hotair--2020-07-07--Is the new ICE policy for international college students a slap to China?

A new policy was announced Monday by the Trump administration which affects international students enrolled in colleges or universities in the United States .
The students will have to leave or face deportation if the school in which they are enrolled only offers online classes this fall because of the coronavirus pandemic .
Also , international students enrolled in schools only offering online courses this fall will be barred from entering the U.S .
This is a reversal in policy from the Trump administration .
Last March , when the coronavirus pandemic was beginning to disrupt our way of life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions , the Trump administration allowed international students to remain in the U.S. and continue their education online with other students .
This policy reversal falls in line with an executive order that will suspend temporary visas for foreign workers until the end of 2020 that was signed two weeks ago .
The Student and Exchange Visitor Program , which is operated by ICE , allowed international students to continue spring and summer classes online as schools shutdown .
It was a temporary exemption This exemption will not be extended to fall classes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and M-1 visas .
F-1 nonimmigrant students pursue academic coursework and M-1 nonimmigrant students pursue vocational coursework while studying in the United States .
The Student and Exchange Visitor Program ( SEVP ) announced modifications Monday to temporary exemptions for nonimmigrant students taking online classes due to the pandemic for the fall 2020 semester .
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security plans to publish the procedures and responsibilities in the Federal Register as a Temporary Final Rule .
Nonimmigrant F-1 and M-1 students attending schools operating entirely online may not take a full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States .
The U.S. Department of State will not issue visas to students enrolled in schools and/or programs that are fully online for the fall semester nor will U.S. Customs and Border Protection permit these students to enter the United States .
Active students currently in the United States enrolled in such programs must depart the country or take other measures , such as transferring to a school with in-person instruction to remain in lawful status .
If not , they may face immigration consequences including , but not limited to , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ F-1 students attending schools operating under normal in-person classes are bound by existing federal regulations .
Eligible F students may take a maximum of one class or three credit hours online .
Nonimmigrant F-1 students attending schools adopting a hybrid model—that is , a mixture of online and in person classes—will be allowed to take more than one class or three credit hours online .
These schools must certify to SEVP , through the Form I-20 , “ Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status , ” certifying that the program is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not taking an entirely online course load this semester , and that the student is taking the minimum number of online classes required to make normal progress in their degree program .
The above exemptions do not apply to F-1 students in English language training programs or M-1 students pursuing vocational degrees , who are not permitted to enroll in any online courses .
Traditionally , the rule is that international students must attend all their courses in person , with only one online course permitted per semester while studying in the U.S @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ICE deputy press secretary , international students enrolled in schools that are only offering online courses this fall due to the pandemic will be given the option of transferring to a school that offers a mix of online and in-person classes or leave the U.S. and take online courses from their home countries .
One immigration attorney says this could be the Trump administration ’ s way of targeting China with a new visa policy .
Chinese students make up the majority of international students in the U.S. As we know , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places the blame on China for the pandemic spreading internationally , including to America .
Allen Orr , a Washington , D.C. , immigration attorney , fears the new ICE policy will pressure universities to offer in-person classes just to avoid losing revenue from international students , putting professors and students at risk of the coronavirus , which causes the disease COVID-19 .
He also said it may not be practical for many international students to take classes remotely from their own countries because of huge time zone differences .
Orr said the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China , which sends the highest number of international students to the U.S. , followed by India , South Korea and Vietnam .
Most importantly to American colleges and universities , the new policy will affect their bottom lines .
International students provide huge financial rewards for American colleges and universities .
Their economic strategies are built around an influx of international students .
College administrators point to the cultural benefits of international students and American students coming together on campuses but the financial gains are not to be ignored .
Schools are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pandemic , and this change adds further uncertainty to financial planning .
The most recent data shows that 872,214 international students were enrolled in the U.S. in 2018-19 .
They contributed $ 45 billion to the U.S. economy in 2018 .
Harvard University , for example , has 10,285 international students from 155 countries .
The school announced Monday they only plan to bring back 40 % of undergraduate students to campus this fall .
All classes are planned to be online , even for those allowed to come back and live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to The Chronicle of Higher Education , 9 % of US universities are planning to teach all their classes online .
Like everything else during this pandemic , that can change in the coming months .
Is this an intentional smack to China in response to the pandemic ?
Maybe .
It can be seen as justified , though , given the visa restrictions on foreign workers now and also given the financial and public health disasters brought about by the pandemic .
You know that the Trump administration may be on to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren are speaking out against it .
Being from Massachusetts , there are many higher learning institutions in her state that are likely complaining to her about the policy change .

A new policy was announced Monday by the Trump administration which affects international students enrolled in colleges or universities in the United States. The students will have to leave or face deportation if the school in which they are enrolled only offers online classes this fall because of the coronavirus pandemic. Also, international students enrolled in schools only offering online courses this fall will be barred from entering the U.S.
This is a reversal in policy from the Trump administration. Last March, when the coronavirus pandemic was beginning to disrupt our way of life due to shutdowns and other coronavirus mitigation actions, the Trump administration allowed international students to remain in the U.S. and continue their education online with other students. This policy reversal falls in line with an executive order that will suspend temporary visas for foreign workers until the end of 2020 that was signed two weeks ago.
The Student and Exchange Visitor Program, which is operated by ICE, allowed international students to continue spring and summer classes online as schools shutdown. It was a temporary exemption This exemption will not be extended to fall classes. This affects international students on F-1 and M-1 visas. F-1 nonimmigrant students pursue academic coursework and M-1 nonimmigrant students pursue vocational coursework while studying in the United States.
The Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) announced modifications Monday to temporary exemptions for nonimmigrant students taking online classes due to the pandemic for the fall 2020 semester. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security plans to publish the procedures and responsibilities in the Federal Register as a Temporary Final Rule. Temporary exemptions for the fall 2020 semester include: Nonimmigrant F-1 and M-1 students attending schools operating entirely online may not take a full online course load and remain in the United States. The U.S. Department of State will not issue visas to students enrolled in schools and/or programs that are fully online for the fall semester nor will U.S. Customs and Border Protection permit these students to enter the United States. Active students currently in the United States enrolled in such programs must depart the country or take other measures, such as transferring to a school with in-person instruction to remain in lawful status. If not, they may face immigration consequences including, but not limited to, the initiation of removal proceedings. Nonimmigrant F-1 students attending schools operating under normal in-person classes are bound by existing federal regulations. Eligible F students may take a maximum of one class or three credit hours online. Nonimmigrant F-1 students attending schools adopting a hybrid model—that is, a mixture of online and in person classes—will be allowed to take more than one class or three credit hours online. These schools must certify to SEVP, through the Form I-20, “Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status,” certifying that the program is not entirely online, that the student is not taking an entirely online course load this semester, and that the student is taking the minimum number of online classes required to make normal progress in their degree program. The above exemptions do not apply to F-1 students in English language training programs or M-1 students pursuing vocational degrees, who are not permitted to enroll in any online courses.
Traditionally, the rule is that international students must attend all their courses in person, with only one online course permitted per semester while studying in the U.S. According to Carissa Cutrell, acting ICE deputy press secretary, international students enrolled in schools that are only offering online courses this fall due to the pandemic will be given the option of transferring to a school that offers a mix of online and in-person classes or leave the U.S. and take online courses from their home countries.
One immigration attorney says this could be the Trump administration’s way of targeting China with a new visa policy. Chinese students make up the majority of international students in the U.S. As we know, the coronavirus pandemic began in China and Trump places the blame on China for the pandemic spreading internationally, including to America.
Allen Orr, a Washington, D.C., immigration attorney, fears the new ICE policy will pressure universities to offer in-person classes just to avoid losing revenue from international students, putting professors and students at risk of the coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. He also said it may not be practical for many international students to take classes remotely from their own countries because of huge time zone differences. Orr said the policy appeared intended as a slap at China, which sends the highest number of international students to the U.S., followed by India, South Korea and Vietnam.
Most importantly to American colleges and universities, the new policy will affect their bottom lines. International students provide huge financial rewards for American colleges and universities. Their economic strategies are built around an influx of international students. College administrators point to the cultural benefits of international students and American students coming together on campuses but the financial gains are not to be ignored. Schools are struggling as it is, due to the pandemic, and this change adds further uncertainty to financial planning. The most recent data shows that 872,214 international students were enrolled in the U.S. in 2018-19. They contributed $45 billion to the U.S. economy in 2018. Harvard University, for example, has 10,285 international students from 155 countries. The school announced Monday they only plan to bring back 40% of undergraduate students to campus this fall. All classes are planned to be online, even for those allowed to come back and live on campus.
This fall, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education, 9% of US universities are planning to teach all their classes online. Like everything else during this pandemic, that can change in the coming months. Is this an intentional smack to China in response to the pandemic? Maybe. It can be seen as justified, though, given the visa restrictions on foreign workers now and also given the financial and public health disasters brought about by the pandemic. You know that the Trump administration may be on to something here if the likes of Elizabeth Warren are speaking out against it. Being from Massachusetts, there are many higher learning institutions in her state that are likely complaining to her about the policy change.


hotair--2020-07-07--Halle Berry self-cancels new film project over "trans issues"

Award-winning actress Halle Berry ( X-men , Swordfish , Monster ’ s Ball ) was killing some time during the pandemic lockdown recently by doing an Instagram interview with a hairdresser when she committed an almost unforgivable sin .
She mentioned an upcoming film project that she was considering doing .
Mind you , this isn ’ t a project that was already in the can , in production , or even greenlighted .
She was just considering it .
While dropping some hints , however , she mentioned that the character she was going to play is a transgender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who “ identifies ” as a man . )
That was all it took .
The LGBTQ community was immediately up in arms , though I ’ m not entirely sure why .
Still , one LGBTQ outlet , Pink News , was moved to immediately express its dismay in an article dramatically titled “ Halle Berry says she ’ s preparing to play a transgender man in a new film , and we are so very , very tired.
” In it , they endeavor to explain why this is such a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s comments come two years after Scarlett Johansson was strongly criticised for signing up to play the role of a trans man in the film Rub and Tug .
After pleas from the trans community , Johansson eventually opted to drop out of the project , which was ultimately cancelled despite calls to recast it with a transgender star .
There are fears Berry ’ s film project could end up the same way , after the clip was noted by The Geekiary .
One writer appealed to LGBT+ film stars to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discuss the project with her .
Berry had plenty of people “ reaching out to her ” in private and on social media .
The backlash was swift and began gaining traction quickly .
Of course , given Berry ’ s record of social activism , it was a far more gentle type of backlash than some random straight , white , male actor likely would have received .
Still , the message apparently came through loud and clear .
Before Berry ’ s agent could even have time to muster some sort @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Berry issued a flood of panicked apologies and promised that she would drop out of contention for the role .
( Deadline ) Berry didn ’ t waste any time to make things right .
On Monday night she took to Twitter to apologize to the trans community and said that she was no longer considering the role .
“ Over the weekend I had the opportunity to discuss my consideration of an upcoming role as a transgender man , and I ’ d like to apologize for those remarks , ” she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I now understand that I should not have considered this role , and that the transgender community should undeniably have the opportunity to tell their own stories.
” She continued , “ I am grateful for the guidance and critical conversation over the past few days and will continue to listen , educate and learn from this mistake .
I vow to be an ally in using my voice to promote better representation on-screen , both in front of and behind the camera.
” You ’ ll notice how many among the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get the movie Rub and Tug onto the silver screen .
They had signed on Scarlett Johansson for the lead role , also a transgender male character .
( Johansson is similarly afflicted with the same curse of being a “ cisgender ” female . )
The pressure got to her and she dropped out .
And what happened to Rub and Tug ?
The entire project collapsed and wound up in the burn file .
That means that the screenwriter , the director , the other actors who would have performed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost out on that work .
The reasons are obvious .
As anyone who has worked in or around the industry will tell you , it ’ s incredibly hard to get a script from the drawing board to the big screen .
There are literally millions of scripts floating around Hollywood and the rest of the country .
Pretty much every waiter and waitress in Los Angeles has one in their glove box at any given time .
But if the people pushing the project can sign on a really big name @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shoot up astronomically .
Halle Berry is one of those names .
Anything she agrees to act in is almost assured a full theatrical release .
So what ’ s going to happen to the film now ?
Nothing is ever a sure thing in Hollywood , but it ’ s a safe bet that it will go the same way that Rub and Tug did .
And everyone else associated with this new project will see the same fate .
So what ’ s the alternative scenario that all of the noisy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for ?
Obviously they want someone who is an authentic transgender actor to be given the leading role .
Fair enough .
Now , without resorting to Google , see if you can list all of the authentically male-to-female transgender actors who have won major awards and draw huge audiences ( and salaries ) .
I was able to think of one from a Netflix series I watched a while back , but without Googling I couldn ’ t recall the name of the series , to say nothing of the actor .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Sense8 , by the way .
Arguably many , many levels below Halle Berry in terms of star power and influence . )
This is apparently being lumped in with the general idea of “ cultural appropriation.
” But what else is off-limits now ?
I ’ ve seen any number of films and series where straight women play characters engaged in lesbian love affairs .
Should those all be banned as well unless the actresses have some sort of pink union card proving that they ’ re lesbians in real life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ playing the roles of real-life figures who were/are white ?
Or vice-versa ?
It sounds to me as if some people in the community have forgotten what the fundamental definition of “ acting ” is .
The job of the actor or actress is to bring to life a character other than themselves .
They are playing the role of someone they are not .
I ’ ve looked over Halley Berry ’ s resume and I see she ’ s never once in her life worked a job as a truck driver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a truck driver in a movie ?
This is an argument that ’ s been going on since before the question of a Black actor playing Othello many years ago .
And the debate hasn ’ t gotten any prettier since then .

Award-winning actress Halle Berry (X-men, Swordfish, Monster’s Ball) was killing some time during the pandemic lockdown recently by doing an Instagram interview with a hairdresser when she committed an almost unforgivable sin. She mentioned an upcoming film project that she was considering doing. Mind you, this isn’t a project that was already in the can, in production, or even greenlighted. She was just considering it. While dropping some hints, however, she mentioned that the character she was going to play is a transgender man. (i.e. a woman who “identifies” as a man.)
That was all it took. The LGBTQ community was immediately up in arms, though I’m not entirely sure why. Still, one LGBTQ outlet, Pink News, was moved to immediately express its dismay in an article dramatically titled “Halle Berry says she’s preparing to play a transgender man in a new film, and we are so very, very tired.” In it, they endeavor to explain why this is such a terrible turn of events.
Berry’s comments come two years after Scarlett Johansson was strongly criticised for signing up to play the role of a trans man in the film Rub and Tug. After pleas from the trans community, Johansson eventually opted to drop out of the project, which was ultimately cancelled despite calls to recast it with a transgender star. There are fears Berry’s film project could end up the same way, after the clip was noted by The Geekiary. One writer appealed to LGBT+ film stars to “reach out to Halle Berry” and discuss the project with her.
Berry had plenty of people “reaching out to her” in private and on social media. The backlash was swift and began gaining traction quickly. Of course, given Berry’s record of social activism, it was a far more gentle type of backlash than some random straight, white, male actor likely would have received. Still, the message apparently came through loud and clear. Before Berry’s agent could even have time to muster some sort of advice or PR statement, Halle Berry issued a flood of panicked apologies and promised that she would drop out of contention for the role. (Deadline)
Berry didn’t waste any time to make things right. On Monday night she took to Twitter to apologize to the trans community and said that she was no longer considering the role. “Over the weekend I had the opportunity to discuss my consideration of an upcoming role as a transgender man, and I’d like to apologize for those remarks,” she said. “As a cisgender woman, I now understand that I should not have considered this role, and that the transgender community should undeniably have the opportunity to tell their own stories.” She continued, “I am grateful for the guidance and critical conversation over the past few days and will continue to listen, educate and learn from this mistake. I vow to be an ally in using my voice to promote better representation on-screen, both in front of and behind the camera.”
You’ll notice how many among the offended masses referenced the short-lived effort to get the movie Rub and Tug onto the silver screen. They had signed on Scarlett Johansson for the lead role, also a transgender male character. (Johansson is similarly afflicted with the same curse of being a “cisgender” female.) The pressure got to her and she dropped out. And what happened to Rub and Tug? The entire project collapsed and wound up in the burn file. That means that the screenwriter, the director, the other actors who would have performed in it and the entire production crew all lost out on that work.
The reasons are obvious. As anyone who has worked in or around the industry will tell you, it’s incredibly hard to get a script from the drawing board to the big screen. There are literally millions of scripts floating around Hollywood and the rest of the country. Pretty much every waiter and waitress in Los Angeles has one in their glove box at any given time. But if the people pushing the project can sign on a really big name for a leading role, your chances shoot up astronomically. Halle Berry is one of those names. Anything she agrees to act in is almost assured a full theatrical release.
So what’s going to happen to the film now? Nothing is ever a sure thing in Hollywood, but it’s a safe bet that it will go the same way that Rub and Tug did. And everyone else associated with this new project will see the same fate.
So what’s the alternative scenario that all of the noisy critics in the LGBTQ community were pushing for? Obviously they want someone who is an authentic transgender actor to be given the leading role. Fair enough. Now, without resorting to Google, see if you can list all of the authentically male-to-female transgender actors who have won major awards and draw huge audiences (and salaries). I was able to think of one from a Netflix series I watched a while back, but without Googling I couldn’t recall the name of the series, to say nothing of the actor. (It was Jamie Clayton who starred in Sense8, by the way. Arguably many, many levels below Halle Berry in terms of star power and influence.)
This is apparently being lumped in with the general idea of “cultural appropriation.” But what else is off-limits now? I’ve seen any number of films and series where straight women play characters engaged in lesbian love affairs. Should those all be banned as well unless the actresses have some sort of pink union card proving that they’re lesbians in real life? Should Black actors be barred from playing the roles of real-life figures who were/are white? Or vice-versa?
It sounds to me as if some people in the community have forgotten what the fundamental definition of “acting” is. The job of the actor or actress is to bring to life a character other than themselves. They are playing the role of someone they are not. I’ve looked over Halley Berry’s resume and I see she’s never once in her life worked a job as a truck driver. Should she be banned from playing a truck driver in a movie?
This is an argument that’s been going on since before the question of a Black actor playing Othello many years ago. And the debate hasn’t gotten any prettier since then.


hotair--2020-07-07--Central Park "Karen" facing criminal charges. We're getting a little carried away here

Amy Cooper , now better known to the world as the “ Central Park Karen , ” appears to have even more trouble coming her way .
After becoming a national symbol of… something , Cooper was widely derided for her reaction to a Black man who was reportedly in the park doing some bird watching after he asked her to put her dog on its leash .
She went viral for all the wrong reasons and was promptly targeted for cancellation by the left .
But her problems aren ’ t over yet .
Since one part of her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Manhattan DA is filing charges against her for abusing the emergency reporting system and Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree .
( NY Post ) The Manhattan DA announced Monday his office is prosecuting Amy Cooper for calling the cops on a black man in Central Park and falsely claiming he had threatened her after he ’ d asked her to leash her dog .
“ Today our Office initiated a prosecution of Amy Cooper for Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree , ” said DA Cy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are strongly committed to holding perpetrators of this conduct accountable.
” Mayor Bill de Blasio was quick to jump on the bandwagon and support this effort at prosecution .
Before the cancel culture mob begins cheering too loudly , I ’ m going to point out that this may wind up backfiring on them big time .
Admittedly , it ’ s pretty hard to turn this “ Karen ” into a sympathetic figure , but the tides of events may wind up doing just that .
From the beginning , anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s initial encounter with the birdwatcher ( also named Cooper… no relation ) likely saw a fairly cut and dry case of a massive overreaction to a random encounter with obvious racial overtones .
The video actually begins well after the initial interaction began ( more on that in a moment ) , but Ms. Cooper can be seen ( and heard ) demanding that the birdwatcher stop filming her .
She approaches him while demanding that he get away from her .
She threatens to call the cops , specifying that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me and my dog.
” Yeesh .
The woman has paid a price for her behavior already .
Cooper subsequently lost her job .
She became the butt of endless jokes in every media outlet , on the late-night shows , and across the web .
While the brouhaha will eventually fade away , her life has pretty much been ruined , at least for the time being .
But now the story is shifting gears in what may prove to be an unpredictable way for two different reasons .
The first is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is trying to bring .
Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree is part of New York Penal Law 40.50 .
That statute makes it a crime to falsely initiate or circulate a report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime , catastrophe or emergency .
But the law specifies that the person must be doing so while “ knowing the information reported , conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless.
” Was she truly in any danger from the birdwatcher ?
It seems highly unlikely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video again if you haven ’ t seen it in a while .
The woman was clearly scared out of her wits and was freaking out .
Why ?
Perhaps it ’ s just because she ’ s such a racist that the mere sight of a Black man in the park sent her into fits .
Or perhaps not .
As I mentioned above , the video only begins when she is approaching Mr. Cooper and demanding he stop recording her .
Prior to that , there was some sort of confrontation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her dog on a leash .
What was said and done during that portion of the encounter ?
We don ’ t know and we only have the testimony of the two participants to go by .
The birdwatching Cooper supposedly claimed to have dog treats that he kept on hand for just such occasions and threatened to “ lure the dog away.
” It seems to me that a fairly competent defense attorney should be able to make the case that Amy Cooper , rightly or wrongly , honestly believed that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her dog .
And if that ’ s the case , proving she filed the report while “ knowing the information to be false ” could be extremely hard to prove .
On top of that , this case would still have to pass the smell test for a jury .
And at this point , people may be tiring of the sport of dunking on Amy Cooper .
At the New York Post , columnist Libby Emmons is no fan of this Karen but also feels that she ’ s suffered enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , knew he ’ d have the Internet on his side .
Amy Cooper believed the cops would be on hers .
It was a stand-off , and she lost .
At any other time , the whole fight might have blown over .
But it happened the morning of May 25 , the same day George Floyd was killed while in Minneapolis police custody .
In the racial reckoning that followed , no Karen can be spared .
Criminals were released from prison this spring in an attempt to staunch the spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that allowed repeat offenders to walk free without consequence or remand .
Violent crimes , murders and gun violence are rising across the city .
Yet a woman who was fired from investment firm Franklin Templeton after this incident , who was denounced by politicians , is facing jail — for getting into a dispute over a leashed dog .
She ’ s already been punished .
Leave the poor Karen alone .
Kicking this Karen around was an amusing sport for many in the days and weeks after the encounter .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of New Yorkers will be swinging further toward the attitude on display in the op-ed I just quoted .
New Yorkers have no issue with engaging in some good old fashioned mean-spirited fun .
But if it begins to look like Amy Cooper is being set up for some massively overreaching punishment over what should have been a passing spat between neighbors in the park , the public is going to start pushing back .

Amy Cooper, now better known to the world as the “Central Park Karen,” appears to have even more trouble coming her way. After becoming a national symbol of… something, Cooper was widely derided for her reaction to a Black man who was reportedly in the park doing some bird watching after he asked her to put her dog on its leash. She went viral for all the wrong reasons and was promptly targeted for cancellation by the left. But her problems aren’t over yet. Since one part of her response involved calling 911 on the birdwatcher, the Manhattan DA is filing charges against her for abusing the emergency reporting system and Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree. (NY Post)
The Manhattan DA announced Monday his office is prosecuting Amy Cooper for calling the cops on a black man in Central Park and falsely claiming he had threatened her after he’d asked her to leash her dog. “Today our Office initiated a prosecution of Amy Cooper for Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree,” said DA Cy Vance Jr. in a statement. “We are strongly committed to holding perpetrators of this conduct accountable.”
Mayor Bill de Blasio was quick to jump on the bandwagon and support this effort at prosecution.
Good. Her racist behavior could have had dire consequences for a Black man.
Glad she’ll face consequences of her own. https://t.co/l7yNVOX2uM — Mayor Bill de Blasio (@NYCMayor) July 6, 2020
Before the cancel culture mob begins cheering too loudly, I’m going to point out that this may wind up backfiring on them big time. Admittedly, it’s pretty hard to turn this “Karen” into a sympathetic figure, but the tides of events may wind up doing just that.
From the beginning, anyone who watched the video of Cooper’s initial encounter with the birdwatcher (also named Cooper… no relation) likely saw a fairly cut and dry case of a massive overreaction to a random encounter with obvious racial overtones. The video actually begins well after the initial interaction began (more on that in a moment), but Ms. Cooper can be seen (and heard) demanding that the birdwatcher stop filming her. She approaches him while demanding that he get away from her. She threatens to call the cops, specifying that it’s “an African-American man threatening me and my dog.” Yeesh.
The woman has paid a price for her behavior already. Cooper subsequently lost her job. She became the butt of endless jokes in every media outlet, on the late-night shows, and across the web. While the brouhaha will eventually fade away, her life has pretty much been ruined, at least for the time being.
But now the story is shifting gears in what may prove to be an unpredictable way for two different reasons. The first is the nature of the charges the DA is trying to bring. Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree is part of New York Penal Law 40.50. That statute makes it a crime to falsely initiate or circulate a report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency. But the law specifies that the person must be doing so while “knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless.”
Was she truly in any danger from the birdwatcher? It seems highly unlikely. But go back and watch the video again if you haven’t seen it in a while. The woman was clearly scared out of her wits and was freaking out. Why? Perhaps it’s just because she’s such a racist that the mere sight of a Black man in the park sent her into fits. Or perhaps not. As I mentioned above, the video only begins when she is approaching Mr. Cooper and demanding he stop recording her. Prior to that, there was some sort of confrontation, allegedly over her failure to keep her dog on a leash. What was said and done during that portion of the encounter? We don’t know and we only have the testimony of the two participants to go by. The birdwatching Cooper supposedly claimed to have dog treats that he kept on hand for just such occasions and threatened to “lure the dog away.”
It seems to me that a fairly competent defense attorney should be able to make the case that Amy Cooper, rightly or wrongly, honestly believed that the birdwatcher was a threat to her or her dog. And if that’s the case, proving she filed the report while “knowing the information to be false” could be extremely hard to prove.
On top of that, this case would still have to pass the smell test for a jury. And at this point, people may be tiring of the sport of dunking on Amy Cooper. At the New York Post, columnist Libby Emmons is no fan of this Karen but also feels that she’s suffered enough.
Bird-watching Cooper, filming the encounter, knew he’d have the Internet on his side. Amy Cooper believed the cops would be on hers. It was a stand-off, and she lost. At any other time, the whole fight might have blown over. But it happened the morning of May 25, the same day George Floyd was killed while in Minneapolis police custody. In the racial reckoning that followed, no Karen can be spared. Criminals were released from prison this spring in an attempt to staunch the spread of COVID-19. Bail reform was enacted that allowed repeat offenders to walk free without consequence or remand. Violent crimes, murders and gun violence are rising across the city. Yet a woman who was fired from investment firm Franklin Templeton after this incident, who was denounced by politicians, is facing jail — for getting into a dispute over a leashed dog. She’s already been punished. Leave the poor Karen alone.
Kicking this Karen around was an amusing sport for many in the days and weeks after the encounter. But I get the sense that a lot of New Yorkers will be swinging further toward the attitude on display in the op-ed I just quoted. New Yorkers have no issue with engaging in some good old fashioned mean-spirited fun. But if it begins to look like Amy Cooper is being set up for some massively overreaching punishment over what should have been a passing spat between neighbors in the park, the public is going to start pushing back.


hotair--2020-07-07--Enough is enough, part II: Kemp calls up National Guard to quell Atlanta violence

The mayor of Atlanta may have declared “ enough is enough ” yesterday after weeks of unrestrained violence , but the governor of Georgia actually did something about it .
After eight-year-old Secoriea Turner got gunned down by protesters — one of dozens shot in the city — Brian Kemp called up the National Guard and declared a statewide emergency .
Units began deploying last night , and as many as 1,000 troops might end up joining law enforcement to put an end to the wave of violence : Gov .
Brian Kemp will deploy as many as 1,000 Georgia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Atlanta on Monday following a burst of violence across the city that left four dead , including an 8-year-old girl , and saw the ransacking of the headquarters of the Georgia State Patrol .
Kemp , a Republican , issued the emergency order after threatening late Sunday to “ take action ” to curb the unrest in Atlanta if Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms failed to do so , a move that highlighted the complicated , and increasingly tense , relationship between two of the state ’ s most prominent politicians .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ three locations in the city : The state Capitol , which has been the focus of protests over statues of segregationists and Civil War leaders ; the Governor ’ s Mansion in Buckhead ; and the recently vandalized Department of Public Safety building in southeast Atlanta .
“ Peaceful protests were hijacked by criminals with a dangerous , destructive agenda .
Now , innocent Georgians are being targeted , shot , and left for dead , ” said Kemp .
“ This lawlessness must be stopped and order restored in our capital city.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in late May too , but that was at the request of Keisha Lance Bottoms .
This time around , apparently , the mayor is not requesting it , but Kemp clearly isn ’ t too concerned about Lance Bottoms ’ feelings on the issue .
The death of Secoriea Turner has changed those political calculations , even as the death of Rayshard Brooks and the charging of two police officers have changed law-enforcement calculations .
The decision to charge the two officers before an investigation could be completed has the APD balking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is why Lance Bottoms not only finds herself in this situation , she seems powerless to address it herself as well .
Democrats criticized Kemp ’ s order for focusing on the three sites only , but the order to the National Guard is a potential land mine , legally speaking .
Kemp might not want to push his authority too hard at first by intruding on the city ’ s jurisdictions , so it makes sense to start with state property first .
The longer those places remain quiet and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the more pressure will come on Lance Bottoms to request National Guard assistance .
Or perhaps Kemp isn ’ t actually worried at all about jurisdiction but just hopes the deployment itself will disincentivize the violence .
That ’ s possible , but not too likely once the momentum for violence has gotten to this level .
It didn ’ t work in Minneapolis ; a nominal deployment did nothing to stop the rioting , and it took a full deployment of thousands of National Guard to pacify the streets .
Eventually , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be effective , and at least according to the local news report in the video above , it looks like Kemp already has plans to order those steps .
Without a doubt , though , this undercuts Lance Bottoms regardless of her COVID-19 status .
It makes her look impotent in the face of rising violence , which given the recent friction between the two , might be part of Kemp ’ s point .
The main issue for Kemp is that the rising violence was making him look impotent too , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lance Bottoms is on her own to solve her problems .

The mayor of Atlanta may have declared “enough is enough” yesterday after weeks of unrestrained violence, but the governor of Georgia actually did something about it. After eight-year-old Secoriea Turner got gunned down by protesters — one of dozens shot in the city — Brian Kemp called up the National Guard and declared a statewide emergency. Units began deploying last night, and as many as 1,000 troops might end up joining law enforcement to put an end to the wave of violence:
Gov. Brian Kemp will deploy as many as 1,000 Georgia National Guard troops to protect state buildings in Atlanta on Monday following a burst of violence across the city that left four dead, including an 8-year-old girl, and saw the ransacking of the headquarters of the Georgia State Patrol. Kemp, a Republican, issued the emergency order after threatening late Sunday to “take action” to curb the unrest in Atlanta if Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms failed to do so, a move that highlighted the complicated, and increasingly tense, relationship between two of the state’s most prominent politicians. The National Guard troops will be dispatched to three locations in the city: The state Capitol, which has been the focus of protests over statues of segregationists and Civil War leaders; the Governor’s Mansion in Buckhead; and the recently vandalized Department of Public Safety building in southeast Atlanta. “Peaceful protests were hijacked by criminals with a dangerous, destructive agenda. Now, innocent Georgians are being targeted, shot, and left for dead,” said Kemp. “This lawlessness must be stopped and order restored in our capital city.”
Kemp called up the National Guard in late May too, but that was at the request of Keisha Lance Bottoms. This time around, apparently, the mayor is not requesting it, but Kemp clearly isn’t too concerned about Lance Bottoms’ feelings on the issue. The death of Secoriea Turner has changed those political calculations, even as the death of Rayshard Brooks and the charging of two police officers have changed law-enforcement calculations. The decision to charge the two officers before an investigation could be completed has the APD balking at doing anything more than bare-minimum response, which is why Lance Bottoms not only finds herself in this situation, she seems powerless to address it herself as well.
Democrats criticized Kemp’s order for focusing on the three sites only, but the order to the National Guard is a potential land mine, legally speaking. Kemp might not want to push his authority too hard at first by intruding on the city’s jurisdictions, so it makes sense to start with state property first. The longer those places remain quiet and the rest of the city does, the more pressure will come on Lance Bottoms to request National Guard assistance.
Or perhaps Kemp isn’t actually worried at all about jurisdiction but just hopes the deployment itself will disincentivize the violence. That’s possible, but not too likely once the momentum for violence has gotten to this level. It didn’t work in Minneapolis; a nominal deployment did nothing to stop the rioting, and it took a full deployment of thousands of National Guard to pacify the streets. Eventually, those troops will need to spread out to be effective, and at least according to the local news report in the video above, it looks like Kemp already has plans to order those steps.
Without a doubt, though, this undercuts Lance Bottoms regardless of her COVID-19 status. It makes her look impotent in the face of rising violence, which given the recent friction between the two, might be part of Kemp’s point. The main issue for Kemp is that the rising violence was making him look impotent too, a problem he solved last night. Lance Bottoms is on her own to solve her problems.


hotair--2020-07-08--Progressives ready to rebel against Biden if he "compromises" with the GOP

On Friday , during an online speech he gave to the National Education Association , Joe Biden committed what some on the left consider an unforgivable sin .
He reminded everyone that he ’ s spent his career in Congress finding ways to work with people on both sides of the aisle .
“ ’ I ’ ve been able to bring Democrats and Republicans together in the United States Congress to pass big things , to deal with big issues , ” Biden said .
He then capped off that moment of inclusiveness by saying , “ Compromise is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s not what the more progressive branch of the Democratic Party is shopping for these days .
That ’ s particularly true of the supporters of Bernie Sanders , who are still smarting from the Vermont Senator ’ s back-to-back losses in presidential primary races .
Their reaction to Joe ’ s speech was far from enthusiastic , to say the least .
( The Hill ) “ Biden is transparently taking a bet to win over a group of anti-Trump Republicans but at the expense of what ?
Potentially losing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
” said progressive activist Nomiki Konst , who supported Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) in the Democratic presidential primary .
She and other progressives also warn it could cost Biden by reducing voter enthusiasm on the left in November .
“ His excitement is extremely low and that should always be alarming for candidates .
It ’ s the Hillary Clinton strategy all over again , ” she said .
This is yet another example of the hole that Joe Biden dug for himself during the primary .
He ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ progressive movement in an effort to win over Sanders ’ supporters and try to build some enthusiasm among those who supported Elizabeth Warren and the rest of the socialist crowd .
But now the general election is gearing up and he needs to not only generate some excitement with minority voters , but also win back the persuadable moderates who migrated over to Trump ’ s camp in 2016 .
That ’ s not a balancing act .
It ’ s a contradiction in terms .
As any successful politician will tell you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to all people , though most of them try to manage the feat .
The problem for Biden is that there are simply too many things from the primary race lurking in his record .
At various points , he has endorsed vast expansions to Medicaid , gun bans , abortion on demand and more .
Back in April , a coalition of progressive youth groups issued a list of demands for Joe Biden if he wanted their support and he quickly toed the line .
The groups call on Biden to endorse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” canceling all student debt , taxing wealth and the Green New Deal framework of a fully clean energy economy by 2030 .
They make process demands like eliminating the legislative filibuster and adding seats to the Supreme Court .
And they include personnel wishes like rejecting Wall Street or other corporate executives for important roles and picking a Homeland Security chief committed to “ dismantling ICE and CBP as we know them , ” referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection .
Does any of that sound @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to you ?
Sooner or later Biden is going to face a reckoning , assuming he can stay awake long enough to address his potential supporters .
And that laundry list of promises will be up for renewed scrutiny .
The same concerns can ’ t be applied to his opponent .
Say what you will about Donald Trump , but he ’ s been consistent from day one until the present .
And nobody expects him to suddenly turn over a new leaf between now and November .

On Friday, during an online speech he gave to the National Education Association, Joe Biden committed what some on the left consider an unforgivable sin. He reminded everyone that he’s spent his career in Congress finding ways to work with people on both sides of the aisle. “’I’ve been able to bring Democrats and Republicans together in the United States Congress to pass big things, to deal with big issues,” Biden said. He then capped off that moment of inclusiveness by saying, “Compromise is not a dirty word.”
Well, that’s not what the more progressive branch of the Democratic Party is shopping for these days. That’s particularly true of the supporters of Bernie Sanders, who are still smarting from the Vermont Senator’s back-to-back losses in presidential primary races. Their reaction to Joe’s speech was far from enthusiastic, to say the least. (The Hill)
“Biden is transparently taking a bet to win over a group of anti-Trump Republicans but at the expense of what? Potentially losing some of the largest movements in history?” said progressive activist Nomiki Konst, who supported Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the Democratic presidential primary. She and other progressives also warn it could cost Biden by reducing voter enthusiasm on the left in November. “His excitement is extremely low and that should always be alarming for candidates. It’s the Hillary Clinton strategy all over again,” she said.
This is yet another example of the hole that Joe Biden dug for himself during the primary. He’s embraced nearly every far-left fantasy of the progressive movement in an effort to win over Sanders’ supporters and try to build some enthusiasm among those who supported Elizabeth Warren and the rest of the socialist crowd. But now the general election is gearing up and he needs to not only generate some excitement with minority voters, but also win back the persuadable moderates who migrated over to Trump’s camp in 2016.
That’s not a balancing act. It’s a contradiction in terms. As any successful politician will tell you, no one can be all things to all people, though most of them try to manage the feat. The problem for Biden is that there are simply too many things from the primary race lurking in his record. At various points, he has endorsed vast expansions to Medicaid, gun bans, abortion on demand and more. Back in April, a coalition of progressive youth groups issued a list of demands for Joe Biden if he wanted their support and he quickly toed the line.
The groups call on Biden to endorse policy initiatives like “Medicare for All,” canceling all student debt, taxing wealth and the Green New Deal framework of a fully clean energy economy by 2030. They make process demands like eliminating the legislative filibuster and adding seats to the Supreme Court. And they include personnel wishes like rejecting Wall Street or other corporate executives for important roles and picking a Homeland Security chief committed to “dismantling ICE and CBP as we know them,” referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection.
Does any of that sound like “compromise” across the aisle to you? Sooner or later Biden is going to face a reckoning, assuming he can stay awake long enough to address his potential supporters. And that laundry list of promises will be up for renewed scrutiny. The same concerns can’t be applied to his opponent. Say what you will about Donald Trump, but he’s been consistent from day one until the present. And nobody expects him to suddenly turn over a new leaf between now and November.


hotair--2020-07-08--VIP Gold Chat: Cam Edwards, Ed Morrissey, and Julio Rosas at 1:30 ET!

Get ready for another tremendous live , interactive VIP Gold chat with Townhall ’ s Julio Rosas , Bearing Arms ’ Cam Edwards , and HotAir ’ s Ed Morrissey !
Join us at 1:30 pm today for another great discussion of the hottest news stories online .
The trio will take your questions and comments and gave an in-depth analysis of the top topics of the day .
If you are not a VIP Gold member , you can join below so you can participate today and in future chats !
Use LOYALTY for 25 % off !
Julio @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while Cam brings his A-game on 2nd Amendment and liberty issues and makes sure to keep it real along the way .
Ed has kept pace with developments abroad , at home and at the local level as well .
We ’ ll plenty to discuss and lots of time to take your questions .
The hot topics so far are : With all the fast-moving developments , our VIP Gold members can get the latest as it happens from Cam , Julio , and Ed .
The live chat will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ miss out !

Did you miss the tremendous live, interactive VIP Gold chat with Townhall’s Julio Rosas, Bearing Arms’ Cam Edwards, and HotAir’s Ed Morrissey? The trio took VIP members’ questions and comments and gave an in-depth analysis of the top topics of the day.
If you are a VIP Gold member but missed the live chat, no worries! A replay of today’s is available! If you are not a VIP Gold member, join below so you can watch what you missed and participate in future chats! Use LOYALTY for 25% off!


hotair--2020-07-07--Trump: We're going to put pressure on governors to open schools this fall

He ’ s right that every effort should be made to do this in any community where the spread is sufficiently low that one might reasonably believe it can be done safely .
Anthony Fauci said the same thing this morning , as I noted in an earlier post .
The cost of keeping schools closed as a precaution is high — high for kids in further retarding their educations , which may have them playing catch-up for years , and high for parents who are destined to be much less productive at work if they ’ re forced to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American Academy of Pediatrics made a splash last week when it announced that it “ strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school.
” Reasoning : Got ta try .
And if you ’ re understandably worried about children being infected and spreading the disease to their parents , take heart in the experience of other countries : When Science looked at reopening strategies from South Africa to Finland to Israel , some encouraging patterns emerged .
Together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ student groups small and requiring masks and some social distancing helps keep schools and communities safe , and that younger children rarely spread the virus to one another or bring it home .
“ Outbreaks in schools are inevitable , ” says Otto Helve , a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare .
“ But there is good news.
” So far , with some changes to schools ’ daily routines , he says , the benefits of attending school seem to outweigh the risks—at least where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are standing by to identify and isolate cases and close contacts… In a broader study of COVID-19 clusters worldwide , epidemiologist Gwen Knight at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and her colleagues collected data before most school closings took effect .
If schools were a major driver of viral spread , she says , “ We would have expected to find more clusters linked to schools .
That ’ s not what we found.
” Still , she adds , without widespread testing of young people , who often don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s hard to know for sure what role schools might play .
If you ’ ve seen the comparative case counts lately in the United States and Europe , you know that we shouldn ’ t feel overly confident in our ability to replicate European outcomes on the pandemic .
But the fact that kids seldom get seriously ill from COVID-19 raises a real possibility that they ’ re just not very effective vectors for the disease .
That thesis needs to be tested , even if it means letting schools in areas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier than schools in harder-hit areas .
See if there ’ s an outbreak in the safer zones .
If not , full speed ahead .
There ’ s risk here , though , and not just the obvious epidemiological risk .
There ’ s political risk .
Despite the hardship in having to somehow home-school their kids and manage work at the same time , plenty of American parents are frightened by the prospect of sending them back into classrooms while cases are still raging locally .
Morning Consult polled that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority : Paradoxically , Americans are more willing to let older kids go back to school even though it ’ s the younger ones who seem most universally immune to the disease .
I wonder if that ’ s driven by the reports of an inflammatory illness similar to Kawasaki syndrome in some children that ’ s been linked to COVID-19 .
Cases of that are comparatively rare , but parents naturally fear their kid becoming the exception to the rule .
The political risk is that Trump , by spearheading the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the brunt of the blowback if he succeeds in arm-twisting governors to get schools back up and running and it ends up seeding outbreaks — or if a bunch of kids come down with the Kawasaki-like illness .
I think part of the reason for his polling slide lately is that he made himself the face of early reopening in April and May ; now that southern states that followed his advice are experiencing major outbreaks , he may be paying a political price .
He can ’ t afford to pay another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far behind .
There ’ s a lot riding on this , notes Gabe Malor : I think in Trump ’ s mind all roads to 270 electoral votes run through economic recovery .
If he can ’ t keep up explosive job growth through November , the case for a second term collapses .
And if he can ’ t get parents focused on work by having schools take their kids off their hands , he can ’ t keep up explosive job growth .
He ’ s going to try to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the dark hints in the clip below about governors maybe keeping schools closed for “ political ” reasons do him no favors .
What ’ s he suggesting , that Gretchen Whitmer or Cuomo or whoever is going to keep them shut in hopes of forcing parents to stay home from work , which in turn will tank their own state ’ s economy , which in turn will tank his reelection chances ?
He tried that sort of conspiracy theorizing about Democratic governors ’ reluctance to reopen early in April and May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a job approval rating much worse than Cuomo ’ s or Whitmer ’ s .
He , more than anyone else , has the most transparent “ political ” motive in his policy on reopening schools .

He’s right that every effort should be made to do this in any community where the spread is sufficiently low that one might reasonably believe it can be done safely. Anthony Fauci said the same thing this morning, as I noted in an earlier post. The cost of keeping schools closed as a precaution is high — high for kids in further retarding their educations, which may have them playing catch-up for years, and high for parents who are destined to be much less productive at work if they’re forced to continue moonlighting as teachers too. The American Academy of Pediatrics made a splash last week when it announced that it “strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school.” Reasoning:
Lengthy time away from school and associated interruption of supportive services often results in social isolation, making it difficult for schools to identify and address important learning deficits as well as child and adolescent physical or sexual abuse, substance use, depression, and suicidal ideation. This, in turn, places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality. Beyond the educational impact and social impact of school closures, there has been substantial impact on food security and physical activity for children and families.
Gotta try. And if you’re understandably worried about children being infected and spreading the disease to their parents, take heart in the experience of other countries:
When Science looked at reopening strategies from South Africa to Finland to Israel, some encouraging patterns emerged. Together, they suggest a combination of keeping student groups small and requiring masks and some social distancing helps keep schools and communities safe, and that younger children rarely spread the virus to one another or bring it home. “Outbreaks in schools are inevitable,” says Otto Helve, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. “But there is good news.” So far, with some changes to schools’ daily routines, he says, the benefits of attending school seem to outweigh the risks—at least where community infection rates are low and officials are standing by to identify and isolate cases and close contacts… In a broader study of COVID-19 clusters worldwide, epidemiologist Gwen Knight at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and her colleagues collected data before most school closings took effect. If schools were a major driver of viral spread, she says, “We would have expected to find more clusters linked to schools. That’s not what we found.” Still, she adds, without widespread testing of young people, who often don’t have symptoms, it’s hard to know for sure what role schools might play.
If you’ve seen the comparative case counts lately in the United States and Europe, you know that we shouldn’t feel overly confident in our ability to replicate European outcomes on the pandemic. But the fact that kids seldom get seriously ill from COVID-19 raises a real possibility that they’re just not very effective vectors for the disease. That thesis needs to be tested, even if it means letting schools in areas where coronavirus is scarce open a little earlier than schools in harder-hit areas. See if there’s an outbreak in the safer zones. If not, full speed ahead.
There’s risk here, though, and not just the obvious epidemiological risk. There’s political risk. Despite the hardship in having to somehow home-school their kids and manage work at the same time, plenty of American parents are frightened by the prospect of sending them back into classrooms while cases are still raging locally. Morning Consult polled that a few weeks ago and found an anxious majority:
Overall, a combined 54 percent of American voters said they are somewhat uncomfortable or very uncomfortable with reopening K-12 schools for the beginning of the coming school year. Fifty-eight percent of voters said they’re uncomfortable with reopening day care centers, according to the online survey of close to 2,000 registered voters. Forty-eight percent of voters said they were very or somewhat uncomfortable with reopening colleges and universities, while 43 percent said they were comfortable with the idea.
Paradoxically, Americans are more willing to let older kids go back to school even though it’s the younger ones who seem most universally immune to the disease. I wonder if that’s driven by the reports of an inflammatory illness similar to Kawasaki syndrome in some children that’s been linked to COVID-19. Cases of that are comparatively rare, but parents naturally fear their kid becoming the exception to the rule.
The political risk is that Trump, by spearheading the “reopen schools” push, will take the brunt of the blowback if he succeeds in arm-twisting governors to get schools back up and running and it ends up seeding outbreaks — or if a bunch of kids come down with the Kawasaki-like illness. I think part of the reason for his polling slide lately is that he made himself the face of early reopening in April and May; now that southern states that followed his advice are experiencing major outbreaks, he may be paying a political price. He can’t afford to pay another one when he’s already this far behind. There’s a lot riding on this, notes Gabe Malor:
There's just a lot of wishcasting here. The hope is that children don't get it much. And that even when they get it, it's not that bad. And that children don't pass it on much to other children and to teachers and parents and grandparents. — Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) July 7, 2020
I think in Trump’s mind all roads to 270 electoral votes run through economic recovery. If he can’t keep up explosive job growth through November, the case for a second term collapses. And if he can’t get parents focused on work by having schools take their kids off their hands, he can’t keep up explosive job growth. He’s going to try to facilitate that however he can.
But the dark hints in the clip below about governors maybe keeping schools closed for “political” reasons do him no favors. What’s he suggesting, that Gretchen Whitmer or Cuomo or whoever is going to keep them shut in hopes of forcing parents to stay home from work, which in turn will tank their own state’s economy, which in turn will tank his reelection chances? He tried that sort of conspiracy theorizing about Democratic governors’ reluctance to reopen early in April and May and all it’s gotten him is a job approval rating much worse than Cuomo’s or Whitmer’s. He, more than anyone else, has the most transparent “political” motive in his policy on reopening schools.


hotair--2020-07-07--Mary Trump's tell-all book release date moved up ... due to popular demand

Election Day is moving closer and that means all the long knives are coming out for personal attacks against both President Trump and First Lady Melania .
Why wait until after Labor Day when more people begin to pay attention to political campaigns if there are some quick bucks to be made right now ?
President Trump ’ s niece Mary has come out on top in court battles over the publication of what is being called a “ tell-all book ” .
Titled Too Much and Never Enough : How My Family Created the World ’ s Most Dangerous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one on Amazon ’ s bestseller list .
So , the publication date has been pushed up by two weeks due to “ high demand and extraordinary interest in this book ” .
The publication date is now set for July 14 .
Trump ’ s younger brother , Robert Trump , and celebrity lawyer Charles Harder have been working for two weeks to stop the publication but have failed to do so .
They filed lawsuits in two courts only to have both judges toss the lawsuits .
Ms. Trump is eager @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , especially if it can potentially temporarily derail her Uncle Donald ’ s re-election campaign .
Her spokesperson even bemoans the fact that Team Trump is trying to stop the book ’ s publication while getting in his own personal dig at Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic .
In the book , which is already number one on Amazon ’ s best seller list , Mary Trump is expected to “ out ” herself as the primary source for The New York Times ’ Trump tax investigation that won a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to contain many “ harrowing and salacious ” stories about the president and his family .
“ In addition to the firsthand accounts I can give as my father ’ s daughter and my uncle ’ s only niece , I have the perspective of a trained clinical psychologist .
Too Much and Never Enough is the story of the most visible and powerful family in the world .
And I am the only Trump who is willing to tell it , ” Mary writes in the book ’ s prologue .
Chris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said in a statement to The Daily Beast , “ The act by a sitting president to muzzle a private citizen is just the latest in a series of disturbing behaviors which have already destabilized a fractured nation in the face of a global pandemic .
If Mary can not comment , one can only help but wonder : what is Donald Trump so afraid of ?
” How silly does that spokesperson sound ?
It is a standard procedure for a “ sitting president ” to try and stop the publication @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he is still in office , especially if it is done during his first term in office .
Presidents are notoriously prickly about books being written about them , especially from a disgruntled staffer or family member .
Why would Trump be any different ?
As I mentioned above , this book ’ s publication has been making the rounds in court battles since the book first began being publicized .
Mary is the daughter of Trump ’ s deceased brother , Fred , Jr. and she is calling herself the only family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her uncle .
“ [ It ] is the story of the most visible and powerful family in the world .
And I am the only Trump who is willing to tell it.
” She ’ s ready to tell embarrassing first-hand stories about the president .
Trump ’ s lawyer argues that Mary is prevented from publishing her book because it violates a settlement agreement in the estate of the president ’ s father .
She signed a non-disclosure agreement in 2001 when the estate was settled .
A lower court issued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s publication but a New York state appeals judge ruled last week that the book can be published .
So , here we are .
From news articles , it looks like Mary is ready to vent about how Uncle Donald treated her father , including in the last years of his life as he suffered from Alzheimer ’ s .
Mary is a clinical psychologist who has severed ties with her family .
Simon and Schuster is the publisher .
Mary Trump is due back in court on July 10 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been lifted on her , only on the publisher .
Her legal troubles are not over .
Simon and Schuster has been busy lately with anti-Trump books .
Besides the book by Mary Trump , the publisher also released The Art of Her Deal by Washington Post reporter Mary Jordan , an anti-Melania Trump book .
John Bolton ’ s book was published by Simon and Schuster .
And now there is a new book to trash Melania , this time by her former best friend , Stephanie Winston Wolkoff .
Winston Wolkoff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you .
She was a loyal confidante to Melania and helped plan President Trump ’ s 2017 inauguration in Washington , D.C .
It is titled Melania and Me .
They had a 15-year friendship .
With friends like that… You may also remember that Wolkoff became mired in the investigation into the financial records of the inauguration .
Her firm was alleged to have been paid handsomely for her work on the planning and execution of the festivities .
The book is said to be heavily negative against Melania Trump .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and expressed her hope that they would remain , friends , though their professional work together was finished , apparently Wolkoff had other ideas .
Wollkoff ’ s book is available for pre-sale on Amazon .
I doubt that Wolkoff ’ s book will be a bestseller but we ’ ll see .
Liberal women despise Melania now that she is in the White House .
We ’ ll see how much that ’ s worth in book sales .

Election Day is moving closer and that means all the long knives are coming out for personal attacks against both President Trump and First Lady Melania. Why wait until after Labor Day when more people begin to pay attention to political campaigns if there are some quick bucks to be made right now?
President Trump’s niece Mary has come out on top in court battles over the publication of what is being called a “tell-all book”. Titled Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man, the book is already number one on Amazon’s bestseller list. So, the publication date has been pushed up by two weeks due to “high demand and extraordinary interest in this book”. The publication date is now set for July 14.
Trump’s younger brother, Robert Trump, and celebrity lawyer Charles Harder have been working for two weeks to stop the publication but have failed to do so. They filed lawsuits in two courts only to have both judges toss the lawsuits. Ms. Trump is eager to spill the beans on her family, especially if it can potentially temporarily derail her Uncle Donald’s re-election campaign. Her spokesperson even bemoans the fact that Team Trump is trying to stop the book’s publication while getting in his own personal dig at Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
In the book, which is already number one on Amazon’s best seller list, Mary Trump is expected to “out” herself as the primary source for The New York Times’ Trump tax investigation that won a Pulitzer prize. It’s expected to contain many “harrowing and salacious” stories about the president and his family. “In addition to the firsthand accounts I can give as my father’s daughter and my uncle’s only niece, I have the perspective of a trained clinical psychologist. Too Much and Never Enough is the story of the most visible and powerful family in the world. And I am the only Trump who is willing to tell it,” Mary writes in the book’s prologue. Chris Bastardi, a spokesperson for Mary Trump, said in a statement to The Daily Beast, “The act by a sitting president to muzzle a private citizen is just the latest in a series of disturbing behaviors which have already destabilized a fractured nation in the face of a global pandemic. If Mary cannot comment, one can only help but wonder: what is Donald Trump so afraid of?”
How silly does that spokesperson sound? It is a standard procedure for a “sitting president” to try and stop the publication of a book written and published while he is still in office, especially if it is done during his first term in office. Presidents are notoriously prickly about books being written about them, especially from a disgruntled staffer or family member. Why would Trump be any different?
As I mentioned above, this book’s publication has been making the rounds in court battles since the book first began being publicized. Mary is the daughter of Trump’s deceased brother, Fred, Jr. and she is calling herself the only family member willing to tell the truth about her uncle. “[It] is the story of the most visible and powerful family in the world. And I am the only Trump who is willing to tell it.” She’s ready to tell embarrassing first-hand stories about the president. Trump’s lawyer argues that Mary is prevented from publishing her book because it violates a settlement agreement in the estate of the president’s father. She signed a non-disclosure agreement in 2001 when the estate was settled. A lower court issued a temporary restraining order on the book’s publication but a New York state appeals judge ruled last week that the book can be published. So, here we are.
From news articles, it looks like Mary is ready to vent about how Uncle Donald treated her father, including in the last years of his life as he suffered from Alzheimer’s. Mary is a clinical psychologist who has severed ties with her family.
Other “explosive” portions of the book include vivid descriptions of the “twisted” values and behaviors Trump picked up as a young man, including: “Financial worth is the same as self-worth; humans are only valued in monetary terms.”
“A ‘killer’ instinct is revered, while qualities like empathy, kindness and expertise are punished.”
“Taking responsibility for your failures is discouraged.”
“Cheating as a way of life.”
Simon and Schuster is the publisher. Mary Trump is due back in court on July 10, as the temporary restraining order has not been lifted on her, only on the publisher. Her legal troubles are not over.
Simon and Schuster has been busy lately with anti-Trump books. Besides the book by Mary Trump, the publisher also released The Art of Her Deal by Washington Post reporter Mary Jordan, an anti-Melania Trump book. John Bolton’s book was published by Simon and Schuster. And now there is a new book to trash Melania, this time by her former best friend, Stephanie Winston Wolkoff.
Winston Wolkoff’s name may sound familiar to you. She was a loyal confidante to Melania and helped plan President Trump’s 2017 inauguration in Washington, D.C. It is titled Melania and Me. They had a 15-year friendship. With friends like that…
You may also remember that Wolkoff became mired in the investigation into the financial records of the inauguration. Her firm was alleged to have been paid handsomely for her work on the planning and execution of the festivities. The book is said to be heavily negative against Melania Trump.
After playing a vital role in plotting Trump’s inaugural festivities, Wolkoff landed the gig of senior adviser to the first lady. However, shortly after the start of the Trump era, the noted New York socialite had a dramatic falling-out with Melania Trump, triggered by news that Wolkoff’s own firm snagged a cool $26 million from the Trump inaugural committee to help plan the events. “Was I fired? No,” Wolkoff told The New York Times last year. “Did I personally receive $26 million or $1.6 million? No. Was I thrown under the bus? Yes.”
While Melania is reported to have reached out and expressed her hope that they would remain, friends, though their professional work together was finished, apparently Wolkoff had other ideas.
According to the Times, the one-time Melania Trump confidante was also cooperating with Manhattan federal prosecutors investigating the Trump inaugural committee’s fundraising and spending. A spokesman from SDNY did not respond to The Daily Beast’s request for comment.
Wollkoff’s book is available for pre-sale on Amazon.
As of Monday afternoon, the Google Books item read that the book, labeled “Untitled SWW” and placed in the “Autobiography” section, is expected on Aug. 11 and will be “a revealing and explosive portrayal of Stephanie Winston Wolkoff’s fifteen-year friendship with Melania Trump and observations of the most chaotic White House in history.”
I doubt that Wolkoff’s book will be a bestseller but we’ll see. Liberal women despise Melania now that she is in the White House. We’ll see how much that’s worth in book sales.


hotair--2020-07-08--Coming soon to Trump rallies: Statues?

Coming soon to Trump rallies: Statues?

Like , real statues ?
Or styrofoam statues with a little something plastered on to make them look vaguely like marble from a distance ?
Big difference cost-wise .
I can imagine Trump and his campaign advisors sitting around a table in the West Wing hashing this out .
“ Okay , sir , so we ’ ve agreed on statues of Washington , Jefferson , and Lincoln .
Anyone else ?
Martin Luther King Jr. ?
Harriet Tubman ?
” “ What about Robert E. Lee ?
” “ That won ’ t work , sir.
” “ Stonewall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Jefferson Davis.
” “ Sir , really… ” I ’ m positive there won ’ t be any Confederate statues onstage .
Ninety-nine percent certainty .
Well , maybe like 85 .
The idea has been discussed by White House and Trump campaign aides , but no final decision has been made , sources familiar with the planning told ABC News .
It ’ s also not clear who exactly the statues would resemble , but sources say one idea was for “ America ’ s Founding Fathers.
” … In an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president reiterated his thought that “ we are in a culture war.
” “ If the Republicans don ’ t toughen up and get smart and get strong and protect our heritage and protect our country , ” Trump told the publication , “ I think they ’ re going to have a very tough election.
” “ The question now is , Is the statue sh*t going to work ?
” said a senior Trump advisor to the Daily Beast about the culture war mentioned by the president .
If they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve decided that it ’ s going to work .
If the point is to defend America ’ s Founders , there won ’ t be Confederates in the array .
If the point is simply to own the libs… It ’ d be fascinating to see how far they get with this strategy as a sustained attempt to deflect Democratic attacks about coronavirus , but the shelf life of the message may be limited .
The wave of idol-smashing seems to have abated this week .
Anti-racism protests aren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has refused to take the bait by siding with the droogs who have targeted statues of Jefferson and Lincoln .
If all of that holds the next few weeks , will the political energy still be there for a statue-centric culture war come , say , August 1 ?
And if it is , will Trump complicate it in the interim by conflating his defense of the Founding Fathers with his defense of less savory symbols ?
Karl Rove went on Fox yesterday and congratulated him on a “ remarkable speech ” at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for taking the focus off of it by grumbling about Bubba Wallace and NASCAR ’ s decision to ban the Confederate flag at events .
“ The president has a limited number of days between now and the election .
And when he tweets , it ’ s a powerful message , ” said Rove .
“ And the question is , does that message continue to advance the narrative that he and those around him decided that he would lay out on [ Friday ] at Mount Rushmore ?
And the answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Wallace himself said this of Trump ’ s tweet : “ When I first read it , I was like , ‘ Man , there ’ s so much more things that are going on in the world that I feel like he should be worried about.
’ ” That ’ s the real risk of decking out his rallies with statues .
It ’ s not that his impulse to defend the Founding Fathers is wrong .
It ’ s that there ’ s no way to justify making it a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s struggling with the virus and how to sustain a durable economic recovery .
A stage full of statues under those circumstances would be an advertisement of unseriousness .
Speaking of Trump rallies , how well attended will the biggest rally of all be ?
Mitt Romney also won ’ t be attending , no doubt because he doesn ’ t want to be booed out of the building .
Grassley and Alexander ( and Mitt to a lesser degree ) have good excuses for not being there , namely that they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they end up being infected with coronavirus .
Collins has a good excuse too , although it ’ s a political one : Since she ’ s in a dogfight to keep her seat in Maine , which is trending blue , it makes no sense for her to show up at Trump ’ s coronation in Jacksonville .
My guess is that most of the Senate caucus will skip the event for one or both of those same reasons , whether because of age ( e.g.
, Mitch McConnell ) or political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even people who aren ’ t up for reelection this fall might find reasons to pass in the belief that the party ’ s Trump era is likely ending soon and so there ’ s no point in hugging him any more tightly .
The big exception : 2024 hopefuls .
All of the GOPers who are hoping to inherit Trump ’ s populist coalition will be there to signal their loyalty and jockey for the most desirable speaking slots .
Hawley , Cotton , and Cruz are givens .
I wonder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he can speak too .
Here ’ s the president yesterday saying the RNC remains “ very flexible ” on how things are handled in Jacksonville as COVID cases continue to rise in Florida .
They ’ re going to do everything possible to have a big live cheering audience but the virus gets a vote too .

Like, real statues? Or styrofoam statues with a little something plastered on to make them look vaguely like marble from a distance? Big difference cost-wise.
I can imagine Trump and his campaign advisors sitting around a table in the West Wing hashing this out.
“Okay, sir, so we’ve agreed on statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln. Anyone else? Martin Luther King Jr.? Harriet Tubman?”
“What about Robert E. Lee?”
“That won’t work, sir.”
“Stonewall Jackson.”
“No. Sir—”
“Jefferson Davis.”
“Sir, really…”
I’m positive there won’t be any Confederate statues onstage. Ninety-nine percent certainty. Well, maybe like 85.
Sixty percent, rock bottom.
A potential new addition to President Trump’s future rallies: statues. The idea has been discussed by White House and Trump campaign aides, but no final decision has been made, sources familiar with the planning told ABC News. It’s also not clear who exactly the statues would resemble, but sources say one idea was for “America’s Founding Fathers.”… In an interview with RealClearPolitics on Tuesday, the president reiterated his thought that “we are in a culture war.” “If the Republicans don’t toughen up and get smart and get strong and protect our heritage and protect our country,” Trump told the publication, “I think they’re going to have a very tough election.”
“The question now is, Is the statue sh*t going to work?” said a senior Trump advisor to the Daily Beast about the culture war mentioned by the president. If they’re commissioning statues, I guess they’ve decided that it’s going to work. If the point is to defend America’s Founders, there won’t be Confederates in the array. If the point is simply to own the libs…
It’d be fascinating to see how far they get with this strategy as a sustained attempt to deflect Democratic attacks about coronavirus, but the shelf life of the message may be limited. The wave of idol-smashing seems to have abated this week. Anti-racism protests aren’t happening in volume anymore either. Biden has refused to take the bait by siding with the droogs who have targeted statues of Jefferson and Lincoln. If all of that holds the next few weeks, will the political energy still be there for a statue-centric culture war come, say, August 1?
And if it is, will Trump complicate it in the interim by conflating his defense of the Founding Fathers with his defense of less savory symbols? Karl Rove went on Fox yesterday and congratulated him on a “remarkable speech” at Mt. Rushmore, then chastised him for taking the focus off of it by grumbling about Bubba Wallace and NASCAR’s decision to ban the Confederate flag at events. “The president has a limited number of days between now and the election. And when he tweets, it’s a powerful message,” said Rove. “And the question is, does that message continue to advance the narrative that he and those around him decided that he would lay out on [Friday] at Mount Rushmore? And the answer is no, it didn’t.” Wallace himself said this of Trump’s tweet: “When I first read it, I was like, ‘Man, there’s so much more things that are going on in the world that I feel like he should be worried about.’”
That’s the real risk of decking out his rallies with statues. It’s not that his impulse to defend the Founding Fathers is wrong. It’s that there’s no way to justify making it a top campaign priority when the country’s struggling with the virus and how to sustain a durable economic recovery. A stage full of statues under those circumstances would be an advertisement of unseriousness.
Speaking of Trump rallies, how well attended will the biggest rally of all be?
SUSAN COLLINS and LISA MURKOWSKI also skipping the RNC convo. https://t.co/8eSbHX8CM2 — Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) July 7, 2020
Mitt Romney also won’t be attending, no doubt because he doesn’t want to be booed out of the building. Grassley and Alexander (and Mitt to a lesser degree) have good excuses for not being there, namely that they’re old and at great risk if they end up being infected with coronavirus. Collins has a good excuse too, although it’s a political one: Since she’s in a dogfight to keep her seat in Maine, which is trending blue, it makes no sense for her to show up at Trump’s coronation in Jacksonville. My guess is that most of the Senate caucus will skip the event for one or both of those same reasons, whether because of age (e.g., Mitch McConnell) or political vulnerability (e.g., Cory Gardner). Even people who aren’t up for reelection this fall might find reasons to pass in the belief that the party’s Trump era is likely ending soon and so there’s no point in hugging him any more tightly.
The big exception: 2024 hopefuls. All of the GOPers who are hoping to inherit Trump’s populist coalition will be there to signal their loyalty and jockey for the most desirable speaking slots. Hawley, Cotton, and Cruz are givens. I wonder if Tucker Carlson will ask Trump if he can speak too.
Here’s the president yesterday saying the RNC remains “very flexible” on how things are handled in Jacksonville as COVID cases continue to rise in Florida. They’re going to do everything possible to have a big live cheering audience but the virus gets a vote too.


hotair--2020-07-08--AP wonders: What could be causing "a surge in violence" in America's cities?

Come on , man .
It ’ s not that much of a mystery , is it ?
Like any other social issue , any number of factors might play into levels of violence , especially in long-term trends .
But the Associated Press ’ claim that the sudden explosion in violence “ defies easy explanation ” is akin to micturating on heads while calling it precipitation : Still reeling from the coronavirus pandemic and street protests over the police killing of George Floyd , exhausted cities around the nation are facing yet another challenge : a surge in shootings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ young children .
The spike defies easy explanation , experts say , pointing to the toxic mix of issues facing America in 2020 : an unemployment rate not seen in a generation , a pandemic that has killed more than 130,000 people , stay-at-home orders , rising anger over police brutality , intense stress , even the weather .
“ I think it ’ s just a perfect storm of distress in America , ” said Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms after a weekend of bloodshed in her city .
Jerry Ratcliffe , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ host of the “ Reducing Crime ” podcast , put it more bluntly : “ Anybody who thinks they can disentangle all of this probably doesn ’ t know what they ’ re talking about.
” Oh , I think people can take a look around and see for themselves what suddenly changed right before the uptick in violence .
In Atlanta specifically , it wasn ’ t a “ perfect storm of distress ” ; it was the decision to file charges against two police officers in the Rayshard Brooks case before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led to an initial blue-flu walkout by police and a sharp retreat in assertiveness ever since .
That all but announced “ open season ” on the streets , and the violent recognized it better than the politicians and the media .
That has been the trend in all these cities — protests , followed by retreats by city leadership on enforcing the law .
Some of this definitely preceded the protests .
For instance , California went as far as making burglaries and thefts under $ 950 into misdemeanors , which unsurprisingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Bail reform put more criminals on the streets , so much so that New York governor Andrew Cuomo supported a rollback of those reforms this spring .
The COVID-19 lockdown undoubtedly contributes to the general unrest and unease , too .
The increase in violent crime , however , has a very recent and relatively precise starting point .
And that was when politicians across the country began demanding reductions in policing , and some — like Minneapolis — began working to dismantle it altogether .
The police officers on the job @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support from their community leadership , and are much less likely to take risks to intervene than they were three months ago .
That ’ s not just in Atlanta , but in every major city in America , followed closely by the surge in violence that “ defies easy explanation.
” That ’ s nonsense , but it ’ s also pretty much par for the course .
The media narrative is that there are no trade-offs for reducing or even eliminating law enforcement .
The people on the front lines , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
True police reform requires more resources and better tactics , not fewer resources and no tactics .
It took us decades to learn that lesson ; let ’ s hope it doesn ’ t take us decades to relearn it .

Come on, man. It’s not that much of a mystery, is it? Like any other social issue, any number of factors might play into levels of violence, especially in long-term trends. But the Associated Press’ claim that the sudden explosion in violence “defies easy explanation” is akin to micturating on heads while calling it precipitation:
Still reeling from the coronavirus pandemic and street protests over the police killing of George Floyd, exhausted cities around the nation are facing yet another challenge: a surge in shootings that has left dozens dead, including young children. The spike defies easy explanation, experts say, pointing to the toxic mix of issues facing America in 2020: an unemployment rate not seen in a generation, a pandemic that has killed more than 130,000 people, stay-at-home orders, rising anger over police brutality, intense stress, even the weather. “I think it’s just a perfect storm of distress in America,” said Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms after a weekend of bloodshed in her city. Jerry Ratcliffe, a Temple University criminal justice professor and host of the “Reducing Crime” podcast, put it more bluntly: “Anybody who thinks they can disentangle all of this probably doesn’t know what they’re talking about.”
Oh, I think people can take a look around and see for themselves what suddenly changed right before the uptick in violence. In Atlanta specifically, it wasn’t a “perfect storm of distress”; it was the decision to file charges against two police officers in the Rayshard Brooks case before the investigation could be finished. That led to an initial blue-flu walkout by police and a sharp retreat in assertiveness ever since. That all but announced “open season” on the streets, and the violent recognized it better than the politicians and the media.
That has been the trend in all these cities — protests, followed by retreats by city leadership on enforcing the law. Some of this definitely preceded the protests. For instance, California went as far as making burglaries and thefts under $950 into misdemeanors, which unsurprisingly resulted in an increase of those crimes. Bail reform put more criminals on the streets, so much so that New York governor Andrew Cuomo supported a rollback of those reforms this spring. The COVID-19 lockdown undoubtedly contributes to the general unrest and unease, too.
The increase in violent crime, however, has a very recent and relatively precise starting point. And that was when politicians across the country began demanding reductions in policing, and some — like Minneapolis — began working to dismantle it altogether. The police officers on the job know very well that they have less support from their community leadership, and are much less likely to take risks to intervene than they were three months ago. That’s not just in Atlanta, but in every major city in America, followed closely by the surge in violence that “defies easy explanation.”
That’s nonsense, but it’s also pretty much par for the course. The media narrative is that there are no trade-offs for reducing or even eliminating law enforcement. The people on the front lines, especially here in Minneapolis, know better. True police reform requires more resources and better tactics, not fewer resources and no tactics. It took us decades to learn that lesson; let’s hope it doesn’t take us decades to relearn it.