hotair--2020-10-20--Tightening: Poll shows Biden's national lead down to two as margin in Pennsylvania shrinks. Or does

Tightening: Poll shows Biden's national lead down to two as margin in Pennsylvania shrinks. Or does it?

Today ’ s new IBD/TIPP national survey is an outlier ( a big one ) but warrants a post if only because of the trendline .
A week ago they had Biden ’ s lead growing from three points to 8.5 , putting it in line with a raft of other polls showing a big Biden lead .
This morning they published their new survey letting all of the air out of that balloon , with the Democrat ’ s lead now down to just 2.3 points .
To put that in context , Biden ’ s *average* lead in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points .
And IBD ’ s number is part of that average , otherwise his lead would be even higher .
Every outlier poll is potentially the start of a trend , though .
And given how stable and boring the national numbers have been lately , any outlier showing a tightening race is newsworthy .
Besides , 2.3 points almost exactly matches the margin of Clinton ’ s popular-vote win four years ago .
If Trump can hold Biden to that spread this time , he certainly can win the electoral college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at an eight-point national deficit , though , then no way .
Since the IBD/TIPP 2020 Presidential Election Tracking Poll launched on Monday , Oct. 12 , Biden ’ s support has slipped 3.8 points , from 51.9 % to a new low-water mark of 48.1 % .
Trump poll numbers have gone the other way , rising 2.4 points to his new high-water mark of 45.8 % .
Biden ’ s lead peaked at 8.6 points in the Oct. 13 presidential poll… Joe Biden ’ s lead among likely independent voters narrowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in IBD/TIPP ’ s latest 2020 presidential poll update .
Biden ’ s lead had ranged from 6 points into the double digits .
Meanwhile , Donald Trump is now having a much easier time corralling Republicans than Biden is having in nailing down Democratic votes .
Biden leads 90 % -7 % among Democrats .
Trump leads 94 % -4 % among Republicans… Senior citizens are another key group Trump carried in 2016 that have swung toward Biden , but the gap has narrowed .
Seniors back the former vice president , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s latest Trump vs. Biden poll , but his lead had been in double digits .
Trump won among senior citizens in 2016 , 53 % -44 % , Pew says .
Got ta say , I ’ m suspicious of that boldfaced part .
One constant in polling this year is that Democrats tend to be almost unanimously behind Biden due to their animosity towards Trump , or at least more solidly behind him than Republicans are behind Trump .
( Never Trump righties could be the deciding factor if you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the New York Times national poll that was published this morning and conducted over nearly the same period as the IBD poll found Sleepy Joe winning Dems 93/4 while Trump wins Republicans 91/7 .
YouGov ’ s last national poll , conducted a week ago , had Biden up 85/1 among Democrats and Trump up 83/3 among GOPers .
Other numbers from IBD jibe with the polling consensus , though .
They have Biden improving considerably in the suburbs compared to Hillary in 2016 and see him ahead by two points among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comfortably four years ago .
Although , even here , other pollsters are seeing much bigger leads for the Democrat among older voters than IBD is : But forget the national polling .
What we care about is battlegrounds , right ?
And there ’ s one battleground lately — a crucially important one — where the trend has been towards Trump .
At least if you believe RCP : Pennsylvania has been seen as Trump ’ s best shot at a victory in the Rust Belt , and lo and behold , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Winning PA wouldn ’ t outright guarantee him a second term ; Biden could still get to 270 via Wisconsin , Michigan , Arizona , and North Carolina .
But if Trump wins Pennsylvania , odds are he ’ s going to win at least one of those other four as well .
Eight days ago he trailed Biden by 7.3 points .
Today the lead is nearly half that , just 3.8 .
PA is in play .
One thing I noticed when looking at the numbers RCP used for its average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polls come from Republican-aligned firms .
One is Trafalgar , which you know all about , and they have Biden up just two points .
The other is Insider Advantage , which conducted its poll for the pro-Trump Center for American Greatness .
They have Biden up three .
The fact that those two firms have a partisan rooting interest doesn ’ t mean their numbers are wrong , of course , it just means that we bear in mind the possibility of a “ house effect ” the same way we do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number for a lefty .
( Case in point : Doug Jones released an internal poll a few days ago showing him up a point on Republican Tommy Tuberville in their Alabama Senate race , which , uh , no . )
That is to say , the “ tightening ” that ’ s going on in PA at the moment may be a mirage driven by the fact that there are a higher-than-usual number of Republican-leaning polls affecting the average at the moment .
Silver ’ s polling average of Pennsylvania gives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his model of the state ’ s election gives the Democrats an 87 percent chance of winning , which is several percentage points higher than on October 1 .
It *would* be odd for Biden to be nosediving in a key swing state at a moment when his national lead is holding steady in the eight- or nine-point range .
But then , the candidates are paying lots more attention to Pennsylvania than they are to most other states .
And in fairness to Trafalgar and Insider Advantage , their recent surveys @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what other pollsters are showing .
Earlier this month the Democratic firm Change Research had Trump within four points in PA .
The most recent poll of the state , from Reuters , had Biden ’ s lead … at four points .
Two other polls published within the last two weeks have seen Biden up by five .
By no means is Pennsylvania off the board for Trump , especially if he has a good debate on Thursday .

Today’s new IBD/TIPP national survey is an outlier (a big one) but warrants a post if only because of the trendline. A week ago they had Biden’s lead growing from three points to 8.5, putting it in line with a raft of other polls showing a big Biden lead. This morning they published their new survey letting all of the air out of that balloon, with the Democrat’s lead now down to just 2.3 points. To put that in context, Biden’s *average* lead in national polling at the moment is 8.6 points. And IBD’s number is part of that average, otherwise his lead would be even higher.
Every outlier poll is potentially the start of a trend, though. And given how stable and boring the national numbers have been lately, any outlier showing a tightening race is newsworthy.
Besides, 2.3 points almost exactly matches the margin of Clinton’s popular-vote win four years ago. If Trump can hold Biden to that spread this time, he certainly can win the electoral college again. If he’s starting at an eight-point national deficit, though, then no way.
Since the IBD/TIPP 2020 Presidential Election Tracking Poll launched on Monday, Oct. 12, Biden’s support has slipped 3.8 points, from 51.9% to a new low-water mark of 48.1%. Trump poll numbers have gone the other way, rising 2.4 points to his new high-water mark of 45.8%. Biden’s lead peaked at 8.6 points in the Oct. 13 presidential poll… Joe Biden’s lead among likely independent voters narrowed to a 45%-41% margin in IBD/TIPP’s latest 2020 presidential poll update. Biden’s lead had ranged from 6 points into the double digits. Meanwhile, Donald Trump is now having a much easier time corralling Republicans than Biden is having in nailing down Democratic votes. Biden leads 90%-7% among Democrats. Trump leads 94%-4% among Republicans… Senior citizens are another key group Trump carried in 2016 that have swung toward Biden, but the gap has narrowed. Seniors back the former vice president, 48%-46%, in IBD/TIPP’s latest Trump vs. Biden poll, but his lead had been in double digits. Trump won among senior citizens in 2016, 53%-44%, Pew says.
Gotta say, I’m suspicious of that boldfaced part. One constant in polling this year is that Democrats tend to be almost unanimously behind Biden due to their animosity towards Trump, or at least more solidly behind him than Republicans are behind Trump. (Never Trump righties could be the deciding factor if you believe Scott Rasmussen.) For instance, the New York Times national poll that was published this morning and conducted over nearly the same period as the IBD poll found Sleepy Joe winning Dems 93/4 while Trump wins Republicans 91/7. YouGov’s last national poll, conducted a week ago, had Biden up 85/1 among Democrats and Trump up 83/3 among GOPers.
Other numbers from IBD jibe with the polling consensus, though. They have Biden improving considerably in the suburbs compared to Hillary in 2016 and see him ahead by two points among senior citizens, a group Trump won comfortably four years ago. Although, even here, other pollsters are seeing much bigger leads for the Democrat among older voters than IBD is:
Here's my latest running average of demographic splits in national live-interview polls w/ new NYT/Siena added in. Biden's surged w/ 65+ between Sept. and Oct., but just a big a deal is the steady decline in undecided/third party since June/July (and vs. '16, of course). pic.twitter.com/TZDBta582B — Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) October 20, 2020
But forget the national polling. What we care about is battlegrounds, right? And there’s one battleground lately — a crucially important one — where the trend has been towards Trump. At least if you believe RCP:
Pennsylvania has been seen as Trump’s best shot at a victory in the Rust Belt, and lo and behold, here he is making his move. Winning PA wouldn’t outright guarantee him a second term; Biden could still get to 270 via Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, and North Carolina. But if Trump wins Pennsylvania, odds are he’s going to win at least one of those other four as well. Eight days ago he trailed Biden by 7.3 points. Today the lead is nearly half that, just 3.8. PA is in play.
Isn’t it?
One thing I noticed when looking at the numbers RCP used for its average is that two of the most recent polls come from Republican-aligned firms. One is Trafalgar, which you know all about, and they have Biden up just two points. The other is Insider Advantage, which conducted its poll for the pro-Trump Center for American Greatness. They have Biden up three. The fact that those two firms have a partisan rooting interest doesn’t mean their numbers are wrong, of course, it just means that we bear in mind the possibility of a “house effect” the same way we do when a Democratic-run poll shows a gaudy number for a lefty. (Case in point: Doug Jones released an internal poll a few days ago showing him up a point on Republican Tommy Tuberville in their Alabama Senate race, which, uh, no.) That is to say, the “tightening” that’s going on in PA at the moment may be a mirage driven by the fact that there are a higher-than-usual number of Republican-leaning polls affecting the average at the moment.
That’s Nate Silver’s theory too, in fact:
Folks, Biden's lead didn't shrink from 7.3 points to 3.6 points in PA in a week (as per RCP) at the same time it was steady or slightly growing nationally. This is why you need poll averages that take a longer time horizon and/or adjust for house effects. https://t.co/wKbW02AGO5 pic.twitter.com/daWEKcLlAm — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) October 20, 2020
I love many things about RCP, but if you have an average and 1/3 of it consists of Trafalgar and InsiderAdvantage and 0% of it consists of live-caller polls, it's not going to be a very reliable average. pic.twitter.com/3LTQ7gEwAd — Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) October 20, 2020
Silver’s polling average of Pennsylvania gives Biden a lead of 6.4 points today and his model of the state’s election gives the Democrats an 87 percent chance of winning, which is several percentage points higher than on October 1. It *would* be odd for Biden to be nosediving in a key swing state at a moment when his national lead is holding steady in the eight- or nine-point range.
But then, the candidates are paying lots more attention to Pennsylvania than they are to most other states. And in fairness to Trafalgar and Insider Advantage, their recent surveys aren’t out of whack with what other pollsters are showing. Earlier this month the Democratic firm Change Research had Trump within four points in PA. The most recent poll of the state, from Reuters, had Biden’s lead … at four points. Two other polls published within the last two weeks have seen Biden up by five. By no means is Pennsylvania off the board for Trump, especially if he has a good debate on Thursday.


hotair--2020-10-20--Havana syndrome: Updates on those mysterious attacks on US diplomats and spies

We first started covering this story back in 2017 when a group of U.S. diplomats and spies in Havana , Cuba were targeted with some kind of mysterious weapon .
Many of the victims described a high-pitched buzzing sound and said that by leaving a room the sound would go away .
There were several subsequent attacks with this mystery weapon and in 2018 U.S. diplomats in China experienced very similar attacks .
By the end of 2018 , there was some consensus that Russia was likely behind the attacks , causing what came to be known as Havana Syndrome @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from poison to sonic weapons were considered but the most likely culprit is now believed to be a microwave weapon which the Soviets developed during the cold war .
Such a weapon would explain the directed beam of the attacks ( which could be escaped by leaving a room ) and the high-pitched noise which is an artifact of directing microwaves at someone ’ s head known as the Frey effect : The notion of weaponizing microwaves dates back to the Cold War , when , in 1961 , an American biologist named @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head with microwaves could produce the sensation of sound—even in deaf ears , even from thousands of feet away .
Playing with the frequency and intensity of the microwave beam could produce a range of different sensations in a person .
In 2018 , Frey told the New York Times that the Soviets took immediate notice of his work and flew him to Moscow , where they squired him around secret military facilities and asked him to give lectures about the effects of microwaves on the brain… A 1976 report compiled by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defense Intelligence Agency , reviewed Soviet research on the topic .
The report detailed Moscow ’ s investigation of the effects of microwaves on the nervous system .
Soviet , and later Russian , scientists found that exposing an animal ’ s brain to microwaves changed the frequency at which neurons fired .
Neurons also became suddenly out of sync with one another .
Some brain cells in mice were found to have withered .
Nerves became damaged .
The radiation also showed the potential to disturb the sacrosanct blood-brain barrier and , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ the alterations of brain function.
” The most common symptoms reported in humans who had been exposed to microwaves for long periods of time sounded familiar : headache , fatigue , perspiration , dizziness , insomnia , depression , anxiety , forgetfulness , and lack of concentration .
There is still ongoing debate about whether microwave attacks explain everything that has happened to American diplomats and spies .
Two new articles published this week offer more details on the experiences of some of the victims .
A NY Times piece focuses on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacks in China : Mr. Lenzi , who has an extensive background working in the former Soviet Union , said classified material pointed to the country that had carried out the attacks , but the State Department denied him access to the documents .
Top officials “ know exactly which country ” was responsible , Mr. Lenzi said , adding that it was not Cuba or China but another country “ which the secretary of state and president do not want to confront.
” The first person to fall ill in China , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who lived next door to Mr. Lenzi , experienced vomiting , nausea , headaches and dizziness for months before she was flown to the United States in April 2018 .
According to a whistle-blower complaint filed by Mr. Lenzi , the State Department took action only after Ms. Werner ’ s visiting mother , an Air Force veteran , used a device to record high levels of microwave radiation in her daughter ’ s apartment .
The mother also fell ill… The State Department labeled only one China officer as having the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the Cuba cases : Ms. Werner , the first evacuee .
In an internal letter , the department said 15 others in Guangzhou , Shanghai and Beijing had some symptoms and clinical findings “ similar to those ” in Cuba , but it had not determined they were suffering from “ Havana syndrome.
” The other piece , published today in GQ goes further and suggests that there have been more attacks on U.S. diplomats and spies including some within U.S. borders : Two sources with knowledge of the situation—and who asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not have authorization to disclose to the press—told me about the ongoing attacks .
In the fall of 2019 , two top CIA officials , both in the clandestine service , traveled to Australia to meet with officials in that country ’ s spy agency .
( Australia is part of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance with the U.S. , the U.K. , Canada , and New Zealand . )
While in their hotel rooms in Australia , both of the Americans felt it : the strange sound , the pressure in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ears .
According to these sources , they became nauseous and dizzy .
They then traveled on to Taiwan to meet with intelligence officials there .
They felt it again while in their hotel rooms on the island .
By now , this was no longer a novel occurrence , and CIA people had come to call it “ getting hit.
” One senior intelligence officer in EEMC , the Center Polymeropoulos used to run , had gotten hit twice while traveling under cover , first in Poland in the spring of 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that fall… Then , shortly after Thanksgiving 2019 , according to three sources familiar with the incident , a White House staffer was hit while walking her dog in Arlington , Virginia , a suburb of Washington , D.C .
According to a government source familiar with the incident , the staffer passed a parked van .
A man got out and walked past her .
Her dog started seizing up .
Then she felt it too : a high-pitched ringing in her ears , an intense headache , and a tingling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to the source , this had happened to the staffer before .
In August 2019 , she had accompanied John Bolton , who was then the national security adviser , on a trip to London .
The staffer , whom GQ is not identifying out of concerns for her privacy , did not respond to requests for comment .
According to the government source , she was in her hotel room when she suddenly felt a tingling in the side of her head that was facing the window .
The intense pressure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tinning in her ears .
When she left the room , the symptoms stopped .
She reported the incident to the Secret Service because it was uncannily similar to the symptoms described by American diplomats who had served in Cuba and China .
This doesn ’ t sound that far-fetched given that we know the Russians have been assassinating people ( or attempting to ) in the UK .
All of the people involved in that attack on Sergei Skripal turned out to be GRU agents .
If Putin is willing to kill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , why would he hesitate to use non-lethal ( but life-altering ) energy weapons against U.S. spies ?

We first started covering this story back in 2017 when a group of U.S. diplomats and spies in Havana, Cuba were targeted with some kind of mysterious weapon. Many of the victims described a high-pitched buzzing sound and said that by leaving a room the sound would go away. There were several subsequent attacks with this mystery weapon and in 2018 U.S. diplomats in China experienced very similar attacks.
By the end of 2018, there was some consensus that Russia was likely behind the attacks, causing what came to be known as Havana Syndrome. Many possibilities for the cause, from poison to sonic weapons were considered but the most likely culprit is now believed to be a microwave weapon which the Soviets developed during the cold war. Such a weapon would explain the directed beam of the attacks (which could be escaped by leaving a room) and the high-pitched noise which is an artifact of directing microwaves at someone’s head known as the Frey effect:
The notion of weaponizing microwaves dates back to the Cold War, when, in 1961, an American biologist named Allan Frey discovered that irradiating a human head with microwaves could produce the sensation of sound—even in deaf ears, even from thousands of feet away. Playing with the frequency and intensity of the microwave beam could produce a range of different sensations in a person. In 2018, Frey told the New York Times that the Soviets took immediate notice of his work and flew him to Moscow, where they squired him around secret military facilities and asked him to give lectures about the effects of microwaves on the brain… A 1976 report compiled by the Pentagon’s intelligence branch, the Defense Intelligence Agency, reviewed Soviet research on the topic. The report detailed Moscow’s investigation of the effects of microwaves on the nervous system. Soviet, and later Russian, scientists found that exposing an animal’s brain to microwaves changed the frequency at which neurons fired. Neurons also became suddenly out of sync with one another. Some brain cells in mice were found to have withered. Nerves became damaged. The radiation also showed the potential to disturb the sacrosanct blood-brain barrier and, according to the DIA, resulted in “the alterations of brain function.” The most common symptoms reported in humans who had been exposed to microwaves for long periods of time sounded familiar: headache, fatigue, perspiration, dizziness, insomnia, depression, anxiety, forgetfulness, and lack of concentration.
There is still ongoing debate about whether microwave attacks explain everything that has happened to American diplomats and spies. Two new articles published this week offer more details on the experiences of some of the victims. A NY Times piece focuses on the U.S. citizens who became ill after attacks in China:
Mr. Lenzi, who has an extensive background working in the former Soviet Union, said classified material pointed to the country that had carried out the attacks, but the State Department denied him access to the documents. Top officials “know exactly which country” was responsible, Mr. Lenzi said, adding that it was not Cuba or China but another country “which the secretary of state and president do not want to confront.” The first person to fall ill in China, a Commerce Department officer named Catherine Werner, who lived next door to Mr. Lenzi, experienced vomiting, nausea, headaches and dizziness for months before she was flown to the United States in April 2018. According to a whistle-blower complaint filed by Mr. Lenzi, the State Department took action only after Ms. Werner’s visiting mother, an Air Force veteran, used a device to record high levels of microwave radiation in her daughter’s apartment. The mother also fell ill… The State Department labeled only one China officer as having the “full constellation” of symptoms consistent with the Cuba cases: Ms. Werner, the first evacuee. In an internal letter, the department said 15 others in Guangzhou, Shanghai and Beijing had some symptoms and clinical findings “similar to those” in Cuba, but it had not determined they were suffering from “Havana syndrome.”
The other piece, published today in GQ goes further and suggests that there have been more attacks on U.S. diplomats and spies including some within U.S. borders:
Two sources with knowledge of the situation—and who asked for anonymity to discuss matters that they did not have authorization to disclose to the press—told me about the ongoing attacks. In the fall of 2019, two top CIA officials, both in the clandestine service, traveled to Australia to meet with officials in that country’s spy agency. (Australia is part of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance with the U.S., the U.K., Canada, and New Zealand.) While in their hotel rooms in Australia, both of the Americans felt it: the strange sound, the pressure in their heads, the ringing in their ears. According to these sources, they became nauseous and dizzy. They then traveled on to Taiwan to meet with intelligence officials there. They felt it again while in their hotel rooms on the island. By now, this was no longer a novel occurrence, and CIA people had come to call it “getting hit.” One senior intelligence officer in EEMC, the Center Polymeropoulos used to run, had gotten hit twice while traveling under cover, first in Poland in the spring of 2019, then again in Tbilisi, Georgia, that fall… Then, shortly after Thanksgiving 2019, according to three sources familiar with the incident, a White House staffer was hit while walking her dog in Arlington, Virginia, a suburb of Washington, D.C. According to a government source familiar with the incident, the staffer passed a parked van. A man got out and walked past her. Her dog started seizing up. Then she felt it too: a high-pitched ringing in her ears, an intense headache, and a tingling on the side of her face. According to the source, this had happened to the staffer before. In August 2019, she had accompanied John Bolton, who was then the national security adviser, on a trip to London. The staffer, whom GQ is not identifying out of concerns for her privacy, did not respond to requests for comment. According to the government source, she was in her hotel room when she suddenly felt a tingling in the side of her head that was facing the window. The intense pressure in her head was accompanied by a tinning in her ears. When she left the room, the symptoms stopped. She reported the incident to the Secret Service because it was uncannily similar to the symptoms described by American diplomats who had served in Cuba and China.
This doesn’t sound that far-fetched given that we know the Russians have been assassinating people (or attempting to) in the UK. All of the people involved in that attack on Sergei Skripal turned out to be GRU agents. If Putin is willing to kill people he considers traitors on foreign soil, why would he hesitate to use non-lethal (but life-altering) energy weapons against U.S. spies?


hotair--2020-10-20--Coons: You bet we're open to court packing

Democratic Senator and Biden surrogate Chris Coons ( Delaware ) went on State of the Union on Sunday to pitch his candidate .
Jake Tapper , to his credit , once again brought up the question that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris refuse to discuss with American voters .
Are they open to packing the Supreme Court if Biden wins ?
Unlike the candidates he represents , Coons indicated that he was definitely receptive to the idea .
And the way he phrased his answer probably gives us a hint as to the buzzwords and spin the Democrats will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Free Beacon ) While Democrats have implied their intention to pack the Supreme Court for weeks , Sen. Chris Coons ( D. , Del . )
on Sunday explicitly said he was “ open ” to adding justices to the High Court .
“ If we happen to be in the fact pattern where we have a President Biden , we ’ ll have to look at what the right steps are to rebalance our federal judiciary , ” said Coons , a Biden campaign surrogate .
Over the past few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominee Joe Biden and his campaign nearly a dozen times about the candidate ’ s intentions to expand the number of justices on the Court .
Each time , Biden has deflected , saying it would shift focus and only benefit President Trump to discuss .
Anyone care to take a guess as to how “ fact pattern ” slipped into that answer ?
It ’ s a curious choice of words to be sure .
It just seems as if “ reality ” might have been better .
But more to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ packing the court in a nearly unprecedented fashion would be described as a way to “ rebalance our federal judiciary.
” First of all , the Supreme Court is not “ out of balance ” currently except for being short one Associate Justice .
Once Amy Coney Barrett is seated , the court will be back “ in balance ” as much as it ever is .
Except , of course , if your definition of “ balance ” means having a majority of justices appointed by Democrats .
But that would just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything else .
That wasn ’ t the only curious clue dropped by Coons , however .
Notice also how he didn ’ t refer to “ rebalancing ” the Supreme Court .
He specifically said “ our federal judiciary.
” While the greatest amount of attention is obviously showered on the Supreme Court , Donald Trump and Cocaine Mitch have been busy filling seats at all levels of the federal courts ever since President Trump was sworn in .
They ’ ve been seating judges at a near record-setting rate .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve seen the legendarily liberal Ninth Circut begin to tilt toward the conservative side .
Might Coons be hinting that the Democrats will be looking at court-packing operations even further down the judicial food chain ?
There are twelve circuit courts dividing up the country , each with its own standard number of judges .
But if you can jam extraneous judges onto the Supreme Court , why not the circuit courts as well , right ?
What Coons , Biden and many other Democrats seem to be forgetting is that even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they won ’ t be in the majority permanently , nor willl they hold the White House in perpetuity .
Eventually , the shoe will be back on the other foot .
And having opened the door to court-packing , they are inviting the GOP to turn around and do the same thing in return .
Before you know it we ’ ll have twenty Supreme Court justices and the Ninth Circuit will need a football stadium to hold their sessions in .

Democratic Senator and Biden surrogate Chris Coons (Delaware) went on State of the Union on Sunday to pitch his candidate. Jake Tapper, to his credit, once again brought up the question that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris refuse to discuss with American voters. Are they open to packing the Supreme Court if Biden wins? Unlike the candidates he represents, Coons indicated that he was definitely receptive to the idea. And the way he phrased his answer probably gives us a hint as to the buzzwords and spin the Democrats will be using if they attempt to do so. (Free Beacon)
While Democrats have implied their intention to pack the Supreme Court for weeks, Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.) on Sunday explicitly said he was “open” to adding justices to the High Court. “If we happen to be in the fact pattern where we have a President Biden, we’ll have to look at what the right steps are to rebalance our federal judiciary,” said Coons, a Biden campaign surrogate. Over the past few weeks, reporters have asked Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his campaign nearly a dozen times about the candidate’s intentions to expand the number of justices on the Court. Each time, Biden has deflected, saying it would shift focus and only benefit President Trump to discuss.
Anyone care to take a guess as to how “fact pattern” slipped into that answer? It’s a curious choice of words to be sure. It just seems as if “reality” might have been better.
But more to the point, notice how Coons refers to packing the court in a nearly unprecedented fashion would be described as a way to “rebalance our federal judiciary.” First of all, the Supreme Court is not “out of balance” currently except for being short one Associate Justice. Once Amy Coney Barrett is seated, the court will be back “in balance” as much as it ever is. Except, of course, if your definition of “balance” means having a majority of justices appointed by Democrats. But that would just make you a sore loser more than anything else.
That wasn’t the only curious clue dropped by Coons, however. Notice also how he didn’t refer to “rebalancing” the Supreme Court. He specifically said “our federal judiciary.” While the greatest amount of attention is obviously showered on the Supreme Court, Donald Trump and Cocaine Mitch have been busy filling seats at all levels of the federal courts ever since President Trump was sworn in. They’ve been seating judges at a near record-setting rate. The numbers have been big enough that we’ve seen the legendarily liberal Ninth Circut begin to tilt toward the conservative side.
Might Coons be hinting that the Democrats will be looking at court-packing operations even further down the judicial food chain? There are twelve circuit courts dividing up the country, each with its own standard number of judges. But if you can jam extraneous judges onto the Supreme Court, why not the circuit courts as well, right?
What Coons, Biden and many other Democrats seem to be forgetting is that even if the Democrats win in November, they won’t be in the majority permanently, nor willl they hold the White House in perpetuity. Eventually, the shoe will be back on the other foot. And having opened the door to court-packing, they are inviting the GOP to turn around and do the same thing in return. Before you know it we’ll have twenty Supreme Court justices and the Ninth Circuit will need a football stadium to hold their sessions in.


hotair--2020-10-20--Say what? Moderator will mute mics in next presidential debate

Team Trump grumbled about this last night , but it might — might — work in his favor on Thursday night .
The Commission on Presidential Debates announced new rules last night to , er , improve the product from the first debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden two weeks ago .
Candidates ’ microphones will only be live during their own answer period and in open discussion in the second and final debate .
The hope is to prevent the meltdown of interruptions from both candidates , but from which Trump came off worse overall : When the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ final televised debate , each candidate will have their microphones cut off while the other is delivering responses to questions on American families , race in America , climate change , national security and leadership .
The 90-minute debate is divided into 15-minute segments on the six topics , with each candidate granted two minutes to deliver uninterrupted remarks before proceeding to an open debate for nine minutes of each segment .
The non-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates ( CPD ) on Monday announced that “ in order to enforce this agreed upon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be open during these two-minute periods is the candidate who has the floor under the rules ” .
Both mics will be unmuted for open discussion .
The commission added in a statement : “ We realize , after discussions with both campaigns , that neither campaign may be totally satisfied with the measures announced today .
One may think they go too far , and one may think they do not go far enough .
We are comfortable that these actions strike the right balance and that they are in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whom these debates are held.
” After initially threatening to walk away if the CPD muted mics , Trump ’ s campaign pledged that Trump would participate under the new rules .
They had a bigger beef with the last-minute topic change from foreign policy issues , which didn ’ t get a lot of play in the first debate .
Kristen Welker and NBC instead announced a slate of new topics , almost all of which had already come up in the first debate .
Nonetheless , Trump says he ’ ll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moderation might end up being better news for Trump than for Biden .
Although the media willfully ignored this , Biden also has a habit of interrupting in debates ; he used that tactic aggressively against Paul Ryan in 2012 ’ s VP debate , and to good effect .
Biden also started the interruptions two weeks ago , although by the end Trump had clearly become the more aggressive candidate on stage with the tactic .
( Chris Wallace might even have challenged Biden as runner-up by the end , too .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump let Biden off the ropes more than once when he got lost on policy questions .
This time around , Trump ’ s team has already advised him to cut down the interruptions in order to let Biden hang himself : What to watch : Trump will tell more jokes and try , if he can stay on message , to strike a softer tone .
At the same time , aides expect Trump to keep going after Biden ’ s son Hunter .
Be smart : Trump ’ s team thinks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the stage to Biden while the moderator is asking questions , Biden would wander rhetorically , “ look doddering ” and “ step on himself.
” “ Don ’ t save him , ” is their advice to the president , a Trump adviser tells Axios .
It ’ s good advice , but it ’ s anyone ’ s guess whether Trump would have followed it .
Biden had already started doing that a couple of times in the first debate ; the question on taxes was critically one of those .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have played right into his hands .
Instead , Trump intervened and made the issue his lack of deportment rather than Biden ’ s lack of competency .
Trump has a brawler ’ s style on stage , and lacks the discipline necessary to deploy it and restrain it tactically .
That ’ s why the new microphone rule might be very good news .
It imposes a discipline on both men that neither really has .
However , it also forces both men to respond to the policy questions rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad news for Biden .
He ’ s been avoiding policy discussions in order to make Trump the only issue .
He got away with that in the first debate because Trump unwittingly cooperated in Biden ’ s strategy .
This time , Biden can ’ t hide .

Team Trump grumbled about this last night, but it might — might — work in his favor on Thursday night. The Commission on Presidential Debates announced new rules last night to, er, improve the product from the first debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden two weeks ago. Candidates’ microphones will only be live during their own answer period and in open discussion in the second and final debate. The hope is to prevent the meltdown of interruptions from both candidates, but from which Trump came off worse overall:
When the two face off on Thursday for a final televised debate, each candidate will have their microphones cut off while the other is delivering responses to questions on American families, race in America, climate change, national security and leadership. The 90-minute debate is divided into 15-minute segments on the six topics, with each candidate granted two minutes to deliver uninterrupted remarks before proceeding to an open debate for nine minutes of each segment. The non-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) on Monday announced that “in order to enforce this agreed upon rule, the only candidate whose microphone will be open during these two-minute periods is the candidate who has the floor under the rules”. Both mics will be unmuted for open discussion. The commission added in a statement: “We realize, after discussions with both campaigns, that neither campaign may be totally satisfied with the measures announced today. One may think they go too far, and one may think they do not go far enough. We are comfortable that these actions strike the right balance and that they are in the interest of the American people, for whom these debates are held.”
After initially threatening to walk away if the CPD muted mics, Trump’s campaign pledged that Trump would participate under the new rules. They had a bigger beef with the last-minute topic change from foreign policy issues, which didn’t get a lot of play in the first debate. Kristen Welker and NBC instead announced a slate of new topics, almost all of which had already come up in the first debate.
Nonetheless, Trump says he’ll press the issue himself:
Trump will debate, despite commission’s decision to mute mikes pic.twitter.com/9HxpxZHfaS — Christopher Cadelago (@ccadelago) October 20, 2020
The microphone moderation might end up being better news for Trump than for Biden. Although the media willfully ignored this, Biden also has a habit of interrupting in debates; he used that tactic aggressively against Paul Ryan in 2012’s VP debate, and to good effect. Biden also started the interruptions two weeks ago, although by the end Trump had clearly become the more aggressive candidate on stage with the tactic. (Chris Wallace might even have challenged Biden as runner-up by the end, too.)
In doing so, however, Trump let Biden off the ropes more than once when he got lost on policy questions. This time around, Trump’s team has already advised him to cut down the interruptions in order to let Biden hang himself:
What to watch: Trump will tell more jokes and try, if he can stay on message, to strike a softer tone. At the same time, aides expect Trump to keep going after Biden’s son Hunter. Be smart: Trump’s team thinks that if he’d just yield the stage to Biden while the moderator is asking questions, Biden would wander rhetorically, “look doddering” and “step on himself.” “Don’t save him,” is their advice to the president, a Trump adviser tells Axios.
It’s good advice, but it’s anyone’s guess whether Trump would have followed it. Biden had already started doing that a couple of times in the first debate; the question on taxes was critically one of those. Had Trump been more disciplined, it would have played right into his hands. Instead, Trump intervened and made the issue his lack of deportment rather than Biden’s lack of competency. Trump has a brawler’s style on stage, and lacks the discipline necessary to deploy it and restrain it tactically.
That’s why the new microphone rule might be very good news. It imposes a discipline on both men that neither really has. However, it also forces both men to respond to the policy questions rather than each other, and that’s bad news for Biden. He’s been avoiding policy discussions in order to make Trump the only issue. He got away with that in the first debate because Trump unwittingly cooperated in Biden’s strategy. This time, Biden can’t hide.


hotair--2020-10-20--Poll: Strong majority opposes Court-packing, plurality wants vote on Barrett before the election

One of the low-key biggest ( and most pleasant ) surprises in a year poisoned by chaos is how unchaotic the process of replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a Scalia-esque SCOTUS nominee has been .
Immediately after Ginsburg ’ s death , poll after poll showed that Americans on balance wanted the seat held open so that the newly elected president could fill the vacancy .
Granted , the preference for that option wasn ’ t strong — it tended to break along the same lines as the Biden/Trump election polling right now , 51/42 or thereabouts — but a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the election was a political loser .
A month later , it no longer is .
Support for confirming Barrett began to rise after her nomination was formally announced and culminated with the Gallup poll Ed wrote about earlier today finding that 51 percent now support putting her on the Court .
What changed ?
Two things , I think .
Barrett herself made a good impression , and liberals who might otherwise have thrown all of their effort into organizing against her are throwing their effort instead into getting Biden elected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do realistically to stop confirmation and they have better things to do right now , so they ’ re wisely not wasting resources .
They ’ re going to get their consolation prize on November 3 , assuming the current polling holds .
A new poll today from the NYT and Siena finds the public a bit more divided about Barrett than Gallup did , but it ’ s clear now that her nomination and confirmation won ’ t be a liability for Trump even if they turn out to be not much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spot of welcome news for Republicans came on the subject of Judge Amy Coney Barrett ’ s nomination to the Supreme Court : While more voters said they would like to see Mr. Biden choose future justices , rather than Mr. Trump , a plurality of voters also said that the Senate should vote on Judge Barrett ’ s nomination before the election .
Voters were about evenly split on Ms. Barrett as a nominee , indicating that the Supreme Court fight had not given a clear electoral advantage to either party .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ about one in seven — gave no opinion , suggesting the court fight had not become an all-consuming issue .
Forty-four percent of voters supported Judge Barrett ’ s nomination , 42 percent opposed it , and the remainder declined to take a position .
Voters split 47/39 in favor of holding a Senate vote on Barrett before Election Day , a turnaround from the early feeling that the winner of the election should make this nomination .
Among independents it was 49/40 .
Some progressives may be coping with the trend towards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blue wave arrives two weeks from now they ’ ll have the votes to expand the Court and offset the Republicans ’ 6-3 majority .
I ’ m here to tell them : You will not , my dude .
The polls on Court-packing have been grim for lefties since Ginsburg passed away and they haven ’ t gotten better .
In late September , the Washington Post found support for adding justices at just 32/54 ; another poll conducted at the time by YouGov also found support at 32 percent .
Nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taken their best shot at persuading Americans that packing the Court is only fair and right , the Times finds support … flat .
If anything , opposition may have ticked up a bit .
Think Joe Manchin , Kyrsten Sinema , and new purple-state Democrats like Mark Kelly are going to bite the bullet on something that ’ s polling -40 with independents , knowing that they ’ d need to nuke the filibuster first just to make it possible ?
With Biden already providing them cover to say no by indicating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court-packing ?
C ’ mon .
It ’ s time for lefties to put their big-boy pants on and abandon this silly idea .
I think they will .
If the rest of today ’ s NYT data is at all representative of reality , they ’ re staring at a decisive win on November 3 .
Biden leads Trump by nine overall , by 12 on handling COVID , and by 20 on who can better unite the country .
On Trump ’ s best issue , the economy , his lead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If they get the presidency and the Senate , they ’ ll have enough on their policy to-do list to let Court-packing drop .
Especially if Breyer retires next year and gives them an opportunity to put a young liberal on the Court .
Here ’ s Van Jones from last week comparing Court-packing to a “ teddy bear ” lefties are clinging to .
In lieu of an exit question , read this piece published a few days ago in WaPo asserting that Supreme Court precedent may require Barrett to recuse herself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The author is as noteworthy as the substance : It ’ s Michael Luttig , who was made a federal appellate judge at the tender age of 37 by Bush 41 and became a conservative legal star , for years regarded as a potential Republican SCOTUS nominee .
He left the bench in 2006 but is still highly respected in conservative legal circles .
For Luttig to suggest that Barrett has a recusal problem is a big deal , especially after yesterday ’ s 4-4 ruling by the Court on mail-in ballots in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote if that subject came before the Court again — unless she ’ s forced to recuse .

One of the low-key biggest (and most pleasant) surprises in a year poisoned by chaos is how unchaotic the process of replacing Ruth Bader Ginsburg with a Scalia-esque SCOTUS nominee has been.
Immediately after Ginsburg’s death, poll after poll showed that Americans on balance wanted the seat held open so that the newly elected president could fill the vacancy. Granted, the preference for that option wasn’t strong — it tended to break along the same lines as the Biden/Trump election polling right now, 51/42 or thereabouts — but a month ago the idea of confirming Barrett before the election was a political loser. A month later, it no longer is. Support for confirming Barrett began to rise after her nomination was formally announced and culminated with the Gallup poll Ed wrote about earlier today finding that 51 percent now support putting her on the Court.
What changed? Two things, I think. Barrett herself made a good impression, and liberals who might otherwise have thrown all of their effort into organizing against her are throwing their effort instead into getting Biden elected. There’s nothing they can do realistically to stop confirmation and they have better things to do right now, so they’re wisely not wasting resources. They’re going to get their consolation prize on November 3, assuming the current polling holds.
A new poll today from the NYT and Siena finds the public a bit more divided about Barrett than Gallup did, but it’s clear now that her nomination and confirmation won’t be a liability for Trump even if they turn out to be not much of an asset either.
A rare spot of welcome news for Republicans came on the subject of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court: While more voters said they would like to see Mr. Biden choose future justices, rather than Mr. Trump, a plurality of voters also said that the Senate should vote on Judge Barrett’s nomination before the election. Voters were about evenly split on Ms. Barrett as a nominee, indicating that the Supreme Court fight had not given a clear electoral advantage to either party. But a sizable number of voters — about one in seven — gave no opinion, suggesting the court fight had not become an all-consuming issue. Forty-four percent of voters supported Judge Barrett’s nomination, 42 percent opposed it, and the remainder declined to take a position.
Voters split 47/39 in favor of holding a Senate vote on Barrett before Election Day, a turnaround from the early feeling that the winner of the election should make this nomination. Among independents it was 49/40.
Some progressives may be coping with the trend towards Barrett by telling themselves that if the blue wave arrives two weeks from now they’ll have the votes to expand the Court and offset the Republicans’ 6-3 majority. I’m here to tell them: You will not, my dude. The polls on Court-packing have been grim for lefties since Ginsburg passed away and they haven’t gotten better. In late September, the Washington Post found support for adding justices at just 32/54; another poll conducted at the time by YouGov also found support at 32 percent. Nearly a month later, with lefties having taken their best shot at persuading Americans that packing the Court is only fair and right, the Times finds support … flat. If anything, opposition may have ticked up a bit.
Think Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, and new purple-state Democrats like Mark Kelly are going to bite the bullet on something that’s polling -40 with independents, knowing that they’d need to nuke the filibuster first just to make it possible? With Biden already providing them cover to say no by indicating he’s not a fan of Court-packing? C’mon. It’s time for lefties to put their big-boy pants on and abandon this silly idea.
I think they will. If the rest of today’s NYT data is at all representative of reality, they’re staring at a decisive win on November 3. Biden leads Trump by nine overall, by 12 on handling COVID, and by 20 on who can better unite the country. On Trump’s best issue, the economy, his lead is down to a single point. If they get the presidency and the Senate, they’ll have enough on their policy to-do list to let Court-packing drop. Especially if Breyer retires next year and gives them an opportunity to put a young liberal on the Court.
Here’s Van Jones from last week comparing Court-packing to a “teddy bear” lefties are clinging to. In lieu of an exit question, read this piece published a few days ago in WaPo asserting that Supreme Court precedent may require Barrett to recuse herself from any election cases this year. The author is as noteworthy as the substance: It’s Michael Luttig, who was made a federal appellate judge at the tender age of 37 by Bush 41 and became a conservative legal star, for years regarded as a potential Republican SCOTUS nominee. He left the bench in 2006 but is still highly respected in conservative legal circles. For Luttig to suggest that Barrett has a recusal problem is a big deal, especially after yesterday’s 4-4 ruling by the Court on mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania. Barrett would be the deciding vote if that subject came before the Court again — unless she’s forced to recuse.


hotair--2020-10-20--Will secret meeting in Syria by Trump officials bring release of two American hostages?

The White House and Syrian officials confirmed Monday that a secret meeting took place in Damascus .
The reason for the meeting in August was in hopes of securing the release of two Americans reported being held in Syria .
President Trump sent deputy presidential aide and senior counterterrorism adviser Kash Patel and Roger Carstens , the White House ’ s Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs to meet with officials of Syrian President Bashar Assad ’ s government .
So far , a potential October surprise of the release of two more American hostages hasn ’ t happened .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the release of Americans held hostage overseas is impressive .
His administration has been successful with the release and rescue of over fifty hostages from twenty-two different countries .
They are working on the release of freelance journalist and former Marine officer Austin Tice and Majd Kamalmaz , a Syrian-American therapist .
Tice disappeared while reporting in Syria in 2012 and Kamalmaz disappeared after being stopped at a Syrian government checkpoint in 2017 .
It is believed that both men are still alive though Syria has not provided any evidence of that .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ hostages in Syria .
Syrian officials confirmed to CBS News that national security adviser Ali Mamlouk met with the White House envoys to discuss the release of Tice and Kamalmaz .
The Syrian officials told them that their release is contingent on the removal of American military forces from the country .
The Wall Street Journal first reported the story .
When CBS News asked the White House for comment , an administration official confirmed the Wall Street Journal story over the weekend was accurate , calling it “ emblematic of how President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bring Americans home who have been detained overseas.
” After filing award-winning reports for various outlets — including McClatchy , The Washington Post and CBS News — Tice was kidnapped while covering the Syrian civil war on August 14 , 2012 .
Since then it has remained unclear who ’ s holding him , or even whether he ’ s still alive .
His family and senior U.S. officials continue to believe he is alive , and U.S. officials believe he ’ s being held by the Assad government .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ posts .
His parents live in Texas .
They have never doubted that he is alive and they continue to fight for his release .
In 2019 they confirmed that they were working closely with the Trump administration and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo .
Tice , a 37-year-old Marine , was working as a freelance journalist in August 2012 while covering Syria ’ s civil war .
A video released a month later showed him blindfolded and held by armed men saying “ Oh , Jesus.
” He has not been heard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government ’ s assessment is that he is still alive , and his family continues to hold out hope .
“ The United States government has assured us that Austin is still alive and assured the public most recently in a statement in April that Austin is alive and that this is a viable mission , ” Debra Tice said .
“ So it ’ s not just a mom and dad and wishful thinking .
It ’ s verifiable information.
” The Tices have spoken with President Trump , Secretary of State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Clearly they have a heart for bringing Americans home , ” Marc Tice said , in reference to Trump ’ s efforts to secure the release of American hostages overseas .
But , he said “ we won ’ t be satisfied with what they ’ re doing , or what we ’ re doing , or what anybody else is doing until Austin gets safely home .
That ’ s fact.
” It is a hopeful sign that the secret meeting is being confirmed by both sides.The Wall Street Journal first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It should be noted the meeting was the first high-level visit by an American official to Syria in years .
The last known talks between White House and Syrian officials in Damascus took place in 2010 .
The U.S. ended diplomatic relations with Syria in 2012 to protest Mr. Assad ’ s brutal crackdown on protesters calling for an end to his regime .
Ibrahim Kamalmaz , one of Mr. Kamalmaz ’ s sons , welcomed Mr. Patel ’ s trip as a positive step in trying to bring his father home .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Assad asking him to work with the administration .
“ Syria , please work with us .
We would appreciate you letting him out , ” Mr. Trump said at the time .
The administration has imposed strict sanctions on Syria and refuses to withdraw American troops in order to try to keep Russia ’ s power in the region at bay .
The U.S. government believes that the Assad regime , or one of its battleground allies , has Tice in custody , but American officials have not said that definitively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to CBS News that the White House could consider forsaking its Syria policy — even withdrawing American forces — in exchange for Tice ’ s return .
Hundreds of American military personnel remain in the country , working with rebel forces in a bid to isolate Assad , who stands accused of war crimes including the use of chemical weapons on his own people .
There are no official , direct negotiations between the Assad regime and Washington , and Mr. T contradicting his own previous statements , but was talked out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump has publicly taken a tough stance on the Russian-backed Syrian president .
He even admitted recently that he had considered assassinating Assad at one point , contradicting his own previous statements , but was talked out of it by then-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis .
Arab media outlets have reported in recent days that Lebanon ’ s director of general security , Major General Abbas Ibrahim , has discussed American hostages with senior Trump administration officials , including national security adviser Robert O ’ Brien .
Ibrahim traveled to Washington , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his help in securing the release of another American hostage , Sam Goodwin .
Now , however , he is in quarantine after testing positive for COVID-19 .
We can hope the release of Tice and Kamalmaz happens soon .
President Trump has a strong record of bringing home hostages and he should tout that more often .
Assad shouldn ’ t hold his breath on Trump bringing American military support home from the region any time soon , though .

The White House and Syrian officials confirmed Monday that a secret meeting took place in Damascus. The reason for the meeting in August was in hopes of securing the release of two Americans reported being held in Syria. President Trump sent deputy presidential aide and senior counterterrorism adviser Kash Patel and Roger Carstens, the White House’s Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs to meet with officials of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government. So far, a potential October surprise of the release of two more American hostages hasn’t happened.
President Trump’s record of securing the release of Americans held hostage overseas is impressive. His administration has been successful with the release and rescue of over fifty hostages from twenty-two different countries. They are working on the release of freelance journalist and former Marine officer Austin Tice and Majd Kamalmaz, a Syrian-American therapist. Tice disappeared while reporting in Syria in 2012 and Kamalmaz disappeared after being stopped at a Syrian government checkpoint in 2017. It is believed that both men are still alive though Syria has not provided any evidence of that. Four other Americans are reported to be hostages in Syria.
Syrian officials confirmed to CBS News that national security adviser Ali Mamlouk met with the White House envoys to discuss the release of Tice and Kamalmaz. The Syrian officials told them that their release is contingent on the removal of American military forces from the country.
The Wall Street Journal first reported the story. When CBS News asked the White House for comment, an administration official confirmed the Wall Street Journal story over the weekend was accurate, calling it “emblematic of how President Trump has made it a major priority to bring Americans home who have been detained overseas.” After filing award-winning reports for various outlets — including McClatchy, The Washington Post and CBS News — Tice was kidnapped while covering the Syrian civil war on August 14, 2012. Since then it has remained unclear who’s holding him, or even whether he’s still alive. His family and senior U.S. officials continue to believe he is alive, and U.S. officials believe he’s being held by the Assad government.
I’ve written about Austin Tice in past posts. His parents live in Texas. They have never doubted that he is alive and they continue to fight for his release. In 2019 they confirmed that they were working closely with the Trump administration and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Tice, a 37-year-old Marine, was working as a freelance journalist in August 2012 while covering Syria’s civil war. A video released a month later showed him blindfolded and held by armed men saying “Oh, Jesus.” He has not been heard from since. However, the U.S. government’s assessment is that he is still alive, and his family continues to hold out hope. “The United States government has assured us that Austin is still alive and assured the public most recently in a statement in April that Austin is alive and that this is a viable mission,” Debra Tice said. “So it’s not just a mom and dad and wishful thinking. It’s verifiable information.” The Tices have spoken with President Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other administration officials. “Clearly they have a heart for bringing Americans home,” Marc Tice said, in reference to Trump’s efforts to secure the release of American hostages overseas. But, he said “we won’t be satisfied with what they’re doing, or what we’re doing, or what anybody else is doing until Austin gets safely home. That’s fact.”
It is a hopeful sign that the secret meeting is being confirmed by both sides.The Wall Street Journal first reported on the meeting on Sunday. It should be noted the meeting was the first high-level visit by an American official to Syria in years. The last known talks between White House and Syrian officials in Damascus took place in 2010. The U.S. ended diplomatic relations with Syria in 2012 to protest Mr. Assad’s brutal crackdown on protesters calling for an end to his regime. Ibrahim Kamalmaz, one of Mr. Kamalmaz’s sons, welcomed Mr. Patel’s trip as a positive step in trying to bring his father home.
“This administration is committed to our dad’s case, and we continue to speak with officials at the highest levels of the U.S. Government to bring dad home,” he said Sunday.
In March President Trump sent a letter to Assad asking him to work with the administration. “Syria, please work with us. We would appreciate you letting him out,” Mr. Trump said at the time. The administration has imposed strict sanctions on Syria and refuses to withdraw American troops in order to try to keep Russia’s power in the region at bay. The U.S. government believes that the Assad regime, or one of its battleground allies, has Tice in custody, but American officials have not said that definitively.
One senior U.S. official voiced concern to CBS News that the White House could consider forsaking its Syria policy — even withdrawing American forces — in exchange for Tice’s return. Hundreds of American military personnel remain in the country, working with rebel forces in a bid to isolate Assad, who stands accused of war crimes including the use of chemical weapons on his own people. There are no official, direct negotiations between the Assad regime and Washington, and Mr. T contradicting his own previous statements, but was talked out of it by then-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis. Trump has publicly taken a tough stance on the Russian-backed Syrian president. He even admitted recently that he had considered assassinating Assad at one point, contradicting his own previous statements, but was talked out of it by then-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis.
Arab media outlets have reported in recent days that Lebanon’s director of general security, Major General Abbas Ibrahim, has discussed American hostages with senior Trump administration officials, including national security adviser Robert O’Brien. Ibrahim traveled to Washington, D.C. to collect an award in recognition of his help in securing the release of another American hostage, Sam Goodwin. Now, however, he is in quarantine after testing positive for COVID-19.
We can hope the release of Tice and Kamalmaz happens soon. President Trump has a strong record of bringing home hostages and he should tout that more often. Assad shouldn’t hold his breath on Trump bringing American military support home from the region any time soon, though.


hotair--2020-10-20--Family with Trump sign in vehicle fired on by Biden/BLM supporter in Maryland

Another story of pre-election insanity has landed in our laps this week , this one taking place in Kingsville , Maryland , on the northwestern outskirts of Baltimore .
Neal Houk , a Trump supporter , was out for a ride with his son in their pickup truck yesterday .
The Truck was adorned with some pro-Trump signage .
They were passing the home of Douglas Kuhn , a Biden supporter and BLM advocate .
Kuhn was in the process of putting up a Black Lives Matter sign in his yard .
For reasons that remain unclear , Houk decided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kuhn on his street .
The response he received took everyone by surprise .
Kuhn dropped the sign , picked up a loaded 12 gauge shotgun , and opened fire .
( WJZ News , CBS Baltimore ) A man putting up a Black Lives Matter sign in his yard is being held without bond Monday after he was charged with firing a shotgun at Trump supporters driving by in a pickup truck .
It happened Saturday afternoon in Kingsville .
Police eventually booked Douglas Kuhn at the White Marsh Precinct .
Neal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their horn at a neighbor putting up a Black Lives Matter sign .
Thankfully , nobody was injured by the shotgun blast and there was only minor damage to the vehicle .
Neighbors confirmed Houk ’ s story , saying that the situation escalated from a honk of a horn to gunfire in a matter of seconds .
Police later tracked down Kuhn , located the firearm and took him into custody .
He ’ s currently being held without bail .
We ’ re not being told a few things about this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t saying why he decided to honk his horn at that moment , or whether it was a single tap on the horn or some prolonged honking .
But does any of that really matter ?
Even if you suspect that it was rude of Neal Houk to hit the horn on his truck in passing , there ’ s no sane rationale for responding with a 12 gauge .
And while we ’ re on the subject , what was Kuhn doing with a shotgun in his front yard if he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sign ?
One of the neighbors suggested that Kuhn may have had some previous signs either stolen or damaged and that could definitely be annoying .
But responding with a deadly weapon is definitely a case of escalating a confrontation far too quickly .
Additionally , CBS reports that the initial investigation by the police revealed that the two men had never even met each other before this incident .
They were complete strangers .
That tells us that there wasn ’ t any sort of grudge or bad blood between the two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a random encounter that escalated to nearly the point of murder at the drop of a hat .
In any event , this is apparently where things stand in terms of both the election and the Antifa/BLM unrest we see in the streets .
The two issues are hopelessly intertwined at this point .
Rather than simply showing support for one side or the other and making their voices heard at the ballot box , too many people are answering what they clearly see as a call to war .
A Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now we nearly had another , similar tragedy unfold just outside of Baltimore .
People really need to keep their heads down and be on alert for the next couple of weeks .
The violence is spilling over into the suburbs at this point .

Another story of pre-election insanity has landed in our laps this week, this one taking place in Kingsville, Maryland, on the northwestern outskirts of Baltimore. Neal Houk, a Trump supporter, was out for a ride with his son in their pickup truck yesterday. The Truck was adorned with some pro-Trump signage. They were passing the home of Douglas Kuhn, a Biden supporter and BLM advocate. Kuhn was in the process of putting up a Black Lives Matter sign in his yard. For reasons that remain unclear, Houk decided to honk his horn as he passed Kuhn on his street. The response he received took everyone by surprise. Kuhn dropped the sign, picked up a loaded 12 gauge shotgun, and opened fire. (WJZ News, CBS Baltimore)
A man putting up a Black Lives Matter sign in his yard is being held without bond Monday after he was charged with firing a shotgun at Trump supporters driving by in a pickup truck. It happened Saturday afternoon in Kingsville. Police eventually booked Douglas Kuhn at the White Marsh Precinct. Neal Houk and his son said they honked their horn at a neighbor putting up a Black Lives Matter sign.
Thankfully, nobody was injured by the shotgun blast and there was only minor damage to the vehicle. Neighbors confirmed Houk’s story, saying that the situation escalated from a honk of a horn to gunfire in a matter of seconds. Police later tracked down Kuhn, located the firearm and took him into custody. He’s currently being held without bail.
We’re not being told a few things about this story. For example, Houk isn’t saying why he decided to honk his horn at that moment, or whether it was a single tap on the horn or some prolonged honking. But does any of that really matter?
Even if you suspect that it was rude of Neal Houk to hit the horn on his truck in passing, there’s no sane rationale for responding with a 12 gauge. And while we’re on the subject, what was Kuhn doing with a shotgun in his front yard if he was just out there putting up a sign? One of the neighbors suggested that Kuhn may have had some previous signs either stolen or damaged and that could definitely be annoying. But responding with a deadly weapon is definitely a case of escalating a confrontation far too quickly.
Additionally, CBS reports that the initial investigation by the police revealed that the two men had never even met each other before this incident. They were complete strangers. That tells us that there wasn’t any sort of grudge or bad blood between the two of them. This appears to simply be a random encounter that escalated to nearly the point of murder at the drop of a hat.
In any event, this is apparently where things stand in terms of both the election and the Antifa/BLM unrest we see in the streets. The two issues are hopelessly intertwined at this point. Rather than simply showing support for one side or the other and making their voices heard at the ballot box, too many people are answering what they clearly see as a call to war. A Trump supporter was shot in Denver recently and now we nearly had another, similar tragedy unfold just outside of Baltimore. People really need to keep their heads down and be on alert for the next couple of weeks. The violence is spilling over into the suburbs at this point.


hotair--2020-10-20--Biden spox on Hunter e-mails: "I don't think anybody is saying they are inauthentic"

Jazz just wrote about the efforts by Joe Biden ’ s allies to shoot down the Hunter Biden laptop story launched last week by the New York Post .
Unfortunately for them , Team Biden apparently insists on keeping it aloft .
The campaign sent Jenna Arnold to battle Fox News host Leland Vittert over it and to change the subject to COVID-19 .
Instead , Vittert managed to force Arnold into an admission that the Bidens haven ’ t done the one thing that could sink the story … actually deny it .
Instead , Arnold concedes that no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ e-mails .
That ’ s certainly news , but not the kind that Team Biden hoped to make : “ It ’ s unclear to me — I would say that what ’ s so important right now , from both the American citizen and the media — yourself included , Leland — is to continue to ask clarifying questions about this , why the FBI is investigating — ” Arnold said before Vittert interjected .
“ It ’ s imperative to note that the NSA told Trump that Giuliani was being played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Vittert responded , as the two talked over one another .
“ Again , Jenna , Jenna , Jenna .
The easiest thing in the world to do : Stop with all the obfuscation .
The easiest thing in the world to do would be to say , ‘ These aren ’ t Hunter Biden ’ s emails.
’ Nobody , including Hunter Biden , and including the campaign , has said it.
” … “ I ’ m so confused .
What ’ s interesting is I feel like you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question , which is : Can anyone say that these emails are inauthentic ?
And so far , I haven ’ t heard anybody say that , ” Vittert said .
Shockingly , Arnold then admitted , “ I think that ’ s fair .
I don ’ t think anybody is saying they are inauthentic.
” Isn ’ t that the whole ballgame ?
If they ’ re not “ inauthentic , ” then it means that Hunter Biden actually sent those e-mails .
And if he did send those e-mails , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s contacts with Burisma before his intervention in Ukraine to get the chief prosecutor fired .
It also means that Hunter has been getting a fortune from China through its regime-linked corporations , which sets up more potential conflicts of interest both in the past while Joe was VP and potentially in a future Biden presidency .
Vittert does a very good job in painting Arnold into this corner .
However , Arnold only gets there because Team Biden has been making process arguments all along .
They have raised some good questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard drive , as well as pointed out the real risks of outside manipulation .
However , they have consistently failed to actually deny the story .
That strategy might have made sense for the first 24 hours or so while they checked Hunter ’ s records .
We ’ re now on Day 7 , and Team Biden still hasn ’ t taken any position on authenticity — and it ’ s starting to look very much like they ’ re ducking it .
Why ?
Presumably because they believe an honest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that a lie would get discovered and do even more damage .
Even with the requisite skepticism of a late bombshell like this in a campaign , it ’ s tough to avoid the conclusion that Team Biden thinks the e-mails are authentic .

Jazz just wrote about the efforts by Joe Biden’s allies to shoot down the Hunter Biden laptop story launched last week by the New York Post. Unfortunately for them, Team Biden apparently insists on keeping it aloft. The campaign sent Jenna Arnold to battle Fox News host Leland Vittert over it and to change the subject to COVID-19. Instead, Vittert managed to force Arnold into an admission that the Bidens haven’t done the one thing that could sink the story … actually deny it.
Instead, Arnold concedes that no one is disputing the authenticity of the e-mails. That’s certainly news, but not the kind that Team Biden hoped to make:
“It’s unclear to me — I would say that what’s so important right now, from both the American citizen and the media — yourself included, Leland — is to continue to ask clarifying questions about this, why the FBI is investigating —” Arnold said before Vittert interjected. “It’s imperative to note that the NSA told Trump that Giuliani was being played by these emails.” “But again,” Vittert responded, as the two talked over one another. “Again, Jenna, Jenna, Jenna. The easiest thing in the world to do: Stop with all the obfuscation. The easiest thing in the world to do would be to say, ‘These aren’t Hunter Biden’s emails.’ Nobody, including Hunter Biden, and including the campaign, has said it.” … “I’m so confused. What’s interesting is I feel like you still haven’t answered the fundamental question, which is: Can anyone say that these emails are inauthentic? And so far, I haven’t heard anybody say that,” Vittert said. Shockingly, Arnold then admitted, “I think that’s fair. I don’t think anybody is saying they are inauthentic.”
Isn’t that the whole ballgame? If they’re not “inauthentic,” then it means that Hunter Biden actually sent those e-mails. And if he did send those e-mails, then the Bidens lied about Joe’s contacts with Burisma before his intervention in Ukraine to get the chief prosecutor fired. It also means that Hunter has been getting a fortune from China through its regime-linked corporations, which sets up more potential conflicts of interest both in the past while Joe was VP and potentially in a future Biden presidency.
Vittert does a very good job in painting Arnold into this corner. However, Arnold only gets there because Team Biden has been making process arguments all along. They have raised some good questions about the provenance of the laptop and hard drive, as well as pointed out the real risks of outside manipulation. However, they have consistently failed to actually deny the story. That strategy might have made sense for the first 24 hours or so while they checked Hunter’s records. We’re now on Day 7, and Team Biden still hasn’t taken any position on authenticity — and it’s starting to look very much like they’re ducking it.
Why? Presumably because they believe an honest and substantive answer would damage Joe Biden, and that a lie would get discovered and do even more damage. Even with the requisite skepticism of a late bombshell like this in a campaign, it’s tough to avoid the conclusion that Team Biden thinks the e-mails are authentic.


hotair--2020-10-20--Libs make their last, desperate efforts to shoot down Hunter Biden email story

With only two weeks to go before the election , the reality of what ’ s going on behind the scenes in terms of the Hunter Biden email scandal has become too obvious to ignore .
The liberal media can ’ t afford to have a story that ’ s potentially damaging to Joe Biden ’ s candidacy making the rounds so a full-blown blackout is being attempted .
But since the question has finally been asked by a reporter from the alphabet networks , Biden ’ s most strident media accomplices are trying desperately to cloud the issue like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business in the litterbox .
One of the latest examples of this trend comes to us from Mediaite , where Colby Hall throws out the claim that Fox News initially passed on the Hunter Biden email story over “ credibility concerns.
” That makes for a great headline if you ’ re trying to throw cold water all over the story , but given the full context of what ’ s been revealed since then , it ’ s a non-news item .
Of course Fox News didn ’ t run with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up .
Something that inflammatory showing up a few weeks before the election couldn ’ t simply be dumped out to the public without checking into it .
But people did check and have since found two people copied on some of the emails who verified their authenticity .
Then they reported on it with that supporting testimony to back it up .
In another example , we have the Daily Beast pointing out that the FBI is still investigating the Russia angle , “ contradicting Trump ’ s intel Czar.
” Once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lede paragraph for the Biden campaign .
They ’ re clearly trying to cast doubt on the authenticity of the emails , hinting at Russian election meddling and making it look like something the Trump administration cooked up .
But just as with the Mediaite story , you don ’ t have to read much further to discover the truth .
Obviously the FBI is investigating it .
The allegation was made and they had to look into it .
But if they ’ d found anything tying the laptop to the Russians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it by now .
I ’ ll even concede that it ’ s still possible that some bad actors , be they foreign or domestic , could theoretically have been involved in making the contents of Hunter Biden ’ s hard drive available as some sort of oppo project .
But at the end of the day , the only real question is whether or not the emails are real and if they were composed by Hunter Biden .
Neither Hunter nor his father ’ s campaign has once tried to deny the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previously mentioned confirmation offered by other recipients of the messages pretty much seals the deal .
Does that mean all of the blackouts and aspersions being cast at this story are going to go away ?
Of course not .
The game plan is fully in place and the mainstream media can ’ t afford to back down now .
Everyone has to lash themselves to the mast and ride out this storm until they drag Sleepy Joe Biden ’ s carcass across the finish line .
Unfortunately , there ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do about it since Biden ’ s supporters control such a massive share of the news media market .

With only two weeks to go before the election, the reality of what’s going on behind the scenes in terms of the Hunter Biden email scandal has become too obvious to ignore. The liberal media can’t afford to have a story that’s potentially damaging to Joe Biden’s candidacy making the rounds so a full-blown blackout is being attempted. But since the question has finally been asked by a reporter from the alphabet networks, Biden’s most strident media accomplices are trying desperately to cloud the issue like a cat flinging sand over its latest business in the litterbox.
One of the latest examples of this trend comes to us from Mediaite, where Colby Hall throws out the claim that Fox News initially passed on the Hunter Biden email story over “credibility concerns.”
Mediaite has learned that Fox News was first approached by Rudy Giuliani to report on a tranche of files alleged to have come from Hunter Biden’s unclaimed laptop left at a Delaware computer repair shop, but that the news division chose not to run the story unless or until the sourcing and veracity of the emails could be properly vetted.
That makes for a great headline if you’re trying to throw cold water all over the story, but given the full context of what’s been revealed since then, it’s a non-news item. Of course Fox News didn’t run with the story as soon as Giuliani served it up. Something that inflammatory showing up a few weeks before the election couldn’t simply be dumped out to the public without checking into it. But people did check and have since found two people copied on some of the emails who verified their authenticity. Then they reported on it with that supporting testimony to back it up.
In another example, we have the Daily Beast pointing out that the FBI is still investigating the Russia angle, “contradicting Trump’s intel Czar.”
The FBI is investigating the purloined laptop materials from Joe Biden’s son as part of a possible foreign disinformation operation, a congressional source told The Daily Beast—an investigation at odds with a statement from President Trump’s director of national intelligence.
Once again we see another great headline and lede paragraph for the Biden campaign. They’re clearly trying to cast doubt on the authenticity of the emails, hinting at Russian election meddling and making it look like something the Trump administration cooked up. But just as with the Mediaite story, you don’t have to read much further to discover the truth.
Obviously the FBI is investigating it. The allegation was made and they had to look into it. But if they’d found anything tying the laptop to the Russians we’d probably have heard about it by now. I’ll even concede that it’s still possible that some bad actors, be they foreign or domestic, could theoretically have been involved in making the contents of Hunter Biden’s hard drive available as some sort of oppo project. But at the end of the day, the only real question is whether or not the emails are real and if they were composed by Hunter Biden. Neither Hunter nor his father’s campaign has once tried to deny the authenticity of the emails. And the previously mentioned confirmation offered by other recipients of the messages pretty much seals the deal.
Does that mean all of the blackouts and aspersions being cast at this story are going to go away? Of course not. The game plan is fully in place and the mainstream media can’t afford to back down now. Everyone has to lash themselves to the mast and ride out this storm until they drag Sleepy Joe Biden’s carcass across the finish line. Unfortunately, there’s not much that the rest of us can do about it since Biden’s supporters control such a massive share of the news media market.


hotair--2020-10-21--Would you be willing to intentionally catch COVID?

This may sound like a rather crazy question , but would you ?
If you were informed that a hospital was looking for volunteers to intentionally contract the disease so they could study the progress and development of the virus , would you do it ?
That ’ s what ’ s happening in England right now .
At Imperial College London , doctors are preparing to infect 90 people and monitor their progress , symptoms , and medical data through the course of their COVID infection .
It ’ s thought that the results may help speed the development @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And they already have volunteers lining up .
One of them is 22-year-old Danica Marcos .
( Associated Press ) Danica Marcos wants to be infected with COVID-19 .
While other people are wearing masks and staying home to avoid the disease , the 22-year-old Londoner has volunteered to contract the new coronavirus as part of a controversial study that hopes to speed the development of a vaccine .
Marcos and other young volunteers say they want to take part to help bring an end to the pandemic after seeing the havoc it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ best friend died early in the crisis , and as a volunteer for a homeless charity she has seen the struggles of those who have lost their jobs .
“ So many people ( are ) struggling right now , and I want this pandemic to be over , ” Marcos told The Associated Press .
I suppose the first thing we should do is offer thanks to Monica for being willing to take this sort of risk in the interest of helping everyone else .
It ’ s the sort of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hear about every day , regardless of how smart of an idea you may consider it to be .
With that said , this project is being described as “ controversial ” and that ’ s probably putting it mildly .
I ’ m not sure if you could even legally attempt it in the United States .
The founding principle of medical ethics is primum non nocere ( “ first , do no harm ” ) .
Intentionally infecting a healthy human being with a potentially deadly virus sounds like they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One mitigating factor here is that all of the volunteers are relatively young , in their 20s or 30s , and in good health .
They ’ re in one of the lowest-risk groups imaginable .
They will also be under the constant supervision and care of some of the best doctors available , further lowering their risk .
But that doesn ’ t mean that the risk is zero .
The general consensus is that the mortality rate for healthy patients in that age group is a bit less than one in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learning about COVID as they go ever since it broke out .
It was initially thought that only the elderly and those with underlying conditions were at serious risk of dying , but by April of this year , we had already recorded some deaths among healthy patients in their 20s .
Further , while many young people shake off the virus with few symptoms , others in this category have survived but been left with serious lung damage .
Others have suffered strokes , leaving them with permanent disabilities .
So while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of anyone in terms of surviving , they are still taking a definite risk of a very serious outcome .
So now that we ’ ve covered all of that background information , I ’ ll put the question to our readers yet again .
Knowing what the possible ramifications might be , including permanent physical disability or even death , would you volunteer for this ?
If it really does speed up the development of vaccines and treatment plans , I ’ d like to think I would if I were a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military days .
But I ’ m honestly not sure .
That ’ s a lot to ask of a volunteer .

This may sound like a rather crazy question, but would you? If you were informed that a hospital was looking for volunteers to intentionally contract the disease so they could study the progress and development of the virus, would you do it? That’s what’s happening in England right now. At Imperial College London, doctors are preparing to infect 90 people and monitor their progress, symptoms, and medical data through the course of their COVID infection. It’s thought that the results may help speed the development of a vaccine or treatment regimens. And they already have volunteers lining up. One of them is 22-year-old Danica Marcos. (Associated Press)
Danica Marcos wants to be infected with COVID-19. While other people are wearing masks and staying home to avoid the disease, the 22-year-old Londoner has volunteered to contract the new coronavirus as part of a controversial study that hopes to speed the development of a vaccine. Marcos and other young volunteers say they want to take part to help bring an end to the pandemic after seeing the havoc it has wreaked. The grandparents of Marcos’ best friend died early in the crisis, and as a volunteer for a homeless charity she has seen the struggles of those who have lost their jobs. “So many people (are) struggling right now, and I want this pandemic to be over,” Marcos told The Associated Press.
I suppose the first thing we should do is offer thanks to Danica for being willing to take this sort of risk in the interest of helping everyone else. It’s the sort of selfless act that we don’t hear about every day, regardless of how smart of an idea you may consider it to be.
With that said, this project is being described as “controversial” and that’s probably putting it mildly. I’m not sure if you could even legally attempt it in the United States. The founding principle of medical ethics is primum non nocere (“first, do no harm”). Intentionally infecting a healthy human being with a potentially deadly virus sounds like they’re crossing some sort of line.
One mitigating factor here is that all of the volunteers are relatively young, in their 20s or 30s, and in good health. They’re in one of the lowest-risk groups imaginable. They will also be under the constant supervision and care of some of the best doctors available, further lowering their risk. But that doesn’t mean that the risk is zero. The general consensus is that the mortality rate for healthy patients in that age group is a bit less than one in 250. The medical community has been learning about COVID as they go ever since it broke out. It was initially thought that only the elderly and those with underlying conditions were at serious risk of dying, but by April of this year, we had already recorded some deaths among healthy patients in their 20s.
Further, while many young people shake off the virus with few symptoms, others in this category have survived but been left with serious lung damage. Others have suffered strokes, leaving them with permanent disabilities. So while these volunteers probably have the best chance of anyone in terms of surviving, they are still taking a definite risk of a very serious outcome.
So now that we’ve covered all of that background information, I’ll put the question to our readers yet again. Knowing what the possible ramifications might be, including permanent physical disability or even death, would you volunteer for this? If it really does speed up the development of vaccines and treatment plans, I’d like to think I would if I were a young, healthy man back in my military days. But I’m honestly not sure. That’s a lot to ask of a volunteer.


hotair--2020-10-21--VIP Gold Chat: Debate preview, Hunter review, Minneapolis residents sue -- and you!

Get ready for another tremendous live , interactive VIP Gold chat with Bearing Arms ’ Cam Edwards and HotAir ’ s Ed Morrissey !
The duo will take VIP Gold members ’ questions and comments and give an in-depth analysis of the top topics of the day .
The live podcast starts at 1:30 pm ET .
If you are not a VIP Gold member , join below so you can watch today and participate in future chats !
Use LOYALTY for 25 % off !
While Cam brings his A-game on 2nd Amendment and liberty issues and makes sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Ed has kept pace with developments abroad , at home and at the local level as well .
We ’ ll plenty to discuss and lots of time to take your questions .
The hot topics so far are : • How will the new debate rules play out tomorrow night ?
• Do Hunter Biden ’ s e-mails check out — and what do they mean ?
• Developments in the Breonna Taylor and McCluskey cases With all the fast-moving developments , our VIP Gold members can get the latest as @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Get ready for another tremendous live, interactive VIP Gold chat with Bearing Arms’ Cam Edwards and HotAir’s Ed Morrissey! The duo will take VIP Gold members’ questions and comments and give an in-depth analysis of the top topics of the day. The live podcast starts at 1:30 pm ET.
If you are not a VIP Gold member, join below so you can watch today and participate in future chats! Use LOYALTY for 25% off!
While Cam brings his A-game on 2nd Amendment and liberty issues and makes sure to keep it real along the way, Ed has kept pace with developments abroad, at home and at the local level as well.
We’ll plenty to discuss and lots of time to take your questions. The hot topics so far are:
How will the new debate rules play out tomorrow night?
Do Hunter Biden’s e-mails check out — and what do they mean?
Developments in the Breonna Taylor and McCluskey cases
COVID-19 developments, and economic meltdown
The 2020 national election
With all the fast-moving developments, our VIP Gold members can get the latest as it happens from Cam and Ed.
Watch the replay of today’s live chat below.