hotair--2020-05-24--ICE to migrant parents: You decide if your kids stay or not

The coronavirus pandemic is changing how the Trump administration handles illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border .
Citing a public health concern , the speed of returning children to their home countries has quickened .
A 1944 emergency public-health law is cited as justification for the changes .
So far , since the pandemic , over 900 children have been returned to their home countries .
The public-health law allows the government to turn back migrants at the border , including children , without taking them into custody or allowing them to file asylum claims .
The CDC backed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extension for 30 days was issued .
Now the extension has been put in place for the duration of the pandemic .
That means it is an indefinite extension since no one knows how long the pandemic will last – we may have another year of it or we may not .
The asylum issue is one that is separate from the non-essential travel restrictions at the Mexican and Canadian borders .
Those restrictions have only been extended for an additional 30 days .
The order allows for the deportation of unaccompanied children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This order has been one of the most critical tools the department has used to prevent the further spread of the virus and to protect the American people , ” acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf said in a written statement .
President Trump said in March he would use an emergency public-health law to temporarily block migrants ’ access to the U.S. asylum system at the southern border , saying migrants crossing the border illegally posed a public-health risk to border agents and local hospitals—and could spark an outbreak if kept in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our border agents encounter thousands of unscreened , unvetted and unauthorized entries from dozens of countries .
And we ’ ve had this problem for decades , ” he said .
“ With the national emergencies and all of the other things that we ’ ve declared , we can actually do something about it.
” Since the order was first issued in March , more than 20,000 illegal immigrants at the border have been turned back , though the flow of migrants has slowed as Latin American countries have issued their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their borders .
Some officials in the administration are pushing for the policy to remain in place until a vaccine is available in the U.S. and Latin America .
That will likely take more than a year .
As the order became effective for an indefinite period of time last week , the government is now asking parents to make the decision of whether or not to keep their children with them in detention centers or allow them to be released to a guardian .
A federal judge on April 24 instructed ICE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and safely release ” migrant children who are being held with their parents in ICE detention centers .
This is meant to help curb the exposure to COVID-19 in ICE jails .
The CBP Commissioner touts the effectiveness of the orders while some ICE officials admit to feeling caught between policies .
As you might expect , parents are choosing to keep their children with them , despite the risks of being infected with the coronavirus .
Last week in all three of ICE ’ s family detention centers , parents began being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children released and so far none have chosen that option .
Parents know they risk deportation while their children would remain in the United States with guardians .
The parents fear they would not be reunited with their children .
In the past several years , the Trump administration has weighed adopting this procedure inside family jails—a policy known as “ binary choice ” —but has mostly opted to release parents with their children , typically within about 20 days .
Lawyers representing immigrant families in detention said ICE ’ s new approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be released .
“ They knew that no family would agree to that , which is why they asked , ” said Bridget Cambria , a lawyer with the nonprofit firm Aldea—the People ’ s Justice Center , which represents families at a family detention center in Leesport , Pa .
The Trump administration argues that Central Americans see an incentive to bring their children as they migrate to the border because the Flores agreement requires children to be released within 20 days .
Typically , adults are released with the children .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents asking them to waive their rights under the Flores agreement in hopes of mitigating the spread of the coronavirus in family detention centers to children .
Immigration advocacy groups have sued the Trump administration since the pandemic outbreak over concerns of those being held in detention but so far there has not been a single report of coronavirus infections at the family detention centers .
One death has been reported at an adult detention center .
This would indicate there is no reason to release families on the pretense of mitigating the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crowd calls for , right ?
It would appear that the precautions in place are working to keep the families virus-free so far .
Meanwhile , an ICE spokesperson says the new form presented to parents is not the same as the binary choice form , though immigration lawyers argue that it is .
Most of the families have been in custody since last fall before the coronavirus pandemic entered the picture .
They are waiting for rulings in federal lawsuits against the Trump administration on asylum policies and procedures .
Since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration due to public health concerns .

The coronavirus pandemic is changing how the Trump administration handles illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border. Citing a public health concern, the speed of returning children to their home countries has quickened. A 1944 emergency public-health law is cited as justification for the changes. So far, since the pandemic, over 900 children have been returned to their home countries.
The public-health law allows the government to turn back migrants at the border, including children, without taking them into custody or allowing them to file asylum claims. The CDC backed the order in March and in April an extension for 30 days was issued. Now the extension has been put in place for the duration of the pandemic. That means it is an indefinite extension since no one knows how long the pandemic will last – we may have another year of it or we may not. The asylum issue is one that is separate from the non-essential travel restrictions at the Mexican and Canadian borders. Those restrictions have only been extended for an additional 30 days. The order allows for the deportation of unaccompanied children under the age of 18.
“This order has been one of the most critical tools the department has used to prevent the further spread of the virus and to protect the American people,” acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf said in a written statement. President Trump said in March he would use an emergency public-health law to temporarily block migrants’ access to the U.S. asylum system at the southern border, saying migrants crossing the border illegally posed a public-health risk to border agents and local hospitals—and could spark an outbreak if kept in border detention. “Every week, our border agents encounter thousands of unscreened, unvetted and unauthorized entries from dozens of countries. And we’ve had this problem for decades,” he said. “With the national emergencies and all of the other things that we’ve declared, we can actually do something about it.”
Since the order was first issued in March, more than 20,000 illegal immigrants at the border have been turned back, though the flow of migrants has slowed as Latin American countries have issued their own stay at home orders and shut down their borders. Some officials in the administration are pushing for the policy to remain in place until a vaccine is available in the U.S. and Latin America. That will likely take more than a year.
As the order became effective for an indefinite period of time last week, the government is now asking parents to make the decision of whether or not to keep their children with them in detention centers or allow them to be released to a guardian. A federal judge on April 24 instructed ICE to “make every effort to promptly and safely release” migrant children who are being held with their parents in ICE detention centers. This is meant to help curb the exposure to COVID-19 in ICE jails. The CBP Commissioner touts the effectiveness of the orders while some ICE officials admit to feeling caught between policies.
“These orders have been tremendously effective in providing the ability to effectively protect United States citizens and others in the country legally by reducing the spread of Covid-19,” said acting CBP Commissioner Mark Morgan, referring to both the public-health law and a ban on all nonessential travel at the border. ICE officials told congressional staff in a briefing this week that they felt caught between the April court order and a separate 2018 ruling in a class-action suit related to families separated at the border. That ruling directs the government to make every effort to keep families united.
As you might expect, parents are choosing to keep their children with them, despite the risks of being infected with the coronavirus. Last week in all three of ICE’s family detention centers, parents began being asked if they want to have their children released and so far none have chosen that option. Parents know they risk deportation while their children would remain in the United States with guardians. The parents fear they would not be reunited with their children.
In the past several years, the Trump administration has weighed adopting this procedure inside family jails—a policy known as “binary choice”—but has mostly opted to release parents with their children, typically within about 20 days. Lawyers representing immigrant families in detention said ICE’s new approach all but ensured that no children would be released. “They knew that no family would agree to that, which is why they asked,” said Bridget Cambria, a lawyer with the nonprofit firm Aldea—the People’s Justice Center, which represents families at a family detention center in Leesport, Pa.
The Trump administration argues that Central Americans see an incentive to bring their children as they migrate to the border because the Flores agreement requires children to be released within 20 days. Typically, adults are released with the children. A new form is presented to the parents asking them to waive their rights under the Flores agreement in hopes of mitigating the spread of the coronavirus in family detention centers to children.
Immigration advocacy groups have sued the Trump administration since the pandemic outbreak over concerns of those being held in detention but so far there has not been a single report of coronavirus infections at the family detention centers. One death has been reported at an adult detention center. This would indicate there is no reason to release families on the pretense of mitigating the coronavirus outbreak, as the open borders crowd calls for, right? It would appear that the precautions in place are working to keep the families virus-free so far.
Meanwhile, an ICE spokesperson says the new form presented to parents is not the same as the binary choice form, though immigration lawyers argue that it is.
A spokesperson for ICE said the form that was presented to parents last week was not part of a new binary choice policy. “ICE has not instituted binary choice or separated any parents from their child pursuant to binary choice, and ICE has not implemented any new forms to conduct the new parole determinations as required by the court,” the spokesperson said. “Any assertion to the contrary is plainly false.”
Most of the families have been in custody since last fall before the coronavirus pandemic entered the picture. They are waiting for rulings in federal lawsuits against the Trump administration on asylum policies and procedures. Since the pandemic, the administration has halted most immigration due to public health concerns.


hotair--2020-05-24--Where is the kingdom? Sunday reflection

Where is the kingdom? Sunday reflection

As Christians , it ’ s easy to sometimes look around at the state of the world and wonder just when Jesus plans to return .
That may be especially true at the moment , in the midst of a pandemic and increasing tensions at home and abroad , along with the economic collapse in motion at the moment .
After two thousand years , it can be difficult to see what comes next — even while marveling at all of our advances and knowing just how much work remains in evangelizing the Good News .
When this question comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of despair , we sometimes exclaim out of exasperation , humor , or a mixture of both , “ Jesus , take the wheel !
” It ’ s an admission of our own lack of omnipotence and omniscience , but it still has that undercurrent of nagging doubt .
When , precisely , will Jesus “ take the wheel ” for good and inarguably establish His kingdom ?
Certainly the apostles must have wondered about this , even after the Ascension , which we celebrate this Sunday .
Today ’ s first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the end of Matthew ’ s testimony , in which the risen Christ makes clear that their work had only just begun .
The new church ’ s mission would take it to the ends of the earth , starting with just the eleven at hand , to bring the Word of God to all people and convert them to repentance for sins .
Even that Great Commission , though , suggested an endpoint .
“ I am with you always , ” Jesus says as He ascended , “ until the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves wondered about the length of that period , even after the Resurrection .
In our first reading today from the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles , Luke notes that the then-disciples asked the risen Christ a curious question just before His Ascension : When they had gathered together they asked him , “ Lord , are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel ?
” He answered them , “ It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has established @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you , and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem , throughout Judea and Samaria , and to the ends of the earth.
” When he had said this , as they were looking on , he was lifted up , and a cloud took him from their sight .
While they were looking intently at the sky as he was going , suddenly two men dressed in white garments stood beside them .
They said , “ Men of Galilee , why are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
This Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven will return in the same way as you have seen him going into heaven.
” This question seems quite curious in the context of everything that had already transpired .
Jesus made it clear during His ministry that He would not fulfill the popular , power-hungry model of a messiah that the Judeans wanted .
He did not pull together armies of soldiers to fight the Romans or the temple authorities ; indeed , Jesus barely mentions the Romans at all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us except to dismiss them as irrelevant .
His exhortation to “ render unto Caesar what is Caesar ’ s , render unto Me what is Mine ” was as political as Jesus got , and then only to dismiss politics as a non-sequitur to the Lord ’ s Word of love , repentance , and forgiveness .
By the time the soon-to-be apostles ask this question , Jesus has already submitted to a humiliating death on the cross rather than rescue Himself to provoke a political revolution .
His return from death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for His followers in the house of God should have already alerted the disciples that the old way of looking at the messiah simply did not apply .
And yet , this shows how difficult it is to let go of the only context we truly know — this material world and our fallen lives within it .
Our exhortations for Jesus to “ take the wheel ” at times falls into the same trap .
We want a messiah on our own terms to rule this world according to our own desires @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ourselves to His will so that we can prepare ourselves to live in His love in the next world .
And why wouldn ’ t we ?
That ’ s the only context we truly know .
This , however , is why faith is more important than knowledge or power .
Jesus sent His apostles out not to conquer the world through power , but to convert the world through love .
To do that , and to face the horrific consequences that often brought to the apostles and their successors , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They accepted that this world would clock along as it always had , at least in their brief time within it , and that the true Kingdom would await us in the next .
To the extent that they could improve this world , it was only through Christ and their own work to evangelize on His behalf by converting more and more people to conform themselves to His will and act accordingly .
They may have well sighed many times with sentiments similar to “ Jesus , take the wheel , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up to us in this world to take the wheel on behalf of Christ .
We should not look for the kingdom in this life , but “ take the wheel ” ourselves to help as many of our brothers and sisters prepare for the kingdom in the next life .
That was Christ ’ s final call to all of us , as He prepared for our arrival at some point — when the cares of this world will fall away for good anyway .
The front page image is a detail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” a 16th-century painting attributed to Dosso Dossi .
Via Wikimedia Commons .
“ Sunday Reflection ” is a regular feature , looking at the specific readings used in today ’ s Mass in Catholic parishes around the world .
The reflection represents only my own point of view , intended to help prepare myself for the Lord ’ s day and perhaps spark a meaningful discussion .
Previous Sunday Reflections from the main page can be found here .
For previous Green Room entries , click here .

This morning’s Gospel reading is Matthew 28:16-20:
The eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had ordered them. When they saw him, they worshiped, but they doubted. Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”
As Christians, it’s easy to sometimes look around at the state of the world and wonder just when Jesus plans to return. That may be especially true at the moment, in the midst of a pandemic and increasing tensions at home and abroad, along with the economic collapse in motion at the moment. After two thousand years, it can be difficult to see what comes next — even while marveling at all of our advances and knowing just how much work remains in evangelizing the Good News.
When this question comes up from a particular event or sense of despair, we sometimes exclaim out of exasperation, humor, or a mixture of both, “Jesus, take the wheel!” It’s an admission of our own lack of omnipotence and omniscience, but it still has that undercurrent of nagging doubt. When, precisely, will Jesus “take the wheel” for good and inarguably establish His kingdom?
Certainly the apostles must have wondered about this, even after the Ascension, which we celebrate this Sunday. Today’s first Gospel reading brings us the Great Commission from the end of Matthew’s testimony, in which the risen Christ makes clear that their work had only just begun. The new church’s mission would take it to the ends of the earth, starting with just the eleven at hand, to bring the Word of God to all people and convert them to repentance for sins.
Even that Great Commission, though, suggested an endpoint. “I am with you always,” Jesus says as He ascended, “until the end of the age.” The apostles themselves wondered about the length of that period, even after the Resurrection. In our first reading today from the beginning of the Acts of the Apostles, Luke notes that the then-disciples asked the risen Christ a curious question just before His Ascension:
When they had gathered together they asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” He answered them, “It is not for you to know the times or seasons that the Father has established by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, throughout Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” When he had said this, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him from their sight. While they were looking intently at the sky as he was going, suddenly two men dressed in white garments stood beside them. They said, “Men of Galilee, why are you standing there looking at the sky? This Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven will return in the same way as you have seen him going into heaven.”
This question seems quite curious in the context of everything that had already transpired. Jesus made it clear during His ministry that He would not fulfill the popular, power-hungry model of a messiah that the Judeans wanted. He did not pull together armies of soldiers to fight the Romans or the temple authorities; indeed, Jesus barely mentions the Romans at all in the gospels that have come to us except to dismiss them as irrelevant. His exhortation to “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, render unto Me what is Mine” was as political as Jesus got, and then only to dismiss politics as a non-sequitur to the Lord’s Word of love, repentance, and forgiveness.
By the time the soon-to-be apostles ask this question, Jesus has already submitted to a humiliating death on the cross rather than rescue Himself to provoke a political revolution. His return from death and further discussion of preparing a place for His followers in the house of God should have already alerted the disciples that the old way of looking at the messiah simply did not apply.
And yet, this shows how difficult it is to let go of the only context we truly know — this material world and our fallen lives within it. Our exhortations for Jesus to “take the wheel” at times falls into the same trap. We want a messiah on our own terms to rule this world according to our own desires, rather than to form and conform ourselves to His will so that we can prepare ourselves to live in His love in the next world. And why wouldn’t we? That’s the only context we truly know.
This, however, is why faith is more important than knowledge or power. Jesus sent His apostles out not to conquer the world through power, but to convert the world through love. To do that, and to face the horrific consequences that often brought to the apostles and their successors, required faith in Christ above all else. They accepted that this world would clock along as it always had, at least in their brief time within it, and that the true Kingdom would await us in the next. To the extent that they could improve this world, it was only through Christ and their own work to evangelize on His behalf by converting more and more people to conform themselves to His will and act accordingly.
They may have well sighed many times with sentiments similar to “Jesus, take the wheel,” but they understood that it was up to us in this world to take the wheel on behalf of Christ. We should not look for the kingdom in this life, but “take the wheel” ourselves to help as many of our brothers and sisters prepare for the kingdom in the next life. That was Christ’s final call to all of us, as He prepared for our arrival at some point — when the cares of this world will fall away for good anyway.
The front page image is a detail from “The Ascension of Christ,” a 16th-century painting attributed to Dosso Dossi. Via Wikimedia Commons.
“Sunday Reflection” is a regular feature, looking at the specific readings used in today’s Mass in Catholic parishes around the world. The reflection represents only my own point of view, intended to help prepare myself for the Lord’s day and perhaps spark a meaningful discussion. Previous Sunday Reflections from the main page can be found here. For previous Green Room entries, click here.


hotair--2020-05-24--The media finally figures out how to (safely) dismiss Tara Reade

While our liberal cable news outlets and major newspapers have done a heroic job of trying to avoid talking about Tara Reade ’ s allegations against Joe Biden as much as possible , it eventually became too much of an embarrassment for most of them , so they had to address the subject .
Efforts to discredit her claims and undermine her legitimacy quickly blew up in their faces because “ Believe Some Women ” was such an obvious reversal of the positions most progressive analysts had taken in previous cases where Republicans or conservatives were being accused .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather unsubtle shift in how the press is talking about Reade after digging more deeply into her background .
Here ’ s one example from the Associated Press this weekend .
See if you can spot the new tactics and tone based on both the headline and this brief excerpt .
Biden accuser ’ s life marred by abuse and financial hardship One thing is clear in the complicated , sometimes contradictory and often chaotic story of Tara Reade : Her life has not been easy .
Her earliest childhood memory was of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told her former husband , a man she would later leave after he abused her , too… “ If you grow up in an abusive household , where your needs , your basic needs aren ’ t met and you aren ’ t taught to appropriately identify boundaries or emotions , then that ’ s going to impact the way that you develop as an adult , ” [ forensic psychologist Barbara ] Ziv said .
Can you see what ’ s going on here ?
Simply claiming that Reade is a liar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ giving her the same level of default acceptance as was shown toward Christine Blasey Ford would breathe far too much life into her story and potentially imperil the electoral prospects of Joe Biden .
We certainly couldn ’ t have that , could we ?
So , instead , they ’ ve dug up all of the travails that Reade suffered over the course of her life .
She ’ s claimed to be the victim of physical and emotional abuse at the hands of her father , her husband , and others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relationship with her mother .
She ’ s faced any number of runs of bad luck financially .
It ’ s been a hard knock life and surviving a background like that is bound to take a toll on a person .
So rather than dismissing her as a dishonest person with less-than-honorable intentions , Reade can now be safely identified as a victim in her own right .
( Though , of course , not a victim of anything Joe Biden might have done . )
Whether she believes her own story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less than honest , it ’ s not her fault , you see .
She wasn ’ t taught proper boundaries as a child .
And the mental scars from the abuse she suffered have led her to speak and behave erratically .
That ’ s why she ’ s saying these awful things about the Democratic nominee , who is obviously innocent as a babe in the woods and cleaner than laundry that ’ s fresh out of the dryer .
It ’ s just perfect , isn ’ t it ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to give Biden a clean bill of political health without looking like they ’ re trying to tear down his accuser .
Instead of painting her as a duplicitous fifth column agent of some kind , they ’ ve turned her into a victim .
You don ’ t have to denounce her or abuse her .
You just need to pity her and put this whole unpleasant story behind us .
This AP story isn ’ t the only article taking this approach this week .
And I can assure you that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Joe Biden , the Democrats and the press that loves them found themselves in a spot of quicksand for a little while because of Tara Reade .
But now they ’ ve found a lifeline to drag themselves out of it .

While our liberal cable news outlets and major newspapers have done a heroic job of trying to avoid talking about Tara Reade’s allegations against Joe Biden as much as possible, it eventually became too much of an embarrassment for most of them, so they had to address the subject. Efforts to discredit her claims and undermine her legitimacy quickly blew up in their faces because “Believe Some Women” was such an obvious reversal of the positions most progressive analysts had taken in previous cases where Republicans or conservatives were being accused. But this week I’ve noticed a rather unsubtle shift in how the press is talking about Reade after digging more deeply into her background. Here’s one example from the Associated Press this weekend. See if you can spot the new tactics and tone based on both the headline and this brief excerpt.
Biden accuser’s life marred by abuse and financial hardship One thing is clear in the complicated, sometimes contradictory and often chaotic story of Tara Reade: Her life has not been easy. Her earliest childhood memory was of being abused by her father, she told her former husband, a man she would later leave after he abused her, too… “If you grow up in an abusive household, where your needs, your basic needs aren’t met and you aren’t taught to appropriately identify boundaries or emotions, then that’s going to impact the way that you develop as an adult,” [forensic psychologist Barbara] Ziv said.
Can you see what’s going on here? Simply claiming that Reade is a liar goes completely against the narrative. But giving her the same level of default acceptance as was shown toward Christine Blasey Ford would breathe far too much life into her story and potentially imperil the electoral prospects of Joe Biden. We certainly couldn’t have that, could we?
So, instead, they’ve dug up all of the travails that Reade suffered over the course of her life. She’s claimed to be the victim of physical and emotional abuse at the hands of her father, her husband, and others. She had a “difficult” relationship with her mother. She’s faced any number of runs of bad luck financially. It’s been a hard knock life and surviving a background like that is bound to take a toll on a person.
So rather than dismissing her as a dishonest person with less-than-honorable intentions, Reade can now be safely identified as a victim in her own right. (Though, of course, not a victim of anything Joe Biden might have done.) Whether she believes her own story or knows that she’s being less than honest, it’s not her fault, you see. She wasn’t taught proper boundaries as a child. And the mental scars from the abuse she suffered have led her to speak and behave erratically. That’s why she’s saying these awful things about the Democratic nominee, who is obviously innocent as a babe in the woods and cleaner than laundry that’s fresh out of the dryer.
It’s just perfect, isn’t it? This line of attack allows the press to give Biden a clean bill of political health without looking like they’re trying to tear down his accuser. Instead of painting her as a duplicitous fifth column agent of some kind, they’ve turned her into a victim. You don’t have to denounce her or abuse her. You just need to pity her and put this whole unpleasant story behind us.
This AP story isn’t the only article taking this approach this week. And I can assure you that it won’t be the last. Joe Biden, the Democrats and the press that loves them found themselves in a spot of quicksand for a little while because of Tara Reade. But now they’ve found a lifeline to drag themselves out of it.


hotair--2020-05-24--The new crackdown on Hong Kong's democracy activists began almost immediately

When we were discussing China ’ s new “ national security ” law for Hong Kong yesterday , it was noted that pro-democracy advocates were already railing against the betrayal of the promises China made when taking over control of the city from Great Britain .
Protests were planned , but pro-Beijing lawmakers were warning that any sort of public demonstrations could be dealt with harshly .
Well , that took all of one day to come to pass .
Despite concerns about a new wave of coronavirus infections , demonstrators took to the streets and were quickly met by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the crowds at a large shopping center .
And then the arrests began .
( Associated Press ) Hong Kong police fired volleys of tear gas in a popular shopping district as hundreds took to the streets Sunday to march against China ’ s proposed tough national security legislation for the city .
Pro-democracy supporters in Hong Kong have sharply criticized China ’ s proposal to enact a national security law that would ban secessionist and subversive activity , as well as foreign interference and terrorism in the semi-autonomous territory .
Critics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country , two systems ” framework that promises the city freedoms not found on the mainland .
Tam Tak-chi , one of the city ’ s most well-known democracy advocates , was arrested shortly after the protests began .
He had previously predicted that he would be detained if China moved forward with its new legislation and it turned out to be a self-fulfilling prophesy .
He was charged with holding “ an unauthorized assembly.
” When Beijing first announced its plans to implement the new legislation , John wrote about widespread concerns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Hong Kong as we know it .
China was supposed to honor the “ one country , two systems ” policy for fifty years , until at least 2047 , but that promise seems to have been forgotten .
Of course , when the new law goes fully into effect ( which is expected to happen on Thursday ) , it really won ’ t be doing much beyond making official the same policies that China has been imposing on Hong Kong for years .
The only difference is that they might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city , allowing them to directly intervene in Hong Kong ’ s affairs more quickly .
In that sense , much of the “ freedom ” enjoyed by Hong Kong since 1997 has largely been illusory anyway .
China regularly intervenes in local elections if the residents begin electing too many people with crazy ideas about freedom and democracy .
The top leadership positions , currently exemplified by Carrie Lam , are always held by pro-Beijing politicians who take their marching orders from the CCP .
People have regularly been arrested in Hong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contacting foreign media outlets , things that people in free nations simply take for granted .
Up until now , a certain amount of demonstrating and chatter about democracy has been allowed , apparently just to humor the locals .
But now it appears that China isn ’ t going to even bother providing a fig leaf to the 1997 agreement they entered into .
They ’ re probably sure that they can get away with it because nobody is going to risk going to war with them or attempt any sort of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s doorstep to free Hong Kong ’ s citizens .
And while it ’ s sad to say , they ’ re probably right .

When we were discussing China’s new “national security” law for Hong Kong yesterday, it was noted that pro-democracy advocates were already railing against the betrayal of the promises China made when taking over control of the city from Great Britain. Protests were planned, but pro-Beijing lawmakers were warning that any sort of public demonstrations could be dealt with harshly. Well, that took all of one day to come to pass. Despite concerns about a new wave of coronavirus infections, demonstrators took to the streets and were quickly met by police forces firing tear gas canisters indiscriminately into the crowds at a large shopping center. And then the arrests began. (Associated Press)
Hong Kong police fired volleys of tear gas in a popular shopping district as hundreds took to the streets Sunday to march against China’s proposed tough national security legislation for the city. Pro-democracy supporters in Hong Kong have sharply criticized China’s proposal to enact a national security law that would ban secessionist and subversive activity, as well as foreign interference and terrorism in the semi-autonomous territory. Critics say it goes against the “one country, two systems” framework that promises the city freedoms not found on the mainland.
Tam Tak-chi, one of the city’s most well-known democracy advocates, was arrested shortly after the protests began. He had previously predicted that he would be detained if China moved forward with its new legislation and it turned out to be a self-fulfilling prophesy. He was charged with holding “an unauthorized assembly.”
When Beijing first announced its plans to implement the new legislation, John wrote about widespread concerns that this could literally be the end of Hong Kong as we know it. China was supposed to honor the “one country, two systems” policy for fifty years, until at least 2047, but that promise seems to have been forgotten. Of course, when the new law goes fully into effect (which is expected to happen on Thursday), it really won’t be doing much beyond making official the same policies that China has been imposing on Hong Kong for years. The only difference is that they might be opening up CCP offices in the city, allowing them to directly intervene in Hong Kong’s affairs more quickly.
In that sense, much of the “freedom” enjoyed by Hong Kong since 1997 has largely been illusory anyway. China regularly intervenes in local elections if the residents begin electing too many people with crazy ideas about freedom and democracy. The top leadership positions, currently exemplified by Carrie Lam, are always held by pro-Beijing politicians who take their marching orders from the CCP. People have regularly been arrested in Hong Kong for demonstrating, giving speeches or contacting foreign media outlets, things that people in free nations simply take for granted.
Up until now, a certain amount of demonstrating and chatter about democracy has been allowed, apparently just to humor the locals. But now it appears that China isn’t going to even bother providing a fig leaf to the 1997 agreement they entered into. They’re probably sure that they can get away with it because nobody is going to risk going to war with them or attempt any sort of direct military intervention right on China’s doorstep to free Hong Kong’s citizens. And while it’s sad to say, they’re probably right.


hotair--2020-05-24--Sunday morning talking heads

Sunday morning talking heads

The wearisome debate over reopening the states for business slogs on this morning with a head-spinning array of doctors , economists , politicians , and business owners on the Sunday shows .
The star guest is Deborah Birx , who ’ ll explain to “ This Week ” and “ Fox News Sunday ” why her task force now seems to pay only glancing attention to its own federal guidelines on reopening .
Are there any states that she thinks should slow down or do her boss ’ s political interests prevent her from saying ?
One guest of note @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 or its economic fallout is national security advisor Robert O ’ Brien .
His plate is suddenly full thanks to deepening animosity between the U.S. and China , particularly after Beijing ’ s move last week to swallow up Hong Kong ’ s autonomy .
What penalties will China pay for that ?
Sanctions on Chinese officials ?
Rescission of the special trade status that Hong Kong enjoys from the U.S. that exempts it from American tariffs ?
How about , er , renewed nuclear testing ?
He ’ ll discuss with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Face the Nation.
” Also worth watching this morning : Democratic Rep. Val Demings , who ’ ll sit down with “ State of the Union.
” Demings is on Biden ’ s VP list and , although she ’ s a long shot , there ’ s a case for her .
She ’ s a woman , African-American , and represents a district in Florida , the most lucrative battleground on the map in terms of electoral votes .
If adding Demings to the ticket could flip that state , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one more red state from 2016 anywhere on the map to win the presidency .
She ’ ll be asked about her prospects of getting the nod and of course about Biden ’ s obnoxious comment on Friday that if you don ’ t prefer him to Trump then “ you ain ’ t black.
” The full line-up is at the AP .

The wearisome debate over reopening the states for business slogs on this morning with a head-spinning array of doctors, economists, politicians, and business owners on the Sunday shows. The star guest is Deborah Birx, who’ll explain to “This Week” and “Fox News Sunday” why her task force now seems to pay only glancing attention to its own federal guidelines on reopening. Are there any states that she thinks should slow down or do her boss’s political interests prevent her from saying?
One guest of note who isn’t scheduled to discuss COVID-19 or its economic fallout is national security advisor Robert O’Brien. His plate is suddenly full thanks to deepening animosity between the U.S. and China, particularly after Beijing’s move last week to swallow up Hong Kong’s autonomy. What penalties will China pay for that? Sanctions on Chinese officials? Rescission of the special trade status that Hong Kong enjoys from the U.S. that exempts it from American tariffs? How about, er, renewed nuclear testing? He’ll discuss with “Meet the Press” and “Face the Nation.”
Also worth watching this morning: Democratic Rep. Val Demings, who’ll sit down with “State of the Union.” Demings is on Biden’s VP list and, although she’s a long shot, there’s a case for her. She’s a woman, African-American, and represents a district in Florida, the most lucrative battleground on the map in terms of electoral votes. If adding Demings to the ticket could flip that state, it would leave Biden needing to convert just one more red state from 2016 anywhere on the map to win the presidency. She’ll be asked about her prospects of getting the nod and of course about Biden’s obnoxious comment on Friday that if you don’t prefer him to Trump then “you ain’t black.” The full line-up is at the AP.


hotair--2020-05-25--Wuhan completes testing of 9 million residents, finds fewer than 200 new cases

Earlier this month , Chinese authorities announced plans to test all 11 million people in Wuhan within ten days , a plan they referred to as “ ten days of mass battle.
” This was prompted by the discovery of a half dozen new cases of the virus in one apartment building .
In the end they didn ’ t quite get it done in ten days .
They did however test about 9 million people using a technique called sample pooling : Most of those nine million samples have already been processed , according to a daily record of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In total , they said , the mass testing identified 180 asymptomatic carriers of the coronavirus , who were put under quarantine and monitored for symptoms .
Just one of those cases was later recategorized as a confirmed case… While falling slightly short of its ambitious target of testing everyone in the city , Wuhan was nonetheless able to test so many people so quickly by adopting an approach known as “ sample pooling , ” used earlier in the U.S. and Germany to track Covid-19 , albeit on a much smaller scale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collected samples one by one from citizens , and then processed five to 10 of them at once in a single nucleic-acid test .
By bundling multiple samples , Wuhan was able to immediately clear all of the citizens included in one test—as long as the test came out as negative—thereby significantly cutting the number of total nucleic-acid tests required .
So by combining ten samples into one test , they only had to perform about 900,000 tests , which is pretty doable in a week .
In the U.S. we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per day .
So we could use a similar technique to run tests on a similar-sized city in about 3 days .
The collection of millions of individual samples is what would take all the time .
In any case , given the way China ’ s handling of the outbreak has become part of a global propaganda effort I don ’ t think we can trust any numbers they are giving out .
And that includes the collection of 9 million samples .
Previous reporting indicated they had already tested nearly 5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they including those tests in this total or were these all new tests ?
Even if they offered an answer to that question , would you believe it ?
There ’ s another coronavirus related story in the Wall Street Journal today which is pretty chilling .
At least one city , Hangzhou , which is directly east of Wuhan and roughly the same size , is talking about making the phone tracking software the Chinese government rolled out to track people ’ s movements a permanent fixture .
In fact , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a permanent health rating from the government .
Anger spread across Chinese social media sites over the weekend following an announcement that officials in the eastern city of Hangzhou could create a permanent version of a smartphone-based health-rating system developed to fight Covid-19 .
The news led some internet users to accuse the city of exploiting the pandemic to expand state monitoring of residents… Hangzhou , a tech hub located south of Shanghai , was among the first cities to roll out a health-rating app .
Developed by authorities with help from Alibaba @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Hangzhou , the app tracks a person ’ s travel history and health conditions in order to single out those at a higher risk of carrying the coronavirus… On Friday , the city ’ s health commission said it was considering a new , permanent version of the tool that would assign each person a colored health badge based on a collation of their medical records , physical examination results and lifestyle habits , such as smoking and alcohol consumption .
In addition to the colored badge , each resident would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 100 , which a city would use to compile health rankings , Hangzhou health commission chief Sun Yongrong said , according to the commission ’ s website .
On the one hand , some kind of voluntary , temporary tracking might make sense until we have a coronavirus treatment or vaccine .
On the other hand , this kind of power to limit people ’ s movement is an Orwellian nightmare in the hands of an authoritarian government like the Community Chinese Party .
It ’ s not hard to imagine how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Hong Kong to prevent protesters from leaving their homes or , more accurately , giving police an excuse to arrest those who gather to protest .
The abuse of this kind of government power over individuals is guaranteed .

Earlier this month, Chinese authorities announced plans to test all 11 million people in Wuhan within ten days, a plan they referred to as “ten days of mass battle.” This was prompted by the discovery of a half dozen new cases of the virus in one apartment building. In the end they didn’t quite get it done in ten days. They did however test about 9 million people using a technique called sample pooling:
Most of those nine million samples have already been processed, according to a daily record of nucleic-acid tests by Wuhan health authorities. In total, they said, the mass testing identified 180 asymptomatic carriers of the coronavirus, who were put under quarantine and monitored for symptoms. Just one of those cases was later recategorized as a confirmed case… While falling slightly short of its ambitious target of testing everyone in the city, Wuhan was nonetheless able to test so many people so quickly by adopting an approach known as “sample pooling,” used earlier in the U.S. and Germany to track Covid-19, albeit on a much smaller scale. Using sample pooling, Wuhan authorities collected samples one by one from citizens, and then processed five to 10 of them at once in a single nucleic-acid test. By bundling multiple samples, Wuhan was able to immediately clear all of the citizens included in one test—as long as the test came out as negative—thereby significantly cutting the number of total nucleic-acid tests required.
So by combining ten samples into one test, they only had to perform about 900,000 tests, which is pretty doable in a week. In the U.S. we’re currently testing around 350,000 to 400,000 people per day. So we could use a similar technique to run tests on a similar-sized city in about 3 days. The collection of millions of individual samples is what would take all the time.
In any case, given the way China’s handling of the outbreak has become part of a global propaganda effort I don’t think we can trust any numbers they are giving out. And that includes the collection of 9 million samples. Previous reporting indicated they had already tested nearly 5 million people in the city. Are they including those tests in this total or were these all new tests? Even if they offered an answer to that question, would you believe it?
There’s another coronavirus related story in the Wall Street Journal today which is pretty chilling. At least one city, Hangzhou, which is directly east of Wuhan and roughly the same size, is talking about making the phone tracking software the Chinese government rolled out to track people’s movements a permanent fixture. In fact, the city is suggesting every resident might get a permanent health rating from the government.
Anger spread across Chinese social media sites over the weekend following an announcement that officials in the eastern city of Hangzhou could create a permanent version of a smartphone-based health-rating system developed to fight Covid-19. The news led some internet users to accuse the city of exploiting the pandemic to expand state monitoring of residents… Hangzhou, a tech hub located south of Shanghai, was among the first cities to roll out a health-rating app. Developed by authorities with help from Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., which is based in Hangzhou, the app tracks a person’s travel history and health conditions in order to single out those at a higher risk of carrying the coronavirus… On Friday, the city’s health commission said it was considering a new, permanent version of the tool that would assign each person a colored health badge based on a collation of their medical records, physical examination results and lifestyle habits, such as smoking and alcohol consumption. In addition to the colored badge, each resident would be assigned a health score ranging from 0 to 100, which a city would use to compile health rankings, Hangzhou health commission chief Sun Yongrong said, according to the commission’s website.
On the one hand, some kind of voluntary, temporary tracking might make sense until we have a coronavirus treatment or vaccine. On the other hand, this kind of power to limit people’s movement is an Orwellian nightmare in the hands of an authoritarian government like the Community Chinese Party.
It’s not hard to imagine how this could be misused in a place like Hong Kong to prevent protesters from leaving their homes or, more accurately, giving police an excuse to arrest those who gather to protest. The abuse of this kind of government power over individuals is guaranteed.


hotair--2020-05-25--New Biden ad hits Trump for playing golf

I don ’ t begrudge him leisure time after spending two months ( mostly ) inside .
Other Americans are stir crazy and shaking off cabin fever by enjoying the holiday weekend outdoors as the first wave of the outbreak recedes .
He ’ s entitled to a break too .
But he begrudged Obama his golf outings — a lot .
Not just on Twitter but in Fox News interviews .
Naturally Dems were going to pay him back for stuff like this once they had the chance : Even if he ’ d never said a word about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been political malpractice not to seize on his outing yesterday as attack-ad material .
One of Democrats ’ most basic critiques of him this fall will be that he ’ s callous to the public ’ s suffering , the same criticism thrown at Bush 43 after the “ now watch this drive ” episode .
Bush later gave up golfing following the invasion of Iraq , saying later , “ I don ’ t want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the Commander-in-Chief playing golf.
” And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blunt attacks that he was uncaring .
That ’ s … not Trump ’ s forte .
What I don ’ t understand is why Trump would help Biden out by calling attention to the ad , which he ’ s done for two days running on his favorite social media platform .
( And which he did recently with at least one other critical ad . )
Yesterday… …and today , although this was a response to the media criticism of him golfing more so than Biden ’ s ad : He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ golfing after an ISIS atrocity .
That was in 2014 after they released the gruesome video of James Foley being beheaded .
Obama gave a statement to the press denouncing it and then headed straight for the links , his own version of “ now watch this drive.
” One difference , though : O admitted later that that had been poor “ optics ” and that he should have been more mindful of the “ theater.
” Not an admission of wrongdoing , but an admission at least that golfing during a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Here ’ s the ad , followed by an extremely rare appearance from a guy who ’ s been locked in a basement for two months .
Even grandpa gets dressed and pays his respects on Memorial Day .
( Trump visited Arlington this morning , by the way , as is customary . )

I don’t begrudge him leisure time after spending two months (mostly) inside. Other Americans are stir crazy and shaking off cabin fever by enjoying the holiday weekend outdoors as the first wave of the outbreak recedes. He’s entitled to a break too.
But he begrudged Obama his golf outings — a lot. Not just on Twitter but in Fox News interviews.
Naturally Dems were going to pay him back for stuff like this once they had the chance:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/521813597799067648
Even if he’d never said a word about Obama’s golfing, it would have been political malpractice not to seize on his outing yesterday as attack-ad material. One of Democrats’ most basic critiques of him this fall will be that he’s callous to the public’s suffering, the same criticism thrown at Bush 43 after the “now watch this drive” episode. Bush later gave up golfing following the invasion of Iraq, saying later, “I don’t want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the Commander-in-Chief playing golf.” And Bush could always communicate empathy effectively to blunt attacks that he was uncaring. That’s … not Trump’s forte.
COVID gave Trump a chance to be a decent, compassionate human being (or pretending to be). But he couldn't even do that. https://t.co/fIzHtmbOfR — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) May 24, 2020
What I don’t understand is why Trump would help Biden out by calling attention to the ad, which he’s done for two days running on his favorite social media platform. (And which he did recently with at least one other critical ad.) Yesterday…
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264734501961433088
…and today, although this was a response to the media criticism of him golfing more so than Biden’s ad:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264912066672046081
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264912072892125190
He’s totally right about Obama going golfing after an ISIS atrocity. That was in 2014 after they released the gruesome video of James Foley being beheaded. Obama gave a statement to the press denouncing it and then headed straight for the links, his own version of “now watch this drive.” One difference, though: O admitted later that that had been poor “optics” and that he should have been more mindful of the “theater.” Not an admission of wrongdoing, but an admission at least that golfing during a national tragedy is a bad look.
Here’s the ad, followed by an extremely rare appearance from a guy who’s been locked in a basement for two months. Even grandpa gets dressed and pays his respects on Memorial Day. (Trump visited Arlington this morning, by the way, as is customary.)
Nearly 100,000 lives have been lost, and tens of millions are out of work. Meanwhile, the president spent his day golfing. pic.twitter.com/H1BVNtgVjA — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) May 24, 2020


hotair--2020-05-25--Turns out a lot of you believe in Bigfoot

There ’ s a very active subculture on social media that attracts people who believe in any number of offbeat subjects ranging from the paranormal and cryptozoology to those who insist that the Earth is flat .
One cryptid , in particular , has a huge , loyal following and a recent survey appears to back up this phenomenon with solid numbers .
Market research firm CivicScience completed a poll of more than 3,400 Americans to test their belief in a variety of “ conspiracy theories ” ranging from subjects such as extraterrestrials to whether or not the moon landing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most surprising statistics , at least to me , was the fact that more than one in ten Americans believe that Bigfoot ( or Sasquatch ) is a real , living animal that roams the woods .
He ’ s also apparently the all-time world champion of social distancing .
( Paul Seaburn for Mysterious Universe ) It ’ s often said that every state in the U.S. has had at least one Bigfoot sighting and every state has at least one Bigfoot organization .
Bigfoot television series dominate reality shows of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come as no surprise that a new survey found 1 in 10 Americans profess a belief in the big hairy one .
However , when compared to belief in extraterrestrials , Bigfoot is a distant third behind aliens and aliens ( we ’ ll explain ) .
Does Sasquatch need better public relations , a better name … or some better conspiracy theories ?
“ More than 1 in 10 American adults believes that Bigfoot is a real , living creature .
Men and women are roughly equally likely to believe in Sasquatch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peaked among Gen X , there was a strong cohort of Gen Z that expressed belief in Bigfoot .
Millennials and Baby Boomers were slightly more skeptical.
” Belief in bigfoot wasn ’ t the most popular theory by a long shot .
Nearly 30 % believe that not only is there other , intelligent extraterrestrial life in the galaxy , but that it ’ s been visiting us here on Earth .
Nearly a quarter of respondents ( 23 % ) are certain that the United States government is in possession of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but is hiding it from the public .
The rest of the topics didn ’ t attract nearly as much support , but even some of the subjects that didn ’ t make it out of single digits may strike you as alarming .
Nine percent believe that the government is using chemtrails to control the population .
Eight percent are convinced that the Illuminati are real and they control most human events around the world .
The same number ( eight percent ) think the Loch Ness Monster is a real , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still think the moon landing was a hoax .
The thing I like about this CivicScience survey is that they really go deep in the crosstabs to not just discover how many people believe in these things , but which specific groups are the most likely .
Belief in Bigfoot was fairly even by gender and there wasn ’ t much variation by age group .
( Gen Z and Gen X were the most likely to believe , but the difference was only a couple of percent . )
One of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different regions .
People living in the mountain west and the Pacific Northwest were significantly more likely to find Sasquatch plausible than people in the northeast .
That makes sense since the vast majority of sightings are reported out west .
Another curious demographic factor was where people tend to get their news .
Regular viewers of Fox News were roughly five times more likely ( 39 % ) to believe in Bigfoot than viewers of CNN ( 6 % ) or MSNBC ( 8 % ) .
I find that kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fairly regularly and you hardly ever see a Sasquatch story on there .
Of course , the big word to keep in mind here is “ believe.
” Much the same as with extraterrestrials , this will always come down to a question of belief unless and until some indisputable physical proof is brought forward .
Just for the record , I can tell you that Bigfoot is real , or at least it was back in 1974 .
But just hearing that from me or even hundreds of other people doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That is unless you wind up seeing one yourself .
Then you ’ ll turn into “ that person ” that everyone is calling a nutcase .
But that ’ s the funny thing about belief , isn ’ t it ?
It doesn ’ t matter whether you ’ re talking about religion or the Loch Ness Monster .
I still recall a clip I once saw of a philosophy professor addressing a group of students sitting around a table .
He asked one of the students if they “ believed ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The young man looked puzzled and thought about it for a moment before saying that the chair had all the physical properties he would normally expect and seemed to function adequately , so yes .
He “ believed ” in the chair .
The professor responded by saying , “ If you stopped believing in the chair right now would you fall to the floor ?
” And that ’ s really the point of all of this .
The chair exists whether you believe in it or not .
So maybe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worry if you ’ re one of those people who doesn ’ t believe in Bigfoot because… Bigfoot believes in you .
Enjoy the rest of your Memorial Day weekend .

There’s a very active subculture on social media that attracts people who believe in any number of offbeat subjects ranging from the paranormal and cryptozoology to those who insist that the Earth is flat. One cryptid, in particular, has a huge, loyal following and a recent survey appears to back up this phenomenon with solid numbers. Market research firm CivicScience completed a poll of more than 3,400 Americans to test their belief in a variety of “conspiracy theories” ranging from subjects such as extraterrestrials to whether or not the moon landing in 1969 was faked. One of the most surprising statistics, at least to me, was the fact that more than one in ten Americans believe that Bigfoot (or Sasquatch) is a real, living animal that roams the woods. He’s also apparently the all-time world champion of social distancing. (Paul Seaburn for Mysterious Universe)
It’s often said that every state in the U.S. has had at least one Bigfoot sighting and every state has at least one Bigfoot organization. Bigfoot television series dominate reality shows of the cryptid kind, so it should come as no surprise that a new survey found 1 in 10 Americans profess a belief in the big hairy one. However, when compared to belief in extraterrestrials, Bigfoot is a distant third behind aliens and aliens (we’ll explain). Does Sasquatch need better public relations, a better name … or some better conspiracy theories? “More than 1 in 10 American adults believes that Bigfoot is a real, living creature. Men and women are roughly equally likely to believe in Sasquatch. And whereas belief in alien theories peaked among Gen X, there was a strong cohort of Gen Z that expressed belief in Bigfoot. Millennials and Baby Boomers were slightly more skeptical.”
Belief in bigfoot wasn’t the most popular theory by a long shot. Nearly 30% believe that not only is there other, intelligent extraterrestrial life in the galaxy, but that it’s been visiting us here on Earth. Nearly a quarter of respondents (23%) are certain that the United States government is in possession of definitive proof that the aliens are here but is hiding it from the public.
The rest of the topics didn’t attract nearly as much support, but even some of the subjects that didn’t make it out of single digits may strike you as alarming. Nine percent believe that the government is using chemtrails to control the population. Eight percent are convinced that the Illuminati are real and they control most human events around the world. The same number (eight percent) think the Loch Ness Monster is a real, living creature and, yes… four percent still think the moon landing was a hoax.
The thing I like about this CivicScience survey is that they really go deep in the crosstabs to not just discover how many people believe in these things, but which specific groups are the most likely. Belief in Bigfoot was fairly even by gender and there wasn’t much variation by age group. (Gen Z and Gen X were the most likely to believe, but the difference was only a couple of percent.) One of the big variations was among people living in different regions. People living in the mountain west and the Pacific Northwest were significantly more likely to find Sasquatch plausible than people in the northeast. That makes sense since the vast majority of sightings are reported out west.
Another curious demographic factor was where people tend to get their news. Regular viewers of Fox News were roughly five times more likely (39%) to believe in Bigfoot than viewers of CNN (6%) or MSNBC (8%). I find that kind of odd, since I watch Fox News fairly regularly and you hardly ever see a Sasquatch story on there.
Of course, the big word to keep in mind here is “believe.” Much the same as with extraterrestrials, this will always come down to a question of belief unless and until some indisputable physical proof is brought forward. Just for the record, I can tell you that Bigfoot is real, or at least it was back in 1974. But just hearing that from me or even hundreds of other people doesn’t make it real for you. That is unless you wind up seeing one yourself. Then you’ll turn into “that person” that everyone is calling a nutcase.
But that’s the funny thing about belief, isn’t it? It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about religion or the Loch Ness Monster. I still recall a clip I once saw of a philosophy professor addressing a group of students sitting around a table. He asked one of the students if they “believed” in the chair they were sitting in. The young man looked puzzled and thought about it for a moment before saying that the chair had all the physical properties he would normally expect and seemed to function adequately, so yes. He “believed” in the chair. The professor responded by saying, “If you stopped believing in the chair right now would you fall to the floor?”
And that’s really the point of all of this. The chair exists whether you believe in it or not. So maybe Bigfoot exists. But don’t worry if you’re one of those people who doesn’t believe in Bigfoot because… Bigfoot believes in you. Enjoy the rest of your Memorial Day weekend.


hotair--2020-05-25--Rose McGowan: Here are the questions the NY Times sent to Tara Reade

Yesterday actress Rose McGowan published a tweet with screenshots of the questions NY Times ’ journalists sent to Tara Reade .
McGowan has been in contact with Reade for several weeks so apparently Reade sent her the list of questions .
The questions cover a lot of territory and seem to suggest the Times is investigating Reade ’ s connections to Russia .
I ’ m not going to highlight all of these but the general idea is that the Times is looking to pin down every bit of Reade ’ s life back to her childhood : “ You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mother as an activist — can you tell us what sort of issues she advocated for ?
” There are lots of questions about Reade ’ s life , nearly all of which seem to be intended to embarrass her .
For instance : “ Various landlords said you left them owing money and property in disarray – can you respond to that ?
” Another one : “ We heard that after your car was repossessed friends sold you their vehicle and let you pay it with a no interest loan but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and they took it back .
Is that true ?
” Near the end the questions suggest the Times is looking into Reade ’ s connections to Russia : “ Several people told me you were dating a Russian man online in the spring of 2019 .
Is that true ?
How did you meet and can you tell me about the relationship ?
” And what is this about ?
“ On Quora you followed three Russian individuals… How was it that you came to know of them and follow them ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the claims that Reade is some kind of Russian plant ?
What are they basing that line of questioning on ?
The final question was clearly submitted by a third party .
It reads , “ We understand that she filed a complaint against supervisors at the census bureau last fall .
Can she tell us about that ?
” I ’ m not sure what the old photo of Reade was about .
There doesn ’ t seem to be a question about the photo .
In any case , the NY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strange bedfellows : The big picture here is that every aspect of Reade ’ s life is now being scrutinized .
And to be fair , she is making some pretty significant claims so some scrutiny seems appropriate .
But this is a long way from the # BelieveWomen mantra we saw during the Kavanaugh confirmation .
Did anyone ever investigate Christine Blasey Ford ’ s life with this level of detail and skepticism ?
The few things we did hear from her ( two front doors , doesn ’ t like to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very misleading .
And yet , I don ’ t remember much concern about how that might relate to the veracity of her allegations .
The contrast in how these cases were handled is pretty striking to me but not to the progressives who supported Dr. Ford .
In their view , there were no negative stories about Ford ’ s life because there was nothing to tell .
This next guy referred to Ford ’ s character as “ pure.
” What is he basing that on ?
Again , the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything detrimental about Ford .
He has total confidence in the media .
Lack of negative material on Ford can only mean complete and utter innocence .
The fact that the media probably never sent a list of questions like this to Dr. Ford doesn ’ t even occur to these people .
The truth is that no one really knows if Ford led a perfect life because , outside of the claims she made about Kavanaugh , we never heard any real scrutiny of her history .
That didn ’ t fit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the time .
Personally , I ’ m okay with investigating the accuser .
It never made sense to assume any accuser was telling the truth , especially when you ’ re talking about ending someone ’ s entire career and making it so they can never show their face in public .
The problem is that the left turns their skepticism of accusers on and off depending who is being accused .
In Kavanaugh ’ s case , their skepticism was nearly zero , even if they don ’ t want @ @ @ @ @

Yesterday actress Rose McGowan published a tweet with screenshots of the questions NY Times’ journalists sent to Tara Reade. McGowan has been in contact with Reade for several weeks so apparently Reade sent her the list of questions. The questions cover a lot of territory and seem to suggest the Times is investigating Reade’s connections to Russia.
BREAKING NEWS: New York Times ‘journalist’ sent these questions to Joe Biden’s accuser, Tara Reade. The public needs to see how @llerer and the #NYT plan on twisting their minds. Now you can all see their tactics & how far they will go. pic.twitter.com/wZMnHtWGW5 — Rose McGowan (@rosemcgowan) May 24, 2020
I’m not going to highlight all of these but the general idea is that the Times is looking to pin down every bit of Reade’s life back to her childhood: “You and your brother have both described your mother as an activist — can you tell us what sort of issues she advocated for?”
There are lots of questions about Reade’s life, nearly all of which seem to be intended to embarrass her. For instance: “Various landlords said you left them owing money and property in disarray – can you respond to that?”
Another one: “We heard that after your car was repossessed friends sold you their vehicle and let you pay it with a no interest loan but that you struggled to make those payments and they took it back. Is that true?”
Near the end the questions suggest the Times is looking into Reade’s connections to Russia: “Several people told me you were dating a Russian man online in the spring of 2019. Is that true? How did you meet and can you tell me about the relationship?”
And what is this about? “On Quora you followed three Russian individuals… How was it that you came to know of them and follow them?”
Is the NY Times taking seriously the claims that Reade is some kind of Russian plant? What are they basing that line of questioning on?
This whole thing from the @NYTimes is disgusting but the last questions – involving interrogating Tara Reade about whether she committed the crime of "following three Russian individuals on Quora" and demanding an explanation – is just deranged. 🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺 https://t.co/1hL3UQbVaQ — Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) May 24, 2020
The final question was clearly submitted by a third party. It reads, “We understand that she filed a complaint against supervisors at the census bureau last fall. Can she tell us about that?”
I’m not sure what the old photo of Reade was about. There doesn’t seem to be a question about the photo. In any case, the NY Times’ approach is making for some strange bedfellows:
WOW! Look at these questions that a NY Times reporter sent Tara Reade.
From what I can discern, they are working to portray her as a russian asset that doesn’t pay her rent. Women that are sexually assaulted by Democrats have their lives destroyed by the left wing media machine https://t.co/02bzc5Ugha — Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) May 24, 2020
The big picture here is that every aspect of Reade’s life is now being scrutinized. And to be fair, she is making some pretty significant claims so some scrutiny seems appropriate. But this is a long way from the #BelieveWomen mantra we saw during the Kavanaugh confirmation. Did anyone ever investigate Christine Blasey Ford’s life with this level of detail and skepticism? The few things we did hear from her (two front doors, doesn’t like to fly) both turned out to be very misleading. And yet, I don’t remember much concern about how that might relate to the veracity of her allegations.
The contrast in how these cases were handled is pretty striking to me but not to the progressives who supported Dr. Ford. In their view, there were no negative stories about Ford’s life because there was nothing to tell.
I think understanding it requires letting go of your iron assumption the two cases are the same. Politico's story reports Reade is a habitual liar who habitually preys upon sympathy at her mistreatment. There's no equivalent Ford story because Ford is not like that — Jonathan Chait (@jonathanchait) May 16, 2020
This next guy referred to Ford’s character as “pure.” What is he basing that on? Again, the fact that no one in the media published anything detrimental about Ford. He has total confidence in the media. Lack of negative material on Ford can only mean complete and utter innocence. The fact that the media probably never sent a list of questions like this to Dr. Ford doesn’t even occur to these people.
I didn’t tell you questioning Ford’s character was wrong. Though I don’t think her character was proven to be anything but pure. And it was never Believe All Women. It was Believe Women. But it should’ve been Hear Women. — Ed Greenberger (@EdGreenberger) May 24, 2020
The truth is that no one really knows if Ford led a perfect life because, outside of the claims she made about Kavanaugh, we never heard any real scrutiny of her history. That didn’t fit with the #BelieveWomen mantra being pushed at the time.
Personally, I’m okay with investigating the accuser. It never made sense to assume any accuser was telling the truth, especially when you’re talking about ending someone’s entire career and making it so they can never show their face in public. The problem is that the left turns their skepticism of accusers on and off depending who is being accused. In Kavanaugh’s case, their skepticism was nearly zero, even if they don’t want to admit it now.


hotair--2020-05-25--Film review: Is <i>Capone</i> a quarantine offer you can refuse?

Just how did Al Capone live out the last year of his life ?
Did he slowly fade into senility due to stage three syphilis — or was it all an act ?
The trailer for Capone suggests that the most famous mobster of his time pulled a Vincent Gigante before The Chin ever thought of it , using the ruse of dementia to look for $ 10 million Capone — “ Fonse , ” to his family — managed to keep hidden from the feds in his tax-evasion trial .
Can Capone remember where he hid the money , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of him first ?
And … is that what Capone is really about ?
The film described in the trailer sounds like it has some promise .
The film viewers actually get to see squanders it .
Rather than any kind of caper film , Capone instead turns into a deeply unpleasant look at a deeply unpleasant man descending into dementia while being perhaps just aware enough of it to torture him .
Almost the entire film takes place inside the Capone mansion , making us feel as quarantined as we already do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more time on eruptions of Capone ’ s bodily functions than it does on the mythical $ 10 million .
That ’ s unfortunate in one aspect , as Capone appears to have spent the money for a good film .
The estimated budget was just over $ 20 million , and got put to good use with an excellent cast .
Tom Hardy gets a thankless task in playing Fonse and makes the most of it , but the mannerisms of a dementia patient get tiresome all too soon .
Linda Cardellini @ @ @ @ @ @ @ performance as his wife Mae , with Al Sapienza and Kathrine Narducci serviceable in smaller roles as Ralphie and Rosie , whose relationship to Fonse never gets an explanation .
Kyle McLachlan has a smaller but critical role as a doctor who ’ s getting threatened to push Fonse into revealing where the money is , but that subplot goes nowhere , which makes McLachlan ’ s role a Macguffin at best .
Ditto for an overblown cameo from Matt Dillon as Capone ’ s friend and mentor “ Johnny ” ( presumably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but in a more horrific fashion .
( Note : the actual Torrio outlived Capone and died of a heart attack while waiting for a haircut . )
Other than the scenery at Capone ’ s Florida mansion , the performances are all that makes Capone worth watching .
The script is a mess , with subplots appearing and disappearing as often as Fonse ’ s memory .
The mythical $ 10 million pops up from time to time , but so does a weird thread about a son Capone may or may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading to all sorts of angst within the family .
All the while Hardy growls at everyone while staring out through bloody eyeballs with a sense of anger and confusion at all of it , at least when he ’ s not losing control of his excretory functions .
One has to wonder what another director might have done with this material .
David Lynch , for example , could have made this into a quasi-masterpiece by making it into a Mulholland Drive-esque puzzler blending fantasy and reality .
Francis Ford Coppola could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel .
Instead , Josh Trank ( Fantastic Four ) opts to play it straight , leaving us with nothing much more than the final decaying stage of a decadent , evil man who appears to have no redeeming qualities whatsoever .
By the end , we finally realize that we ’ ve all been caught up in the cinematic version of Geraldo Rivera ’ s famous journalistic pratfall .
We ’ ve all gone on a treasure hunt in Capone ’ s vault , only to find nothing there — and no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ find at all , ever .
Using the Hot Air scale for films already on home theater platforms , Capone gets a 2 , but only for the performances : • 2 – Wait for it to come on a TV channel you already get Capone is rated R for graphic violence , language , and a few other graphically represented events .
It ’ s not appropriate for teenagers , nor would the subject of Al Capone interest them much anyway , at least not in its ending .

Some spoilers included past the video.
Just how did Al Capone live out the last year of his life? Did he slowly fade into senility due to stage three syphilis — or was it all an act? The trailer for Capone suggests that the most famous mobster of his time pulled a Vincent Gigante before The Chin ever thought of it, using the ruse of dementia to look for $10 million Capone — “Fonse,” to his family — managed to keep hidden from the feds in his tax-evasion trial.
Can Capone remember where he hid the money, or will his illness get the best of him first? And … is that what Capone is really about?
The film described in the trailer sounds like it has some promise. The film viewers actually get to see squanders it. Rather than any kind of caper film, Capone instead turns into a deeply unpleasant look at a deeply unpleasant man descending into dementia while being perhaps just aware enough of it to torture him. Almost the entire film takes place inside the Capone mansion, making us feel as quarantined as we already do in real life. The film spends more time on eruptions of Capone’s bodily functions than it does on the mythical $10 million.
That’s unfortunate in one aspect, as Capone appears to have spent the money for a good film. The estimated budget was just over $20 million, and got put to good use with an excellent cast. Tom Hardy gets a thankless task in playing Fonse and makes the most of it, but the mannerisms of a dementia patient get tiresome all too soon. Linda Cardellini provides the most humanity in a solid performance as his wife Mae, with Al Sapienza and Kathrine Narducci serviceable in smaller roles as Ralphie and Rosie, whose relationship to Fonse never gets an explanation. Kyle McLachlan has a smaller but critical role as a doctor who’s getting threatened to push Fonse into revealing where the money is, but that subplot goes nowhere, which makes McLachlan’s role a Macguffin at best. Ditto for an overblown cameo from Matt Dillon as Capone’s friend and mentor “Johnny” (presumably Torrio), which also goes nowhere but in a more horrific fashion. (Note: the actual Torrio outlived Capone and died of a heart attack while waiting for a haircut.)
Other than the scenery at Capone’s Florida mansion, the performances are all that makes Capone worth watching. The script is a mess, with subplots appearing and disappearing as often as Fonse’s memory. The mythical $10 million pops up from time to time, but so does a weird thread about a son Capone may or may not have had out of wedlock, leading to all sorts of angst within the family. All the while Hardy growls at everyone while staring out through bloody eyeballs with a sense of anger and confusion at all of it, at least when he’s not losing control of his excretory functions.
One has to wonder what another director might have done with this material. David Lynch, for example, could have made this into a quasi-masterpiece by making it into a Mulholland Drive-esque puzzler blending fantasy and reality. Francis Ford Coppola could have given it a mythic, Shakespearean-tragedy feel. Instead, Josh Trank (Fantastic Four) opts to play it straight, leaving us with nothing much more than the final decaying stage of a decadent, evil man who appears to have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
By the end, we finally realize that we’ve all been caught up in the cinematic version of Geraldo Rivera’s famous journalistic pratfall. We’ve all gone on a treasure hunt in Capone’s vault, only to find nothing there — and no indication that there was anything there to find at all, ever.
Using the Hot Air scale for films already on home theater platforms, Capone gets a 2, but only for the performances:
4 – Buy the Blu-Ray/DVD
3 – Worth a rental price or pay-per-view
2 – Wait for it to come on a TV channel you already get
1 – Avoid at all costs
Capone is rated R for graphic violence, language, and a few other graphically represented events. It’s not appropriate for teenagers, nor would the subject of Al Capone interest them much anyway, at least not in its ending.


hotair--2020-05-25--Trump and Pence: We might have to move the convention if North Carolina can't guarantee full capacit

Trump and Pence: We might have to move the convention if North Carolina can't guarantee full capacity in August

There ’ s an ulterior motive to this .
There has to be , as it ’ s nutty to expect a guarantee about how a state will react to an unpredictable global pandemic three months in advance .
The convention is scheduled to begin three months from yesterday .
To give you a sense of how much can change in that span of time , here ’ s what Trump was tweeting three months ago yesterday : The United States had no confirmed deaths from coronavirus on February 24 , although later investigation found that a few had already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can change in 90 days .
Another odd thing about this is that North Carolina ’ s Democratic governor , Roy Cooper , isn ’ t still in “ Shutdown mood.
” The state is moving to reopen .
They moved to phase two just a few days ago , in fact , with restaurants , salons , retail businesses , and child-care facilities all allowed to open at 50 percent capacity .
( Bars , gyms , and movie theaters are still closed . )
Phase one lasted just two weeks so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his team are slow-walking the process .
Local health officials expect phase two to last five weeks , but even on that timeline they ’ ll reach phase three nearly two months before the convention starts .
“ The tweets completely blindsided party officials and those involved in planning the convention , who have repeatedly argued that health and safety will come first , ” said CNN of Trump ’ s new convention demand this morning .
I ’ ll bet .
A few days ago there was a report that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ limited-capacity convention , just in case .
But behind the scenes , Republicans are looking at possible contingency plans , including limiting the number of people who descend on Charlotte to only delegates , and making alternate delegates stay home , according to interviews with a half-dozen Republicans close to the planning .
Mr. Trump , who was heavily involved in the staging of his last nominating convention , has even shown a new openness to participating in a scaled-down event .
He has mused aloud to several aides about why the convention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hotel ballroom in Florida , given all of the health concerns and the fact that Florida is further along in reopening portions of the state… [ RNC chair Ronna ] McDaniel and other Republicans have said that they have hired a medical expert and that they are consulting with the governor of North Carolina and the mayor of Charlotte , who have been focused on controlling the spread of the coronavirus .
Local politicians in North Carolina , including Republicans , have expressed skepticism that the convention will be able to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reaches phase three by July 1 and manages to meet its benchmarks to remain at that phase until the convention .
Do state and federal guidelines allow for mass indoor gatherings even at phase three ?
Trump ’ s federal guidelines refer to “ limited ” social distancing at that stage , whatever that means : “ LARGE VENUES ( e.g.
, sit-down dining , movie theaters , sporting venues , places of worship ) can operate under limited physical distancing protocols.
” North Carolina ’ s guidelines are even vaguer : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , other businesses , houses of worship and entertainment venues.
” What about full capacity with no meaningful physical distancing , though ?
Here ’ s a timely article from the WSJ about the latest scientific thinking on containing COVID-19 .
Some believe that the spread of the disease can be effectively limited in day-to-day interactions with measures as simple as mask-wearing and common-sense distancing , as most people are practicing right now .
What we should strictly avoid , though , are “ superspreader events , ” huge mass gatherings in confined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And , uh , presumably political conventions .
The theory is that banning mass public events where hundreds of attendees can infect themselves in the space of a few hours , along with other measures such as wearing face masks , might slow the pace of the new coronavirus ’ s progression to a manageable level even as shops and factories reopen .
Researchers believe the explosive growth of coronavirus infections that overwhelmed hospitals in some countries was primarily driven by such events this year—horse races in Britain , carnival festivities in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Italy… The Mardi Gras festivities in Louisiana , a choir practice in Skagit County , Wash. , and a meeting of executives of the Biogen drug company near Boston are among the one-off events scientists think helped give the pandemic a fateful boost .
Mass transit is essentially an endless superspreader event , which may explain the apocalyptic outbreak that gripped New York City .
Scientists have also suspected for months that a soccer match in northern Italy in mid-February lit the fuse on the horrendous contagion that afflicted Lombardy .
Worse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only spread the disease but may generate deadlier infections in attendees : “ The people who attended not only got infected and then spread the virus across the county , but also showed stronger symptoms and a comparatively severe illness , Dr. Streeck said—possibly because they received a higher load of the virus from close and prolonged exposure , ” said a German researcher about a carnival held in Germany on February 15 .
There ’ s a reason why every pro sports league that ’ s considering resuming play is expecting to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ twisted logic should the RNC hold a full-capacity event at an arena in August if Major League Baseball and every musical act in the world is refusing to do so because safety comes first ?
Picking a fight with Cooper over this shows how Trump continues to misunderstand the mechanics of reopening .
Whether the RNC holds a convention or not isn ’ t really up to Cooper in the same way that whether Michigan ’ s economy comes back isn ’ t really up to Gretchen Whitmer .
Consumer confidence will determine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safer it is to shop , the more people will do it .
If cases begin to climb and people perceive risk , they ’ ll retreat into their homes again , whether or not there ’ s a local lockdown order .
By the same token , if there ’ s a second wave in North Carolina this summer , Cooper could throw open the doors to the RNC and invite them to hold their convention at whatever capacity they want and Republicans would end up opting for limited capacity voluntarily .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ as the spectacle of Trump cavalierly inviting attendees to put themselves at risk would cost him more politically than holding a scaled-down convention would .
Exit question : If they moved the convention , where would they move it ?
Most other key swing states are governed by Democrats ( Pennsylvania , Wisconsin , Michigan , Minnesota , Nevada ) so Trump would run into the same cautious approach by state leadership on reopening there as he would in North Carolina .
His obvious options would be either Florida or Arizona , each @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who ’ ll let him do whatever he wants .
Given Biden ’ s growing strength with senior citizens and the outside possibility that he nominates Val Demings for VP , moving the convention to Florida might not be a bad idea .
Maybe that ’ s what today ’ s Twitter gambit is about — as suggested by the boldfaced excerpt above , Trump may be looking for an excuse to move the convention to a state he needs more than NC .
If he insists on holding it at Mar-a-Lago then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well .
Two for one !

There’s an ulterior motive to this. There has to be, as it’s nutty to expect a guarantee about how a state will react to an unpredictable global pandemic three months in advance.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264891998017859584
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1264892000052088832
The convention is scheduled to begin three months from yesterday. To give you a sense of how much can change in that span of time, here’s what Trump was tweeting three months ago yesterday:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1232058127740174339
The United States had no confirmed deaths from coronavirus on February 24, although later investigation found that a few had already occurred and gone undetected. A lot can change in 90 days.
Another odd thing about this is that North Carolina’s Democratic governor, Roy Cooper, isn’t still in “Shutdown mood.” The state is moving to reopen. They moved to phase two just a few days ago, in fact, with restaurants, salons, retail businesses, and child-care facilities all allowed to open at 50 percent capacity. (Bars, gyms, and movie theaters are still closed.) Phase one lasted just two weeks so it’s not as if Cooper and his team are slow-walking the process. Local health officials expect phase two to last five weeks, but even on that timeline they’ll reach phase three nearly two months before the convention starts.
“The tweets completely blindsided party officials and those involved in planning the convention, who have repeatedly argued that health and safety will come first,” said CNN of Trump’s new convention demand this morning. I’ll bet. A few days ago there was a report that the RNC had itself begun planning for a limited-capacity convention, just in case.
But behind the scenes, Republicans are looking at possible contingency plans, including limiting the number of people who descend on Charlotte to only delegates, and making alternate delegates stay home, according to interviews with a half-dozen Republicans close to the planning. Mr. Trump, who was heavily involved in the staging of his last nominating convention, has even shown a new openness to participating in a scaled-down event. He has mused aloud to several aides about why the convention can’t simply be held in a hotel ballroom in Florida, given all of the health concerns and the fact that Florida is further along in reopening portions of the state… [RNC chair Ronna] McDaniel and other Republicans have said that they have hired a medical expert and that they are consulting with the governor of North Carolina and the mayor of Charlotte, who have been focused on controlling the spread of the coronavirus. Local politicians in North Carolina, including Republicans, have expressed skepticism that the convention will be able to go forward as planned.
Assume North Carolina reaches phase three by July 1 and manages to meet its benchmarks to remain at that phase until the convention. Do state and federal guidelines allow for mass indoor gatherings even at phase three? Trump’s federal guidelines refer to “limited” social distancing at that stage, whatever that means: “LARGE VENUES (e.g., sit-down dining, movie theaters, sporting venues, places of worship) can operate under limited physical distancing protocols.” North Carolina’s guidelines are even vaguer: “Allow increased capacity at restaurants, bars, other businesses, houses of worship and entertainment venues.” What about full capacity with no meaningful physical distancing, though?
Here’s a timely article from the WSJ about the latest scientific thinking on containing COVID-19. Some believe that the spread of the disease can be effectively limited in day-to-day interactions with measures as simple as mask-wearing and common-sense distancing, as most people are practicing right now. What we should strictly avoid, though, are “superspreader events,” huge mass gatherings in confined spaces, like sports and concerts. And, uh, presumably political conventions.
The theory is that banning mass public events where hundreds of attendees can infect themselves in the space of a few hours, along with other measures such as wearing face masks, might slow the pace of the new coronavirus’s progression to a manageable level even as shops and factories reopen. Researchers believe the explosive growth of coronavirus infections that overwhelmed hospitals in some countries was primarily driven by such events this year—horse races in Britain, carnival festivities in the U.S. and Germany or a soccer match in Italy… The Mardi Gras festivities in Louisiana, a choir practice in Skagit County, Wash., and a meeting of executives of the Biogen drug company near Boston are among the one-off events scientists think helped give the pandemic a fateful boost.
Mass transit is essentially an endless superspreader event, which may explain the apocalyptic outbreak that gripped New York City. Scientists have also suspected for months that a soccer match in northern Italy in mid-February lit the fuse on the horrendous contagion that afflicted Lombardy. Worse, researchers believe that superspreader events not only spread the disease but may generate deadlier infections in attendees: “The people who attended not only got infected and then spread the virus across the county, but also showed stronger symptoms and a comparatively severe illness, Dr. Streeck said—possibly because they received a higher load of the virus from close and prolonged exposure,” said a German researcher about a carnival held in Germany on February 15.
There’s a reason why every pro sports league that’s considering resuming play is expecting to do so without fans. By what twisted logic should the RNC hold a full-capacity event at an arena in August if Major League Baseball and every musical act in the world is refusing to do so because safety comes first?
Picking a fight with Cooper over this shows how Trump continues to misunderstand the mechanics of reopening. Whether the RNC holds a convention or not isn’t really up to Cooper in the same way that whether Michigan’s economy comes back isn’t really up to Gretchen Whitmer. Consumer confidence will determine the fate of the economy; the safer it is to shop, the more people will do it. If cases begin to climb and people perceive risk, they’ll retreat into their homes again, whether or not there’s a local lockdown order. By the same token, if there’s a second wave in North Carolina this summer, Cooper could throw open the doors to the RNC and invite them to hold their convention at whatever capacity they want and Republicans would end up opting for limited capacity voluntarily. They’ll have no choice, as the spectacle of Trump cavalierly inviting attendees to put themselves at risk would cost him more politically than holding a scaled-down convention would.
Exit question: If they moved the convention, where would they move it? Most other key swing states are governed by Democrats (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada) so Trump would run into the same cautious approach by state leadership on reopening there as he would in North Carolina. His obvious options would be either Florida or Arizona, each of which is governed by a Republican who’ll let him do whatever he wants. Given Biden’s growing strength with senior citizens and the outside possibility that he nominates Val Demings for VP, moving the convention to Florida might not be a bad idea. Maybe that’s what today’s Twitter gambit is about — as suggested by the boldfaced excerpt above, Trump may be looking for an excuse to move the convention to a state he needs more than NC. If he insists on holding it at Mar-a-Lago then he can fleece the RNC on costs as well. Two for one!