hotair--2020-08-02--A quiet moment, a miraculous feast: Sunday reflection

When Jesus heard of the death of John the Baptist , he withdrew in a boat to a deserted place by himself .
The crowds heard of this and followed him on foot from their towns .
When he disembarked and saw the vast crowd , his heart was moved with pity for them , and he cured their sick .
When it was evening , the disciples approached him and said , “ This is a deserted place and it is already late ; dismiss the crowds so that they can go to the villages and buy food for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There is no need for them to go away ; give them some food yourselves.
” But they said to him , “ Five loaves and two fish are all we have here.
” Then he said , “ Bring them here to me , ” and he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass .
Taking the five loaves and the two fish , and looking up to heaven , he said the blessing , broke the loaves , and gave them to the disciples , who in turn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all ate and were satisfied , and they picked up the fragments left over — twelve wicker baskets full .
Those who ate were about five thousand men , not counting women and children .
How difficult is it in our times to seek quiet ?
Even in the middle of a pandemic , it seems like life is as busy as ever .
Zoom meetings , coordinating issues with family over distances , home projects ( ahem ) … life just buzzes by , seemingly at breakneck pace even inside the home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , though ?
Do we purposely structure our lives so that we avoid silence and inward reflection ?
With so many options for real or virtual connections , and so many choices in entertainment , the noise of life overwhelms our ability to be still and listen for what God has to say to us , and what we have to say to ourselves .
And at times in my life , it seems that is a deliberate choice — a way to push off that connection and its call for authenticity and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me think of the necessity of that quiet and stillness .
Today we have one of the most marvelous of Jesus ’ miracles , the multiplication of the fishes and loaves , in which He fed multitudes from a modest amount of food .
Faith brings sustenance in abundance , and this miracle made that point clear .
The word of God is our true food and true sustenance , and the Lord will give us the means to come into communion with it when we make that effort .
And make no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hold to hear Jesus ’ preaching .
We tend to see this Gospel and others like it through modern eyes , when we have plenty of free time to go to concerts and theater in the park .
It ’ s not unusual , especially in this country , for thousands of people to show up to see something entertaining , even on short notice .
In those days , however , only the wealthy had any kind of free time .
In Judea in those days , almost everyone else had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kept the Sabbath holy , but they worked from dawn to dusk every other day just to stay alive .
They didn ’ t worry about paying a cable bill ; they worried about not being able to eat .
It would have been an extraordinary sacrifice to walk away from the farms and trades that these thousands would normally have worked just to hear Jesus preach .
The act of feeding them , especially in such abundance , was a miracle to the disciples who knew that Jesus had miraculously expanded the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might have been miracle enough for most of the rest of the crowd .
They came to listen to Jesus preach , of course , but pay attention to what Jesus does first .
The death of John the Baptist hits Him hard , apparently , so Jesus withdraws to be by himself .
Nor is this the first or last time that Jesus finds quiet and solitude to draw Himself into closer communion with the Father .
In fact , as Luke writes ( 5:15-16 ) , as the crowds grew , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We know that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human .
Why did He need to pray alone ?
He often prayed with the disciples as well , but Jesus needed His solitude , too .
The noise and the busy-ness around Him was necessary , but so was His time with the Father , and that could only be accomplished in the silences .
Only in silence can we truly listen , and truly give our full attention to the Lord .
In our first reading from Isaiah , the prophet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abundance , but also about the necessity of listening , emphasis mine : This kind of listening in silence is not a rejection of the world .
Jesus worked in the world to provide us with salvation ; He could not have achieved His mission through utter silence .
No crowds would have shown up to see someone not preaching .
However , that silence in which we make ourselves still and listen to what the Holy Spirit may be saying to us is what can sustain us in our own mission , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ All the noise around us acts as a cocoon to shield us from that kind of deeper connection .
In The Screwtape Letters , C.S .
Lewis has a soliloquy from the demon about the usefulness of noise in isolating us from God : Not all noise is vice , and it ’ s fair to say that not all silence is virtue , either .
( Lewis has something to say about silence-as-sloth through Screwtape ’ s letters , too . )
However , some silence is necessary when put to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ourselves to His Word .
It is only by listening that we can hear , and it is only by quieting ourselves that we can listen .
We may not work miracles from that connection , but we can help align our will with the Lord ’ s once we allow Him to speak to us .
That can form us to be the Lord ’ s instrument more fully , to be more fully the children of God , so that when we do speak , we can speak in love and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Garden at the Church of the Multiplication , Tabgha , Galilee , Israel .
Photo from my own collection .
“ 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 .

This morning’s Gospel reading is Matthew 14:13–21:
When Jesus heard of the death of John the Baptist, he withdrew in a boat to a deserted place by himself. The crowds heard of this and followed him on foot from their towns. When he disembarked and saw the vast crowd, his heart was moved with pity for them, and he cured their sick. When it was evening, the disciples approached him and said, “This is a deserted place and it is already late; dismiss the crowds so that they can go to the villages and buy food for themselves.” Jesus said to them, “There is no need for them to go away; give them some food yourselves.” But they said to him, “Five loaves and two fish are all we have here.” Then he said, “Bring them here to me,” and he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, he said the blessing, broke the loaves, and gave them to the disciples, who in turn gave them to the crowds. They all ate and were satisfied, and they picked up the fragments left over — twelve wicker baskets full. Those who ate were about five thousand men, not counting women and children.
How difficult is it in our times to seek quiet? Even in the middle of a pandemic, it seems like life is as busy as ever. Zoom meetings, coordinating issues with family over distances, home projects (ahem) … life just buzzes by, seemingly at breakneck pace even inside the home.
Do we do this to ourselves, though? Do we purposely structure our lives so that we avoid silence and inward reflection? With so many options for real or virtual connections, and so many choices in entertainment, the noise of life overwhelms our ability to be still and listen for what God has to say to us, and what we have to say to ourselves. And at times in my life, it seems that is a deliberate choice — a way to push off that connection and its call for authenticity and honesty.
Today’s Gospel makes me think of the necessity of that quiet and stillness. Today we have one of the most marvelous of Jesus’ miracles, the multiplication of the fishes and loaves, in which He fed multitudes from a modest amount of food. Faith brings sustenance in abundance, and this miracle made that point clear. The word of God is our true food and true sustenance, and the Lord will give us the means to come into communion with it when we make that effort.
And make no mistake, those crowds put everything on hold to hear Jesus’ preaching. We tend to see this Gospel and others like it through modern eyes, when we have plenty of free time to go to concerts and theater in the park. It’s not unusual, especially in this country, for thousands of people to show up to see something entertaining, even on short notice.
In those days, however, only the wealthy had any kind of free time. In Judea in those days, almost everyone else had to scratch for subsistence at best. They kept the Sabbath holy, but they worked from dawn to dusk every other day just to stay alive. They didn’t worry about paying a cable bill; they worried about not being able to eat. It would have been an extraordinary sacrifice to walk away from the farms and trades that these thousands would normally have worked just to hear Jesus preach. The act of feeding them, especially in such abundance, was a miracle to the disciples who knew that Jesus had miraculously expanded the food, but just the meal itself might have been miracle enough for most of the rest of the crowd.
They came to listen to Jesus preach, of course, but pay attention to what Jesus does first. The death of John the Baptist hits Him hard, apparently, so Jesus withdraws to be by himself. Nor is this the first or last time that Jesus finds quiet and solitude to draw Himself into closer communion with the Father. In fact, as Luke writes (5:15-16), as the crowds grew, Jesus went to pray alone often:
Yet the news about him spread all the more, so that crowds of people came to hear him and to be healed of their sicknesses. But Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed.
We know that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human. Why did He need to pray alone? He often prayed with the disciples as well, but Jesus needed His solitude, too. The noise and the busy-ness around Him was necessary, but so was His time with the Father, and that could only be accomplished in the silences. Only in silence can we truly listen, and truly give our full attention to the Lord.
In our first reading from Isaiah, the prophet relays the Lord’s message about abundance, but also about the necessity of listening, emphasis mine:
Heed me, and you shall eat well, you shall delight in rich fare. Come to me heedfully, listen, that you may have life. I will renew with you the everlasting covenant, the benefits assured to David.
This kind of listening in silence is not a rejection of the world. Jesus worked in the world to provide us with salvation; He could not have achieved His mission through utter silence. No crowds would have shown up to see someone not preaching. However, that silence in which we make ourselves still and listen to what the Holy Spirit may be saying to us is what can sustain us in our own mission, just as it did with Jesus. All the noise around us acts as a cocoon to shield us from that kind of deeper connection.
In The Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis has a soliloquy from the demon about the usefulness of noise in isolating us from God:
Music and silence—how I detest them both! How thankful we should be that ever since Our Father entered Hell—though longer ago than humans, reckoning in light years, could express—no square inch of infernal space and no moment of infernal time has been surrendered to either of those abominable forces, but all has been occupied by Noise—Noise, the grand dynamism, the audible expression of all that is exultant, ruthless, and virile—Noise which alone defends us from silly qualms, despairing scruples and impossible desires. We will make the whole universe a noise in the end. We have already made great strides in this direction as regards the Earth. The melodies and silences of Heaven will be shouted down in the end.
Not all noise is vice, and it’s fair to say that not all silence is virtue, either. (Lewis has something to say about silence-as-sloth through Screwtape’s letters, too.) However, some silence is necessary when put to the use of the Lord, in opening ourselves to His Word. It is only by listening that we can hear, and it is only by quieting ourselves that we can listen. We may not work miracles from that connection, but we can help align our will with the Lord’s once we allow Him to speak to us. That can form us to be the Lord’s instrument more fully, to be more fully the children of God, so that when we do speak, we can speak in love and truth.
The front page image is the Garden at the Church of the Multiplication, Tabgha, Galilee, Israel. Photo from my own collection.
“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.


hotair--2020-08-02--So were the mystery seeds a Chinese bio-attack?

Roughly one week ago , Ed looked at the strange story of people all over the country receiving mysterious , unrequested packages of seeds in the mail .
Many of the packages had what appeared to be Chinese characters on them , leading some observers to suspect that the Chinese Communist Party was up to some sort of nefarious shenanigans .
Governments in every state were quick to issue warnings for people to not just go randomly planting the seeds in their gardens for fear of some sort of invasive species sprouting and further disrupting the natural balance of plants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were they really ?
Or was this just some sort of cheap marketing scam designed to gin up interest in a new seed company ?
There ’ s finally been some testing done on some of the packages of seeds .
Rather than some form of bioweapons , the initial results suggest something far more mundane .
( USA Today ) The U.S. Department of Agriculture has identified 14 different kinds of seeds in the mysterious packages that appear to have been sent unsolicited from China to people around the country .
All @ @ @ @ @ @ @ packages some of which contain flowering plants like morning glory , hibiscus and roses , according to Osama El-Lissy , with the Plant Protection program of USDA ’ s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service .
El-Lissy said other packages contain vegetables like cabbage and herbs including mint , sage , rosemary , and lavender .
“ This is a just a subset of the samples we ’ ve collected so far , ” he said Wednesday .
So we have morning glory , roses , lavender , mint and… cabbages ?
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an alien invasion at this point , is it ?
But that doesn ’ t necessarily mean that it ’ s entirely harmless .
( Though it could still be nothing more than a cheap marketing ploy , as I suggested above . )
The Agriculture Department is still cautioning everyone against planting these seeds , however , and for good reason .
They ’ ve only tested a tiny sample of the packages so far .
The fact that different packages had different types of seeds in them suggests that there could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a smaller subset of the packages and that could represent a very real danger .
Keep in mind that kudzu came to the United States way back in 1876 at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition .
Rather than being snuck into the country by bioterrorists or accidentally stuck to some cargo containers , we actually welcomed this import from the Japanese .
People started planting it all over the place , particularly in the south .
And now it ’ s overrunning significant parts of the country and we are totally unable to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new animal or plant species into an area where it has no natural predators to keep it under control , things can blow up in your face rather quickly .
And if we really want to go the full paranoia and science-fiction route , what if some of the more mundane looking seeds have been genetically modified ?
After all , this is China that we ’ re talking about .
As we ’ ve been learning the hard way all year , they ’ re no strangers to novel lifeforms showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dinner tables .
I sincerely hope people are paying attention to this news and being smart about it .
Are you really so hard up for seeds for your garden that you have to use random ones that arrive in the mail ?
Seeds are dirt cheap , people .
( Pardon the pun . )
And if they ’ re not labeled you don ’ t even know what you ’ ll be growing anyway .
I regularly buy large bags of birdseed to feed our local feathered friends and even that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now have a “ crop ” of millet growing around the edges of my property .
Thankfully that ’ s not really an invasive species ( and you can even grind it up for flour if you ’ re ambitious ) but it ’ s still a pain in the backside while doing yardwork .
Be careful out there , folks .
This whole episode may turn out to be nothing sinister , but why take the chance ?

Roughly one week ago, Ed looked at the strange story of people all over the country receiving mysterious, unrequested packages of seeds in the mail. Many of the packages had what appeared to be Chinese characters on them, leading some observers to suspect that the Chinese Communist Party was up to some sort of nefarious shenanigans. Governments in every state were quick to issue warnings for people to not just go randomly planting the seeds in their gardens for fear of some sort of invasive species sprouting and further disrupting the natural balance of plants and animals in North America.
But were they really? Or was this just some sort of cheap marketing scam designed to gin up interest in a new seed company? There’s finally been some testing done on some of the packages of seeds. Rather than some form of bioweapons, the initial results suggest something far more mundane. (USA Today)
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has identified 14 different kinds of seeds in the mysterious packages that appear to have been sent unsolicited from China to people around the country. All 50 states have issued warnings about the packages some of which contain flowering plants like morning glory, hibiscus and roses, according to Osama El-Lissy, with the Plant Protection program of USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. El-Lissy said other packages contain vegetables like cabbage and herbs including mint, sage, rosemary, and lavender. “This is a just a subset of the samples we’ve collected so far,” he said Wednesday.
So we have morning glory, roses, lavender, mint and… cabbages? It’s not exactly adding up to an alien invasion at this point, is it? But that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s entirely harmless. (Though it could still be nothing more than a cheap marketing ploy, as I suggested above.)
The Agriculture Department is still cautioning everyone against planting these seeds, however, and for good reason. They’ve only tested a tiny sample of the packages so far. The fact that different packages had different types of seeds in them suggests that there could still be other species out there in a smaller subset of the packages and that could represent a very real danger.
Keep in mind that kudzu came to the United States way back in 1876 at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition. Rather than being snuck into the country by bioterrorists or accidentally stuck to some cargo containers, we actually welcomed this import from the Japanese. People started planting it all over the place, particularly in the south. And now it’s overrunning significant parts of the country and we are totally unable to get rid of it. When you introduce a new animal or plant species into an area where it has no natural predators to keep it under control, things can blow up in your face rather quickly.
And if we really want to go the full paranoia and science-fiction route, what if some of the more mundane looking seeds have been genetically modified? After all, this is China that we’re talking about. As we’ve been learning the hard way all year, they’re no strangers to novel lifeforms showing up in places ranging from laboratories to dinner tables.
I sincerely hope people are paying attention to this news and being smart about it. Are you really so hard up for seeds for your garden that you have to use random ones that arrive in the mail? Seeds are dirt cheap, people. (Pardon the pun.) And if they’re not labeled you don’t even know what you’ll be growing anyway. I regularly buy large bags of birdseed to feed our local feathered friends and even that’s had some repercussions. I now have a “crop” of millet growing around the edges of my property. Thankfully that’s not really an invasive species (and you can even grind it up for flour if you’re ambitious) but it’s still a pain in the backside while doing yardwork.
Be careful out there, folks. This whole episode may turn out to be nothing sinister, but why take the chance?


hotair--2020-08-02--Boston "abolishes" special SWAT team that captured Marathon Bomber

If you happen to be an aspiring domestic terrorist , particularly in or around Boston , with a hankering to blow up a marathon or some other large , public event , it ’ s been a pretty good week for you .
First we learned that Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ’ s death penalty sentence has been revoked .
( At least temporarily . )
And now we find out that the elite Boston Transit SWAT team that was widely celebrated for bringing Tsarnaev to justice has been unceremoniously disbanded .
Officers assigned to the highly-trained unit were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and return to more regular duty .
( CBS Boston ) The highly trained Transit SWAT team that was once celebrated for capturing Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been dissolved .
Transit Police spend a lot of time training for anything that could happen .
And in 2013 , the unimaginable did… For a unit that was so highly trained and regarded , sources say the team is disappointed that it has been dissolved .
The I-Team reached out to the Transit Police and were told it had no comment on disbanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be… why ?
The CBS News team who broke this story asked the Boston PD but received no comment .
The closest they came was an observation made by some inside sources who said that the tactical team “ had not been used on calls much over the last few years.
” I ’ m not trying to speak out of turn here , but if you haven ’ t had many violent crimes requiring SWAT intervention on the metro over the past few years , might the reason be that you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ highly-trained and well equipped SWAT team keeping an eye on things ?
One might speculate that a lack of mass shootings , bombings or other forms of attack is a sign that the system was working .
But what the heck… let ’ s just disband the unit and see what happens , amirite ?
It ’ s hard not to wonder if the current climate of social unrest and riots isn ’ t playing into this decision .
Mayor Marty Walsh has been under a lot of pressure to defund the police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the big complaints we ’ ve been hearing regularly out of Seattle and Portland is that the police are too “ militarized ” and they shouldn ’ t be looking or acting like “ storm troopers.
” SWAT teams tend to go about their business while very well armed and armored .
Was this some stealth maneuver intended to fend off that sort of criticism by making the transit cops look more warm and fuzzy ?
Even if so , this is a sad sign of the winds of change blowing through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the midst of two different epidemics .
One involves a nasty disease , but the other is comprised of waves of social unrest , disruption and rioting that have taken on the hallmarks of what looks for all the world like a war against the forces of anarchy .
You might imagine that , particularly at a time such as this , you would want to have some of your most highly-trained and well-equipped foot soldiers on standby .
But that ’ s apparently not the sort of thinking taking place in Boston @ @ @ @ @ @ @ note , I wanted to turn back to that court decision I mentioned above reversing Tsarnaev ’ s death sentence .
Over at Fox News , there was a pretty good analysis of the situation from Andrew McCarthy this week .
He suggests that the justices who made that decision appeared to be handing down a ruling against the entire concept of the death penalty itself rather than come considered conclusion that the bomber hadn ’ t received a fair trial or had been overcharged .
Because of the decision ’ s girth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study it .
The upshot of the ruling , however , is that the trial judge failed to ensure that the Boston jury could be fair and impartial in light of all the prejudicial pretrial publicity .
There is a strong suggestion that the trial judge should have granted a change of venue .
This seems utterly unpersuasive to me .
To start with , if there is grave doubt that Tsarnaev got a fair trial under the circumstances , then why does the court leave the bulk of his convictions undisturbed ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of venue for his trial ?
I would respond to that question with another one .
To where ?
Mars ?
That ’ s about how far you ’ d have had to go to find anyone who wasn ’ t already intimately familiar with the story of the Boston Marathon Bombing and the deadly manhunt that followed it .
And I seriously doubt there were twelve people out there in any potential jury pool who were going to have much sympathy for the convicted terrorist .
Much like McCarthy , I find @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crafted this ruling was issuing more of an indictment of the death penalty itself than the relative fairness of the trial the killer received .
But that ’ s not their job .
You can oppose the death penalty all you like , but if you want to see it end you need to work to change the laws .
While it ’ s on the table , it ’ s still available for prosecutors to use .
And it ’ s hard to imagine anyone more deserving than Dzhokhar Tsarnaev .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go rejoin his brother .

If you happen to be an aspiring domestic terrorist, particularly in or around Boston, with a hankering to blow up a marathon or some other large, public event, it’s been a pretty good week for you. First we learned that Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s death penalty sentence has been revoked. (At least temporarily.) And now we find out that the elite Boston Transit SWAT team that was widely celebrated for bringing Tsarnaev to justice has been unceremoniously disbanded. Officers assigned to the highly-trained unit were told to turn in their special equipment and return to more regular duty. (CBS Boston)
The highly trained Transit SWAT team that was once celebrated for capturing Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been dissolved. Transit Police spend a lot of time training for anything that could happen. And in 2013, the unimaginable did… For a unit that was so highly trained and regarded, sources say the team is disappointed that it has been dissolved. The I-Team reached out to the Transit Police and were told it had no comment on disbanding the unit.
The obvious question here would be… why? The CBS News team who broke this story asked the Boston PD but received no comment. The closest they came was an observation made by some inside sources who said that the tactical team “had not been used on calls much over the last few years.”
I’m not trying to speak out of turn here, but if you haven’t had many violent crimes requiring SWAT intervention on the metro over the past few years, might the reason be that you’ve got a very visible, highly-trained and well equipped SWAT team keeping an eye on things? One might speculate that a lack of mass shootings, bombings or other forms of attack is a sign that the system was working. But what the heck… let’s just disband the unit and see what happens, amirite?
It’s hard not to wonder if the current climate of social unrest and riots isn’t playing into this decision. Mayor Marty Walsh has been under a lot of pressure to defund the police and institute other sweeping reforms. One of the big complaints we’ve been hearing regularly out of Seattle and Portland is that the police are too “militarized” and they shouldn’t be looking or acting like “storm troopers.” SWAT teams tend to go about their business while very well armed and armored. Was this some stealth maneuver intended to fend off that sort of criticism by making the transit cops look more warm and fuzzy?
Even if so, this is a sad sign of the winds of change blowing through Boston. We’re currently in the midst of two different epidemics. One involves a nasty disease, but the other is comprised of waves of social unrest, disruption and rioting that have taken on the hallmarks of what looks for all the world like a war against the forces of anarchy. You might imagine that, particularly at a time such as this, you would want to have some of your most highly-trained and well-equipped foot soldiers on standby. But that’s apparently not the sort of thinking taking place in Boston these days.
On a vaguely related note, I wanted to turn back to that court decision I mentioned above reversing Tsarnaev’s death sentence. Over at Fox News, there was a pretty good analysis of the situation from Andrew McCarthy this week. He suggests that the justices who made that decision appeared to be handing down a ruling against the entire concept of the death penalty itself rather than come considered conclusion that the bomber hadn’t received a fair trial or had been overcharged.
Because of the decision’s girth, more time will be needed to study it. The upshot of the ruling, however, is that the trial judge failed to ensure that the Boston jury could be fair and impartial in light of all the prejudicial pretrial publicity. There is a strong suggestion that the trial judge should have granted a change of venue. This seems utterly unpersuasive to me. To start with, if there is grave doubt that Tsarnaev got a fair trial under the circumstances, then why does the court leave the bulk of his convictions undisturbed?
Should Tsarnaev have been granted a change of venue for his trial? I would respond to that question with another one. To where? Mars? That’s about how far you’d have had to go to find anyone who wasn’t already intimately familiar with the story of the Boston Marathon Bombing and the deadly manhunt that followed it. And I seriously doubt there were twelve people out there in any potential jury pool who were going to have much sympathy for the convicted terrorist.
Much like McCarthy, I find myself thinking that the three-judge panel who crafted this ruling was issuing more of an indictment of the death penalty itself than the relative fairness of the trial the killer received. But that’s not their job. You can oppose the death penalty all you like, but if you want to see it end you need to work to change the laws. While it’s on the table, it’s still available for prosecutors to use. And it’s hard to imagine anyone more deserving than Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. It’s well past time for him to go rejoin his brother.


hotair--2020-08-03--Bass: On second thought, maybe Castro wasn't so wonderful

As some of our other writers here have already noted , there ’ s been quite a bit of chatter among politicos this week suggesting that California Congresswoman Karen Bass ( D ) may be rising near the top of the stack in the Joe Biden veepstakes .
That choice would have struck me as slightly odd even without her documented record of being a cheerleader for Fidel Castro ’ s Cuban regime when she was younger .
But with that added wrinkle in the story , Bass seemed like even less of an optimal pick .
Now it looks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ note about how her chances at the number two slot were about to go up in flames because yesterday she began changing her tune .
You see , she ’ s been “ listening ” to various voices around her and has discovered much more about Castro ’ s legendary brutality .
( Free Beacon ) California representative and potential vice presidential pick Karen Bass ( D. ) said Sunday that she “ absolutely ” should not have made a statement mourning the death of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro in 2016 because she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” about Castro ’ s brutality .
“ I absolutely would have not put that statement out and I will tell you that after talking to my colleagues who represent the state of Florida , raised those concerns with me , lesson learned , would not do that again for sure , ” Bass said during an appearance on Fox News Sunday .
Bass said that she knows “ an awful lot more now ” about Castro ’ s abuses against the Cuban people since her initial visits to the country in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ developed over time.
” Ah .
So her views have “ evolved over time.
” But they didn ’ t evolve all that quickly .
As Ed Morrissey pointed out in the article I linked above , Bass didn ’ t go to Cuba just once to build houses and listen to Castro speak , learning what a monster he was in the process .
She went back seven more times .
And her policy positions as a Democrat in California haven ’ t exactly veered too far away from socialist principles .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Todd how much things have changed , despite all indications .
I remain surprised that Bass showed up on the veep shortlist to begin with except for the obvious reason .
In case you need that spelled out for you , she ’ s a Black female ( or “ individual with a cervix ” as CNN would put it ) and has been a vocal proponent of police reform amid the ongoing protests and riots .
Bass definitely isn ’ t a backbencher in the traditional sense of the word , particularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Caucus with nearly ten years in office .
But at the same time , she still hasn ’ t risen to the senior ranks of Democratic leadership or been discussed very much for national office .
Listening to a couple of her speeches and press appearances she certainly seems comfortable enough on the stump to be an effective candidate , but that ’ s a pretty low bar for a shot at the Vice Presidency .
Aside from ticking off the aforementioned race and gender boxes , she doesn ’ t appear to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ race .
He ’ s already locked up California and having her on the ticket probably wouldn ’ t run up his lead in the popular vote by much in that state .
But her previous support of Castro could actually wind up costing Biden votes in Florida where he definitely can ’ t afford to be squandering any .
She has zero executive branch experience , unlike Kamala Harris who at least served as an Attorney General .
One apology tour on the Sunday shows never shuts up the media entirely when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a story like this .
If Biden picks her , you ’ ll be hearing Castro ’ s name at the VP debate and pretty much every stop she makes on the campaign trail between now and November .
Honestly , if Biden actually winds up picking Bass , pundits are going to be wondering if Uncle Joe is even more addled than some might already suspect .

As some of our other writers here have already noted, there’s been quite a bit of chatter among politicos this week suggesting that California Congresswoman Karen Bass (D) may be rising near the top of the stack in the Joe Biden veepstakes. That choice would have struck me as slightly odd even without her documented record of being a cheerleader for Fidel Castro’s Cuban regime when she was younger. But with that added wrinkle in the story, Bass seemed like even less of an optimal pick. Now it looks like somebody must have slipped her a note about how her chances at the number two slot were about to go up in flames because yesterday she began changing her tune. You see, she’s been “listening” to various voices around her and has discovered much more about Castro’s legendary brutality. (Free Beacon)
California representative and potential vice presidential pick Karen Bass (D.) said Sunday that she “absolutely” should not have made a statement mourning the death of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro in 2016 because she knows “an awful lot more now” about Castro’s brutality. “I absolutely would have not put that statement out and I will tell you that after talking to my colleagues who represent the state of Florida, raised those concerns with me, lesson learned, would not do that again for sure,” Bass said during an appearance on Fox News Sunday. Bass said that she knows “an awful lot more now” about Castro’s abuses against the Cuban people since her initial visits to the country in the 1970s and that her perspective has “developed over time.”
Ah. So her views have “evolved over time.” But they didn’t evolve all that quickly. As Ed Morrissey pointed out in the article I linked above, Bass didn’t go to Cuba just once to build houses and listen to Castro speak, learning what a monster he was in the process. She went back seven more times. And her policy positions as a Democrat in California haven’t exactly veered too far away from socialist principles. Here’s Bass explaining to Chuck Todd how much things have changed, despite all indications.
I remain surprised that Bass showed up on the veep shortlist to begin with except for the obvious reason. In case you need that spelled out for you, she’s a Black female (or “individual with a cervix” as CNN would put it) and has been a vocal proponent of police reform amid the ongoing protests and riots.
Bass definitely isn’t a backbencher in the traditional sense of the word, particularly as the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus with nearly ten years in office. But at the same time, she still hasn’t risen to the senior ranks of Democratic leadership or been discussed very much for national office. Listening to a couple of her speeches and press appearances she certainly seems comfortable enough on the stump to be an effective candidate, but that’s a pretty low bar for a shot at the Vice Presidency.
Aside from ticking off the aforementioned race and gender boxes, she doesn’t appear to do much for Biden in the national race. He’s already locked up California and having her on the ticket probably wouldn’t run up his lead in the popular vote by much in that state. But her previous support of Castro could actually wind up costing Biden votes in Florida where he definitely can’t afford to be squandering any. She has zero executive branch experience, unlike Kamala Harris who at least served as an Attorney General.
One apology tour on the Sunday shows never shuts up the media entirely when they’ve gotten their teeth into a story like this. If Biden picks her, you’ll be hearing Castro’s name at the VP debate and pretty much every stop she makes on the campaign trail between now and November. Honestly, if Biden actually winds up picking Bass, pundits are going to be wondering if Uncle Joe is even more addled than some might already suspect.


hotair--2020-08-03--Maryland gov overrules county health official who wanted to force private schools to close over coro

Maryland gov overrules county health official who wanted to force private schools to close over coronavirus

I think of school reopenings at this point the way I thought of the baseball season a few weeks ago .
We ’ ve got ta try — but we ’ ve also got ta realize that odds are very long against this experiment lasting more than a few weeks .
I ’ m reminded of what Nationals pitcher Sean Doolittle said not long before opening day : “ Look at where other developed countries are in their response to this .
We haven ’ t done any of the things that other countries have done to bring sports back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a functioning society.
” A society that can ’ t function well enough to make sports viable isn ’ t likely to make schools viable .
But we ’ ve got ta try .
A few months ago Maryland Gov .
Larry Hogan gave local health officials the power to close down facilities that are unsafe due to the COVID risk they pose .
Montgomery County turned around and used that power to slap a blanket ban on classroom instruction in private and parochial schools until October 1 .
The point of Hogan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ counties operate in a targeted way to protect public health , not to set categorical rules for a huge number of schools , especially ones that are taking proper safety precautions .
We ’ ve got ta try to let schools open , he believes .
And so the power that local officials used to enjoy has now been curtailed : It ’ s a bold move , as Hogan is essentially assuming political responsibility for whatever happens in Montgomery County ’ s schools in September .
If they can hold down infections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a hero .
If it ’ s a sh*tshow and cases county-wide skyrocket , hoo boy .
Local teachers ’ unions are presumably displeased , as many teachers don ’ t want to be back in the classroom … and also don ’ t want to do a full day of virtual learning , which raises the question of what they ’ re being paid for .
Parents should be happier with Hogan ’ s move , as the temporary closure of private schools in Montgomery County reportedly drew “ swift @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The polling among parents nationally is on Hogan ’ s side of the great reopening debate — sort of .
Although relatively few want full-time classroom instruction this fall , many others are open to a hybrid system of classroom learning and virtual learning .
Add ’ em up and that ’ s 72 percent who want kids in class at least part-time .
One ER doctor who has children in private school in Montgomery County cheered Hogan ’ s decision , telling WaPo , “ Schools had made significant financial investments , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and pages of plans.
” Why not give them a chance to put those plans into practice and see if they can make a go of this ?
That ’ s the Hogan view .
The alternate view is that this is destined to be a sh*tshow across America and we ’ re chumps for exposing people to avoidable infections by following through on it .
“ This push to open schools is guaranteed to fail , ” says Peter Hotez , a pediatrician and molecular virologist , and the dean for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ College of Medicine .
I ’ ve been corresponding with Hotez , and with several epidemiologists , over the course of the pandemic , and have noticed a starkness in their views in recent weeks .
“ The social-distancing expectations and mask requirements for the lower grades are unrealistic , ” Hotez told me .
“ In communities with high transmission , it ’ s inevitable that COVID-19 will enter the schools .
Within two weeks of opening schools in communities with high virus transmission , teachers will become ill. All it will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become hospitalized with COVID and everything will shut down.
” … Indeed , my conversations with epidemiologists in recent days were all strikingly dark .
They agreed : Schools should not risk reopening , probably not even for the youngest children , in the coming weeks .
“ We can ’ t pretend like everything ’ s fine , ” said Gary Simon , the director of the infectious diseases division at George Washington University .
“ If I had a school-age kid , I wouldn ’ t want to send him to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the community there ’ ll be spread in schools , potentially a lot based on that recent CDC study , and then the infected kids will seed it back into the community .
A school in Indiana that was among the first to reopen nationally got a call from the local health department literally within hours of class resuming alerting them that one of their students had tested positive .
That child , as well as everyone who was within six feet of him for 15 minutes or more , has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ ll happen thousands of times in thousands of towns and cities across the country in September , presumably .
I ’ ll leave you with a point/counterpoint .
Here ’ s the head of the CDC a few days ago , testifying that in-person instruction is immensely important for kids .
And here ’ s an op-ed by the superintendent of a small , not very wealthy school in Arizona who ’ s already had one teacher die of COVID and has no idea how to make things safe for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his staff has already tested positive despite not having had kids around since March .
Exit quotation : “ We still haven ’ t received our order of Plexiglas barriers , so we ’ re cutting up shower curtains and trying to make do with that .
”

I think of school reopenings at this point the way I thought of the baseball season a few weeks ago. We’ve gotta try — but we’ve also gotta realize that odds are very long against this experiment lasting more than a few weeks. I’m reminded of what Nationals pitcher Sean Doolittle said not long before opening day: “Look at where other developed countries are in their response to this. We haven’t done any of the things that other countries have done to bring sports back. Sports are like the reward of a functioning society.”
A society that can’t function well enough to make sports viable isn’t likely to make schools viable. But we’ve gotta try.
A few months ago Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan gave local health officials the power to close down facilities that are unsafe due to the COVID risk they pose. Montgomery County turned around and used that power to slap a blanket ban on classroom instruction in private and parochial schools until October 1. The point of Hogan’s initial action was to let counties operate in a targeted way to protect public health, not to set categorical rules for a huge number of schools, especially ones that are taking proper safety precautions. We’ve gotta try to let schools open, he believes. And so the power that local officials used to enjoy has now been curtailed:
I strongly disagree with Montgomery County’s decision to mandate the closure of private and parochial schools. My full statement: pic.twitter.com/4pESSu93Tj — Governor Larry Hogan (@GovLarryHogan) August 1, 2020
I have issued an amended emergency order ensuring that local schools and school systems retain the primary authority to determine when to safely reopen their facilities. My full statement: pic.twitter.com/DGcF5EBxx6 — Governor Larry Hogan (@GovLarryHogan) August 3, 2020
It’s a bold move, as Hogan is essentially assuming political responsibility for whatever happens in Montgomery County’s schools in September. If they can hold down infections and keep classroom learning afloat, he’s a hero. If it’s a sh*tshow and cases county-wide skyrocket, hoo boy.
Local teachers’ unions are presumably displeased, as many teachers don’t want to be back in the classroom … and also don’t want to do a full day of virtual learning, which raises the question of what they’re being paid for. Parents should be happier with Hogan’s move, as the temporary closure of private schools in Montgomery County reportedly drew “swift blowback” from moms and dads. The polling among parents nationally is on Hogan’s side of the great reopening debate — sort of. Although relatively few want full-time classroom instruction this fall, many others are open to a hybrid system of classroom learning and virtual learning. Add ’em up and that’s 72 percent who want kids in class at least part-time. One ER doctor who has children in private school in Montgomery County cheered Hogan’s decision, telling WaPo, “Schools had made significant financial investments, and had medical advisory boards and pages and pages of plans.” Why not give them a chance to put those plans into practice and see if they can make a go of this? That’s the Hogan view.
The alternate view is that this is destined to be a sh*tshow across America and we’re chumps for exposing people to avoidable infections by following through on it.
“This push to open schools is guaranteed to fail,” says Peter Hotez, a pediatrician and molecular virologist, and the dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine. I’ve been corresponding with Hotez, and with several epidemiologists, over the course of the pandemic, and have noticed a starkness in their views in recent weeks. “The social-distancing expectations and mask requirements for the lower grades are unrealistic,” Hotez told me. “In communities with high transmission, it’s inevitable that COVID-19 will enter the schools. Within two weeks of opening schools in communities with high virus transmission, teachers will become ill. All it will take is for a single teacher to become hospitalized with COVID and everything will shut down.”… Indeed, my conversations with epidemiologists in recent days were all strikingly dark. They agreed: Schools should not risk reopening, probably not even for the youngest children, in the coming weeks. “We can’t pretend like everything’s fine,” said Gary Simon, the director of the infectious diseases division at George Washington University. “If I had a school-age kid, I wouldn’t want to send him to school.”
If there’s spread in the community there’ll be spread in schools, potentially a lot based on that recent CDC study, and then the infected kids will seed it back into the community. A school in Indiana that was among the first to reopen nationally got a call from the local health department literally within hours of class resuming alerting them that one of their students had tested positive. That child, as well as everyone who was within six feet of him for 15 minutes or more, has been sent home to isolate for two weeks. That’ll happen thousands of times in thousands of towns and cities across the country in September, presumably.
I’ll leave you with a point/counterpoint. Here’s the head of the CDC a few days ago, testifying that in-person instruction is immensely important for kids. And here’s an op-ed by the superintendent of a small, not very wealthy school in Arizona who’s already had one teacher die of COVID and has no idea how to make things safe for returning students. More than 10 percent of his staff has already tested positive despite not having had kids around since March. Exit quotation: “We still haven’t received our order of Plexiglas barriers, so we’re cutting up shower curtains and trying to make do with that.”


hotair--2020-08-03--Murkowski: I wouldn't support filling a Supreme Court vacancy before the election

Here ’ s your second chance to read my take on the thorny politics of a Supreme Court vacancy before the election — or after the election , as there ’ s a chance a seat will open during the lame-duck session , God help us .
Chuck Grassley said two weeks ago that if he were still the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee , which he isn ’ t , he wouldn ’ t hold a hearing on a new nominee this close to Election Day .
He ’ d follow the same standard as in 2016 after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , allowing the voters to decide which party should fill that seat .
But that ’ s not the standard , you say .
The standard is that voters should decide who fills the vacancy only if the White House and the Senate are controlled by different parties .
When they ’ re controlled by the same party , the vacancy can be filled immediately .
That ’ s the Mitch McConnell standard .
But it ’ s not the Chuck Grassley standard , it seems .
And , importantly , not the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Murkowski ( R-Alaska ) says that confirming a Trump nominee to the high court in the middle of an election year or during the lame-duck session in November and December would create a “ double standard ” after what happened in 2016 .
“ When Republicans held off Merrick Garland it was because nine months prior to the election was too close , we needed to let people decide .
And I agreed to do that .
If we now say that months prior to the election is OK when nine months was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I don ’ t believe we should do it , ” she said .
“ So I would not support it.
” The current chairman of the Judiciary Committee is Lindsey Graham .
Surely the president ’ s golf buddy will help ram through a nomination for him if a seat opens up before November , no ?
Graham was noncommittal when asked about it recently : It would take four Republican no votes to block confirmation of a new nominee .
Murkowski sounds like a hard no .
Grassley is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea of confirming someone this close to Election Day , no one thinks he ’ d be the 51st vote for Democrats to block Trump .
Mitt Romney and Susan Collins were also asked by The Hill if they ’ d confirm a nominee this year and both ducked the question .
Romney is also very likely to vote no , I think , as it ’ s clearer by the day that he intends to go his own way in the Senate and let the electoral chips fall where they may .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ because she ’ s trailing in the latest poll and would be destined to alienate either her base or certain voters in the center no matter what she did about a new vacancy .
Because she already went to the mat for Kavanaugh two years ago , I think she ’ d try to “ balance ” that vote by voting no this time , and maybe try to sell it to Maine Republicans as a reason to reelect her .
“ This vacancy makes it more important than ever to have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year.
” They ’ d be mad , but the prospect of getting to fill that seat would lead most to hold their noses and vote Collins anyway .
That ’ s three likely Republican no votes , a 50/50 tie on a new nominee .
Is there a fourth anywhere in the Senate ?
Would Cory Gardner dare flake out on Trump in his bluish state of Colorado , knowing how doing so might conceivably help him by giving his candidacy more of an independent tinge ?
McConnell might even encourage it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate majority leader has become so concerned over Republicans losing control of the Senate that he has signaled to vulnerable GOP senators in tough races that they could distance themselves from the President if they feel it is necessary , according to multiple senior Republicans including a source close to McConnell.
” Although *blocking* the Senate from confirming a conservative to the Supreme Court goes against every last strand of McConnell ’ s political DNA .
Democrats are going to try to make it easy for Grassley or Gardner or whoever else to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say yes .
The point of ramming through a nomination before the election would be to make SCOTUS dependably conservative for a generation or more , but what if lefty outrage over it spurs Dems to undo that generational control … next year ?
They ’ re going to pack the Court anyway , we might respond .
Maybe , but Biden opposed the idea during the primaries .
Even in a best-case scenario for Democrats on election night , they ’ re likely to have only a narrow majority in the Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t have 50 votes for Court-packing once the red-state Dems like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have their say .
Some lefties pounding the table about packing the Court are also destined to be sated once Ginsburg and/or Breyer steps down in short order and Biden starts installing his own young nominees on the bench .
I think it ’ s unlikely that Democrats will go thermonuclear by trying to add seats to SCOTUS , but if anything ’ s going to give them the political juice to try , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new confirmation less than 100 days before the election .
In fact , even if a seat opened very soon , it ’ s reasonable to think that confirming the new justice would necessarily happen no earlier than mid-September and possibly even *October* in light of the timetable for previous nominees .
Depending upon how the polling looked for a move like that , even McConnell might get cold feet about it .
Imagine if it stood at , say , 35/65 while early voting was ongoing .
As for a lame-duck confirmation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If the election is over and the president is still the president , then I think it ’ s fair game .
If there was a change in administration , obviously you got a lame-duck administration .
That ’ s perhaps is a different scenario , ” said … John Thune , the number two Republican in the Senate , to The Hill .
If leadership ’ s not ready to cowboy up on that scenario , the backbenchers won ’ t do it either .
That really would put Court-packing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Dems , I think , more so than a pre-election confirmation in the fall would .

Here’s your second chance to read my take on the thorny politics of a Supreme Court vacancy before the election — or after the election, as there’s a chance a seat will open during the lame-duck session, God help us. Chuck Grassley said two weeks ago that if he were still the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which he isn’t, he wouldn’t hold a hearing on a new nominee this close to Election Day. He’d follow the same standard as in 2016 after Antonin Scalia’s seat was vacated, allowing the voters to decide which party should fill that seat.
But that’s not the standard, you say. The standard is that voters should decide who fills the vacancy only if the White House and the Senate are controlled by different parties. When they’re controlled by the same party, the vacancy can be filled immediately. That’s the Mitch McConnell standard.
But it’s not the Chuck Grassley standard, it seems. And, importantly, not the Lisa Murkowski standard either.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) says that confirming a Trump nominee to the high court in the middle of an election year or during the lame-duck session in November and December would create a “double standard” after what happened in 2016. “When Republicans held off Merrick Garland it was because nine months prior to the election was too close, we needed to let people decide. And I agreed to do that. If we now say that months prior to the election is OK when nine months was not, that is a double standard and I don’t believe we should do it,” she said. “So I would not support it.”
The current chairman of the Judiciary Committee is Lindsey Graham. Surely the president’s golf buddy will help ram through a nomination for him if a seat opens up before November, no? Graham was noncommittal when asked about it recently:
Graham said he’d be “willing” to fill a vacancy, but cautioned: “I’d like to get input from my colleagues.” “I don’t know. We’ll see,” he added. “I hope everybody stays healthy on the Supreme Court and we don’t have to worry about it.”
It would take four Republican no votes to block confirmation of a new nominee. Murkowski sounds like a hard no. Grassley is a soft no: Although he dislikes the idea of confirming someone this close to Election Day, no one thinks he’d be the 51st vote for Democrats to block Trump. Mitt Romney and Susan Collins were also asked by The Hill if they’d confirm a nominee this year and both ducked the question. Romney is also very likely to vote no, I think, as it’s clearer by the day that he intends to go his own way in the Senate and let the electoral chips fall where they may.
Collins would be in a terrible bind because she’s trailing in the latest poll and would be destined to alienate either her base or certain voters in the center no matter what she did about a new vacancy. Because she already went to the mat for Kavanaugh two years ago, I think she’d try to “balance” that vote by voting no this time, and maybe try to sell it to Maine Republicans as a reason to reelect her. “This vacancy makes it more important than ever to have a Republican president and a Republican Senate next year.” They’d be mad, but the prospect of getting to fill that seat would lead most to hold their noses and vote Collins anyway.
That’s three likely Republican no votes, a 50/50 tie on a new nominee. Is there a fourth anywhere in the Senate? Would Cory Gardner dare flake out on Trump in his bluish state of Colorado, knowing how doing so might conceivably help him by giving his candidacy more of an independent tinge? McConnell might even encourage it: “In recent weeks, the Senate majority leader has become so concerned over Republicans losing control of the Senate that he has signaled to vulnerable GOP senators in tough races that they could distance themselves from the President if they feel it is necessary, according to multiple senior Republicans including a source close to McConnell.”
Although *blocking* the Senate from confirming a conservative to the Supreme Court goes against every last strand of McConnell’s political DNA.
Democrats are going to try to make it easy for Grassley or Gardner or whoever else to say no by threatening consequences if they say yes. The point of ramming through a nomination before the election would be to make SCOTUS dependably conservative for a generation or more, but what if lefty outrage over it spurs Dems to undo that generational control … next year?
Kaine, the party’s last vice presidential nominee and a lawmaker with a reputation as an institutionalist, said confirming a nominee of President Donald Trump this year could compel Democrats to consider adding seats to the high court. “If they show that they’re unwilling to respect precedent, rules and history, then they can’t feign surprise when others talk about using a statutory option that we have that’s fully constitutional in our availability,” he said. “I don’t want to do that. But if they act in such a way, they may push it to an inevitability. So they need to be careful about that.”
They’re going to pack the Court anyway, we might respond. Maybe, but Biden opposed the idea during the primaries. Even in a best-case scenario for Democrats on election night, they’re likely to have only a narrow majority in the Senate next year. They probably won’t have 50 votes for Court-packing once the red-state Dems like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have their say. Some lefties pounding the table about packing the Court are also destined to be sated once Ginsburg and/or Breyer steps down in short order and Biden starts installing his own young nominees on the bench. I think it’s unlikely that Democrats will go thermonuclear by trying to add seats to SCOTUS, but if anything’s going to give them the political juice to try, it’s the GOP trying to squeeze through a new confirmation less than 100 days before the election.
In fact, even if a seat opened very soon, it’s reasonable to think that confirming the new justice would necessarily happen no earlier than mid-September and possibly even *October* in light of the timetable for previous nominees. Depending upon how the polling looked for a move like that, even McConnell might get cold feet about it. Imagine if it stood at, say, 35/65 while early voting was ongoing.
As for a lame-duck confirmation, I think the chances are near-zero. “If the election is over and the president is still the president, then I think it’s fair game. If there was a change in administration, obviously you got a lame-duck administration. That’s perhaps is a different scenario,” said … John Thune, the number two Republican in the Senate, to The Hill. If leadership’s not ready to cowboy up on that scenario, the backbenchers won’t do it either. That really would put Court-packing on the table as a retaliatory move by Dems, I think, more so than a pre-election confirmation in the fall would.


hotair--2020-08-03--NBC News publishes an op-ed on the reality of UFOs... sort of

I touched on this subject over the weekend when discussing the ( admittedly small ) possibility that President Trump might decide to shoot for some sort of UAP Disclosure as an October election surprise , but I wanted to circle back to it today .
One of the more remarkable evolutions we ’ ve seen in the area of UAP/UFO debates in this country is the way that more mainstream media outlets are choosing to cover the topic .
One of the last to get into gear ( after CNN ( twice this week ) , the New York Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NBC News .
But to my surprise , they opted to run an op-ed over the weekend from someone who is an expert in a related field , tackling the question of whether or not we truly might be on the verge of Disclosure and whether or not the United States government has anything really remarkable to disclose to begin with .
The article was written by Dr. Seth Shostak , an astrophysicist who currently serves as the Senior Astronomer for the SETI Institute ( Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence ) .
Sounds like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the subject , eh ?
Well… yes .
He certainly knows a lot about what ’ s out in the skies , provided you ’ re talking about things that are way , way out there in space .
But when it comes to the idea of UFOs flitting around in our atmosphere and the possibility of extraterrestrial life having visited us , he ’ s developed something of a reputation as a debunker .
You get a sense of that from part of the title of the article which reads , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t quite add up.
” Fair enough , however .
We should hear him out .
Shostak begins by reviewing all of the recent news about this topic , reports in major outlets , congressional hearings and the rest of the material most of our regular readers are familiar with by now .
He then asks the leading question , “ So , where there ’ s smoke , there ’ s fire , right ?
” But that ’ s where he pumps the brakes and begins to throw cold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that these craft seem to show up frequently near our military facilities , but points out that anyone with the technological capability to navigate the void between the stars wouldn ’ t give a hoot about our weapons .
It would be like Jean-Luc Picard checking out piles of slingshots on a primitive planet .
And that ’ s the point where we get to the serious debunking effort .
Check out his closing argument .
( Emphasis in original ) If the UFOs are interested in our military , that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from another star system .
Instead , it suggests Russian aircraft , Chinese drones , or something else terrestrial — hardware we could understand .
Humans have always been tempted to ascribe strange phenomena to the workings of superhuman beings , much as the Greeks argued that lightning bolts were javelin tosses by Zeus .
But science demands that any hypothesis be supported by detailed , repeatable and impartial observations .
Those are lacking here .
The Office of Naval Intelligence will supposedly make regular reports on at least some of its findings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if it would be good news for those who , like Fox Mulder , “ want to believe.
” But in fact , it might actually work the other way .
Disclosure could rob the believers of their best piece of evidence — which is to say , a dearth of good evidence .
Amazingly , Shostak makes the leap from the skeptics of the past who said that the lack of physical evidence was reason enough to doubt a possible extraterrestrial hypothesis to saying that if physical proof shows up , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ probably Russian or Chinese technology .
In other words , if there ’ s no physical evidence , it ’ s all in your head .
But if physical evidence is presented , you ’ ve misidentified it .
There are a few things I would put forward for Dr. Shostak in response .
First of all , I think one of the most common mistakes we make when considering these questions comes from the annoying human habit of trying to ascribe human motivations , rationale and reasoning to a potential alien intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they would be interested in our military capabilities involves believing you know how their minds work or what motivates them .
Yes , we could definitely understand why our terrestrial adversaries would be interested .
But what some totally foreign lifeform might be thinking is a complete unknown .
The author also conveniently ignores the data we have from the Nimitz encounters in particular .
As has been repeatedly pointed out , the Tic Tac that Cmr .
David Fravor encountered was doing things that should be completely impossible using the latest in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or the Chinese have figured out how to attenuate gravity or master inertial dampening , he should be prepared to explain how they did it .
In closing , I would point to one possible motivation for Dr. Shostak ’ s apparent reluctance to consider more exotic explanations .
He works for SETI .
Their entire reason for being is to search for the aliens , but they do it by listening for tiny snippets of signals coming from other stars or even other galaxies .
And they ’ ve been doing it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that looks like evidence .
If ET suddenly shows up and lands outside of a Burger King in DesMoines , that sort of puts SETI out of business , doesn ’ t it ?
There ’ s not much point in listening for their radio waves if they stop by and drop one of their transmitters in your lap .

I touched on this subject over the weekend when discussing the (admittedly small) possibility that President Trump might decide to shoot for some sort of UAP Disclosure as an October election surprise, but I wanted to circle back to it today. One of the more remarkable evolutions we’ve seen in the area of UAP/UFO debates in this country is the way that more mainstream media outlets are choosing to cover the topic. One of the last to get into gear (after CNN (twice this week), the New York Times and the Washington Post) has been NBC News. But to my surprise, they opted to run an op-ed over the weekend from someone who is an expert in a related field, tackling the question of whether or not we truly might be on the verge of Disclosure and whether or not the United States government has anything really remarkable to disclose to begin with.
The article was written by Dr. Seth Shostak, an astrophysicist who currently serves as the Senior Astronomer for the SETI Institute (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence). Sounds like he should be qualified to chime in on the subject, eh? Well… yes. He certainly knows a lot about what’s out in the skies, provided you’re talking about things that are way, way out there in space. But when it comes to the idea of UFOs flitting around in our atmosphere and the possibility of extraterrestrial life having visited us, he’s developed something of a reputation as a debunker. You get a sense of that from part of the title of the article which reads, “But Navy’s alien sightings don’t quite add up.” Fair enough, however. We should hear him out.
Shostak begins by reviewing all of the recent news about this topic, reports in major outlets, congressional hearings and the rest of the material most of our regular readers are familiar with by now. He then asks the leading question, “So, where there’s smoke, there’s fire, right?” But that’s where he pumps the brakes and begins to throw cold water on everyone’s parade.He notes that these craft seem to show up frequently near our military facilities, but points out that anyone with the technological capability to navigate the void between the stars wouldn’t give a hoot about our weapons. It would be like Jean-Luc Picard checking out piles of slingshots on a primitive planet.
And that’s the point where we get to the serious debunking effort. Check out his closing argument. (Emphasis in original)
If the UFOs are interested in our military, that’s actually an argument against them being visitors from another star system. Instead, it suggests Russian aircraft, Chinese drones, or something else terrestrial — hardware we could understand. Humans have always been tempted to ascribe strange phenomena to the workings of superhuman beings, much as the Greeks argued that lightning bolts were javelin tosses by Zeus. But science demands that any hypothesis be supported by detailed, repeatable and impartial observations. Those are lacking here. The Office of Naval Intelligence will supposedly make regular reports on at least some of its findings. That sort of disclosure sounds as if it would be good news for those who, like Fox Mulder, “want to believe.” But in fact, it might actually work the other way. Disclosure could rob the believers of their best piece of evidence — which is to say, a dearth of good evidence.
Amazingly, Shostak makes the leap from the skeptics of the past who said that the lack of physical evidence was reason enough to doubt a possible extraterrestrial hypothesis to saying that if physical proof shows up, it undercuts the argument because it’s probably Russian or Chinese technology. In other words, if there’s no physical evidence, it’s all in your head. But if physical evidence is presented, you’ve misidentified it.
There are a few things I would put forward for Dr. Shostak in response. First of all, I think one of the most common mistakes we make when considering these questions comes from the annoying human habit of trying to ascribe human motivations, rationale and reasoning to a potential alien intelligence. Trying to assume you know why they would be interested in our military capabilities involves believing you know how their minds work or what motivates them. Yes, we could definitely understand why our terrestrial adversaries would be interested. But what some totally foreign lifeform might be thinking is a complete unknown.
The author also conveniently ignores the data we have from the Nimitz encounters in particular. As has been repeatedly pointed out, the Tic Tac that Cmr. David Fravor encountered was doing things that should be completely impossible using the latest in known human technology. If the Russians or the Chinese have figured out how to attenuate gravity or master inertial dampening, he should be prepared to explain how they did it.
In closing, I would point to one possible motivation for Dr. Shostak’s apparent reluctance to consider more exotic explanations. He works for SETI. Their entire reason for being is to search for the aliens, but they do it by listening for tiny snippets of signals coming from other stars or even other galaxies. And they’ve been doing it for many decades without producing anything repeatable that looks like evidence. If ET suddenly shows up and lands outside of a Burger King in DesMoines, that sort of puts SETI out of business, doesn’t it? There’s not much point in listening for their radio waves if they stop by and drop one of their transmitters in your lap.


hotair--2020-08-03--WSJ: Homicides up by double digits in dozens of America's large cities

Should we put on our shocked faces ?
Naah .
We have seen anecdotal evidence of a violent-crime spike in cities across America for weeks , but the Wall Street Journal now has a fairly solid data analysis of the trend .
In dozens of America ’ s largest cities , homicides really have spiked upward , in some cases by large percentages , while police have been retreating from assertive positions .
Interestingly , though , reports of other crimes have declined .
Note well that I use the word “ reports , ” however : The murder rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and other types of serious crime have dropped in the past few months .
But researchers , police and some residents fear the homicide spike , if not tamed , could threaten an urban renaissance spurred in part by more than two decades of declining crime .
A Wall Street Journal analysis of crime statistics among the nation ’ s 50 largest cities found that reported homicides were up 24 % so far this year , to 3,612 .
Shootings and gun violence also rose , even though many other violent crimes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cities with long-running crime problems saw their numbers rise , including Philadelphia , Detroit and Memphis , Tenn. Chicago , the worst-hit , has tallied more than one of every eight homicides .
Less-violent places have been struck as well , such as Omaha , Neb.
, and Phoenix .
In all , 36 of the 50 cities studied saw homicide rise at double-digit rates , representing all regions of the country .
The increases in some cases are in both real and percentage terms , and in others more of the latter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Austin leads the chart on a percentage basis , but the actual increase in homicides is nominal .
It barely outstrips San Jose , whose data shows a 20 % decrease in homicides .
Fort Worth and San Antonio come in third and fourth in the percentage listings , but their total homicides put them much farther down the list — well below Dallas , for instance , which has also seen a percentage decrease so far this year .
Looking at this list , you ’ d think Texas was a major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but it ’ s the usual suspects instead — New York , Chicago , Los Angeles , Philadelphia , and , er , Houston too , it seems .
The percentage basis increase can be misleading for cities which have had traditionally lower homicide rates all along .
Rather than using total homicides as the comparison point , it might have been better to score cities on homicides per 1000 people and then score the increase from the previous year on that basis .
It might also help to better pinpoint when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offers several explanations , including COVID-19 shutdowns , for the uptick — rather than the obvious explanation of protests , riots , and police retreats in major cities .
Don ’ t forget that the trends in March and early April looked much different : Crime rates plunged in cities and counties across the U.S. over the second half of March as the coronavirus pandemic drove millions of residents to stay inside their homes .
Police logged dramatically fewer calls for service , crime incidents and arrests in the last two weeks of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks , a USA TODAY analysis of crime data published by 53 law enforcement agencies in two dozen states found .
The analysis is among the largest studies measuring the impact of the coronavirus on crime and policing .
NPR noted this two weeks ago , along with a decline in other reported crimes : That also has some nuance to it .
When people confined themselves to their homes except for the most essential transactions — food , mainly — interaction decreased and with it opportunities for many forms of violent crime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ however , one has to wonder just how many people are bothering to report crime at all .
What ’ s the point of calling police on an assault or a burglary when police are too tied up with riots and protests to respond ?
Some people , including one notable example in a Minneapolis neighborhood , have decided not to report crimes to police at all , including armed robbery and sexual assault .
Homicides are different , in that the bodies have to accounted for and the victim can no longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As a result , homicides are probably the most reliable marker for the environment in America ’ s big cities .
Whichever way that gets measured , those environments have taken a sharp and sudden turn for the worse — and it ’ s clear why , too .

Should we put on our shocked faces? Naah. We have seen anecdotal evidence of a violent-crime spike in cities across America for weeks, but the Wall Street Journal now has a fairly solid data analysis of the trend. In dozens of America’s largest cities, homicides really have spiked upward, in some cases by large percentages, while police have been retreating from assertive positions.
Interestingly, though, reports of other crimes have declined. Note well that I use the word “reports,” however:
The murder rate is still low compared with previous decades, and other types of serious crime have dropped in the past few months. But researchers, police and some residents fear the homicide spike, if not tamed, could threaten an urban renaissance spurred in part by more than two decades of declining crime. A Wall Street Journal analysis of crime statistics among the nation’s 50 largest cities found that reported homicides were up 24% so far this year, to 3,612. Shootings and gun violence also rose, even though many other violent crimes such as robbery fell. … Some cities with long-running crime problems saw their numbers rise, including Philadelphia, Detroit and Memphis, Tenn. Chicago, the worst-hit, has tallied more than one of every eight homicides. Less-violent places have been struck as well, such as Omaha, Neb., and Phoenix. In all, 36 of the 50 cities studied saw homicide rise at double-digit rates, representing all regions of the country.
The increases in some cases are in both real and percentage terms, and in others more of the latter than the former. For instance, Austin leads the chart on a percentage basis, but the actual increase in homicides is nominal. It barely outstrips San Jose, whose data shows a 20% decrease in homicides. Fort Worth and San Antonio come in third and fourth in the percentage listings, but their total homicides put them much farther down the list — well below Dallas, for instance, which has also seen a percentage decrease so far this year. Looking at this list, you’d think Texas was a major hot spot for homicides in 2020, but it’s the usual suspects instead — New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and, er, Houston too, it seems.
The percentage basis increase can be misleading for cities which have had traditionally lower homicide rates all along. Rather than using total homicides as the comparison point, it might have been better to score cities on homicides per 1000 people and then score the increase from the previous year on that basis. It might also help to better pinpoint when the increase took place, as the WSJ offers several explanations, including COVID-19 shutdowns, for the uptick — rather than the obvious explanation of protests, riots, and police retreats in major cities.
Don’t forget that the trends in March and early April looked much different:
Crime rates plunged in cities and counties across the U.S. over the second half of March as the coronavirus pandemic drove millions of residents to stay inside their homes. Police logged dramatically fewer calls for service, crime incidents and arrests in the last two weeks of March than each of the previous six weeks, a USA TODAY analysis of crime data published by 53 law enforcement agencies in two dozen states found. The analysis is among the largest studies measuring the impact of the coronavirus on crime and policing.
NPR noted this two weeks ago, along with a decline in other reported crimes:
Baltimore, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and Chicago all have witnessed a drop of more than 30%. Violent crimes such as aggravated assaults and robberies also fell substantially. That wasn’t true of homicides and shootings though. In some cities, there’s a troubling rise compared with last year.
That also has some nuance to it. When people confined themselves to their homes except for the most essential transactions — food, mainly — interaction decreased and with it opportunities for many forms of violent crime. With police in retreat now, however, one has to wonder just how many people are bothering to report crime at all. What’s the point of calling police on an assault or a burglary when police are too tied up with riots and protests to respond? Some people, including one notable example in a Minneapolis neighborhood, have decided not to report crimes to police at all, including armed robbery and sexual assault. Homicides are different, in that the bodies have to accounted for and the victim can no longer decide whether to involve police or not.
As a result, homicides are probably the most reliable marker for the environment in America’s big cities. Whichever way that gets measured, those environments have taken a sharp and sudden turn for the worse — and it’s clear why, too.


hotair--2020-08-03--Biden hires top staffers in Texas, exploits anniversary of El Paso mass shooting

Team Biden announced the hiring of top staffers in Texas on Monday morning .
Two Latinas will lead the effort to turn Texas blue in November .
The Biden campaign insists its efforts are to be taken seriously , as they are going all-in to win the state ’ s 38 Electoral College votes .
A Democrat presidential candidate has not won Texas since Jimmy Carter in 1976 .
This is the year that all changes if you listen to Biden ’ s campaign .
Biden ’ s campaign is excited because the polls show Trump and Biden within a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ depending on which day it is .
As I write this on Monday morning , Trump squeaks past Biden by +0.2 , according to Real Clear Politics .
That ’ s alarming for Republican voters but even the most squishy of Trump voters don ’ t think Biden will win Texas in November .
Biden doesn ’ t have the enthusiasm that Beto O ’ Rourke had during his race against Ted Cruz in 2018 , though , so if Beto couldn ’ t win then , it ’ s not likely Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is holding on to hopes of a victory .
Though the push in Democrat politics this cycle is for the advancement of Black women , this is Texas and Team Biden chose to pander to Latino voters .
Two Latina women were chosen for their experience in Democrat politics in the state .
The campaign also announced the name of its communication director and advisers .
Biden ’ s campaign announced that Rebecca Acuña will be his Texas State Director and Jennifer Longoria his Deputy State Director .
Acuña , who was raised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Texas State House members and was a press secretary for Wendy Davis during her 2014 run for governor .
Longoria , an Edinburg native who now works in San Antonio , was Texas Director for the Elizabeth Warren ’ s presidential campaign .
Biden has also announced former Texas Democratic Party communications director Tariq Thowfeek will serve as his communications director in Texas with 2018 former Lieutenant Governor candidate Mike Collier working as a senior adviser .
Jane Hamilton , Biden Campaign ’ s Statewide Director during the primary , will be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Houston native , will be Biden ’ s Director of Coalitions .
An interesting point I heard Karl Rove make earlier today during an interview was about the Biden campaign bloviating about running ads in Texas .
It turns out that they only spent $ 70,000 .
That ’ s a drop in the bucket for Texas political ad campaigns .
Most of all , the Biden campaign just wants to get under the Trump campaign ’ s skin and stir things up .
The earlier gesture was all for show .
Also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a video that exploits the first anniversary of the mass shooting in El Paso at a Walmart .
Just as happened at the time of the horrific event at the hands of a mad man , Biden blames President Trump for the gunman ’ s actions .
Just when you think politics can ’ t go much lower , it does .
You ’ ll note the part when Biden sanctimoniously says we must demonize no one .
What he meant to say was demonize no one but President Trump and his supporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bit , too , which is enough to make anyone ’ s eyes roll to the back of their head , especially if you are old enough to remember Biden ended one past presidential run due to plagiarism charges and for years he claimed a drunk driver killed his wife and young daughter .
It was a horrible car wreck but not at the hands of a drunk driver .
And , he has fibbed about his college records , too , so , when you add everything up , he is far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He regularly exaggerates his involvement in civil rights and his own Senate record , too .
How about those sweet deals he helped his son obtain in Ukraine and China while he was vice-president ?
The campaign released videos to the media before the general public saw them .
That ’ s standard for a campaign looking for publicity , which they all are .
Biden ’ s campaign also blames Trump ’ s rhetoric for problems in detaining illegal immigrants .
Democrats never blame the illegal immigrants for breaking U.S. law in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegally .
The open-borders crowd has convinced Biden to offer a “ path to citizenship ” ( amnesty ) for all illegal immigrants if he is elected .
“ Trump set up in so many ways the hateful rhetoric that led to the massacre , ” Biden senior advisor Cristobal Alex told Newsweek in an interview .
The Biden campaign argued that not only that Trump ’ s caustic approach to race led to the attack , but that El Paso has been in the crosshairs “ since Donald Trump came down those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when he attacked Mexicans , ” Alex said .
El Paso was the site of a detention center holding migrant children last summer that led to a march to end the detention of children a month before the shooting occurred .
The hate crime which followed is now the biggest case in city history .
Remember , if Biden is elected , he promised he would put Beto O ’ Rourke in charge of any gun-grabbing initiatives he might put into place .
Seems to me that Beto ’ s remarks that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ door to door to take away guns is pretty inflammatory rhetoric .
No measure of gun control is too extreme for O ’ Rourke and his wing of the Democrat Party .
He ’ ll come along for the ride if Joe ’ s back in the White House .
Now , that is scary .

Team Biden announced the hiring of top staffers in Texas on Monday morning. Two Latinas will lead the effort to turn Texas blue in November. The Biden campaign insists its efforts are to be taken seriously, as they are going all-in to win the state’s 38 Electoral College votes.
A Democrat presidential candidate has not won Texas since Jimmy Carter in 1976. This is the year that all changes if you listen to Biden’s campaign. Biden’s campaign is excited because the polls show Trump and Biden within a point or two in most polls, depending on which day it is. As I write this on Monday morning, Trump squeaks past Biden by +0.2, according to Real Clear Politics. That’s alarming for Republican voters but even the most squishy of Trump voters don’t think Biden will win Texas in November. Biden doesn’t have the enthusiasm that Beto O’Rourke had during his race against Ted Cruz in 2018, though, so if Beto couldn’t win then, it’s not likely Biden will win in November. The campaign is holding on to hopes of a victory.
“We are quite serious about putting [Texas] in play,” Jenn Ridder, the campaign’s national states director, told CBS News. “Increasingly we are seeing polls that show that there is real opportunity there for us.”
Though the push in Democrat politics this cycle is for the advancement of Black women, this is Texas and Team Biden chose to pander to Latino voters. Two Latina women were chosen for their experience in Democrat politics in the state. The campaign also announced the name of its communication director and advisers.
Biden’s campaign announced that Rebecca Acuña will be his Texas State Director and Jennifer Longoria his Deputy State Director. Acuña, who was raised in Laredo, has worked for three Texas State House members and was a press secretary for Wendy Davis during her 2014 run for governor. Longoria, an Edinburg native who now works in San Antonio, was Texas Director for the Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign. Biden has also announced former Texas Democratic Party communications director Tariq Thowfeek will serve as his communications director in Texas with 2018 former Lieutenant Governor candidate Mike Collier working as a senior adviser. Jane Hamilton, Biden Campaign’s Statewide Director during the primary, will be a strategic adviser. Shekira Dennis, a Houston native, will be Biden’s Director of Coalitions.
An interesting point I heard Karl Rove make earlier today during an interview was about the Biden campaign bloviating about running ads in Texas. It turns out that they only spent $70,000. That’s a drop in the bucket for Texas political ad campaigns. Most of all, the Biden campaign just wants to get under the Trump campaign’s skin and stir things up. The earlier gesture was all for show.
Also on Monday morning, Team Biden released a video that exploits the first anniversary of the mass shooting in El Paso at a Walmart. Just as happened at the time of the horrific event at the hands of a mad man, Biden blames President Trump for the gunman’s actions. Just when you think politics can’t go much lower, it does.
You’ll note the part when Biden sanctimoniously says we must demonize no one. What he meant to say was demonize no one but President Trump and his supporters. Biden lays on the moral authority bit, too, which is enough to make anyone’s eyes roll to the back of their head, especially if you are old enough to remember Biden ended one past presidential run due to plagiarism charges and for years he claimed a drunk driver killed his wife and young daughter. It was a horrible car wreck but not at the hands of a drunk driver. And, he has fibbed about his college records, too, so, when you add everything up, he is far from the epitome of morality himself. He regularly exaggerates his involvement in civil rights and his own Senate record, too. How about those sweet deals he helped his son obtain in Ukraine and China while he was vice-president?
The campaign released videos to the media before the general public saw them. That’s standard for a campaign looking for publicity, which they all are.
“This anniversary is a moment to resummon the purpose we felt one year ago and to recommit to the battle for the soul of this nation—a battle against the forces of white supremacy that are part of the very foundations of our nation but which this president has encouraged and emboldened,” Biden says in one video, which the campaign provided to Newsweek ahead of its public release Monday.
Biden’s campaign also blames Trump’s rhetoric for problems in detaining illegal immigrants. Democrats never blame the illegal immigrants for breaking U.S. law in the first place and entering the country illegally. The open-borders crowd has convinced Biden to offer a “path to citizenship” (amnesty) for all illegal immigrants if he is elected.
“Trump set up in so many ways the hateful rhetoric that led to the massacre,” Biden senior advisor Cristobal Alex told Newsweek in an interview. The Biden campaign argued that not only that Trump’s caustic approach to race led to the attack, but that El Paso has been in the crosshairs “since Donald Trump came down those escalators, when he attacked immigrants, when he attacked Mexicans,” Alex said. El Paso was the site of a detention center holding migrant children last summer that led to a march to end the detention of children a month before the shooting occurred. The hate crime which followed is now the biggest case in city history.
Remember, if Biden is elected, he promised he would put Beto O’Rourke in charge of any gun-grabbing initiatives he might put into place. Seems to me that Beto’s remarks that he is in favor of federal agents going door to door to take away guns is pretty inflammatory rhetoric. No measure of gun control is too extreme for O’Rourke and his wing of the Democrat Party. He’ll come along for the ride if Joe’s back in the White House. Now, that is scary.