hotair--2020-07-31--James Lindsay: Why the woke won't debate you

Having just written about two separate examples of the woke in Seattle getting rough with people they dislike , I wanted to highlight something about the underlying mindset driving some of this behavior .
Yesterday , James Lindsay , one of the people involved in the grievance studies academic hoax , published an essay titled “ No , the Woke Won ’ t Debate You .
Here ’ s Why.
” He attempts to explain some of the philosophical reasons why this might be true .
In Lindsay ’ s view the answer isn ’ t as simple as hoping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s much deeper than that .
So far as he is aware , there ’ s no single explanation published anywhere by any woke academic advising people not to debate those they disagree with but he believes there are things within the structure of the belief system which naturally discourage it .
There are a number of points within Critical Social Justice Theory that would see having a debate or conversation with people of opposing views as unacceptable , and they all combine to create a mindset where that wouldn ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely or even willing to do in general .
This reticence , if not unwillingness , to converse with anyone who disagrees actually has a few pretty deep reasons behind it , and they ’ re interrelated but not quite the same .
They combine , however , to produce the first thing everyone needs to understand about this ideology : it is a complete worldview with its own ethics , epistemology , and morality , and theirs is not the same worldview the rest of us use .
Theirs is , very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In fact , theirs advances itself rather parasitically or virally by depending upon us to play the liberal game while taking advantage of its openings .
That ’ s not the same thing as being willing to play the liberal game themselves , however , including to have thoughtful dialogue with people who oppose them and their view of the world .
Conversation and debate are part of our game , and they are not part of their game .
Most of us look at a disagreement over some topic as an ongoing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe one thing and some another and there ’ s a give and take over which views hold up to scrutiny and which don ’ t .
But for the truly woke , there ’ s a deep skepticism of the entire process which has its roots in postmodernism .
For these academics , the debate itself is really a kind of falsehood which exists to reinforce structures of power .
And because the ultimate goal of critical theory is social justice , anything which gets in the way needs to be dispensed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like reason and argument .
To set the table for Lindsay a bit , keep in mind that just a couple weeks ago the NY Times published a piece based on interviews with anti-racism trainers including White Fragility author Robin DiAngelo .
While the piece was sympathetic in many ways it found that many of these trainers have a deep skepticism of “ scientific , linear thinking ” as well as the primacy of the written word ( including written history ) , individual achievement , excellence and even punctuality .
Those views @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of the substructure of the woke project .
Lindsay points to a 2017 academic paper by an author I ’ ve never heard of to make the point that for the woke fringe “ critical-thinking ” is considered an enemy of the revolutionary project : The critical-thinking tradition is concerned primarily with epistemic adequacy .
To be critical is to show good judgment in recognizing when arguments are faulty , assertions lack evidence , truth claims appeal to unreliable sources , or concepts are sloppily crafted and applied .
For critical thinkers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ examine the assumptions , commitments , and logic of daily life… the basic problem is irrational , illogical , and unexamined living.
” In this tradition sloppy claims can be identified and fixed by learning to apply the tools of formal and informal logic correctly .
Critical pedagogy begins from a different set of assumptions rooted in the neo-Marxian literature on critical theory commonly associated with the Frankfurt School .
Here , the critical learner is someone who is empowered and motivated to seek justice and emancipation .
Critical pedagogy regards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to social-justice issues not as propositions to be assessed for their truth value , but as expressions of power that function to re-inscribe and perpetuate social inequalities .
Its mission is to teach students ways of identifying and mapping how power shapes our understandings of the world .
This is the first step toward resisting and transforming social injustices .
By interrogating the politics of knowledge-production , this tradition also calls into question the uses of the accepted critical-thinking toolkit to determine epistemic adequacy .
To extend Audre Lorde ’ s classic metaphor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( for example , validity , soundness , conceptual clarity ) can not dismantle the master ’ s house : they can temporarily beat the master at his own game , but they can never bring about any enduring structural change .
They fail because the critical thinker ’ s toolkit is commonly invoked in particular settings , at particular times to reassert power : those adept with the tools often use them to restore an order that assures their comfort .
They can be habitually invoked to defend our epistemic home terrains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Lindsay ’ s take on this : I don ’ t think the average woke protester on the street has absorbed all of this material or could restate it in his or her own words , but the point is that if you soak in enough of this thinking , the opposition to the fundamentals of liberal thought are there at the base of it .
And it doesn ’ t take much to pick up the idea that what matters to the woke is not expertise and reason but passion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t have to have read any of this material as a 20-something college student to understand that there is a group of people who don ’ t care if the professor speaking on campus is a subject matter expert who might have some sound ideas .
What the woke students care about is shouting down a bad person for reinforcing structural harm .
You literally don ’ t have to argue , you just have to have a loud voice and a few accusations to level .
And that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even more specific , the social justice warriors at Evergreen State College didn ’ t have a hope of out-arguing Professor Bret Weinstein on any topic .
But by showing up as a group they could label him a racist and demand his firing .
The goal wasn ’ t enlightenment , it was power .
We ’ re seeing the same thing in Portland , Seattle and other cities around the country .
The people agitating to “ defund police ” haven ’ t won an argument on the topic of policing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by marching in the street .
We ’ ll only find out the problem with listening to activists rather than experts later after these ideas get instituted without any real debate .

Having just written about two separate examples of the woke in Seattle getting rough with people they dislike, I wanted to highlight something about the underlying mindset driving some of this behavior. Yesterday, James Lindsay, one of the people involved in the grievance studies academic hoax, published an essay titled “No, the Woke Won’t Debate You. Here’s Why.” He attempts to explain some of the philosophical reasons why this might be true.
In Lindsay’s view the answer isn’t as simple as hoping to avoid being embarrassed. It’s much deeper than that. So far as he is aware, there’s no single explanation published anywhere by any woke academic advising people not to debate those they disagree with but he believes there are things within the structure of the belief system which naturally discourage it.
There are a number of points within Critical Social Justice Theory that would see having a debate or conversation with people of opposing views as unacceptable, and they all combine to create a mindset where that wouldn’t be something that adherents to the Theory are likely or even willing to do in general. This reticence, if not unwillingness, to converse with anyone who disagrees actually has a few pretty deep reasons behind it, and they’re interrelated but not quite the same. They combine, however, to produce the first thing everyone needs to understand about this ideology: it is a complete worldview with its own ethics, epistemology, and morality, and theirs is not the same worldview the rest of us use. Theirs is, very much in particular, not liberal. In fact, theirs advances itself rather parasitically or virally by depending upon us to play the liberal game while taking advantage of its openings. That’s not the same thing as being willing to play the liberal game themselves, however, including to have thoughtful dialogue with people who oppose them and their view of the world. Conversation and debate are part of our game, and they are not part of their game.
Most of us look at a disagreement over some topic as an ongoing debate in the public square. Some believe one thing and some another and there’s a give and take over which views hold up to scrutiny and which don’t. But for the truly woke, there’s a deep skepticism of the entire process which has its roots in postmodernism. For these academics, the debate itself is really a kind of falsehood which exists to reinforce structures of power. And because the ultimate goal of critical theory is social justice, anything which gets in the way needs to be dispensed with, even if that includes things like reason and argument.
To set the table for Lindsay a bit, keep in mind that just a couple weeks ago the NY Times published a piece based on interviews with anti-racism trainers including White Fragility author Robin DiAngelo. While the piece was sympathetic in many ways it found that many of these trainers have a deep skepticism of “scientific, linear thinking” as well as the primacy of the written word (including written history), individual achievement, excellence and even punctuality. Those views aren’t incidental, they are part of the substructure of the woke project.
Lindsay points to a 2017 academic paper by an author I’ve never heard of to make the point that for the woke fringe “critical-thinking” is considered an enemy of the revolutionary project:
The critical-thinking tradition is concerned primarily with epistemic adequacy. To be critical is to show good judgment in recognizing when arguments are faulty, assertions lack evidence, truth claims appeal to unreliable sources, or concepts are sloppily crafted and applied. For critical thinkers, the problem is that people fail to “examine the assumptions, commitments, and logic of daily life… the basic problem is irrational, illogical, and unexamined living.” In this tradition sloppy claims can be identified and fixed by learning to apply the tools of formal and informal logic correctly. Critical pedagogy begins from a different set of assumptions rooted in the neo-Marxian literature on critical theory commonly associated with the Frankfurt School. Here, the critical learner is someone who is empowered and motivated to seek justice and emancipation. Critical pedagogy regards the claims that students make in response to social-justice issues not as propositions to be assessed for their truth value, but as expressions of power that function to re-inscribe and perpetuate social inequalities. Its mission is to teach students ways of identifying and mapping how power shapes our understandings of the world. This is the first step toward resisting and transforming social injustices. By interrogating the politics of knowledge-production, this tradition also calls into question the uses of the accepted critical-thinking toolkit to determine epistemic adequacy. To extend Audre Lorde’s classic metaphor, the tools of the critical-thinking tradition (for example, validity, soundness, conceptual clarity) cannot dismantle the master’s house: they can temporarily beat the master at his own game, but they can never bring about any enduring structural change. They fail because the critical thinker’s toolkit is commonly invoked in particular settings, at particular times to reassert power: those adept with the tools often use them to restore an order that assures their comfort. They can be habitually invoked to defend our epistemic home terrains. (pp. 881–882)
Here’s Lindsay’s take on this:
Here, the “master’s tools” are explicitly named by Bailey as including soundness and validity of argument, conceptual clarity, and epistemic adequacy (i.e., knowing what you’re talking about) and can easily be extended to science, reason, and rationality, and thus also to conversation and debate. The “master’s house” is the “organizational schemata” laid out by Kristie Dotson as the prevailing knowing system. Her claim is that these tools—essentially all of the liberal ones—cannot dismantle liberal societies from within, which is their goal, because they are the very tools that build and keep building it.
I don’t think the average woke protester on the street has absorbed all of this material or could restate it in his or her own words, but the point is that if you soak in enough of this thinking, the opposition to the fundamentals of liberal thought are there at the base of it. And it doesn’t take much to pick up the idea that what matters to the woke is not expertise and reason but passion:
Debate and conversation, especially when they rely upon reason, rationality, science, evidence, epistemic adequacy, and other Enlightenment-based tools of persuasion are the very thing they think produced injustice in the world in the first place. Those are not their methods and they reject them. Their methods are, instead, storytelling and counter-storytelling, appealing to emotions and subjectively interpreted lived experience, and problematizing arguments morally, on their moral terms.
To pick an example, you don’t have to have read any of this material as a 20-something college student to understand that there is a group of people who don’t care if the professor speaking on campus is a subject matter expert who might have some sound ideas. What the woke students care about is shouting down a bad person for reinforcing structural harm. You literally don’t have to argue, you just have to have a loud voice and a few accusations to level. And that’s exactly what they do.
To be even more specific, the social justice warriors at Evergreen State College didn’t have a hope of out-arguing Professor Bret Weinstein on any topic. But by showing up as a group they could label him a racist and demand his firing. The goal wasn’t enlightenment, it was power.
We’re seeing the same thing in Portland, Seattle and other cities around the country. The people agitating to “defund police” haven’t won an argument on the topic of policing, they’ve simply made demands by marching in the street. We’ll only find out the problem with listening to activists rather than experts later after these ideas get instituted without any real debate.


hotair--2020-07-31--There sure is a lot of Karen Bass veepstakes chatter in the media this afternoon

It ’ s pretty clear what this is about and it ’ s not about nominating Karen Bass for vice president .
If her “ comandante in jefe ” nonsense about Castro hadn ’ t already finished her off , the Venceremos Brigade dirt that Ed wrote about this morning did .
( I ’ m going to make the easy assumption that that was fed to the Atlantic by Kamala Harris and friends . )
No doubt she has many supporters on Capitol Hill , especially in the Congressional Black Caucus , which she chairs , but Democrats aren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unneeded Castro baggage at a moment when Florida seems winnable .
As I write this , new dirt is surfacing that she spoke at the opening of a Scientologist church 10 years ago , in case Biden wants that baggage too .
Assuming he doesn ’ t , why are BidenWorld sources chattering to the Times and CNN that Bass is very much an A-list top-tier might-just-get-the-nod candidate for the slot ?
It has to be that she ’ s been ruled out and they ’ re checking the box of making sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was considered carefully , right up to the last moment before the die was cast .
It ’ s a show of respect to them for their input more so than to Bass , to make them a bit more comfortable with Biden ’ s actual choice .
And as a matter of pure stagecraft , it can ’ t hurt to build extra suspense before the big unveiling .
Is Karen Bass about to come out of nowhere and land a place on the national ticket ?
Ah , no .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might , it makes the veep countdown more intriguing .
In more than two dozen interviews with CNN in recent days , members of Congress , top Democratic donors , Biden allies and others close to the vice presidential vetting process said California Rep. Karen Bass , the 66-year-old chair of the Congressional Black Caucus , has gained real traction in the late stage of the search… Bass ’ new emergence as one of the top contenders has been propelled by intensive lobbying on her behalf by some of her colleagues in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donors .
Her star has risen after Speaker Nancy Pelosi recommended weeks ago that Bass should not be overlooked… “ Everybody likes Karen Bass .
People are scratching their heads saying , who is this woman ?
” he said .
“ When you ’ ve been speaker of the legislature for a state that ’ s twice the population of New York and the world ’ s fifth biggest economy , you know how to manage media , you understand the economy .
I think she is stronger than people think.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( “ Ms .
Bass in particular has moved rapidly toward the top of Mr. Biden ’ s list amid an intensive lobbying drive by her fellow House Democrats ” ) but the most interesting parts of that article have to do with people trying to dissuade him from choosing Harris .
There are a lot of people around Biden who dislike the idea of putting her on the ticket , as various other outlets have reported this week .
Same with the NYT : “ There ’ s going to be an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 , so I think it ’ s important to have somebody who can be focused on that task and not running for president as soon as we finish the inauguration , ” said Representative Cedric Richmond of Louisiana , one of Mr. Biden ’ s campaign chairs… “ The thing I keep thinking about Kamala is her performance in the primary , ” said Representative Filemon Vela of Texas , an early supporter of Mr. Biden .
Mr. Vela said his top three choices were Ms. Bass , Ms. Rice and Ms. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two would fare best in his state… One Democrat close to Mr. Biden ’ s campaign said its polling indicated that Ms. Harris has little allure with Black voters .
More telling , a Biden campaign official reached out to The New York Times , unprompted , to say that some of the former vice president ’ s own staff members are not supportive of her .
CNN ’ s story also mentions an “ intensive effort by some Biden allies to torpedo Harris ’ chances of being chosen ” and quotes one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ Biden allies are laying the groundwork for the vice president to have a reason to not choose her.
” Hmmmm .
Where I get stuck on the idea of Biden passing over Harris is the fact that he ’ ll be the oldest president in American history , a man who ’ ll turn 80 in office , and thus someone with an unusually high chance of not finishing his term .
One of Trump ’ s core attacks on him is that he ’ s already begun to lose his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ share , which raises a potential 25th Amendment issue down the road .
More so for Biden than for practically any other nominee , his VP needs to be someone whom undecideds believe won ’ t be overmatched by the presidency if it ’ s suddenly thrust upon them .
That ’ s why Stacey Abrams was never a serious candidate .
Voters use experience as a proxy for ability and Abrams has never held federal or statewide office .
She ’ s young too , in her mid-40s .
That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comfy zone .
So Abrams is out .
Bass is out because of her Florida problems .
Susan Rice is a Biden favorite and she has some relevant experience as a former ambassador and NSA , but she ’ s never so much as run for office .
And she ’ s a foreign-policy specialist at a moment when the country ’ s biggest challenges are domestic .
Does she get undecideds to the comfy zone , realistically ?
Would Democrats or Republicans , who have a long list of grievances with Rice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if she were chosen ?
That leaves Harris , Elizabeth Warren , and Tammy Duckworth .
The problem with Warren and Duckworth is that , as Biden adds more African-American women to his shortlist — which didn ’ t include Rice or Bass or Val Demings circa late May , remember — it ’ ll feel like that much more of a snub if he ends up choosing a woman who ’ s not African-American .
Imagine the optics of passing over Harris and Rice and Bass and Demings and Abrams for snow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ snow white minus 1/1024th ) .
It ’ s inconceivable .
All of BidenWorld ’ s concerns about Harris are valid .
She would start running for president on day one , no one seems terribly excited about her , she doesn ’ t have a rep as a policy maven the way Warren does and badly botched her handling of Medicare for All on the trail .
But she is in fact a U.S. senator and a former AG of California .
She probably gets closer to the comfy zone than anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden needs to check .
“ I think many Americans just instinctively believe that if you ’ re going to be a heartbeat away from the presidency , they should have heard about you by now , ” said Jim Geraghty today , writing about the odd Bass boomlet .
It ’ d be especially weird for Biden to spring a surprise with the VP pick , he adds , since Sleepy Joe ’ s whole appeal is that he ’ s the ultimate known quantity .
Trump is the chaos candidate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of that together and it points to Harris , however grudgingly on BidenWorld ’ s part .
…Although I still think there ’ s a chance of a Demings surprise .
She has the same problem as Bass does in having too low a public profile , but she comes with law-enforcement cred as a former police chief that might hold special value to Biden at a moment when Trump ’ s claiming that Antifa will take over the government if he ’ s elected .
Biden might be willing to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Trump ’ s strongest attack lines against him .
Still a long way to go before he makes the pick .
I ’ ll leave you with this , the latest twist in the search :

It’s pretty clear what this is about and it’s not about nominating Karen Bass for vice president. If her “comandante in jefe” nonsense about Castro hadn’t already finished her off, the Venceremos Brigade dirt that Ed wrote about this morning did. (I’m going to make the easy assumption that that was fed to the Atlantic by Kamala Harris and friends.) No doubt she has many supporters on Capitol Hill, especially in the Congressional Black Caucus, which she chairs, but Democrats aren’t about to freight themselves with unneeded Castro baggage at a moment when Florida seems winnable.
As I write this, new dirt is surfacing that she spoke at the opening of a Scientologist church 10 years ago, in case Biden wants that baggage too. Assuming he doesn’t, why are BidenWorld sources chattering to the Times and CNN that Bass is very much an A-list top-tier might-just-get-the-nod candidate for the slot?
It has to be that she’s been ruled out and they’re checking the box of making sure that the CBC believes that their favorite was considered carefully, right up to the last moment before the die was cast. It’s a show of respect to them for their input more so than to Bass, to make them a bit more comfortable with Biden’s actual choice.
And as a matter of pure stagecraft, it can’t hurt to build extra suspense before the big unveiling. Is Karen Bass about to come out of nowhere and land a place on the national ticket? Ah, no. But to the extent that people think she might, it makes the veep countdown more intriguing.
In more than two dozen interviews with CNN in recent days, members of Congress, top Democratic donors, Biden allies and others close to the vice presidential vetting process said California Rep. Karen Bass, the 66-year-old chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, has gained real traction in the late stage of the search… Bass’ new emergence as one of the top contenders has been propelled by intensive lobbying on her behalf by some of her colleagues in the House including influential California Democrats and top donors. Her star has risen after Speaker Nancy Pelosi recommended weeks ago that Bass should not be overlooked… “Everybody likes Karen Bass. People are scratching their heads saying, who is this woman?” he said. “When you’ve been speaker of the legislature for a state that’s twice the population of New York and the world’s fifth biggest economy, you know how to manage media, you understand the economy. I think she is stronger than people think.”
The Times is alleging Bass-mentum as well (“Ms. Bass in particular has moved rapidly toward the top of Mr. Biden’s list amid an intensive lobbying drive by her fellow House Democrats”) but the most interesting parts of that article have to do with people trying to dissuade him from choosing Harris. There are a lot of people around Biden who dislike the idea of putting her on the ticket, as various other outlets have reported this week. Same with the NYT:
“There’s going to be an awful lot to do starting on Day 1, so I think it’s important to have somebody who can be focused on that task and not running for president as soon as we finish the inauguration,” said Representative Cedric Richmond of Louisiana, one of Mr. Biden’s campaign chairs… “The thing I keep thinking about Kamala is her performance in the primary,” said Representative Filemon Vela of Texas, an early supporter of Mr. Biden. Mr. Vela said his top three choices were Ms. Bass, Ms. Rice and Ms. Duckworth — but he said the last two would fare best in his state… One Democrat close to Mr. Biden’s campaign said its polling indicated that Ms. Harris has little allure with Black voters. More telling, a Biden campaign official reached out to The New York Times, unprompted, to say that some of the former vice president’s own staff members are not supportive of her.
CNN’s story also mentions an “intensive effort by some Biden allies to torpedo Harris’ chances of being chosen” and quotes one aide involved in the process this way: “Biden allies are laying the groundwork for the vice president to have a reason to not choose her.” Hmmmm.
Where I get stuck on the idea of Biden passing over Harris is the fact that he’ll be the oldest president in American history, a man who’ll turn 80 in office, and thus someone with an unusually high chance of not finishing his term. One of Trump’s core attacks on him is that he’s already begun to lose his mental bearings, a view many voters share, which raises a potential 25th Amendment issue down the road. More so for Biden than for practically any other nominee, his VP needs to be someone whom undecideds believe won’t be overmatched by the presidency if it’s suddenly thrust upon them. That’s why Stacey Abrams was never a serious candidate. Voters use experience as a proxy for ability and Abrams has never held federal or statewide office. She’s young too, in her mid-40s. That’s not going to get undecideds to their comfy zone.
So Abrams is out. Bass is out because of her Florida problems. Susan Rice is a Biden favorite and she has some relevant experience as a former ambassador and NSA, but she’s never so much as run for office. And she’s a foreign-policy specialist at a moment when the country’s biggest challenges are domestic. Does she get undecideds to the comfy zone, realistically? Would Democrats or Republicans, who have a long list of grievances with Rice, be more motivated to turn out if she were chosen?
That leaves Harris, Elizabeth Warren, and Tammy Duckworth. The problem with Warren and Duckworth is that, as Biden adds more African-American women to his shortlist — which didn’t include Rice or Bass or Val Demings circa late May, remember — it’ll feel like that much more of a snub if he ends up choosing a woman who’s not African-American. Imagine the optics of passing over Harris and Rice and Bass and Demings and Abrams for snow white Elizabeth Warren. (Sorry, snow white minus 1/1024th). It’s inconceivable.
All of BidenWorld’s concerns about Harris are valid. She would start running for president on day one, no one seems terribly excited about her, she doesn’t have a rep as a policy maven the way Warren does and badly botched her handling of Medicare for All on the trail. But she is in fact a U.S. senator and a former AG of California. She probably gets closer to the comfy zone than anyone else who checks the demographic boxes that Biden needs to check. “I think many Americans just instinctively believe that if you’re going to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, they should have heard about you by now,” said Jim Geraghty today, writing about the odd Bass boomlet. It’d be especially weird for Biden to spring a surprise with the VP pick, he adds, since Sleepy Joe’s whole appeal is that he’s the ultimate known quantity. Trump is the chaos candidate, Biden is the no-sudden-moves candidate. Put all of that together and it points to Harris, however grudgingly on BidenWorld’s part.
…Although I still think there’s a chance of a Demings surprise. She has the same problem as Bass does in having too low a public profile, but she comes with law-enforcement cred as a former police chief that might hold special value to Biden at a moment when Trump’s claiming that Antifa will take over the government if he’s elected. Biden might be willing to make a sudden move if it counters one of Trump’s strongest attack lines against him. Still a long way to go before he makes the pick. I’ll leave you with this, the latest twist in the search:


hotair--2020-07-31--Man who asked Seattle protesters to quiet down was harassed and beaten

A group of 80-100 protesters were walking through a residential neighborhood early Thursday morning .
They had come to protest at the home of Seattle City Council member Teresa Mosqueda .
But according to neighbors , Mosqueda doesn ’ t live in the neighborhood anymore .
The protest group was noisy and one resident who was unable to sleep went into the street to confront them and ask them to quiet down .
A small group of protesters became angry that the man was filming his encounter with them on his phone : Officers met the victim at Swedish Hospital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ receiving treatment for a head injury .
The victim told officers that around 12 am , he was attempting to sleep but was kept awake by a protest that had been making its way through the neighborhood .
He said that he went outside his home near 10th Ave W and W Lee Street and asked the crowd to quiet down so that he could sleep , video recording the confrontation on his phone .
The man said that members of the protest became angry that he was recording them , flashed laser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struck him in the head with a blunt object , possibly a flashlight .
Several other protesters provided first aid to the victim while , according to the victim , a person with the protest deleted the video on his phone .
A family member transported the victim to the hospital , where he met with police .
Officers spoke with multiple witnesses who confirmed the victim ’ s story , found surveillance cameras that may have captured the incident , and took photos of blood splatter at the crime scene .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the man collapsed after the blow to his head : Kiro 7 found two videos of the incident posted by members of the protest group .
It appears to show a woman in the protest group shining a flashlight directly in the man ’ s face from about 2 feet away .
The man got sick of it and pulled the flashlight out of her hand and threw it on the ground .
That led several members of the group to start shoving him and he wound up on the ground .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who hit the man in the head but it doesn ’ t seem that any of the protesters were injured , even slightly , before the assault .
Everything in this clip is pretty standard operating procedure for protesters .
Make a lot of noise , confront anyone with a camera and ratchet up the confrontation , in this case by keeping a light in the man ’ s face to further irritate him .
Police are seeking help to identify the people responsible but since the same group deleted the video from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not a lot to go on .

A group of 80-100 protesters were walking through a residential neighborhood early Thursday morning. They had come to protest at the home of Seattle City Council member Teresa Mosqueda. But according to neighbors, Mosqueda doesn’t live in the neighborhood anymore. The protest group was noisy and one resident who was unable to sleep went into the street to confront them and ask them to quiet down. A small group of protesters became angry that the man was filming his encounter with them on his phone:
Officers met the victim at Swedish Hospital early this morning, where he was receiving treatment for a head injury. The victim told officers that around 12 am, he was attempting to sleep but was kept awake by a protest that had been making its way through the neighborhood. He said that he went outside his home near 10th Ave W and W Lee Street and asked the crowd to quiet down so that he could sleep, video recording the confrontation on his phone. The man said that members of the protest became angry that he was recording them, flashed laser pointers in his eyes, and then struck him in the head with a blunt object, possibly a flashlight. Several other protesters provided first aid to the victim while, according to the victim, a person with the protest deleted the video on his phone. A family member transported the victim to the hospital, where he met with police. Officers spoke with multiple witnesses who confirmed the victim’s story, found surveillance cameras that may have captured the incident, and took photos of blood splatter at the crime scene.
There is still blood on the ground where the man collapsed after the blow to his head:
In Queen Anne, neighbors say 80-100 protesters moved through here (10th Ave W/W Lee) late last night and early this morning. @SeattlePD says one man came out, confronting them, and was assaulted. Dried blood can be seen in the street #KOMONews https://t.co/IZEjsLjZrQ pic.twitter.com/75idmyMrgy — Cole Miller (@ColeMillerTV) July 31, 2020
Kiro 7 found two videos of the incident posted by members of the protest group. It appears to show a woman in the protest group shining a flashlight directly in the man’s face from about 2 feet away. The man got sick of it and pulled the flashlight out of her hand and threw it on the ground. That led several members of the group to start shoving him and he wound up on the ground. It’s not clear from these clips who hit the man in the head but it doesn’t seem that any of the protesters were injured, even slightly, before the assault.
Everything in this clip is pretty standard operating procedure for protesters. Make a lot of noise, confront anyone with a camera and ratchet up the confrontation, in this case by keeping a light in the man’s face to further irritate him. Police are seeking help to identify the people responsible but since the same group deleted the video from the victim’s phone there’s not a lot to go on.


hotair--2020-07-31--ABC: Black/white split widening in Portland demonstrations; calming down?

Last week , the head of the local NAACP , E.D .
Mondainé , warned that the Black Lives Matter demonstrations in Portland had started becoming a “ white spectacle.
” Yesterday , the BLM-affiliated group Don ’ t Shoot Portland accused the white leadership of Wall of Moms of “ anti-Blackness.
” ABC News reports today that problem has gone all the way down to the streets , with black demonstrators attempting to stop violence in order to keep the protests from turning into riots — and that white agitators are pushing back .
Why , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goals , ABC News notes : In recent days as vandalism , attacks on police and fires ignited in the streets have increased , protesters have become split between those bent on destruction and those who believe the peaceful actions of the Black Lives Matter movement are being drowned out by demonstrators and agitators pushing violence as a means to achieving their goals .
On Tuesday night , the difference in philosophy played out in the streets of Portland when a white protester dressed in riot gear set a sizable fire in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lives Matter protester , who identified himself to ABC News as Najee , ran over and put the blaze out in an incident caught on video .
The white protester in full riot gear responded by yelling , “ light the fire again !
” A frustrated Najee yelled back , trying to explain that inciting violence and destruction was taking away from the BLM message .
The white protester responded , “ they burned down one police building in Minneapolis and they defunded the police department.
” Actually they haven ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Right now , it looks like they won ’ t get a chance to abolish it at all until next year , thanks to votes at the Charter Commission to put off a referendum until the Minneapolis city council produces a specific proposal for a replacement of its law-enforcement functions .
It does show , though , how appeasement incites greater radicalism — and whose goals that serves .
Last night , however , demonstrations did calm down after Oregon state police took over for city police and federal law enforcement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal officers in sight , apparently less inclined to act out : Oregon state troopers arrived Thursday at the downtown Portland federal courthouse , the scene of nightly clashes between federal officers and protesters .
State police are now taking over to try to defuse the sometimes violent confrontations .
Thursday night ’ s demonstrations remained overwhelmingly calm past midnight , with no troopers in sight .
Oregon State Police took on the high-profile assignment to provide security at the courthouse after the Trump administration this month sent more than 100 federal officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ larger crowds of thousands protesting their presence and widespread condemnation by city and state officials and members of Congress .
“ Calm down ” doesn ’ t necessarily mean entirely peaceful , as Andy Ngo reported from the scene .
Yes , that ’ s a pig ’ s head with a police cap : The after-midnight violence didn ’ t materialize , KGW reports , perhaps in response to a planned withdrawal of federal law enforcement .
However , KGW also notes that BLM leaders have gotten annoyed that the agitators have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ federal enforcement rather than police reform , and that also explains a little more assertiveness in squelching the provocateurs : Police said even when some demonstrators tried to do things like set fires or climb the fence at the federal courthouse , other protesters stopped them .
“ At times people lit small fires along sidewalks on surrounding blocks and attempted to light fires inside the fence at the federal courthouse , ” Portland police said .
“ Others in the crowd put the fires out .
Some people climbed on or near @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but others admonished them and they got down .
People could be heard in the crowd repeating that the protest was to remain peaceful.
” … Black Lives Matter organizers said they feel this issue of the feds being in town has been a distraction from the movement .
“ This doesn ’ t go away tomorrow .
This problem that we face as Black people , it ’ s every day , ” said Reese Monson , organizer of Black Unity PDX .
“ So , with having the feds here still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think , it ’ s not an issue .
It ’ s not going to stop us .
We ’ re still going to be here .
We ’ re still going to chant .
We ’ re still going to let them know that Black lives matter.
” It appears that the BLM movement has had enough of its Antifa “ allies ” in the streets .
It appears that they have belatedly begun asking themselves the same questions Mondainé asked last week : Images of “ Naked Athena , ” as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gone viral , her unclothed confrontation with police earning her accolades as a brave ally of the cause .
But I see something else : a beneficiary of white privilege dancing vainly on a stage that was originally created to raise up the voices of my oppressed brothers and sisters .
… Unfortunately , “ spectacle ” is now the best way to describe Portland ’ s protests .
Vandalizing government buildings and hurling projectiles at law enforcement draw attention — but how do these actions stop police from killing black people ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ achieving for the cause of black equality ?
The “ Wall of Moms , ” while perhaps well-intentioned , ends up redirecting attention away from the urgent issue of murdered black bodies .
This might ease the consciences of white , affluent women who have previously been silent in the face of black oppression , but it ’ s fair to ask : Are they really furthering the cause of justice , or is this another example of white co-optation ?
Belatedly , at least , BLM leaders are concluding it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a very different agenda than that of the NAACP and the majority of African-Americans , who need better policing rather than no policing .

Last week, the head of the local NAACP, E.D. Mondainé, warned that the Black Lives Matter demonstrations in Portland had started becoming a “white spectacle.” Yesterday, the BLM-affiliated group Don’t Shoot Portland accused the white leadership of Wall of Moms of “anti-Blackness.” ABC News reports today that problem has gone all the way down to the streets, with black demonstrators attempting to stop violence in order to keep the protests from turning into riots — and that white agitators are pushing back.
Why, it’s almost as if they have two different goals, ABC News notes:
In recent days as vandalism, attacks on police and fires ignited in the streets have increased, protesters have become split between those bent on destruction and those who believe the peaceful actions of the Black Lives Matter movement are being drowned out by demonstrators and agitators pushing violence as a means to achieving their goals. On Tuesday night, the difference in philosophy played out in the streets of Portland when a white protester dressed in riot gear set a sizable fire in the middle of a street. A Black Lives Matter protester, who identified himself to ABC News as Najee, ran over and put the blaze out in an incident caught on video. The white protester in full riot gear responded by yelling, “light the fire again!” A frustrated Najee yelled back, trying to explain that inciting violence and destruction was taking away from the BLM message. The white protester responded, “they burned down one police building in Minneapolis and they defunded the police department.”
Actually they haven’t yet “defunded” the police department. Right now, it looks like they won’t get a chance to abolish it at all until next year, thanks to votes at the Charter Commission to put off a referendum until the Minneapolis city council produces a specific proposal for a replacement of its law-enforcement functions. It does show, though, how appeasement incites greater radicalism — and whose goals that serves.
Last night, however, demonstrations did calm down after Oregon state police took over for city police and federal law enforcement. The crowds were smaller, and without federal officers in sight, apparently less inclined to act out:
Oregon state troopers arrived Thursday at the downtown Portland federal courthouse, the scene of nightly clashes between federal officers and protesters. State police are now taking over to try to defuse the sometimes violent confrontations. Thursday night’s demonstrations remained overwhelmingly calm past midnight, with no troopers in sight. Oregon State Police took on the high-profile assignment to provide security at the courthouse after the Trump administration this month sent more than 100 federal officers to guard the building, leading to larger crowds of thousands protesting their presence and widespread condemnation by city and state officials and members of Congress.
“Calm down” doesn’t necessarily mean entirely peaceful, as Andy Ngo reported from the scene. Yes, that’s a pig’s head with a police cap:
Antifa protesters dumped a bloody severed pig's head on an American flag outside the Justice Center in downtown Portland. They put a cop's hat on it and set all of it on fire. #PortlandRiots #antifa pic.twitter.com/qfAOT4ItxP — Andy Ngô (@MrAndyNgo) July 31, 2020
The after-midnight violence didn’t materialize, KGW reports, perhaps in response to a planned withdrawal of federal law enforcement. However, KGW also notes that BLM leaders have gotten annoyed that the agitators have bogarted the protests for the issue of federal enforcement rather than police reform, and that also explains a little more assertiveness in squelching the provocateurs:
Police said even when some demonstrators tried to do things like set fires or climb the fence at the federal courthouse, other protesters stopped them. “At times people lit small fires along sidewalks on surrounding blocks and attempted to light fires inside the fence at the federal courthouse,” Portland police said. “Others in the crowd put the fires out. Some people climbed on or near the fence at the federal courthouse, but others admonished them and they got down. People could be heard in the crowd repeating that the protest was to remain peaceful.” … Black Lives Matter organizers said they feel this issue of the feds being in town has been a distraction from the movement. “This doesn’t go away tomorrow. This problem that we face as Black people, it’s every day,” said Reese Monson, organizer of Black Unity PDX. “So, with having the feds here still, so we say or so we think, it’s not an issue. It’s not going to stop us. We’re still going to be here. We’re still going to chant. We’re still going to let them know that Black lives matter.”
It appears that the BLM movement has had enough of its Antifa “allies” in the streets. It appears that they have belatedly begun asking themselves the same questions Mondainé asked last week:
Images of “Naked Athena,” as the protester has been labeled, have gone viral, her unclothed confrontation with police earning her accolades as a brave ally of the cause. But I see something else: a beneficiary of white privilege dancing vainly on a stage that was originally created to raise up the voices of my oppressed brothers and sisters. … Unfortunately, “spectacle” is now the best way to describe Portland’s protests. Vandalizing government buildings and hurling projectiles at law enforcement draw attention — but how do these actions stop police from killing black people? What are antifa and other leftist agitators achieving for the cause of black equality? The “Wall of Moms,” while perhaps well-intentioned, ends up redirecting attention away from the urgent issue of murdered black bodies. This might ease the consciences of white, affluent women who have previously been silent in the face of black oppression, but it’s fair to ask: Are they really furthering the cause of justice, or is this another example of white co-optation?
Belatedly, at least, BLM leaders are concluding it’s the latter — and that the anarchists have a very different agenda than that of the NAACP and the majority of African-Americans, who need better policing rather than no policing.


hotair--2020-07-31--White House condemns China for delaying Hong Kong election day after Trump imagined delaying U.S. el

White House condemns China for delaying Hong Kong election day after Trump imagined delaying U.S. election

I appreciate that McEnany read this statement instead of delivering an extemporaneous version of it .
After yesterday , trying to make it sound sincere would have been pathetic .
Better to check the box half-heartedly and recite from a script since we know now that the executive branch doesn ’ t actually oppose delaying elections in principle .
Even so , I ’ m surprised there ’ s so much as a perfunctory denunciation .
Many times over the past few decades the president has made clear that he admires shows of authoritarian ruthlessness as examples of “ strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right now by showing Hong Kongers that their right to vote is really more of a privilege granted by the Chinese Communist Party , to be granted or withdrawn as political circumstances warrant .
And with pro-democracy candidates poised to win and embarrass Beijing , that ’ s definitely a “ withdraw ” kind of moment .
China ’ s excuse , by the way , is that it ’ s too dangerous to public health to have people turning out to cast ballots in the middle of a pandemic .
Which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ canceling an election will than Trump ’ s pretext that mail-in ballots will corrupt the results irretrievably .
Philip Klein raised a fascinating possibility about the Hong Kong news this morning .
China would have found a reason to cancel the election no matter what , once it concluded that its puppet candidates were at risk of losing .
But maybe China wouldn ’ t have announced the cancellation today if not for you-know-who ’ s “ fascistic ” tweet yesterday : Unfortunately , thanks to President Trump ’ s reckless tweet Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delaying its election over concerns about mail-in voting , the U.S. has much less moral authority to criticize China for the delay .
In fact , given how Beijing approaches public relations and diplomacy , it ’ s difficult to avoid wondering whether they purposely made the announcement now to take advantage of the cover provided by Trump ’ s tweet .
Makes sense .
At any other moment , postponing Hong Kong ’ s vote would have drawn the world ’ s attention and a torrent of criticism from western powers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it today guarantees that most of the coverage of China ’ s illiberal gambit will mention the fact that the leader of the free world proposed doing something similar on social media just yesterday .
It ’ s mitigation of bad PR via optimal timing , handed to them on a silver platter by the White House .
Delaying the election now also puts the U.S. in a no-win position of either condemning the Hong Kong election ’ s postponement and looking ridiculous in light of yesterday ’ s tweet or swallowing its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to condemn China at all .
The White House chose the better option among those two — better to formally disapprove and be left looking absurd than to keep quiet and further advance the idea that postponing elections is no big deal .
But they do look absurd .
The United States doesn ’ t often look silly when it stands up for civil liberties abroad , but darned if we didn ’ t pull it off today .
Needless to say , China has gone , and will go , further than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unfavorable outcome at the polls .
Postponing the election is only their latest attempt to control the results there ; recently they outright disqualified 12 candidates from the ballot for supporting democracy too strongly .
One of them was Joshua Wong , a young activist who ’ s established a global profile for his courage in speaking out against Beijing .
How courageous ?
He ’ s pictured in this Times story wearing a t-shirt that reads , “ They Can ’ t Kill Us All.
” I wish I were more confident @ @ @ @ @ @

I appreciate that McEnany read this statement instead of delivering an extemporaneous version of it. After yesterday, trying to make it sound sincere would have been pathetic. Better to check the box half-heartedly and recite from a script since we know now that the executive branch doesn’t actually oppose delaying elections in principle.
Even so, I’m surprised there’s so much as a perfunctory denunciation. Many times over the past few decades the president has made clear that he admires shows of authoritarian ruthlessness as examples of “strong” leadership. China looks awfully strong right now by showing Hong Kongers that their right to vote is really more of a privilege granted by the Chinese Communist Party, to be granted or withdrawn as political circumstances warrant. And with pro-democracy candidates poised to win and embarrass Beijing, that’s definitely a “withdraw” kind of moment.
China’s excuse, by the way, is that it’s too dangerous to public health to have people turning out to cast ballots in the middle of a pandemic. Which is superficially more convincing as a pretext for canceling an election will than Trump’s pretext that mail-in ballots will corrupt the results irretrievably.
Philip Klein raised a fascinating possibility about the Hong Kong news this morning. China would have found a reason to cancel the election no matter what, once it concluded that its puppet candidates were at risk of losing. But maybe China wouldn’t have announced the cancellation today if not for you-know-who’s “fascistic” tweet yesterday:
Unfortunately, thanks to President Trump’s reckless tweet Thursday floating the idea of the United States delaying its election over concerns about mail-in voting, the U.S. has much less moral authority to criticize China for the delay. In fact, given how Beijing approaches public relations and diplomacy, it’s difficult to avoid wondering whether they purposely made the announcement now to take advantage of the cover provided by Trump’s tweet.
Makes sense. At any other moment, postponing Hong Kong’s vote would have drawn the world’s attention and a torrent of criticism from western powers, starting with the United States. Doing it today guarantees that most of the coverage of China’s illiberal gambit will mention the fact that the leader of the free world proposed doing something similar on social media just yesterday. It’s mitigation of bad PR via optimal timing, handed to them on a silver platter by the White House.
Delaying the election now also puts the U.S. in a no-win position of either condemning the Hong Kong election’s postponement and looking ridiculous in light of yesterday’s tweet or swallowing its embarrassment over what Trump said by declining to condemn China at all. The White House chose the better option among those two — better to formally disapprove and be left looking absurd than to keep quiet and further advance the idea that postponing elections is no big deal. But they do look absurd. The United States doesn’t often look silly when it stands up for civil liberties abroad, but darned if we didn’t pull it off today.
Needless to say, China has gone, and will go, further than Trump would in order to avoid an unfavorable outcome at the polls. Postponing the election is only their latest attempt to control the results there; recently they outright disqualified 12 candidates from the ballot for supporting democracy too strongly. One of them was Joshua Wong, a young activist who’s established a global profile for his courage in speaking out against Beijing. How courageous? He’s pictured in this Times story wearing a t-shirt that reads, “They Can’t Kill Us All.” I wish I were more confident that he’s right.


hotair--2020-07-31--Seattle police officer injured in last weekend's riot: 'There's just so much hate'

One of the 59 Seattle police officers injured during last weekend ’ s rioting gave interviews to two local news channels .
Q13 refers to her only as “ Ellie ” because she ’ s concerned about being targeted again by the mob .
Ellie is an immigrant from Lebanon who decided to become a police officer because she wanted to help serve her own community .
As Q13 puts it , “ Ellie is the kind of officer that a progressive city like Seattle hopes for.
” But last weekend she was seriously injured when a large crown marched @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outside trying to keep people away from the building someone threw a rock at her : During a riot outside the Seattle Police Department ’ s East Precinct on July 25 , Ellie suffered a torn meniscus when someone in the crowd threw a rock at her right leg .
She jerked it away quickly , causing her left knee to twist .
In total , Seattle police said 59 officers were injured that day .
Ellie says her recovery could take months , but there is emotional healing too .
“ There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she said .
“ I saw so much hate in people ’ s eyes.
” In the Q13 interview she says she thought about quitting the force because of the lack of support from the community for the police .
But then she got a call in which she was able to speak Arabic to a distressed couple who didn ’ t speak very good English .
The woman involved in the call had previously been tortured by police in Iraq so having a sympathetic female officer who could communicate with her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay on but she ’ ll have to have surgery on her knee so could be on desk duty for a while .
Here ’ s the Q13 interview : King 5 also published an interview with the same officer .
In this clip , she describes how officers were dodging large rocks being thrown at them while people in the crowd were chanting “ There ’ s no riot here , take off your riot gear.
” “ It just felt like they were there to hurt us , ” she said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up by the Seattle PD .
I think it ’ s a smart thing for police departments that are under attack to put forward some of these officers who are on the receiving end to humanize their side of the story .
These are real people taking abuse and getting hurt .
Here ’ s the King 5 interview which covers a lot of the same territory :

One of the 59 Seattle police officers injured during last weekend’s rioting gave interviews to two local news channels. Q13 refers to her only as “Ellie” because she’s concerned about being targeted again by the mob. Ellie is an immigrant from Lebanon who decided to become a police officer because she wanted to help serve her own community. As Q13 puts it, “Ellie is the kind of officer that a progressive city like Seattle hopes for.”
But last weekend she was seriously injured when a large crown marched on her precinct. While she was outside trying to keep people away from the building someone threw a rock at her:
During a riot outside the Seattle Police Department’s East Precinct on July 25, Ellie suffered a torn meniscus when someone in the crowd threw a rock at her right leg. She jerked it away quickly, causing her left knee to twist. In total, Seattle police said 59 officers were injured that day. Ellie says her recovery could take months, but there is emotional healing too. “There’s just so much hate,” she said. “I saw so much hate in people’s eyes.”
In the Q13 interview she says she thought about quitting the force because of the lack of support from the community for the police. But then she got a call in which she was able to speak Arabic to a distressed couple who didn’t speak very good English. The woman involved in the call had previously been tortured by police in Iraq so having a sympathetic female officer who could communicate with her made a difference. Ellie decided to stay on but she’ll have to have surgery on her knee so could be on desk duty for a while. Here’s the Q13 interview:

King 5 also published an interview with the same officer. In this clip, she describes how officers were dodging large rocks being thrown at them while people in the crowd were chanting “There’s no riot here, take off your riot gear.”
“It just felt like they were there to hurt us,” she said.
These interviews were pretty obviously set up by the Seattle PD. I think it’s a smart thing for police departments that are under attack to put forward some of these officers who are on the receiving end to humanize their side of the story. These are real people taking abuse and getting hurt.
Here’s the King 5 interview which covers a lot of the same territory:


hotair--2020-07-31--Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Unemployment impasse, Fatima, police reform, entertainment in

Today's hot topics on Relevant Radio®: Unemployment impasse, Fatima, police reform, entertainment in COVID-19 shutdown, and more!

Once again , I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today !
The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air , as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows .
• What is happening with unemployment benefits in Congress ?
What should our priorities be in that policy ?
Thomas Storck joins us to discuss the prudential judgment required in this crisis .
• David Carollo joins us from the World Apostolate of Fatima • Are police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
National Review ’ s George Terwilliger warns that it is .
• Is this a time to dial down on nudity in television ?
Melissa Henson brings us up to speed on the Parents Television Council ’ s efforts to encourage more family-friendly programming during the pandemic • What ’ s new at the box office — er , the virtual box office ?
Christian Toto joins us to discuss the latest releases , including a strong recommend for Most Wanted — which echoes one of my favorites this year , Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ … stay tuned !
We may add more before the show starts today , plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour .
We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149 .
You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world , so download it now .
I ’ ll look forward to talking with you !

Once again, I get to step outside the box and guest host the Drew Mariani Show on Relevant Radio® from 3-6 ET today! The Catholic talk-radio network is heard nationwide on the air, as well as online and through their free mobile app that plays live and podcast shows.
Today’s Relevant Radio® show includes:
What is happening with unemployment benefits in Congress? What should our priorities be in that policy? Thomas Storck joins us to discuss the prudential judgment required in this crisis.
David Carollo joins us from the World Apostolate of Fatima
Are police reform protests and defund pushes costing lives? National Review’s George Terwilliger warns that it is.
Is this a time to dial down on nudity in television? Melissa Henson brings us up to speed on the Parents Television Council‘s efforts to encourage more family-friendly programming during the pandemic
What’s new at the box office — er, the virtual box office? Christian Toto joins us to discuss the latest releases, including a strong recommend for Most Wanted — which echoes one of my favorites this year, Mr. Jones.
And more to come … stay tuned!
We may add more before the show starts today, plus we will have the chaplet of Divine Mercy in the second hour. We will also take your calls at 1-888-914-9149. You can also listen on the Relevant Radio® app no matter where you are in the world, so download it now. I’ll look forward to talking with you!


hotair--2020-07-31--Jim Jordan vs. Fauci: Should we limit protesting in order to contain the virus?

I misunderstood Jordan when I first watched the clip .
Maybe Fauci did too , or maybe he ’ s just playing dumb .
“ I ’ m not sure what you mean , ” he says when Jordan asks him about “ limiting ” protesting .
I thought that , by “ limit , ” Jordan meant using state power to somehow prevent the marches .
How could we feasibly do that ?
We could have cops at the demonstration handing out tickets to every participant they see for congregating in a group larger than 10 people ( or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s not going to deter many , and deterrence in the name of containing the spread of the virus is what we ’ re after .
The revenue from the fines is nice , but all we really care about is getting people not to congregate in the first place .
But by “ limiting ” protests , I think what he means is simply : Should protesters voluntarily limit their own protest activity so as to limit the spread of the virus ?
I.e .
would Fauci like to take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discourage protesting ?
Which he sort of ends up doing , but not nearly as clearly as he should .
Fauci ’ s verrrrry reluctant to say an unkind word about protests specifically .
He does admit that mass gatherings spread the virus no matter how “ woke ” their purpose .
“ You should stay away from crowds no matter where the crowds are , ” he says at one point .
And he ’ s said that before .
On June 5 , the day before the demonstrations that Jordan references @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mass protests are a “ perfect set-up ” for viral spread .
Jordan ’ s right to feel disgust at the many woke experts who carved out an exception to social-distancing rules for demonstrators on the dubious theory that protesting racism is a more urgent matter of public health than containing a once-in-a-century killer virus .
But Fauci isn ’ t one of them .
He should have used this as a chance to get Fauci to acknowledge that it was irresponsible for members of Fauci ’ s profession to give them a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American was sternly warned to play by the rules .
We can ’ t feasibly “ limit ” street protests but our expert and political classes sure as sh*t could have discouraged them a lot more emphatically than they did .
The double standard they set was so legally dubious as policy that politicians who implemented it have lost lawsuits over it .
But Jordan never actually pits Fauci against the woke MDs .
He ’ s too caught up in playing to the populist passion of the moment , which is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ends up browbeating him on how policy should be set and enforced when all Fauci ’ s really qualified to tell him is , “ Yeah , crowds are a bad idea .
They spread the virus.
” Can ’ t fault Jordan too much for that , though .
This is why we have congressional hearings in 2020 , to give members a chance to theatrically fawn over or attack each witness depending on whether the witness is a hero or villain to that member ’ s party in whatever political debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right now is “ Who ’ s to blame for the state of the pandemic , Trump or the experts ?
” Jordan played his part .

I misunderstood Jordan when I first watched the clip. Maybe Fauci did too, or maybe he’s just playing dumb. “I’m not sure what you mean,” he says when Jordan asks him about “limiting” protesting. I thought that, by “limit,” Jordan meant using state power to somehow prevent the marches.
How could we feasibly do that? We could have cops at the demonstration handing out tickets to every participant they see for congregating in a group larger than 10 people (or whatever the local regulation is) but that’s not going to deter many, and deterrence in the name of containing the spread of the virus is what we’re after. The revenue from the fines is nice, but all we really care about is getting people not to congregate in the first place.
But by “limiting” protests, I think what he means is simply: Should protesters voluntarily limit their own protest activity so as to limit the spread of the virus? I.e. would Fauci like to take the opportunity here and now to formally discourage protesting?
Which he sort of ends up doing, but not nearly as clearly as he should. Fauci’s verrrrry reluctant to say an unkind word about protests specifically.
He does admit that mass gatherings spread the virus no matter how “woke” their purpose. “You should stay away from crowds no matter where the crowds are,” he says at one point. And he’s said that before. On June 5, the day before the demonstrations that Jordan references, Fauci told a radio host that mass protests are a “perfect set-up” for viral spread. Jordan’s right to feel disgust at the many woke experts who carved out an exception to social-distancing rules for demonstrators on the dubious theory that protesting racism is a more urgent matter of public health than containing a once-in-a-century killer virus. But Fauci isn’t one of them.
He should have used this as a chance to get Fauci to acknowledge that it was irresponsible for members of Fauci’s profession to give them a pass on doing so when every other American was sternly warned to play by the rules. We can’t feasibly “limit” street protests but our expert and political classes sure as sh*t could have discouraged them a lot more emphatically than they did. The double standard they set was so legally dubious as policy that politicians who implemented it have lost lawsuits over it. But Jordan never actually pits Fauci against the woke MDs. He’s too caught up in playing to the populist passion of the moment, which is to treat Fauci as an enemy. He ends up browbeating him on how policy should be set and enforced when all Fauci’s really qualified to tell him is, “Yeah, crowds are a bad idea. They spread the virus.”
Can’t fault Jordan too much for that, though. This is why we have congressional hearings in 2020, to give members a chance to theatrically fawn over or attack each witness depending on whether the witness is a hero or villain to that member’s party in whatever political debate is currently raging. The debate raging right now is “Who’s to blame for the state of the pandemic, Trump or the experts?” Jordan played his part.


hotair--2020-07-31--More on the Ghislaine Maxwell docs: Bill Clinton on Epstein's island with 'two young girls' from New

More on the Ghislaine Maxwell docs: Bill Clinton on Epstein's island with 'two young girls' from New York

Earlier today Ed wrote about the release of documents from lawsuits involving Ghislaine Maxwell and Virginia Roberts Giuffre .
One of the things included in the documents is the claim that Giuffre saw Bill Clinton on Epstein ’ s private island , Little St. James , with “ two young girls.
” Virginia Giuffre — who has also accused Epstein ’ s alleged madam Ghislaine Maxwell of abusing her — told lawyers in 2011 that Clinton visited Epstein ’ s private Little St. James Island with Maxwell , herself and “ two young girls ” from New York .
She @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s private residence on the island , where “ orgies were a constant thing that took place.
” … “ I remember asking Jeffrey what ’ s Bill Clinton doing here kind of thing , and he laughed it off and said well he owes me a favor , ” Giuffre said .
“ He never told me what favors they were .
I never knew .
I didn ’ t know if he was serious .
It was just a joke , ” she said .
So maybe the part about Clinton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe not .
In any case , she claims he was on the island .
Here ’ s the excerpts via Techno Fog : The allegations about Bill Clinton have actually been around for a while but a spokesman for Bill Clinton denied being on the island ( again ) on Friday : In a statement on Friday , Angel Ureña , a spokesperson for Clinton , told Newsweek that the former president has “ never been to Little St. James Island.
” “ He ’ d not spoken to Epstein in well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Well before his terrible crimes came to light.
” So is Bill Clinton telling the truth ?
Well , Bill Clinton has a documented history of lying about his sex life .
I think Virginia Roberts is generally more credible than he is but there ’ s another reason to prefer her version over his .
Just a few months ago Netflix released a special about Jeffrey Epstein titled “ Filthy Rich.
” In one episode of the show there ’ s an interview with Steve Scully , an IT guy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Epstein ’ s island .
Here ’ s how the Sun reported it back in May : Steve Scully , now 70 , who maintained the phones and internet on the island , claims in the Netflix show that he saw Mr Clinton with Epstein sitting in the porch area of the island ’ s villa .
There were no other guests around at the time , he claims .
Scully ’ s claims about Bill Clinton haven ’ t been clipped onto YouTube but it ’ s still part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two people who claim they saw him there .
Last year Clinton released a statement saying he had taken just four trips on Epstein ’ s private jet and that he was never on the island : Flight logs reviewed by Buzzfeed and Fox News indicate that Clinton flew many times on Epstein ’ s plane from 2001 to 2003 but there is nothing clearly showing that Clinton traveled to Epstein ’ s island .
In the past , that seemed to be the end of it .
What has changed now is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirm Clinton ’ s whereabouts , Ghislaine Maxwell , is now in jail and potentially facing many years in prison .
We ’ ll have to wait and see what she has to say about it .

Earlier today Ed wrote about the release of documents from lawsuits involving Ghislaine Maxwell and Virginia Roberts Giuffre. One of the things included in the documents is the claim that Giuffre saw Bill Clinton on Epstein’s private island, Little St. James, with “two young girls.”
Virginia Giuffre — who has also accused Epstein’s alleged madam Ghislaine Maxwell of abusing her — told lawyers in 2011 that Clinton visited Epstein’s private Little St. James Island with Maxwell, herself and “two young girls” from New York. She added that Clinton stayed in Epstein’s private residence on the island, where “orgies were a constant thing that took place.”… “I remember asking Jeffrey what’s Bill Clinton doing here kind of thing, and he laughed it off and said well he owes me a favor,” Giuffre said. “He never told me what favors they were. I never knew. I didn’t know if he was serious. It was just a joke,” she said.
So maybe the part about Clinton owing Esptein favors was a joke and maybe not. In any case, she claims he was on the island. Here’s the excerpts via Techno Fog:
Witness interview: Bill Clinton was at Epstein's island with Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and "2 young girls." pic.twitter.com/NG8PbaZLNt — Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) July 31, 2020
The allegations about Bill Clinton have actually been around for a while but a spokesman for Bill Clinton denied being on the island (again) on Friday:
In a statement on Friday, Angel Ureña, a spokesperson for Clinton, told Newsweek that the former president has “never been to Little St. James Island.” “He’d not spoken to Epstein in well over a decade,” he said. “Well before his terrible crimes came to light.”
So is Bill Clinton telling the truth? Well, Bill Clinton has a documented history of lying about his sex life. I think Virginia Roberts is generally more credible than he is but there’s another reason to prefer her version over his.
Just a few months ago Netflix released a special about Jeffrey Epstein titled “Filthy Rich.” In one episode of the show there’s an interview with Steve Scully, an IT guy who handled all of the communication equipment on Epstein’s island. Here’s how the Sun reported it back in May:
Steve Scully, now 70, who maintained the phones and internet on the island, claims in the Netflix show that he saw Mr Clinton with Epstein sitting in the porch area of the island’s villa. There were no other guests around at the time, he claims.
Scully’s claims about Bill Clinton haven’t been clipped onto YouTube but it’s still part of the Netflix special. So that’s two people who claim they saw him there.
Last year Clinton released a statement saying he had taken just four trips on Epstein’s private jet and that he was never on the island:
News: President Clinton has issued a statement on Jeffrey Epstein pic.twitter.com/LlTZC8j6pv — Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) July 8, 2019
Flight logs reviewed by Buzzfeed and Fox News indicate that Clinton flew many times on Epstein’s plane from 2001 to 2003 but there is nothing clearly showing that Clinton traveled to Epstein’s island. In the past, that seemed to be the end of it. What has changed now is that a person in a position to confirm Clinton’s whereabouts, Ghislaine Maxwell, is now in jail and potentially facing many years in prison. We’ll have to wait and see what she has to say about it.


hotair--2020-07-31--Trump offers to pay for funeral expenses of slain Ft. Hood soldier

The story of Vanessa Guillen is sad and tragic .
Guillen was a 20-year-old soldier killed at Fort Hood , allegedly by a fellow soldier who is believed to have been sexually harassing her .
She was reported missing in April .
Her remains were found in late June .
Hers is a gruesome story .
Guillen is believed to have been bludgeoned to death and then dismembered .
The main suspect , Spc .
Aaron Robinson shot and killed himself as law enforcement authorities moved in on him in a neighboring city .
His girlfriend , 22-year-old Cecily Ann @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she helped discard the body and hide evidence .
She pleaded not guilty .
President Trump invited relatives of Vanessa Guillen to the White House Thursday to tell him about her story .
They spoke with him , some with the help of a translator , and the family ’ s attorney was present .
It is reported that the meeting was emotional and the president offered his personal financial support for Vanessa ’ s funeral expenses , if the family is in need .
The family has turned down a military funeral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her remains .
“ I don ’ t even know if you need help , maybe you don ’ t need help from a financial standpoint .
I have no idea .
I just think it ’ s a horrific thing that happened and if you did need help , I ’ ll be there to help you , ” Trump said .
In response to a reporter ’ s question , Trump said he ’ s paid for other soldiers ’ funerals .
“ I have , I have .
I have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t do it through government , ” Trump said .
“ I have because some families need help .
They need help.
” Trump announced his support for a new congressional bill aimed at changing how sexual abuse and harassment cases are handled by the military .
He asked the family ’ s attorney , Natalie Khawam , to tell Guillen ’ s story .
He doesn ’ t want it “ swept under the rug.
” Khawan described the situation surrounding sexual harassment and assualt in the military as “ picking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was “ septic.
” Guillen ’ s family had said the soldier was a victim of sexual harassment .
“ It ’ s a systemic problem , ” Khawam told Trump in the Oval Office .
“ There isn ’ t enough protection in place , because they get nervous about retaliation.
” Khawam went on to say that the military has not been transparent or helpful in gaining answers surrounding the murder of Guillen , who was killed on base , in the armory of Fort Hood .
“ You have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on it already , as you know , ” Trump said announcing his backing of the # IamVanessaGuillen Bill .
“ We won ’ t stop , and hopefully something very positive will come out in honor of your sister and your daughter , ” Trump said to Guillen ’ s family .
The legislation is named in memory of Guillen .
It would allow active-duty service members to report sexual harassment or assault to a third party outside their chain of command .
The goal is to eliminate fears of retaliation that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When Guillen went missing , her family mentioned that she had told them she was being sexually harassed by another soldier but had not reported it , out of fear of retaliation .
Earlier in the day , Guillen ’ s mother and younger sister spoke during a news conference on the National Mall .
Her mother speaks in Spanish , that is why a translator was used .
While I can ’ t imagine the grief she is experiencing , her call for Fort Hood to be closed is over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there have been homicides at Fort Hood in recent months , two of which are Pfc .
Gregory Wedel and Pfc .
Brandon Rosecrans .
Clearly , something is happening and needs to be addressed .
The Army released a statement and also acknowledged that Vanessa Guillen may have been harassed in an unrelated matter to her disappearance and murder .
That is still under investigation .
Also Thursday , the Army named an independent panel of five experts to investigate whether personnel at Fort Hood and the surrounding community have allowed a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flourish .
The independent review will be led by Chris Swecker , a lawyer and former assistant director of the FBI ’ s Criminal Investigative Division .
“ The Army is committed to taking care of our soldiers , civilians , families , and soldiers for life , and this independent review will explore the current command climate and culture at Fort Hood , ” Army Sec .
Ryan McCarthy said in a statement .
Sexual harassment and abuse isn ’ t anything new coming from the military .
Tailhook , anyone ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their own .
They experience the same problems that civilians do outside the bases .
Vanessa Guillen ’ s story is a tragedy .
By all reported accounts , she was well-liked and a good person .
Groups from around the country attended the march to the National Mall in honor of Vanessa , including a Houston congresswoman who tweeted about it .
“ We can not stop until Gloria Guillén and the rest of the Guillén family receive # JusticiaPorVanessaGuillén .
Today it is about Vanessa Guillén and her legacy.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump – to reach out to a Latino family in grief .
Trump ’ s support of the members of the military is unquestionable .
Showing his support for Vanessa Guillen gave him a chance to mention his support of legislation that addresses the problems that may have led to her death .
And , it was a good opportunity for him to show compassion , something the ugly left insists he is lacking as a human being .

The story of Vanessa Guillen is sad and tragic. Guillen was a 20-year-old soldier killed at Fort Hood, allegedly by a fellow soldier who is believed to have been sexually harassing her. She was reported missing in April. Her remains were found in late June.
Hers is a gruesome story. Guillen is believed to have been bludgeoned to death and then dismembered. The main suspect, Spc. Aaron Robinson shot and killed himself as law enforcement authorities moved in on him in a neighboring city. His girlfriend, 22-year-old Cecily Ann Aguilar was charged with conspiracy charges alleging she helped discard the body and hide evidence. She pleaded not guilty.
President Trump invited relatives of Vanessa Guillen to the White House Thursday to tell him about her story. They spoke with him, some with the help of a translator, and the family’s attorney was present. It is reported that the meeting was emotional and the president offered his personal financial support for Vanessa’s funeral expenses, if the family is in need. The family has turned down a military funeral and is waiting for the return of her remains.
“I don’t even know if you need help, maybe you don’t need help from a financial standpoint. I have no idea. I just think it’s a horrific thing that happened and if you did need help, I’ll be there to help you,” Trump said. In response to a reporter’s question, Trump said he’s paid for other soldiers’ funerals. “I have, I have. I have to do it personally, I can’t do it through government,” Trump said. “I have because some families need help. They need help.”
Trump announced his support for a new congressional bill aimed at changing how sexual abuse and harassment cases are handled by the military. He asked the family’s attorney, Natalie Khawam, to tell Guillen’s story. He doesn’t want it “swept under the rug.”
Khawan described the situation surrounding sexual harassment and assualt in the military as “picking at a scab” and finding that it was “septic.” Guillen’s family had said the soldier was a victim of sexual harassment. “It’s a systemic problem,” Khawam told Trump in the Oval Office. “There isn’t enough protection in place, because they get nervous about retaliation.” Khawam went on to say that the military has not been transparent or helpful in gaining answers surrounding the murder of Guillen, who was killed on base, in the armory of Fort Hood. “You have our support and we’re working on it already, as you know,” Trump said announcing his backing of the #IamVanessaGuillen Bill. “We won’t stop, and hopefully something very positive will come out in honor of your sister and your daughter,” Trump said to Guillen’s family.
The legislation is named in memory of Guillen. It would allow active-duty service members to report sexual harassment or assault to a third party outside their chain of command. The goal is to eliminate fears of retaliation that discourage soldiers from reporting abuse by superiors. When Guillen went missing, her family mentioned that she had told them she was being sexually harassed by another soldier but had not reported it, out of fear of retaliation.
Earlier in the day, Guillen’s mother and younger sister spoke during a news conference on the National Mall. Her mother speaks in Spanish, that is why a translator was used. While I can’t imagine the grief she is experiencing, her call for Fort Hood to be closed is over the top. I’ll note that there have been homicides at Fort Hood in recent months, two of which are Pfc. Gregory Wedel and Pfc. Brandon Rosecrans. Clearly, something is happening and needs to be addressed.
“My daughter is already history,” the soldier’s mother, Gloria Guillen, told a crowd in Spanish Thursday morning at a news conference on the National Mall. “If the president of the nation wants to make history together with my daughter, he’ll make sure that the devil base is closed and all the damn corruption that exists in the Army is cleaned out.” “I am a 16-year-old girl — a woman standing here speaking for my sister. I want Congress to pass #IamVanessaGuillen,” Vanessa Guillén’s younger sister, Lupe, said.
The Army released a statement and also acknowledged that Vanessa Guillen may have been harassed in an unrelated matter to her disappearance and murder. That is still under investigation.
Also Thursday, the Army named an independent panel of five experts to investigate whether personnel at Fort Hood and the surrounding community have allowed a climate of sexual harassment and discrimination to flourish. The independent review will be led by Chris Swecker, a lawyer and former assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division. “The Army is committed to taking care of our soldiers, civilians, families, and soldiers for life, and this independent review will explore the current command climate and culture at Fort Hood,” Army Sec. Ryan McCarthy said in a statement.
Sexual harassment and abuse isn’t anything new coming from the military. Tailhook, anyone? Military bases are little cities or towns of their own. They experience the same problems that civilians do outside the bases. Vanessa Guillen’s story is a tragedy. By all reported accounts, she was well-liked and a good person.
“It hit me very hard, what happened to your daughter Vanessa, who is a spectacular person and respected and loved by everybody, including in the military,” Trump told the family.
Groups from around the country attended the march to the National Mall in honor of Vanessa, including a Houston congresswoman who tweeted about it. “We cannot stop until Gloria Guillén and the rest of the Guillén family receive #JusticiaPorVanessaGuillén. Today it is about Vanessa Guillén and her legacy.”
This meeting was a smart move for Trump – to reach out to a Latino family in grief. Trump’s support of the members of the military is unquestionable. Showing his support for Vanessa Guillen gave him a chance to mention his support of legislation that addresses the problems that may have led to her death. And, it was a good opportunity for him to show compassion, something the ugly left insists he is lacking as a human being.


hotair--2020-07-31--Buzzfeed: Dozens accusing Ellen Show production of "rampant sexual misconduct and harassment"

Should we create a # HerToo Twitter hashtag ?
The problems at Ellen DeGeneres ’ eponymous daytime talk show apparently go far beyond weird quirks and microaggressions , as reported earlier this week .
Buzzfeed dropped a blockbuster report overnight that claims almost a dozen employees allege “ rampant sexual misconduct and harassment ” by show execs , especially its top producer Kevin Leman : Being asked to join the control room inside The Ellen DeGeneres Show is a coveted spot in Hollywood , but according to dozens of men and women who work behind the scenes , the office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misconduct by top executive producers runs rampant .
One ex-employee said head writer and executive producer Kevin Leman asked him if he could give him a hand job or perform oral sex in a bathroom at a company party in 2013 .
Another said they separately saw Leman grab a production assistant ’ s penis .
In May 2017 , another former employee also said she saw Leman grope a production assistant in a car and kiss his neck .
Nearly a dozen former employees , who range from longtime , senior-level employees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also common for Leman to make sexually explicit comments in the office , like pointing out male colleagues ’ bulges in their crotches , or ask them questions like , “ Are you a top or a bottom ?
” Leman issued a categorical denial late yesterday , but he ’ s not the only one being accused of sexual misconduct .
Another executive producer named in the earlier hostile-workplace accusations , Ed Glavin , got “ handsy with women , ” according to other complaints : The outlet claimed that dozens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reputation for being handsy with women , ” particularly in the control room , where he would use intimidation to control employees .
“ You could definitely see the creep factor and the creepy touching .
That was out in the open for everybody to see , ” said one former employee who also accused Glavin of touching her regularly .
“ Obviously , no one wants that and no one wants to be uncomfortably touched by someone … but you didn ’ t want to piss them off or you would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ culture of fear.
” Another employee claimed that Glavin would ask producers and assistants to sit near him during segments they had worked on and he would touch them inappropriately in front of nearly 30 people .
“ Even though I was being abused [ at work ] constantly , Ed putting his arm around you in the control room was like the nicest experience you had all day , as messed up as that sounds , ” an accuser said .
“ But you had been crying last night and now your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you feel like you got credit for something from the executive producer directly .
… That friendly banter accompanied by a friendly hand.
” Oof .
If this had suddenly emerged out of the blue , it might be easier to credit Leman ’ s claim that the article was “ malicious and misleading , ” and a misinterpretation of attempts to write jokes for the show .
However , this is just the latest salvo of a series of internal complaints about DeGeneres ’ production , and an external complaint as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that DeGeneres had issued diva-esque demands for an interview : Neil Breen claimed the chat show host had a series of “ bizarre ” demands when she appeared on his program , the Today show , in 2013 .
Neil claimed Ellen was initially supposed to co-host the Today show during her 2013 tour of Australia , but this plan was repeatedly changed by her team .
“ The producer called us aside and said , ‘ Now Neil , no one is to talk to Ellen .
You don ’ t talk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approach her , you don ’ t look at her , ' ” he said .
Neil , who now hosts his own show , claimed Ellen ’ s staff were the only ones allowed to interact with her .
He alleged that they “ walked on eggshells ” around her and laughed so loudly at her jokes during the interview that he had to tell them to keep it down .
That ’ s an odd way to deal with other people in the media , but it ’ s also not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When you work in radio , you get to hear some fun stories about guests and hosts , most of which are impossible to verify . )
The volume of complaints now cascading out of the Ellen production shows that something is definitely wrong there , even if it may not be quite as bad as it sounds .
We should wait to hear more about the specifics before jumping to any conclusions , of course .
However , that hasn ’ t always been the standard applied to productions and broadcasters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see if that same standard gets applied to DeGeneres now .

Should we create a #HerToo Twitter hashtag? The problems at Ellen DeGeneres’ eponymous daytime talk show apparently go far beyond weird quirks and microaggressions, as reported earlier this week. Buzzfeed dropped a blockbuster report overnight that claims almost a dozen employees allege “rampant sexual misconduct and harassment” by show execs, especially its top producer Kevin Leman:
Being asked to join the control room inside The Ellen DeGeneres Show is a coveted spot in Hollywood, but according to dozens of men and women who work behind the scenes, the office is a place where sexual harassment and misconduct by top executive producers runs rampant. One ex-employee said head writer and executive producer Kevin Leman asked him if he could give him a hand job or perform oral sex in a bathroom at a company party in 2013. Another said they separately saw Leman grab a production assistant’s penis. In May 2017, another former employee also said she saw Leman grope a production assistant in a car and kiss his neck. Nearly a dozen former employees, who range from longtime, senior-level employees to production assistants, said it was also common for Leman to make sexually explicit comments in the office, like pointing out male colleagues’ bulges in their crotches, or ask them questions like, “Are you a top or a bottom?”
Leman issued a categorical denial late yesterday, but he’s not the only one being accused of sexual misconduct. Another executive producer named in the earlier hostile-workplace accusations, Ed Glavin, got “handsy with women,” according to other complaints:
The outlet claimed that dozens of employees understood that Glavin “had a reputation for being handsy with women,” particularly in the control room, where he would use intimidation to control employees. “You could definitely see the creep factor and the creepy touching. That was out in the open for everybody to see,” said one former employee who also accused Glavin of touching her regularly. “Obviously, no one wants that and no one wants to be uncomfortably touched by someone … but you didn’t want to piss them off or you would be fired, so it was just that culture of fear.” Another employee claimed that Glavin would ask producers and assistants to sit near him during segments they had worked on and he would touch them inappropriately in front of nearly 30 people. “Even though I was being abused [at work] constantly, Ed putting his arm around you in the control room was like the nicest experience you had all day, as messed up as that sounds,” an accuser said. “But you had been crying last night and now your segment is going well … and then you feel like you got credit for something from the executive producer directly. … That friendly banter accompanied by a friendly hand.”
Oof. If this had suddenly emerged out of the blue, it might be easier to credit Leman’s claim that the article was “malicious and misleading,” and a misinterpretation of attempts to write jokes for the show. However, this is just the latest salvo of a series of internal complaints about DeGeneres’ production, and an external complaint as well. Australian media picked up on-the-record reports that DeGeneres had issued diva-esque demands for an interview:
Neil Breen claimed the chat show host had a series of “bizarre” demands when she appeared on his program, the Today show, in 2013. Neil claimed Ellen was initially supposed to co-host the Today show during her 2013 tour of Australia, but this plan was repeatedly changed by her team. “The producer called us aside and said, ‘Now Neil, no one is to talk to Ellen. You don’t talk to her, you don’t approach her, you don’t look at her,'” he said. Neil, who now hosts his own show, claimed Ellen’s staff were the only ones allowed to interact with her. He alleged that they “walked on eggshells” around her and laughed so loudly at her jokes during the interview that he had to tell them to keep it down.
That’s an odd way to deal with other people in the media, but it’s also not entirely unheard of, either. (When you work in radio, you get to hear some fun stories about guests and hosts, most of which are impossible to verify.) The volume of complaints now cascading out of the Ellen production shows that something is definitely wrong there, even if it may not be quite as bad as it sounds.
We should wait to hear more about the specifics before jumping to any conclusions, of course. However, that hasn’t always been the standard applied to productions and broadcasters, and it will be very interesting to see if that same standard gets applied to DeGeneres now.