tax, but a tax unilaterally imposed on a transaction at the president’s whim, without the involvement of Congress. He’s not conceptualizing it that way, though, as a public official; to him, this is more like a real-estate deal in which the “landlord,” who I guess is the U.S. government in this analogy, gets “key money” for renting a property to the lessee. Think of it as a commission, or a finder’s fee. Or, on the seedier side, a kickback.
This is literally the Mafia’s business model. “We’ll threaten them until they’re forced to sell their business; then you give us a cut for the use of our muscle.” — Julian Sanchez (@normative) August 3, 2020
How does he imagine America’s cut affecting the final sales price? Would Microsoft pay extra to cover Treasury’s “share” of the deal or would the U.S. simply expropriate a certain percentage of whatever ByteDance receives from Microsoft? Do we plan on telling either party up front what we think Treasury’s fair share would be, or is the plan to just seize an amount once Trump settles on it?
Libertarians are rubbing their temples imagining what sort of message it’ll send to foreign companies about operating in the U.S. if the president gets the idea that he can use his natsec powers to squeeze them into selling and then taking a cut of their sales price. Others are wondering, a la Trump’s trade war, how foreign governments are apt to treat American companies operating overseas once they see their own native firms being subjected to this squeeze-and-steal tactic by the United States. Trump’s interest in banning TikTok as a security risk is legitimate, but the public interest in forcing ByteDance to sell to a U.S. company is the improvement in national security that would come from having users’ data controlled by an American firm instead of having it within the grasp of the Chinese government. The fact that Trump would resort to tacking on some petty pecuniary interest to U.S. action, as if the natsec benefits weren’t enough in and of themselves, is indeed a window onto how he approaches the world:
The campaign committees use Trump properties. The inaugural committee spent more than $1 million at the Trump hotel. There is a mindset. https://t.co/u6vwr8V0ak — Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) August 3, 2020
At least it’s the public’s pocketbook he’s looking out for in this case, not his own. But yes, “What’s in it for me?” is very much part of his bedrock psychology, which is why it was always easy to believe that he wanted a quid pro quo from Ukraine’s president in dangling military aid in return for reopening the Burisma probe into the Bidens. A guy who approaches government like a real-estate deal, expecting a certain amount of backscratching in order to make things work, isn’t going to just hand over something of value to another party when that party is in a position to do him an important favor — even if handing it over was in the public interest by advancing Congress’s foreign-policy goals. As a general rule, I don’t think Trump has much regard for the idea of the “public interest” unless it can be expressed in dollars-and-cents terms, such as, for instance, reducing trade deficits. Wanting a cut of the Microsoft/ByteDance deal is just another aspect of that. National security is nice, but where’s the money?
In all likelihood this’ll end up as one of many comments that everyone just sort of forgets about. His lawyers and advisors will explain to him why it won’t work and the public will write it off as something new for the Stuff Trump Says file. It’s actually to his advantage if everyone forgets it, as a sale here would be an elegant way to extricate him from a tricky political spot with the election looming. If he’s forced to ban TikTok instead, it’s unclear how things would go in court and it would leave him at risk of a backlash at the polls among the app’s many young users. To the extent that he’s complicating a sale between Microsoft and ByteDance with this weird ask for a cut of the sales price, he’s putting himself in a position where a ban is his only option.


hotair--2020-08-03--Reaction: Record number of first-time gun buyers in 2020

What happens when government locks people down into their houses and then police begin to retreat from ensuring public order ?
Homicides go up , and people start protecting themselves — people who never considered it necessary before .
Fox News reports that first-time gun purchases have shot through the roof , pardon the pun , as crime escalates and cities discussing cutting or eliminating police resources : At the beginning of June , the National Shooting Sports Foundation ( NSSF ) announced that more than 2.5 million people had become first-time gun owners in the first half of 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was “ unlike any other year for firearm purchases — particularly by first-time buyers — as new NSSF research reveals millions of people chose to purchase their first gun during the COVID-19 pandemic , ” said Jim Curcuruto , the shooting foundation ’ s director of research and market development , at the time .
NSSF data show a record number of gun transactions – 10.3 million – were processed in the country during that time period .
“ First off , ” Curcuruto wrote in a July 21 blog post , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an increase in firearm and ammunition sales during the first half of 2020 versus the first half of 2019 .
How big are those increases ?
Responding retailers noted that they are seeing a 95 percent increase in firearm sales and a 139 percent increase in ammunition sales over the same period in 2019.
” Those who were previously too afraid to handle firearms are now too afraid of the alternatives to handling firearms : Marilyn Miller , one of Paladin ’ s firearms instructors , said she ’ s recently been teaching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have thought of buying a gun until recently.
” “ I went from a couple of students a week to probably at least a dozen a week , ” she said .
“ Couples are bringing their kids , ages 14 , 15 , 16 , all the way up to their 20s and want them all to know how to use the same gun that they ’ re going to keep in the house … A lot of them came in afraid of guns , and came in to try shooting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun.
” We ’ ve seen this reported anecdotally and locally before now , particularly in Minneapolis in the immediate aftermath of the riots .
Local residents wondered whether they would shortly see “ World War II ” in the streets of the Twin Cities , and thus far have pretty much been proven prescient .
The city council ’ s response to the explosion of violent crime and robberies has been to tell residents to cooperate with criminals while the council comes up with a way to get rid of the police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country , as detailed in the Wall Street Journal ’ s study earlier today , no doubt has convinced many other previously reluctant Americans to exercise their right to self-defense .
In the bigger cities especially , a retreat by police — fueled by local politicians ’ pandering on # DefundthePolice — has made it clear that government is less interested in public safety than they are in pandering to outrage mobs .
That means more and more Americans will either decide to be victims-in-waiting by default , or at least having the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choose .
That means that more and more American voters will have a personal investment in the gun-control debate , too .
How will that shape the debate and the agenda ?
Let ’ s just say that the same progressives that have pushed gun control for decades might suddenly realize that they ’ ve painted themselves into a corner by demanding the defunding of police — that they claim had the only legitimate claim on firearms to “ defend ” citizens .
That circle could never be squared anyway , but that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year ’ s riots over law enforcement .
A whole lot more Americans are personally experiencing the necessity of the Second Amendment in 2020 , and that will resonate for decades .

What happens when government locks people down into their houses and then police begin to retreat from ensuring public order? Homicides go up, and people start protecting themselves — people who never considered it necessary before. Fox News reports that first-time gun purchases have shot through the roof, pardon the pun, as crime escalates and cities discussing cutting or eliminating police resources:
At the beginning of June, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) announced that more than 2.5 million people had become first-time gun owners in the first half of 2020. January to June 1 of 2020, was “unlike any other year for firearm purchases — particularly by first-time buyers — as new NSSF research reveals millions of people chose to purchase their first gun during the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Jim Curcuruto, the shooting foundation’s director of research and market development, at the time. NSSF data show a record number of gun transactions – 10.3 million – were processed in the country during that time period. “First off,” Curcuruto wrote in a July 21 blog post, “approximately 90 percent of retailers reported an increase in firearm and ammunition sales during the first half of 2020 versus the first half of 2019. How big are those increases? Responding retailers noted that they are seeing a 95 percent increase in firearm sales and a 139 percent increase in ammunition sales over the same period in 2019.”
Those who were previously too afraid to handle firearms are now too afraid of the alternatives to handling firearms:
Marilyn Miller, one of Paladin’s firearms instructors, said she’s recently been teaching people who told her they “never would have thought of buying a gun until recently.” “I went from a couple of students a week to probably at least a dozen a week,” she said. “Couples are bringing their kids, ages 14, 15, 16, all the way up to their 20s and want them all to know how to use the same gun that they’re going to keep in the house … A lot of them came in afraid of guns, and came in to try shooting before they went out and purchased a gun.”
We’ve seen this reported anecdotally and locally before now, particularly in Minneapolis in the immediate aftermath of the riots. Local residents wondered whether they would shortly see “World War II” in the streets of the Twin Cities, and thus far have pretty much been proven prescient. The city council’s response to the explosion of violent crime and robberies has been to tell residents to cooperate with criminals while the council comes up with a way to get rid of the police.
The rising crime levels across the country, as detailed in the Wall Street Journal’s study earlier today, no doubt has convinced many other previously reluctant Americans to exercise their right to self-defense. In the bigger cities especially, a retreat by police — fueled by local politicians’ pandering on #DefundthePolice — has made it clear that government is less interested in public safety than they are in pandering to outrage mobs. That means more and more Americans will either decide to be victims-in-waiting by default, or at least having the option to defend themselves if they so choose.
That means that more and more American voters will have a personal investment in the gun-control debate, too. How will that shape the debate and the agenda? Let’s just say that the same progressives that have pushed gun control for decades might suddenly realize that they’ve painted themselves into a corner by demanding the defunding of police — that they claim had the only legitimate claim on firearms to “defend” citizens. That circle could never be squared anyway, but that claim will ring particularly hollow after this year’s riots over law enforcement. A whole lot more Americans are personally experiencing the necessity of the Second Amendment in 2020, and that will resonate for decades.


hotair--2020-08-04--On second thought: It's okay to vote by mail in Florida, says Trump

It makes me laugh that he had this change of heart at a moment when the sh*tshow in New York over mail-in voting continues to get worse .
Normally that would be an opportunity for a presidential I-told-you-so victory lap .
“ Andrew Cuomo ’ s even worse at running elections than he is at managing nursing homes .
Sad !
” But there are countervailing considerations here .
It ’ s been clear for months that Trump ’ s crusade against voting by mail has enormous backfire potential for him and the GOP .
He ’ s not scaring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about them every day , he ’ s scaring his own party .
GOP state and national officials have pleaded with him publicly and privately to back off , fearing that the party will be at an insurmountable disadvantage on Election Day if circumstances arise that make it difficult to vote in person , whether weather-related or COVID-related .
If Republicans are waiting until the day of to cast their ballots , and we end up in the middle of a ferocious coronavirus second wave on November 3 , many GOPers might feel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves by staying home .
Meanwhile , many ( if not most ) Democrats will have already voted by mail .
Result : A total wipeout nationally .
Trump has to back off and start bringing Republicans around to voting by mail , using whatever lame face-saving excuse he prefers .
Today he finally did — in one state .
Why ’ d he choose Florida specifically ?
It ’ s not that their system is so much safer than anyone else ’ s .
It ’ s strategic : 1 .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so every vote counts .
2 .
There are a disproportionate number of senior citizens , who may be even more inclined to stay home instead of voting in person on Election Day due to the health risks from COVID .
3 .
Florida is currently the site of one of the worst outbreaks in the country , bad enough to have forced Trump to cancel the Jacksonville component of the GOP convention .
Hopefully the outbreak will dwindle the same way New York ’ s eventually did , but there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at its current rate , or worse , until November .
4 .
Lefty Brian Beutler ’ s right that the whole election probably comes down to Florida , as usual : There are other paths to victory for Biden ( a clean sweep in the Rust Belt , or Arizona plus Michigan and Pennsylvania ) but Beutler ’ s correct that if Biden has enough of a margin for Florida to be called on election night , it ’ ll blow up Trump ’ s plan to point to the mail-in votes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as evidence that Biden cheated to win .
He has no path to a second term without FL .
At a minimum , he needs to be ahead in the state once the day-of votes are counted on Election Day to have any remotely credible claim that he “ really ” won the election .
5 .
Not coincidentally , Politico had a story out this morning about just how badly Trump ’ s criticism of mail-in voting is hurting the GOP .
The main focus of the story ?
Florida , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his own fans into boycotting the election .
On top of that , Trump voters skew older than Biden voters , which means they ’ re more apt to get cold feet at the last minute about in-person voting in the middle of a COVID second wave .
WaPo reports that even RNC chair Ronna McDaniel has taken to begging Trump to “ present a more nuanced message ” on when voting by mail is and isn ’ t okay .
There does seem to be a lot of confusion about that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after months of Trump messaging : One North Carolina Republican official posted a plea on Facebook encouraging people to take advantage of the absentee ballots mailed to them .
Zombified MAGA fans replied with comments like “ Burned it !
” and “ You know damn well that we are arguing against this , and here it is our own damn party sending this horse dung out ?
!
!
!
” In Iowa , the Republican-controlled legislature barred the secretary of state from sending out applications for mail-in ballots statewide — only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mailing them out instead .
That ’ s a microcosm for the entire party ’ s dilemma right now : Republicans are only spiting themselves .
Eventually the legislature backed off and allowed the state to proceed in hopes of equalizing GOPers ’ access to ballots .
An easy prediction , then .
Trump ’ s going to end up declaring that the systems in Michigan , Pennsylvania , Wisconsin , Arizona , and North Carolina are also sufficiently “ safe ” that Republicans there have his blessing to vote by mail .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , of course , and all of them allow for no-excuse “ absentee ” voting , which is indistinguishable from mail-in voting .
Where Trump ’ s going to end up drawing the line , I assume , is at states automatically mailing ballot applications to people instead of forcing voters to jump through the hoop of requesting an application first .
Mail-in voting is fine , he ’ ll decide , but we can ’ t have states sending out applications willy nilly , not knowing who might get hold of one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to vote illegally .
“ Somebody got a ballot for a dog .
Somebody got a ballot for something else .
You got millions of ballots going .
Nobody even knows where they ’ re going , ” he told Axios .
McDaniel ’ s already hammering that distinction today : The wrinkle is that five states ( Colorado , Hawaii , Oregon , Utah , and Washington ) already conduct elections entirely by mail , raising the question of whether Trump thinks the results in those states should be disqualified as presumptively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them are likely to be competitive , he probably doesn ’ t care .
Hopefully most Americans will avert an election-night uproar over mail-in voting by choosing to vote in-person early instead .
Normally I loathe early voting since sometimes events occur between the time a ballot is cast and Election Day that might have changed some voters ’ minds , but it may be the least bad option this year .
Exit question : Didn ’ t Trump say a few days ago that we need to know who won the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have confidence in the outcome ?
What ’ s left of that message now that he ’ s backing mail-in voting in Florida ?

It makes me laugh that he had this change of heart at a moment when the sh*tshow in New York over mail-in voting continues to get worse. Normally that would be an opportunity for a presidential I-told-you-so victory lap. “Andrew Cuomo’s even worse at running elections than he is at managing nursing homes. Sad!”
But there are countervailing considerations here.
It’s been clear for months that Trump’s crusade against voting by mail has enormous backfire potential for him and the GOP. He’s not scaring Democrats away from mail ballots by ranting about them every day, he’s scaring his own party. GOP state and national officials have pleaded with him publicly and privately to back off, fearing that the party will be at an insurmountable disadvantage on Election Day if circumstances arise that make it difficult to vote in person, whether weather-related or COVID-related. If Republicans are waiting until the day of to cast their ballots, and we end up in the middle of a ferocious coronavirus second wave on November 3, many GOPers might feel they have no choice but to protect themselves by staying home. Meanwhile, many (if not most) Democrats will have already voted by mail. Result: A total wipeout nationally.
Trump has to back off and start bringing Republicans around to voting by mail, using whatever lame face-saving excuse he prefers. Today he finally did — in one state.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1290692768675901440
Why’d he choose Florida specifically? It’s not that their system is so much safer than anyone else’s. It’s strategic:
1. The margin of victory is always small there, so every vote counts.
2. There are a disproportionate number of senior citizens, who may be even more inclined to stay home instead of voting in person on Election Day due to the health risks from COVID.
3. Florida is currently the site of one of the worst outbreaks in the country, bad enough to have forced Trump to cancel the Jacksonville component of the GOP convention. Hopefully the outbreak will dwindle the same way New York’s eventually did, but there’s a nonzero chance that it continues at its current rate, or worse, until November.
4. Lefty Brian Beutler’s right that the whole election probably comes down to Florida, as usual:
1) Florida is fast at counting mail ballots. 2) Florida is filled with seniors. 3) If Trump discourages Republicans from voting absentee there during a pandemic, Biden wins the state, and thus the whole election, ON ELECTION NIGHT. 4) Ergo, the below tweet. https://t.co/Uben7QTbs8 — Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) August 4, 2020
There are other paths to victory for Biden (a clean sweep in the Rust Belt, or Arizona plus Michigan and Pennsylvania) but Beutler’s correct that if Biden has enough of a margin for Florida to be called on election night, it’ll blow up Trump’s plan to point to the mail-in votes counted in the days after November 3 as evidence that Biden cheated to win. He has no path to a second term without FL. At a minimum, he needs to be ahead in the state once the day-of votes are counted on Election Day to have any remotely credible claim that he “really” won the election.
5. Not coincidentally, Politico had a story out this morning about just how badly Trump’s criticism of mail-in voting is hurting the GOP. The main focus of the story? Florida, of course.
New private polling shared first with POLITICO showed that Republicans have become overwhelmingly concerned about mail balloting, which Trump has claimed without evidence, will lead to widespread voter fraud. A potentially decisive slice of Trump’s battleground-state base — 15 percent of Trump voters in Florida, 12 percent in Pennsylvania and 10 percent in Michigan — said that getting a ballot in the mail would make them less likely to vote in November… Overall, 53 percent of voters in Florida and about half in Michigan and Pennsylvania expressed health concerns about casting their ballots in person and prefer voting by mail in November… In Florida, 302,000 more Democrats have enrolled in the state’s vote-by-mail program than Republicans.
He’s literally talking his own fans into boycotting the election. On top of that, Trump voters skew older than Biden voters, which means they’re more apt to get cold feet at the last minute about in-person voting in the middle of a COVID second wave. WaPo reports that even RNC chair Ronna McDaniel has taken to begging Trump to “present a more nuanced message” on when voting by mail is and isn’t okay. There does seem to be a lot of confusion about that, if not outright rejectionism of mail ballots after months of Trump messaging:
Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill, describing a recent meeting with a group of Republican voters in Fort Payne, said he felt compelled to explain that there is only one kind of mail-in voting in Alabama, and that it is safe and secure. “They were confused about two different kinds of mail-in balloting,” he said, “where one is ‘good’ and one is not.”… “It is a problem,” said one Republican strategist in North Carolina. “The president has oversimplified the issue to criticize the method of voting, rather than the way it’s done. The details matter.”
One North Carolina Republican official posted a plea on Facebook encouraging people to take advantage of the absentee ballots mailed to them. Zombified MAGA fans replied with comments like “Burned it!” and “You know damn well that we are arguing against this, and here it is our own damn party sending this horse dung out?!!!” In Iowa, the Republican-controlled legislature barred the secretary of state from sending out applications for mail-in ballots statewide — only to find local officials in Democratic-controlled counties mailing them out instead. That’s a microcosm for the entire party’s dilemma right now: Republicans are only spiting themselves. Eventually the legislature backed off and allowed the state to proceed in hopes of equalizing GOPers’ access to ballots.
An easy prediction, then. Trump’s going to end up declaring that the systems in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, and North Carolina are also sufficiently “safe” that Republicans there have his blessing to vote by mail. All of those are key swing states, of course, and all of them allow for no-excuse “absentee” voting, which is indistinguishable from mail-in voting. Where Trump’s going to end up drawing the line, I assume, is at states automatically mailing ballot applications to people instead of forcing voters to jump through the hoop of requesting an application first. Mail-in voting is fine, he’ll decide, but we can’t have states sending out applications willy nilly, not knowing who might get hold of one or more of those applications and try to vote illegally. “Somebody got a ballot for a dog. Somebody got a ballot for something else. You got millions of ballots going. Nobody even knows where they’re going,” he told Axios. McDaniel’s already hammering that distinction today:
.@realDonaldTrump was right, and Axios was wrong about mail-in voting. The plan is for millions of ballots to automatically be mailed to voters in states like CA & NV. What’s worse, Democrats are suing to make that a reality in more states like MN & NM. (1/3) — Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) August 4, 2020
If there is chaos on Election Day, Democrats will only have themselves to blame! We are fighting back at https://t.co/tidEkbV9KS! (3/3) — Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) August 4, 2020
The wrinkle is that five states (Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington) already conduct elections entirely by mail, raising the question of whether Trump thinks the results in those states should be disqualified as presumptively unreliable or not. Since none of them are likely to be competitive, he probably doesn’t care.
Hopefully most Americans will avert an election-night uproar over mail-in voting by choosing to vote in-person early instead. Normally I loathe early voting since sometimes events occur between the time a ballot is cast and Election Day that might have changed some voters’ minds, but it may be the least bad option this year. Exit question: Didn’t Trump say a few days ago that we need to know who won the election on Election Day itself in order to have confidence in the outcome? What’s left of that message now that he’s backing mail-in voting in Florida?


hotair--2020-08-04--Just FYI... in Colorado, vandalizing an MLK statue is a hate crime

Last week , in Pueblo Colorado , someone went onto the property of the Friendly Harbor Community Center and dumped paint on a statue of the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. and Emmett Till .
There were also racist bits of graffiti in support of the KKK painted on the sidewalk in the immediate area .
Fortunately , neither statue was torn down or suffered significant physical damage as we ’ ve seen in so many other recent incidents .
Also , members of the community joined together the next day to assist in removing the graffiti and restoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ None of that alters the fact that the vandalism took place .
But one response from local officials does highlight the differences we see in how various attacks and acts of unrest and destruction are handled in these very uncertain times .
Officials immediately announced that an investigation was underway and the incident was being looked at as a possible hate crime .
( CBS Denver ) A hate crime investigation is underway in Colorado after someone vandalized a statue of Martin Luther King , Jr. and Emmett Till .
It stands outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grand Avenue in Pueblo .
“ KKK ” was also painted on the sidewalk and pillars on the building ’ s exterior sometime Wednesday night or Thursday morning .
The director of the center said police were out canvassing the neighborhood Thursday night .
The statue and the land it sits upon are public property .
As such , whoever committed this attack needs to be identified and brought to justice .
While that ’ s going on , however , we should take the opportunity to yet again pause and consider precisely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a “ hate crime ” in America these days .
Regular readers are likely already aware of my less than glowing assessment of the entire idea of hate crimes .
All acts of vandalism are already illegal and treated as property crimes .
Putting additional resources into the investigation and giving the perpetrators harsher sentences based on what they were thinking at the time makes these thought crimes , which really shouldn ’ t be anywhere in our legal codes if we supposedly value equal justice under the law for all .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ courts have largely gone along with this worrisome trend so we ’ re left dealing with hate crimes when they crop up , as was clearly the case in Pueblo last week .
With all of this as a prelude , let ’ s consider some other recent “ property crimes ” that bear certain similarities to this one .
What of the case where a statue of Christopher Columbus was torn down in Baltimore last month ?
.
( There were several of these , actually . )
What were the people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ property thinking at the time ?
Did they simply not care for the depiction of the explorer or the materials used in its creation ?
Perhaps there were some crazed Columbus fans there who thought the nose was too large .
No .
Obviously they hated what Columbus symbolized as a “ colonialist ” and the impact his discoveries had on Indigenous Peoples .
( Never mind the fact that Columbus never set foot on North American soil , which is an argument we can save for another day . )
How about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ destroyed by rioters in Portland ?
Was the angry mob simply upset that the statue was blocking their view of the park ?
Were they huge fans of apple trees ?
Again , no .
They were clearly demonstrating their hatred of what Washington represents and the fact that he was a slave owner in a time when that was unfortunately not only legal in our country but ended up being baked into the constitution .
He wasn ’ t just a slave owner , either .
He was a White slave owner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place in those instances as well ?
It ’ s bad enough to that we have to go along with these ideas of thought crimes being prosecutable in the first place , but if we must have them , shouldn ’ t they be applied consistently ?
Apparently not .
While slavery is evil and it remains a dark chapter in our history , it was a part of the world those people grew up in .
And even though they ’ ve been dead for centuries , you ’ re still allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same goes for the leaders of the confederacy .
But if hate is the factor driving you to commit any sort of property crime , you ’ ve done the same thing as the people who desecrate monuments to protected classes .
Do I expect this to change ?
Not in the least .
But we ’ ve navigated a course over the history of our country where we ’ ve migrated from one form of inequality to another , even if you find the modern version more palatable .
Just something to @ @ @ @ @

Last week, in Pueblo Colorado, someone went onto the property of the Friendly Harbor Community Center and dumped paint on a statue of the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. and Emmett Till. There were also racist bits of graffiti in support of the KKK painted on the sidewalk in the immediate area. Fortunately, neither statue was torn down or suffered significant physical damage as we’ve seen in so many other recent incidents. Also, members of the community joined together the next day to assist in removing the graffiti and restoring the monument to its previous condition.
None of that alters the fact that the vandalism took place. But one response from local officials does highlight the differences we see in how various attacks and acts of unrest and destruction are handled in these very uncertain times. Officials immediately announced that an investigation was underway and the incident was being looked at as a possible hate crime. (CBS Denver)
A hate crime investigation is underway in Colorado after someone vandalized a statue of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Emmett Till. It stands outside the Friendly Harbor Community Center on North Grand Avenue in Pueblo. “KKK” was also painted on the sidewalk and pillars on the building’s exterior sometime Wednesday night or Thursday morning. The director of the center said police were out canvassing the neighborhood Thursday night.
The statue and the land it sits upon are public property. As such, whoever committed this attack needs to be identified and brought to justice. While that’s going on, however, we should take the opportunity to yet again pause and consider precisely what does or doesn’t qualify as a “hate crime” in America these days.
Regular readers are likely already aware of my less than glowing assessment of the entire idea of hate crimes. All acts of vandalism are already illegal and treated as property crimes. Putting additional resources into the investigation and giving the perpetrators harsher sentences based on what they were thinking at the time makes these thought crimes, which really shouldn’t be anywhere in our legal codes if we supposedly value equal justice under the law for all.
But for better or worse, the courts have largely gone along with this worrisome trend so we’re left dealing with hate crimes when they crop up, as was clearly the case in Pueblo last week. With all of this as a prelude, let’s consider some other recent “property crimes” that bear certain similarities to this one.
What of the case where a statue of Christopher Columbus was torn down in Baltimore last month?. (There were several of these, actually.) What were the people committing this act of destruction of public property thinking at the time? Did they simply not care for the depiction of the explorer or the materials used in its creation? Perhaps there were some crazed Columbus fans there who thought the nose was too large. No. Obviously they hated what Columbus symbolized as a “colonialist” and the impact his discoveries had on Indigenous Peoples. (Never mind the fact that Columbus never set foot on North American soil, which is an argument we can save for another day.)
How about the statue of George Washington that was destroyed by rioters in Portland? Was the angry mob simply upset that the statue was blocking their view of the park? Were they huge fans of apple trees? Again, no. They were clearly demonstrating their hatred of what Washington represents and the fact that he was a slave owner in a time when that was unfortunately not only legal in our country but ended up being baked into the constitution. He wasn’t just a slave owner, either. He was a White slave owner.
Were there not thought crimes taking place in those instances as well? It’s bad enough to that we have to go along with these ideas of thought crimes being prosecutable in the first place, but if we must have them, shouldn’t they be applied consistently? Apparently not. While slavery is evil and it remains a dark chapter in our history, it was a part of the world those people grew up in. And even though they’ve been dead for centuries, you’re still allowed to hate them without penalty. The same goes for the leaders of the confederacy.
But if hate is the factor driving you to commit any sort of property crime, you’ve done the same thing as the people who desecrate monuments to protected classes. Do I expect this to change? Not in the least. But we’ve navigated a course over the history of our country where we’ve migrated from one form of inequality to another, even if you find the modern version more palatable. Just something to mull over this evening.


hotair--2020-08-04--Live results: The Kansas GOP Senate primary and bitter recriminations threa

Live results: The Kansas GOP Senate primary and bitter recriminations thread

Most of the background you need on the race and why it ’ s being watched so closely can be found in this post from last night .
Establishment Republicans fear that populist candidate Kris Kobach is unelectable even with Trump at the top of the ballot this fall , as he ’ s lost statewide to a Democrat before and has benefited this summer from ads run by a Democratic-linked Super PAC .
Populist Republicans fear that establishment candidate Roger Marshall will score an undeserving victory , propped up by money from the NRSC and Mitch McConnell ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ border hawk Kobach out of the Senate .
Polls show a tight race .
Whichever side loses will be ticked off in the extreme .
If it ’ s Kobach , populists will shake their fists at the NRSC : “ Sons of bitches .
You put a thumb on the scale for Marshall because you know he ’ s a robot who ’ ll do anything McConnell tells him .
The establishment bought the nomination .
You ’ ll pay for this.
” If it ’ s Marshall , establishmentarians will shake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of bitches .
You probably just cost us the Senate .
We could have had an easy win in a red state and now we ’ ll have to spend money there trying to drag Kobach over the finish line .
Democrats bought the nomination .
You ’ ll pay for this.
” As a bonus , the losing side will also be pissed at Trump .
Kobach fans will conclude that he betrayed his populist base by refusing to endorse an acolyte who shares his views on immigration .
Marshall supporters will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority by refusing to endorse a more electable candidate .
Consider it a sneak preview of the months-long melee that will engulf the entire GOP next year if Trump wipes out in November and the party has to find a way forward without him .
Are the idiot Never Trumpers to blame for the party ’ s failures by refusing to rally to Trump ’ s side because they ’ re bitter that old-school conservatism is passe ?
Or are the idiot Trumpers to blame for the party ’ s failures by having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was always manifestly unfit for office ?
Do we need Tea Party 2.0 or do we need Trumpism Minus Trump ?
It ’ ll be real .
Polls close at 8 p.m .
ET .
Here ’ s the Decision Desk HQ where live results will be posted as they happen .
As further reading on why Kobach is a bad bet , read this scathing Dan McLaughlin piece subtly entitled “ Kris Kobach Is an Incompetent Loser Who Loses , and That Is Why Democrats Want Him.
” I knew that Kobach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we say , “ checkered ” for a populist Republican running in a reliably red state but I had forgotten all the humiliations he ’ s had in court and beyond trying to defend the policies he ’ s supported .
McLaughlin didn ’ t .

Most of the background you need on the race and why it’s being watched so closely can be found in this post from last night. Establishment Republicans fear that populist candidate Kris Kobach is unelectable even with Trump at the top of the ballot this fall, as he’s lost statewide to a Democrat before and has benefited this summer from ads run by a Democratic-linked Super PAC. Populist Republicans fear that establishment candidate Roger Marshall will score an undeserving victory, propped up by money from the NRSC and Mitch McConnell’s allies in a desperate play to keep border hawk Kobach out of the Senate.
Polls show a tight race. Whichever side loses will be ticked off in the extreme. If it’s Kobach, populists will shake their fists at the NRSC: “Sons of bitches. You put a thumb on the scale for Marshall because you know he’s a robot who’ll do anything McConnell tells him. The establishment bought the nomination. You’ll pay for this.”
If it’s Marshall, establishmentarians will shake their fists at populists: “Sons of bitches. You probably just cost us the Senate. We could have had an easy win in a red state and now we’ll have to spend money there trying to drag Kobach over the finish line. Democrats bought the nomination. You’ll pay for this.”
As a bonus, the losing side will also be pissed at Trump. Kobach fans will conclude that he betrayed his populist base by refusing to endorse an acolyte who shares his views on immigration. Marshall supporters will conclude that he farted away the Senate majority by refusing to endorse a more electable candidate.
Consider it a sneak preview of the months-long melee that will engulf the entire GOP next year if Trump wipes out in November and the party has to find a way forward without him. Are the idiot Never Trumpers to blame for the party’s failures by refusing to rally to Trump’s side because they’re bitter that old-school conservatism is passe? Or are the idiot Trumpers to blame for the party’s failures by having stuck so stubbornly to a candidate who was always manifestly unfit for office? Do we need Tea Party 2.0 or do we need Trumpism Minus Trump? It’ll be real.
Polls close at 8 p.m. ET. Here’s the Decision Desk HQ where live results will be posted as they happen. As further reading on why Kobach is a bad bet, read this scathing Dan McLaughlin piece subtly entitled “Kris Kobach Is an Incompetent Loser Who Loses, and That Is Why Democrats Want Him.” I knew that Kobach’s electoral history was, shall we say, “checkered” for a populist Republican running in a reliably red state but I had forgotten all the humiliations he’s had in court and beyond trying to defend the policies he’s supported. McLaughlin didn’t.


hotair--2020-08-04--Some worried Democrats are unhappy with Joe Biden hiding in his basement

The only consistent strategy we ’ ve seen out of Team Biden this summer seems to be a plan to keep him in his basement for as long as possible , not have him answer too many questions , and by all means , do not debate Donald Trump .
While sort of painfully obvious and embarrassing , you can understand why they might want to stick to that plan given some of Joe ’ s “ uneven ” performances so far ( to put it kindly ) .
But not everyone is happy about it .
There are Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get some excitement ramped up in the hopes that it will have helpful effects further down the ballot .
The Washington Post looks at a couple of people in this category this week , including one state representative from Pennsylvania .
In the states that will likely decide the presidential election , President Trump is everywhere .
Discussion of his presidency and the actions of his administration — often critical — fill social media feeds , newscasts , letters-to-the-editor pages and socially distanced end-of-the-driveway conversations .
For months , his campaign ads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ signs and flags hung on barns , boats and retirement community golf carts .
That has not necessarily helped Trump , who trails former vice president Joe Biden in almost all key states .
Yet to some of Biden ’ s supporters , Trump ’ s continuing dominance is a warning sign .
They are lobbying for Biden to take a more aggressive stance , worried that despite his seeming advantage he has failed so far to persuade people to vote for him — not simply against Trump .
“ I want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another excited for this race , ” said Pennsylvania state Rep. Ryan Bizzarro ( D ) , whose Erie County district split its vote in 2016 , siding with him and Trump .
“ I want some more movement up here ; I want a presence up here .
I think that ’ s really needed .
It ’ s needed now more than ever.
” These complaints seem to be largely coming from Michigan , Ohio , Pennsylvania and Florida , all states that Biden badly needs but Trump snagged in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safely get Biden to travel to see them in person , they would like more targeted “ virtual ” town halls and meetings to drive up the Democrats ’ level of support , both for himself and the local candidates .
But by all reports , they ’ re not getting it .
Is anyone really surprised ?
Biden barely does any remote interviews with major networks .
He seems to leave his home under only the direst circumstances and most of what we hear from him comes in the form of prerecorded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a teleprompter and have unlimited takes while filming .
Their entire strategy seems to be one of hoping that Donald Trump will sink his own ship and let Joe coast across the finish line with the least risk of blowing it .
The state and local Democrats pushing for more from Biden may be exhibiting some behavior that ’ s both selfish and potentially foolish .
First of all , Biden is probably in one of the highest-risk categories you can name in terms of COVID-19 .
If they send him out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winds up getting exposed despite all the precautions they would take , his odds of making it to election day are probably worse than your average person ’ s .
And putting someone else on the ballot at that late stage would be a logistical nightmare for his party .
But even if everything was fine and dandy on the pandemic front , do they really want Biden out there campaigning ?
Before he was locked down for the pandemic we all watched one incident after another where he seemed to either forget @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what he ’ d been saying only a moment before .
This phenomenon seemed to be even worse in the evening .
Can you imagine him doing that on the stump with all of the cameras rolling ?
Or worse , on the debate stage facing off with Trump ?
Biden is likely to remain in hiding for as long as he can possibly get away with it .
And if there ’ s any way his team can justify canceling the debates , you know that ’ s the path they will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether or not President Trump can rally and make his way across the finish line against a virtually invisible and silent opponent whose only signature issue is not being Donald Trump .

The only consistent strategy we’ve seen out of Team Biden this summer seems to be a plan to keep him in his basement for as long as possible, not have him answer too many questions, and by all means, do not debate Donald Trump. While sort of painfully obvious and embarrassing, you can understand why they might want to stick to that plan given some of Joe’s “uneven” performances so far (to put it kindly). But not everyone is happy about it. There are Democrats out there who are feeling the pressure to get some excitement ramped up in the hopes that it will have helpful effects further down the ballot. The Washington Post looks at a couple of people in this category this week, including one state representative from Pennsylvania.
In the states that will likely decide the presidential election, President Trump is everywhere. Discussion of his presidency and the actions of his administration — often critical — fill social media feeds, newscasts, letters-to-the-editor pages and socially distanced end-of-the-driveway conversations. For months, his campaign ads dominated the airwaves. His name decorates signs and flags hung on barns, boats and retirement community golf carts. That has not necessarily helped Trump, who trails former vice president Joe Biden in almost all key states. Yet to some of Biden’s supporters, Trump’s continuing dominance is a warning sign. They are lobbying for Biden to take a more aggressive stance, worried that despite his seeming advantage he has failed so far to persuade people to vote for him — not simply against Trump. “I want to see Democrats doing more to get one another excited for this race,” said Pennsylvania state Rep. Ryan Bizzarro (D), whose Erie County district split its vote in 2016, siding with him and Trump. “I want some more movement up here; I want a presence up here. I think that’s really needed. It’s needed now more than ever.”
These complaints seem to be largely coming from Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, all states that Biden badly needs but Trump snagged in 2016. Even if they can’t safely get Biden to travel to see them in person, they would like more targeted “virtual” town halls and meetings to drive up the Democrats’ level of support, both for himself and the local candidates. But by all reports, they’re not getting it.
Is anyone really surprised? Biden barely does any remote interviews with major networks. He seems to leave his home under only the direst circumstances and most of what we hear from him comes in the form of prerecorded video announcements where he can read off of a teleprompter and have unlimited takes while filming. Their entire strategy seems to be one of hoping that Donald Trump will sink his own ship and let Joe coast across the finish line with the least risk of blowing it.
The state and local Democrats pushing for more from Biden may be exhibiting some behavior that’s both selfish and potentially foolish. First of all, Biden is probably in one of the highest-risk categories you can name in terms of COVID-19. If they send him out on the trail too much and he winds up getting exposed despite all the precautions they would take, his odds of making it to election day are probably worse than your average person’s. And putting someone else on the ballot at that late stage would be a logistical nightmare for his party.
But even if everything was fine and dandy on the pandemic front, do they really want Biden out there campaigning? Before he was locked down for the pandemic we all watched one incident after another where he seemed to either forget where he was or struggle to remember what he’d been saying only a moment before. This phenomenon seemed to be even worse in the evening. Can you imagine him doing that on the stump with all of the cameras rolling? Or worse, on the debate stage facing off with Trump?
Biden is likely to remain in hiding for as long as he can possibly get away with it. And if there’s any way his team can justify canceling the debates, you know that’s the path they will choose. The only remaining question is whether or not President Trump can rally and make his way across the finish line against a virtually invisible and silent opponent whose only signature issue is not being Donald Trump.


hotair--2020-08-04--Axios: Don't look now, but Trump and RNC are winning on voter registrations

Just how much as the RNC and the Trump campaign improved its get-out-the-vote operations in four years ?
In the 2016 cycle , the RNC had to do most of the heavy lifting on both data and groundwork , as Team Trump focused more on rallies and earned media .
Hillary Clinton essentially bailed out both by being perhaps the worst major-party candidate in recent memory at GOTV , losing hundreds of thousands of votes in battleground states from Barack Obama ’ s 2012 totals and allowing Donald Trump to steal Wisconsin and Michigan out from under her without any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did boost turnout in Pennsylvania , where his campaign did do some energetic GOTV , but only modestly .
This time around , Joe Biden ’ s campaign can ’ t be counted upon to fumble turnout as badly , perhaps especially in this environment .
It will take a more concerted effort by the Trump/RNC combined campaign to contend in the battleground states .
And this time , Axios reports , they ’ ve put together a much more assertive effort — but will it be enough ?
The Trump campaign and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the 2020 cycle , more than doubling their numbers from 2016 and shrinking Democrats ’ registration advantage in key swing states , according to new Trump Victory data provided exclusively to Axios .
Why it matters : Democrats still have more active registered voters in Pennsylvania , North Carolina and Florida , but Republicans have managed to narrow the margins in those states by tens of thousands of voters since 2016 .
The efforts targeted the key states , and not just the Blue Wall where Trump won in 2016 .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to shore up the Red Wall , too : Republicans have lessened the margin by 133,000 registered voters in Pennsylvania and 87,000 voters in Florida .
Republicans have also chipped away at Democrats ’ advantage in the tossup state of North Carolina — gaining a net 216,410 voters since Election Day 2016 .
… In Iowa , the number of registered Democratic voters surpassed Republicans in March , but Republicans recently took back the advantage .
Democrats had been outpacing Republicans in Arizona as well — but since April , Republicans have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news indeed , but it ’ s also only half the story .
Registration wins only count if the new voters end up casting ballots .
With many states pressing forward with mail-in balloting , that part of GOTV gets incredibly complicated .
And with Donald Trump putting up a hard fight against the mail-in systems , it might discourage voters from participating — or so the Washington Post warns : President Trump ’ s unfounded attacks on mail balloting are discouraging his own supporters from embracing the practice , according to polls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prompting growing alarm that one of the central strategies of his campaign is threatening GOP prospects in November .
Multiple public surveys show a growing divide between Democrats and Republicans about the security of voting by mail , with Republicans saying they are far less likely to trust it in November .
In addition , party leaders in several states said they are encountering resistance among GOP voters who are being encouraged to vote absentee while also seeing the president describe mail voting as “ rigged ” and “ fraudulent.
” As a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country fear they are falling dramatically behind in a practice that is expected to be key to voter turnout this year .
Through mailers and Facebook ads , they are racing to promote absentee balloting among their own .
Trump ’ s attacks on mass mail balloting are not entirely “ unfounded , ” even he ’ s primarily using a weaker argument about potential fraud .
The better argument is undue complexity and multiple points of failure , which experience has proven in primaries held in New York , California , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rates of 3 % or higher in states where the eventual margin of victory can be expected to be 2 % or lower will create all sorts of credibility issues for the results , not to mention endless legal challenges and interventions that could derail an efficient transition of power .
It ’ s beyond obtuse to pretend that these problems don ’ t exist , even in absentee balloting , which is why states traditionally limit that process to necessity only .
Still , the argument against mass mail-in ballots — valid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ depressing Republican turnout in the end .
If states decide to proceed with mass mail-in voting , then the registration advantage might dissipate .
Republicans had better come up with a Plan B on GOTV , and soon .

Just how much as the RNC and the Trump campaign improved its get-out-the-vote operations in four years? In the 2016 cycle, the RNC had to do most of the heavy lifting on both data and groundwork, as Team Trump focused more on rallies and earned media. Hillary Clinton essentially bailed out both by being perhaps the worst major-party candidate in recent memory at GOTV, losing hundreds of thousands of votes in battleground states from Barack Obama’s 2012 totals and allowing Donald Trump to steal Wisconsin and Michigan out from under her without any real increase in Republican turnout. Trump did boost turnout in Pennsylvania, where his campaign did do some energetic GOTV, but only modestly.
This time around, Joe Biden’s campaign can’t be counted upon to fumble turnout as badly, perhaps especially in this environment. It will take a more concerted effort by the Trump/RNC combined campaign to contend in the battleground states. And this time, Axios reports, they’ve put together a much more assertive effort — but will it be enough?
The Trump campaign and RNC have now registered 100,000 new voters in the 2020 cycle, more than doubling their numbers from 2016 and shrinking Democrats’ registration advantage in key swing states, according to new Trump Victory data provided exclusively to Axios. Why it matters: Democrats still have more active registered voters in Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Florida, but Republicans have managed to narrow the margins in those states by tens of thousands of voters since 2016.
The efforts targeted the key states, and not just the Blue Wall where Trump won in 2016. To a large extent, they’re trying to shore up the Red Wall, too:
Republicans have lessened the margin by 133,000 registered voters in Pennsylvania and 87,000 voters in Florida. Republicans have also chipped away at Democrats’ advantage in the tossup state of North Carolina — gaining a net 216,410 voters since Election Day 2016. … In Iowa, the number of registered Democratic voters surpassed Republicans in March, but Republicans recently took back the advantage. Democrats had been outpacing Republicans in Arizona as well — but since April, Republicans have overtaken them.
That is very good news indeed, but it’s also only half the story. Registration wins only count if the new voters end up casting ballots. With many states pressing forward with mail-in balloting, that part of GOTV gets incredibly complicated. And with Donald Trump putting up a hard fight against the mail-in systems, it might discourage voters from participating — or so the Washington Post warns:
President Trump’s unfounded attacks on mail balloting are discouraging his own supporters from embracing the practice, according to polls and Republican leaders across the country, prompting growing alarm that one of the central strategies of his campaign is threatening GOP prospects in November. Multiple public surveys show a growing divide between Democrats and Republicans about the security of voting by mail, with Republicans saying they are far less likely to trust it in November. In addition, party leaders in several states said they are encountering resistance among GOP voters who are being encouraged to vote absentee while also seeing the president describe mail voting as “rigged” and “fraudulent.” As a result, state and local Republicans across the country fear they are falling dramatically behind in a practice that is expected to be key to voter turnout this year. Through mailers and Facebook ads, they are racing to promote absentee balloting among their own.
Trump’s attacks on mass mail balloting are not entirely “unfounded,” even he’s primarily using a weaker argument about potential fraud. The better argument is undue complexity and multiple points of failure, which experience has proven in primaries held in New York, California, and Florida this year already. Failure rates of 3% or higher in states where the eventual margin of victory can be expected to be 2% or lower will create all sorts of credibility issues for the results, not to mention endless legal challenges and interventions that could derail an efficient transition of power. It’s beyond obtuse to pretend that these problems don’t exist, even in absentee balloting, which is why states traditionally limit that process to necessity only.
Still, the argument against mass mail-in ballots — valid as it is — might end up depressing Republican turnout in the end. If states decide to proceed with mass mail-in voting, then the registration advantage might dissipate. Republicans had better come up with a Plan B on GOTV, and soon.


hotair--2020-08-04--CNN political analyst "can't wait" to see armed forces eject Trump from White House

April Ryan allowed her personal fantasies to get the better of her as she weighed in on the upcoming presidential election .
On CNN , Ryan , one of the cable news network ’ s political analysts predicted that if President Trump loses the election , he will refuse to leave the White House .
She sees a split-screen scenario in the future .
She isn ’ t alone in this particular fantasy .
Several politicians and public figures have voiced the same scenario .
Others in the media have spouted the same nonsense .
The theory is nothing new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media made similar predictions in 2019 when the Mueller probe didn ’ t force Trump out of office .
MSNBC ’ s Joy Reid speculated last year that Trump “ doesn ’ t have any intention of committing to a peaceful transition of power , ” while CNN ’ s editor-at-large Chris Cillizza was once ridiculed for tweeting a link to a fictional column he wrote about what would happen if Trump “ refuses to admit ” he loses in 2020 .
The conversation included the Grand Poobah of the Never Trumpers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ryan pontificated .
He ’ s busy conserving conservatism , you know .
The CNN host was asking about Trump ’ s concerns about election integrity when Ryan took the opportunity to say , “ This president has already used mail-in voting hisself.
” ( Yes , she said “ hisself ” ) But Trump used absentee voting , not mail-in voting .
That ’ s a critical distinction , as Ryan well knows , or at least she should know .
To vote with an absentee ballot , the voter must request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposing is that voters across the nation use mail-in ballots for the November election .
That means that ballots are mass-mailed out and all sorts of problems develop from that .
Dead people , pets , illegal immigrants , felons , all potentially would be mailed a ballot .
The probability for widespread fraud is there , whether Democrats want to admit it or not .
It ’ s part of their hope that the election is chaotic .
Look for more of this narrative – that Trump will have to be carried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accept a defeat gracefully – to continue and escalate as the election grows near .
This leads to another story about the potential for Trump to refuse to accept the election results .
A “ non-partisan ” group of 67 Democrats and Republicans came together to wargame the November election in June .
On Monday the group released their recommendations should the election be contested .
Transition Integrity Project , a bipartisan group of political operatives , former government officials , and academics met four times and gamed out possible scenarios of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bi-partisan makeup of the group .
A left-wing partisan , Rosa Brooks , whose resume includes serving as special counsel in George Soros ’ s foundation , leads the group .
She held two positions in the Obama administration and was a frequent critic of George W. Bush during his administration , often using Hitler references .
The Republicans in the group are all described as “ Never Trump ” Republicans .
The group released a report with recommendations on how local officials and others should be moving forward in preparation for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the expectation that Biden will win is strong .
“ We assess with a high degree of likelihood that November ’ s elections will be marked by a chaotic legal and political landscape , ” the group wrote in a 22-page report .
“ We also assess that President Trump is likely to contest the result by both legal and extra-legal means , in an attempt to hold onto power.
” With Democrats playing Democrats and Republicans playing Republicans , they used the game to play out four Election Day scenarios — a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a bigger margin , a Trump victory in which Biden wins the popular vote , and an election that is too close to call for weeks .
The scenarios followed chaotic twists and turns that stretched political norms to the breaking point , resulting in massive street protests and , in some cases , constitutional crises .
“ The purpose of this report is not to frighten , but to spur all stakeholders to action , ” the report said .
“ Our legal rules and political norms don ’ t work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to speak out when others violate them.
” The report expresses a fear that the bad Orange Man doesn ’ t respect norms and can use his incumbency to his advantage .
They want everyone to prepare for a street fight , not a legal one , you see .
Yet , if I remember correctly , it was Democrats – Hillary supporters and Never Trump Republicans – who took to the streets after her defeat and continue to refuse to accept the 2016 election results .
Projection , much ?
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lots of responsibility placed on their cohorts in the media to “ prepare the public ” .
The group urged the media to prepare the public for the idea that a long period of ballot-counting should not cast doubt on the final election results , given that some states have expanded access to mail-in ballots due to the coronavirus .
Mail-in ballots , which Trump has railed against , take longer to count , and results may be delayed past Election Night .
The report and participants in the games have urged officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and legislative leaders — especially in swing states with divided government — to consider the choices they might have to make in a contested election .
“ They can sit down now , before the election , and agree on how they are going to adjudicate potential contestation , ” said Gilman .
“ I think that can head off a great deal of mischief.
” The report urged congressional leaders to conduct oversight hearings around the election and to set clear expectations and urged military and law enforcement leaders to be “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will seek to manipulate or misuse their coercive powers for inappropriate political ends.
” It also urged political leaders and the media to push back against unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud by Trump , who has repeatedly and baselessly questioned the legitimacy of mail-in ballots .
It also urged civil servants and government officials to anticipate a rocky administrative transition , no matter what happens .
The fact remains that Trump has said he ’ ll accept the election results either way if he wins or loses .
He rightly acknowledges his right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election as all candidates do .
That is not a nefarious thought to have .
Al Gore and Hillary Clinton both refused to concede as they questioned election results .
This is some level one projection coming from Democrats and Never Trumpers who are all working to get Joe Biden into the White House .

April Ryan allowed her personal fantasies to get the better of her as she weighed in on the upcoming presidential election. On CNN, Ryan, one of the cable news network’s political analysts predicted that if President Trump loses the election, he will refuse to leave the White House. She sees a split-screen scenario in the future.
“There’s going to be a split-screen on Jan. 20, 2021. If Joe Biden is now going to be the 46th president of the United States, you will have him being inaugurated and watching police and armed forces trying to pull Donald Trump out of the White House. I cannot wait for that split-screen,” Ryan said.
She isn’t alone in this particular fantasy. Several politicians and public figures have voiced the same scenario. Others in the media have spouted the same nonsense.
The theory is nothing new, as many members of the mainstream media made similar predictions in 2019 when the Mueller probe didn’t force Trump out of office. MSNBC’s Joy Reid speculated last year that Trump “doesn’t have any intention of committing to a peaceful transition of power,” while CNN’s editor-at-large Chris Cillizza was once ridiculed for tweeting a link to a fictional column he wrote about what would happen if Trump “refuses to admit” he loses in 2020.
The conversation included the Grand Poobah of the Never Trumpers, Bill Kristol, who remained mute as Ryan pontificated. He’s busy conserving conservatism, you know. The CNN host was asking about Trump’s concerns about election integrity when Ryan took the opportunity to say, “This president has already used mail-in voting hisself.” (Yes, she said “hisself”) But Trump used absentee voting, not mail-in voting. That’s a critical distinction, as Ryan well knows, or at least she should know. To vote with an absentee ballot, the voter must request that ballot. What the Democrats are proposing is that voters across the nation use mail-in ballots for the November election. That means that ballots are mass-mailed out and all sorts of problems develop from that. Dead people, pets, illegal immigrants, felons, all potentially would be mailed a ballot. The probability for widespread fraud is there, whether Democrats want to admit it or not. It’s part of their hope that the election is chaotic. Look for more of this narrative – that Trump will have to be carried out of the Oval Office rather than accept a defeat gracefully – to continue and escalate as the election grows near.
This leads to another story about the potential for Trump to refuse to accept the election results. A “non-partisan” group of 67 Democrats and Republicans came together to wargame the November election in June. On Monday the group released their recommendations should the election be contested. Transition Integrity Project, a bipartisan group of political operatives, former government officials, and academics met four times and gamed out possible scenarios of the election. Excuse my skepticism of the bi-partisan makeup of the group. A left-wing partisan, Rosa Brooks, whose resume includes serving as special counsel in George Soros’s foundation, leads the group. She held two positions in the Obama administration and was a frequent critic of George W. Bush during his administration, often using Hitler references. The Republicans in the group are all described as “Never Trump” Republicans.
The group released a report with recommendations on how local officials and others should be moving forward in preparation for the election results. It sure sounds like the expectation that Biden will win is strong.
“We assess with a high degree of likelihood that November’s elections will be marked by a chaotic legal and political landscape,” the group wrote in a 22-page report. “We also assess that President Trump is likely to contest the result by both legal and extra-legal means, in an attempt to hold onto power.” With Democrats playing Democrats and Republicans playing Republicans, they used the game to play out four Election Day scenarios — a narrow Biden win, a Biden victory with a bigger margin, a Trump victory in which Biden wins the popular vote, and an election that is too close to call for weeks. The scenarios followed chaotic twists and turns that stretched political norms to the breaking point, resulting in massive street protests and, in some cases, constitutional crises. “The purpose of this report is not to frighten, but to spur all stakeholders to action,” the report said. “Our legal rules and political norms don’t work unless people are prepared to defend them and to speak out when others violate them.”
The report expresses a fear that the bad Orange Man doesn’t respect norms and can use his incumbency to his advantage. They want everyone to prepare for a street fight, not a legal one, you see. Yet, if I remember correctly, it was Democrats – Hillary supporters and Never Trump Republicans – who took to the streets after her defeat and continue to refuse to accept the 2016 election results. Projection, much?
The recommendations are as you might expect – lots of responsibility placed on their cohorts in the media to “prepare the public”.
The group urged the media to prepare the public for the idea that a long period of ballot-counting should not cast doubt on the final election results, given that some states have expanded access to mail-in ballots due to the coronavirus. Mail-in ballots, which Trump has railed against, take longer to count, and results may be delayed past Election Night. The report and participants in the games have urged officials including governors, secretaries of state, and legislative leaders — especially in swing states with divided government — to consider the choices they might have to make in a contested election. “They can sit down now, before the election, and agree on how they are going to adjudicate potential contestation,” said Gilman. “I think that can head off a great deal of mischief.” The report urged congressional leaders to conduct oversight hearings around the election and to set clear expectations and urged military and law enforcement leaders to be “attuned to the possibility that partisan actors will seek to manipulate or misuse their coercive powers for inappropriate political ends.” It also urged political leaders and the media to push back against unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud by Trump, who has repeatedly and baselessly questioned the legitimacy of mail-in ballots. It also urged civil servants and government officials to anticipate a rocky administrative transition, no matter what happens.
The fact remains that Trump has said he’ll accept the election results either way if he wins or loses. He rightly acknowledges his right to question the results in a close election as all candidates do. That is not a nefarious thought to have. Al Gore and Hillary Clinton both refused to concede as they questioned election results. This is some level one projection coming from Democrats and Never Trumpers who are all working to get Joe Biden into the White House.


hotair--2020-08-04--Oh my: NYC health commissioner resigns -- and takes aim at de Blasio

This escalates a long-simmering feud between Bill de Blasio and New York City ’ s health department .
The mayor has tried to cut out and work around their expertise at times , which created a number of headaches for all involved .
Now the top executive at the department has abruptly resigned — and made sure everyone knows why : New York City ’ s health commissioner , Dr. Oxiris Barbot , resigned on Tuesday in protest over her “ deep disappointment ” with Mayor Bill de Blasio ’ s handling of the coronavirus outbreak and subsequent efforts to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came after escalating tensions between City Hall and top Health Department officials , which began at the start of the city ’ s outbreak in March , burst into public view .
“ I leave my post today with deep disappointment that during the most critical public health crisis in our lifetime , that the Health Department ’ s incomparable disease control expertise was not used to the degree it could have been , ” she said in her resignation email sent to Mr. de Blasio , a copy of which was shared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Our experts are world renowned for their epidemiology , surveillance and response work .
The city would be well served by having them at the strategic center of the response not in the background.
” De Blasio had moved contact tracing away from Barbot ’ s control , which apparently was the last straw : Barbot ’ s resignation comes after de Blasio stripped control of the city ’ s COVID-19 contact tracing program from the health department , which has historically handled tracing .
The mayor instead placed the program under Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city ’ s public hospitals .
In recent weeks , the city ’ s contract tracing program has come under fire after complaints from contact tracers about the program being disorganized and having poor working conditions .
Barbot also butted heads with NYPD Police Chief Terence Monahan when he asked for more face masks for his officers in March , according to the New York Post .
Following the incident , which was widely reported in the media , Barbot disappeared from public view for days — at the height of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The city ’ s performance hasn ’ t exactly covered the Big Apple in glory , but Barbot ’ s resignation punctures the narrative that de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo have tried to inflate over the last few weeks .
Both have insisted that New York and NYC have led the way in dealing with COVID-19 , a rather ridiculous assertion given the massive number of deaths , especially in nursing homes .
Reporters had finally started taking an interest in poking around that issue , and Barbot ’ s resignation makes it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ de Blasio trying to put a good face on it by claiming to be world-beaters at pandemic management : Note well that de Blasio never even mentions Barbot , let alone thank her for her contributions .
If NYC was really that good at managing the pandemic , then Barbot had to be one of the key people .
And if she ’ s not even worth mentioning in the same breath , then it makes de Blasio ’ s bloviating even more transparently nonsensical .
At some point , de Blasio is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Perhaps Barbot will have more to say — hopefully soon , too .

This escalates a long-simmering feud between Bill de Blasio and New York City’s health department. The mayor has tried to cut out and work around their expertise at times, which created a number of headaches for all involved. Now the top executive at the department has abruptly resigned — and made sure everyone knows why:
New York City’s health commissioner, Dr. Oxiris Barbot, resigned on Tuesday in protest over her “deep disappointment” with Mayor Bill de Blasio’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak and subsequent efforts to keep it in check. Her departure came after escalating tensions between City Hall and top Health Department officials, which began at the start of the city’s outbreak in March, burst into public view. “I leave my post today with deep disappointment that during the most critical public health crisis in our lifetime, that the Health Department’s incomparable disease control expertise was not used to the degree it could have been,” she said in her resignation email sent to Mr. de Blasio, a copy of which was shared with The New York Times. “Our experts are world renowned for their epidemiology, surveillance and response work. The city would be well served by having them at the strategic center of the response not in the background.”
De Blasio had moved contact tracing away from Barbot’s control, which apparently was the last straw:
Barbot’s resignation comes after de Blasio stripped control of the city’s COVID-19 contact tracing program from the health department, which has historically handled tracing. The mayor instead placed the program under Health and Hospitals, the agency that runs the city’s public hospitals. In recent weeks, the city’s contract tracing program has come under fire after complaints from contact tracers about the program being disorganized and having poor working conditions. Barbot also butted heads with NYPD Police Chief Terence Monahan when he asked for more face masks for his officers in March, according to the New York Post. Following the incident, which was widely reported in the media, Barbot disappeared from public view for days — at the height of the coronavirus outbreak in New York City.
The city’s performance hasn’t exactly covered the Big Apple in glory, but Barbot’s resignation punctures the narrative that de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo have tried to inflate over the last few weeks. Both have insisted that New York and NYC have led the way in dealing with COVID-19, a rather ridiculous assertion given the massive number of deaths, especially in nursing homes. Reporters had finally started taking an interest in poking around that issue, and Barbot’s resignation makes it even more acute.
Here’s de Blasio trying to put a good face on it by claiming to be world-beaters at pandemic management:
Note well that de Blasio never even mentions Barbot, let alone thank her for her contributions. If NYC was really that good at managing the pandemic, then Barbot had to be one of the key people. And if she’s not even worth mentioning in the same breath, then it makes de Blasio’s bloviating even more transparently nonsensical.
At some point, de Blasio is going to have to explain that conundrum. Perhaps Barbot will have more to say — hopefully soon, too.


hotair--2020-08-04--Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Media bias, protest and equal protection, sex in cinema, hist

Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Media bias, protest and equal protection, sex in cinema, history's forgotten, and more!

Once again , I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today !
The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air , as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows .
• A news roundup , along with your calls !
• Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew !
The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day .
• Do depictions of sexual intimacy in films cross @ @ @ @ @ @ @ O ’ Shea , president of the University of Mary , discusses this and its implications • What is the difference between painting protest slogans on the streets and chalking them ?
One of them gets you arrested in Washington DC .
Notre Dame professor Rick Garnett joins us to talk about that , plus Gavin Newsom ’ s orders to churches in California .
• History is filled with people who made a difference … but are rarely remembered nonetheless .
Salena Zito joins us to talk about those who disappear from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on .
• And more to come … stay tuned !
We may add more before the show starts today , plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour .
We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149 .
You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world , so download it now .
I ’ ll look forward to talking with you !

Once again, I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today! The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air, as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows.
Today’s Relevant Radio® show includes:
A news roundup, along with your calls!
Andrew Malcolm joins us for Tuesdays with Andrew! The Prince of Twitter and I will discuss all of the hot political stories of the day.
Do depictions of sexual intimacy in films cross the line into sin? Monsignor James O’Shea, president of the University of Mary, discusses this and its implications
What is the difference between painting protest slogans on the streets and chalking them? One of them gets you arrested in Washington DC. Notre Dame professor Rick Garnett joins us to talk about that, plus Gavin Newsom’s orders to churches in California.
History is filled with people who made a difference … but are rarely remembered nonetheless. Salena Zito joins us to talk about those who disappear from the pages, but whose contributions live on.
And more to come … stay tuned!
We may add more before the show starts today, plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour. We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149. You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world, so download it now. I’ll look forward to talking with you!


hotair--2020-08-04--Should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev be executed? Joe Biden won't say

After the news broke that convicted Boston Marathon bomber and mass murderer Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ’ s death sentence had been set aside , an immediate debate broke out about whether the feds should put him on trial again and take another run at helping the maniac shuffle off this mortal coil .
We didn ’ t have to wait long for President Trump to weigh in on the issue and he wasn ’ t in the least ambiguous about where he stands .
Not so for his presumptive opponent in November , however .
Joe Biden has had multiple opportunities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but has ducked the question every time .
And considering that it could potentially be his Department of Justice handling the matter if he wins in November , you might think it would be worth hearing his thoughts .
But the silence has been almost deafening .
( Free Beacon ) Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has been silent on the news that Boston Marathon bombing perpetrator Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will need a new trial in order to be executed—a trial Biden ’ s Justice Department would prosecute , if the Democrat is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s capital sentence has gone unmentioned by Biden ’ s campaign in press releases and on social media since Friday ’ s ruling .
The campaign also did not respond to inquiries from the Washington Free Beacon as to whether Biden would pursue the death penalty for Tsarnaev if elected .
The ruling and Tsarnaev ’ s crime also went unmentioned in Biden ’ s Sunday remarks on the anniversary of the El Paso Walmart shooting .
While I agree that Biden should have made his position on the question clear by now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t have that answer isn ’ t entirely his fault .
We have a press corps that seems to be content to let him hide out in his basement and issue campaign advertisements while in his bunker .
On the rare instances when he agrees to take any questions from reporters , he ’ s mostly hit with softballs and invited to talk about how terrible the Bad Orange Man is .
If anyone from the major newspapers and cable outlets were really interested in covering this situation , they could have pressed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing is , it appears that Biden ’ s handlers are seeking to avoid yet another example of Biden shifting all of his political beliefs to gratify the far left .
When Joe was in the Senate he was a supporter of the death penalty where applicable .
And he didn ’ t used to be shy about his feelings regarding the Boston Marathon bombers either .
In 2013 he described them as “ twisted , perverted , cowardly , knock-off jihadis.
” But now it ’ s 2020 , and Biden has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his old beliefs .
The death penalty has never been popular on the left and it ’ s even less so today .
So Uncle Joe has to move with the times and flip his positions to what his base wants to hear .
But if he comes out and takes a position on this question he ’ s going to undermine either the moderates he needs in the swing states or his base that has to drive what little enthusiasm exists for his candidacy .
This really shouldn ’ t be that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t simply morally opposed to capital punishment in any and all cases .
The idea that Tsarnaev is somehow not guilty or that we “ got the wrong guy ” is clearly laughable .
There ’ s simply too much evidence to be brushed aside over the worry that we might put an innocent person to death .
The change of venue request that Tsarnaev ’ s lawyers submitted doesn ’ t seem as if it would have made any difference in the outcome .
But that ’ s where things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to let the voters know how his Department of Justice will be handling the case if he ’ s sworn in as the next President .
But so far we ’ re only getting crickets .

After the news broke that convicted Boston Marathon bomber and mass murderer Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s death sentence had been set aside, an immediate debate broke out about whether the feds should put him on trial again and take another run at helping the maniac shuffle off this mortal coil. We didn’t have to wait long for President Trump to weigh in on the issue and he wasn’t in the least ambiguous about where he stands.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1290011585587666946
Not so for his presumptive opponent in November, however. Joe Biden has had multiple opportunities to offer his take on the subject, but has ducked the question every time. And considering that it could potentially be his Department of Justice handling the matter if he wins in November, you might think it would be worth hearing his thoughts. But the silence has been almost deafening. (Free Beacon)
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has been silent on the news that Boston Marathon bombing perpetrator Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will need a new trial in order to be executed—a trial Biden’s Justice Department would prosecute, if the Democrat is elected. The overturning of Tsarnaev’s capital sentence has gone unmentioned by Biden’s campaign in press releases and on social media since Friday’s ruling. The campaign also did not respond to inquiries from the Washington Free Beacon as to whether Biden would pursue the death penalty for Tsarnaev if elected. The ruling and Tsarnaev’s crime also went unmentioned in Biden’s Sunday remarks on the anniversary of the El Paso Walmart shooting.
While I agree that Biden should have made his position on the question clear by now, the fact that we don’t have that answer isn’t entirely his fault. We have a press corps that seems to be content to let him hide out in his basement and issue campaign advertisements while in his bunker. On the rare instances when he agrees to take any questions from reporters, he’s mostly hit with softballs and invited to talk about how terrible the Bad Orange Man is. If anyone from the major newspapers and cable outlets were really interested in covering this situation, they could have pressed his campaign for an answer.
The thing is, it appears that Biden’s handlers are seeking to avoid yet another example of Biden shifting all of his political beliefs to gratify the far left. When Joe was in the Senate he was a supporter of the death penalty where applicable. And he didn’t used to be shy about his feelings regarding the Boston Marathon bombers either. In 2013 he described them as “twisted, perverted, cowardly, knock-off jihadis.”
But now it’s 2020, and Biden has shifted very far to the left of his old beliefs. The death penalty has never been popular on the left and it’s even less so today. So Uncle Joe has to move with the times and flip his positions to what his base wants to hear. But if he comes out and takes a position on this question he’s going to undermine either the moderates he needs in the swing states or his base that has to drive what little enthusiasm exists for his candidacy.
This really shouldn’t be that hard of a call for anyone who isn’t simply morally opposed to capital punishment in any and all cases. The idea that Tsarnaev is somehow not guilty or that we “got the wrong guy” is clearly laughable. There’s simply too much evidence to be brushed aside over the worry that we might put an innocent person to death. The change of venue request that Tsarnaev’s lawyers submitted doesn’t seem as if it would have made any difference in the outcome. But that’s where things stand now, and Joe Biden needs to let the voters know how his Department of Justice will be handling the case if he’s sworn in as the next President. But so far we’re only getting crickets.