theamericanconservative--2020-05-07--Three Pa. Counties Key to 2020 Got Whomped by N.Y. Superspreaders

Antiquarantine and pro-Trump protestors took over the steps of the Pennsylvania State Capitol in Harrisburg , Pennsylvania , Friday , 01 May 2020 .
( Photo by B.A .
Van Sise/NurPhoto via Getty Images ) In times of peace and prosperity , or in today ’ s case , a pandemic and economic crisis , Pennsylvanians ultimately decide the outcome of presidential elections .
Beyond the Democratic protectorates of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh , the state ’ s ticket-splitting voters—nurturing a moderate disposition , shaped by tradition and pride—determine who gets an encore or the vaudeville hook .
This is especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Joe Biden ’ s birthplace , the anthracite coal region , and the Pocono Mountains—and the Lehigh Valley , perhaps this year ’ s biggest bellwether for Donald Trump ’ s fate .
Both regions are now reeling from the coronavirus and statewide lockdown , making this geographical corner that much more unpredictable , yet crucial , in the election .
By mid-April , the Poconos ’ Monroe County , along with Lehigh County , home to Allentown , and Luzerne County—which accounted for nearly 60 percent of Trump ’ s winning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infection rates in Pennsylvania .
Location caused this unfortunate distinction .
Through demography , economics , and highways , the counties are inextricably linked to New York City and northern New Jersey .
The insidious pathogen ’ s arrival was therefore inevitable , but preexisting conditions intensified these regional hotspots .
Monroe County , for example , has long illustrated the urban-rural divide .
Since the 1980s , scores of New York metro residents have flocked to the county ’ s bucolic towns and gated communities for a more affordable quality of life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major commuter hub where thousands of Pocono residents travel east—many in busses—on Route 80 to work in New York and New Jersey .
Monroe is also a major tourist attraction , where city dwellers head “ to the mountains ” and enjoy weekends in lakeside cabins .
In March , as the crisis intensified , Monroe turned into a center for “ escape-from-New York coronavirus tourism.
” Social media and online advertisements of short-term rentals promoted “ social distancing in comfort ” and the opportunity to “ Quarantine in the Poconos.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York license plates , ” said State Rep. Maureen Madden ( D – Monroe ) at the time .
“ They ’ re actually coming here , ” she added , “ they ’ re spreading more germs , they ’ re taking more germs back.
” “ This is not vacation time , ” a Smithfield Township resident told LehighValleyLive.com .
“ I realize and understand people fleeing a hot zone ; however , we are being asked to stay in place for a reason.
” By April 1 , over a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stay-at-home ” order , Governor Tom Wolf announced a temporary ban on the region ’ s short-term rentals .
At that point , bus companies had suspended commuter services and the CDC urged residents from New York , New Jersey , and Connecticut to refrain from “ non-essential ” domestic travel for 14 days .
But it was too late in Monroe , which had the most Covid-19 cases per capita in Pennsylvania .
Local health officials stated that the county resembled what was happening in New York .
More than half of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treated for Covid-19 .
In response to rising case numbers , the state Department of Health and National Guard members set up a temporary hospital at East Stroudsburg University .
Meanwhile , the Lehigh Valley—a sprawling , populous region between the Poconos and suburban Philadelphia—confronted the same crisis with different underlying circumstances .
Similar to Monroe County , thousands commute east on Route 78 in busses and cars to New Jersey and even Manhattan for work .
But the Lehigh Valley is hardly a destination for rural tourism .
Its proximity to New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top logistics hub , where massive fulfillment centers transport e-commerce packages throughout the East Coast .
The Valley ’ s largest city , Allentown , has a population with strong familial ties to metro New York .
By late April , The Morning Call reported that Allentown ’ s “ known rate of infection—1 case per 81 residents—remains more than four times greater than the known statewide rate , 10 times greater than Pittsburgh ’ s rate , and twice that of Philadelphia.
” Public health experts withheld theories for the high rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Allentown ’ s population density , cramped apartments , and the high number of positive cases in regional warehouses .
Reader comments on The Morning Call ’ s Facebook page , however , noted that the region ’ s New York connection , plus residents ’ failure to social distance or wear masks , turned the city into a hotspot .
“ No surprise , really .
Too many NYC friends and family there , ” one commenter wrote .
The Covid-19 pandemic has proven most dramatic in Luzerne County ’ s Hazleton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an hour west of Monroe County .
By late April , 4 percent of Hazleton ’ s population had tested positive for the virus .
The city—a population of about 30,000 people packed into 6 square miles—now has among the nation ’ s highest rates of the virus .
Just like the Poconos and the Lehigh Valley , a metro New York exodus played a major role in the local crisis .
When New Yorkers headed to Monroe County in March , many continued westward on Route 80 to Hazleton , which , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a demographic transformation largely fueled by New York and Paterson , New Jersey .
Packed passenger vans transported family and friends to the city , where they stayed in half-double homes .
In recent years , landlords have turned many of these pre-war properties—intended for two families—into code-breaking apartments .
Such conditions increased community spread , including to the area ’ s many industrial employers .
As the New York Times ’ Michael Powell reported this week , many of the city ’ s residents “ faced a primal calculus .
They could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fell sick and some brought the virus home with them.
” One local meat-packaging plant closed after 130 workers tested positive for Covid-19 .
This perfect storm has proven especially dangerous for the Hazleton area ’ s large senior citizen population .
In early April , local health-care officials attributed Hazleton ’ s rising Covid-19 cases to a lack of social distancing .
“ Eighteen percent of our community are practicing social distancing , ” noted the president of Hazleton ’ s hospital .
In response , the mayor imposed a curfew , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s manager even asked Governor Wolf to deploy the National Guard .
Wolf denied the request .
Meanwhile , local officials worked to stop transit companies from running New York vans .
For now , Hazleton remains in lockdown—a community devastated by the crisis .
A large testing center operates 30 minutes north at Wilkes-Barre ’ s Mohegan Sun arena , once a regular venue for Trump ’ s campaign stops and rallies .
The Covid-19 experiences in Hazleton , the Lehigh Valley , and the Poconos are the direct result of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subsequent population exodus .
On May 8 , 24 mostly rural counties will begin a phased reopening in Pennsylvania , but Luzerne , Monroe , and Lehigh counties will remain closed for the foreseeable future .
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics , the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton area ’ s March unemployment rate was 7.1-percent—the highest of any metropolitan region in the state .
The emotional shrapnel of this period will only increase .
How will each county ’ s voters respond on Election Day ?
In Luzerne and Monroe , residents on both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s response , believing his inaction in northeastern Pennsylvania reflected indifference .
In 2016 , Trump ’ s largest base was in Luzerne .
It ’ s likely that the county ’ s voters—many lifelong Democrats—will reaffirm their support for Trump in response to the socioeconomic factors behind the local crisis .
And in Monroe , which Trump lost by only 532 votes , a rural backlash could turn the county in the president ’ s favor .
The Lehigh Valley , however , remains a toss-up .
Before the crisis , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ development has even continued .
Though Trump won the region ’ s Northampton County , voters still trend Democratic , and enough mercurial suburbanites—exhausted and angry—may embrace Biden .
In November , look to Pennsylvania ’ s northeast and Lehigh Valley to know how the night will end .
Their pandemic experience will serve as the ultimate referendum on Trump ’ s presidency .
Charles F. McElwee III is assistant editor of City Journal .
Follow him on Twitter at @ CFMcElwee .

In times of peace and prosperity, or in today’s case, a pandemic and economic crisis, Pennsylvanians ultimately decide the outcome of presidential elections. Beyond the Democratic protectorates of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, the state’s ticket-splitting voters—nurturing a moderate disposition, shaped by tradition and pride—determine who gets an encore or the vaudeville hook.
This is especially true in the state’s northeast—home to Joe Biden’s birthplace, the anthracite coal region, and the Pocono Mountains—and the Lehigh Valley, perhaps this year’s biggest bellwether for Donald Trump’s fate. Both regions are now reeling from the coronavirus and statewide lockdown, making this geographical corner that much more unpredictable, yet crucial, in the election.
By mid-April, the Poconos’ Monroe County, along with Lehigh County, home to Allentown, and Luzerne County—which accounted for nearly 60 percent of Trump’s winning margin statewide in 2016—had the highest Covid-19 infection rates in Pennsylvania. Location caused this unfortunate distinction. Through demography, economics, and highways, the counties are inextricably linked to New York City and northern New Jersey. The insidious pathogen’s arrival was therefore inevitable, but preexisting conditions intensified these regional hotspots.
Monroe County, for example, has long illustrated the urban-rural divide. Since the 1980s, scores of New York metro residents have flocked to the county’s bucolic towns and gated communities for a more affordable quality of life. Today, the county is a major commuter hub where thousands of Pocono residents travel east—many in busses—on Route 80 to work in New York and New Jersey. Monroe is also a major tourist attraction, where city dwellers head “to the mountains” and enjoy weekends in lakeside cabins.
In March, as the crisis intensified, Monroe turned into a center for “escape-from-New York coronavirus tourism.” Social media and online advertisements of short-term rentals promoted “social distancing in comfort” and the opportunity to “Quarantine in the Poconos.”
“We are seeing an influx of New York license plates,” said State Rep. Maureen Madden (D – Monroe) at the time. “They’re actually coming here,” she added, “they’re spreading more germs, they’re taking more germs back.”
“This is not vacation time,” a Smithfield Township resident told LehighValleyLive.com. “I realize and understand people fleeing a hot zone; however, we are being asked to stay in place for a reason.”
By April 1, over a week after the county’s “stay-at-home” order, Governor Tom Wolf announced a temporary ban on the region’s short-term rentals. At that point, bus companies had suspended commuter services and the CDC urged residents from New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut to refrain from “non-essential” domestic travel for 14 days. But it was too late in Monroe, which had the most Covid-19 cases per capita in Pennsylvania. Local health officials stated that the county resembled what was happening in New York. More than half of admissions at one local hospital were being treated for Covid-19. In response to rising case numbers, the state Department of Health and National Guard members set up a temporary hospital at East Stroudsburg University.
Meanwhile, the Lehigh Valley—a sprawling, populous region between the Poconos and suburban Philadelphia—confronted the same crisis with different underlying circumstances. Similar to Monroe County, thousands commute east on Route 78 in busses and cars to New Jersey and even Manhattan for work. But the Lehigh Valley is hardly a destination for rural tourism. Its proximity to New York has transformed the region into a top logistics hub, where massive fulfillment centers transport e-commerce packages throughout the East Coast. The Valley’s largest city, Allentown, has a population with strong familial ties to metro New York.
By late April, The Morning Call reported that Allentown’s “known rate of infection—1 case per 81 residents—remains more than four times greater than the known statewide rate, 10 times greater than Pittsburgh’s rate, and twice that of Philadelphia.” Public health experts withheld theories for the high rate, but the paper noted Center City Allentown’s population density, cramped apartments, and the high number of positive cases in regional warehouses. Reader comments on The Morning Call’s Facebook page, however, noted that the region’s New York connection, plus residents’ failure to social distance or wear masks, turned the city into a hotspot. “No surprise, really. Too many NYC friends and family there,” one commenter wrote.
The Covid-19 pandemic has proven most dramatic in Luzerne County’s Hazleton, an hour north of Allentown and an hour west of Monroe County. By late April, 4 percent of Hazleton’s population had tested positive for the virus. The city—a population of about 30,000 people packed into 6 square miles—now has among the nation’s highest rates of the virus. Just like the Poconos and the Lehigh Valley, a metro New York exodus played a major role in the local crisis.
When New Yorkers headed to Monroe County in March, many continued westward on Route 80 to Hazleton, which, since the early 2000s, has experienced a demographic transformation largely fueled by New York and Paterson, New Jersey. Packed passenger vans transported family and friends to the city, where they stayed in half-double homes. In recent years, landlords have turned many of these pre-war properties—intended for two families—into code-breaking apartments. Such conditions increased community spread, including to the area’s many industrial employers. As the New York Times’ Michael Powell reported this week, many of the city’s residents “faced a primal calculus. They could not leave jobs, even as co-workers fell sick and some brought the virus home with them.” One local meat-packaging plant closed after 130 workers tested positive for Covid-19. This perfect storm has proven especially dangerous for the Hazleton area’s large senior citizen population.
In early April, local health-care officials attributed Hazleton’s rising Covid-19 cases to a lack of social distancing. “Eighteen percent of our community are practicing social distancing,” noted the president of Hazleton’s hospital. In response, the mayor imposed a curfew, still in place, and Luzerne County’s manager even asked Governor Wolf to deploy the National Guard. Wolf denied the request. Meanwhile, local officials worked to stop transit companies from running New York vans. For now, Hazleton remains in lockdown—a community devastated by the crisis. A large testing center operates 30 minutes north at Wilkes-Barre’s Mohegan Sun arena, once a regular venue for Trump’s campaign stops and rallies.
The Covid-19 experiences in Hazleton, the Lehigh Valley, and the Poconos are the direct result of New York’s crisis and a subsequent population exodus. On May 8, 24 mostly rural counties will begin a phased reopening in Pennsylvania, but Luzerne, Monroe, and Lehigh counties will remain closed for the foreseeable future. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton area’s March unemployment rate was 7.1-percent—the highest of any metropolitan region in the state. The emotional shrapnel of this period will only increase.
How will each county’s voters respond on Election Day? In Luzerne and Monroe, residents on both political sides resent the Democratic governor’s response, believing his inaction in northeastern Pennsylvania reflected indifference. In 2016, Trump’s largest base was in Luzerne. It’s likely that the county’s voters—many lifelong Democrats—will reaffirm their support for Trump in response to the socioeconomic factors behind the local crisis. And in Monroe, which Trump lost by only 532 votes, a rural backlash could turn the county in the president’s favor. The Lehigh Valley, however, remains a toss-up. Before the crisis, the region was an economic powerhouse; warehousing development has even continued. Though Trump won the region’s Northampton County, voters still trend Democratic, and enough mercurial suburbanites—exhausted and angry—may embrace Biden.
In November, look to Pennsylvania’s northeast and Lehigh Valley to know how the night will end. Their pandemic experience will serve as the ultimate referendum on Trump’s presidency.
Charles F. McElwee III is assistant editor of City Journal. Follow him on Twitter at @CFMcElwee.


theamericanconservative--2020-05-07--New Yorkers Made These Bellwether Counties Pennsylvania’s Hotspot


theamericanconservative--2020-05-08--No, Mr. Biden, Climate Change is Not a ‘Crisis’ Like This One

We know what a crisis looks like .
We know how to define an emergency .
Perhaps we weren ’ t totally sure of these definitions before the coronavirus wreaked havoc on our lives and livelihoods , but we know now .
Yet Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is still using this same rhetoric about urgency and emergency to push his economy-changing climate change agenda .
Biden is effectively trying to shift the focus of our fear from coronavirus to climate change .
It ’ s as though he believes that once this crisis has done with us , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their anxiety to a whole new economy disrupting level and tackle climate change as though it too is a coronavirus level crisis .
It isn ’ t .
Speaking to Washington State Governor Jay Inslee on his “ Here ’ s the Deal ” podcast , Biden said that climate change is an “ existential threat ” and that bad things will happen if we don ’ t take “ bold action.
” “ What lessons can the American people learn from this pandemic to help ensure that we move quickly to address @ @ @ @ @ @ @ late , or is there a connection ?
” Biden asked Inslee from his Delaware basement studio .
“ Oh yeah , big connection , ” Inslee said .
“ Y ’ know you could think of COVID-19 as a metaphor for the , it ’ s kind of a fast acting climate change .
Climate change is much slower but equally fatal , and the COVID-19 situation is kind of a metaphor for the whole effort we ’ re now engaged in .
Number 1 it means that you need to act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do that , and that ’ s why I ’ m looking forward to your leadership in the White House on this.
” But coronavirus is not a metaphor .
It ’ s a virus that has uniquely invasive properties .
We know that the bad things it can cause include death and total economic devastation .
The impact of that is being seen worldwide .
Our national and local leaders effectively dealt with the coronavirus by doing anything they could think of , no matter how absurd sounding .
This has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activists for years .
Greta Thurnberg told us to behave as though our house was on fire , to be enraged , to freak out .
But this coronavirus crisis is what freaking out looks like , and it turns out that not only is climate change not a “ house on fire ” scenario , but that behaving as though your house is on fire leaves a vibrant economy in free fall and 27 million people unemployed through no fault of their own .
Biden went on to say that “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn the changing , the climate , generating a fundamentally green infrastructure and turning it around in a way that can be the very thing that helps us get through this existential threat to our economy.
” Biden is here in line with Secretary General of the UN António Guterres , who believes that the recovery from the coronavirus “ is an opportunity to build more sustainable and inclusive economies and societies.
” Guterres is also on board with spending trillions on a “ green transition , ” not bailing out industries that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to invest altruistically , and to “ work together as an international community.
” Climate change activists like Greta Thurnberg , Extinction Rebellion , and the more moderate environmental reactionaries like Al Gore , have long been saying that the global economies need to stop in their tracks , regroup , and move in a different , more sustainable direction .
Biden and Inslee say that we can use this crisis as something of a model in itself as to how we can be “ bold ” and “ decisive ” with climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those climate change activists who wanted us to freak out are watching the reversal of the industrial impacts on the environment with glee .
But as they mark the reduction of carbon dioxide and emissions as a necessary correction or reckoning , we need to be aware of the human cost .
We need to care for the planet , but not at the cost of human industry and progress .
“ I think we can become a net exporter of the climate change technology , ” Biden said .
“ I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world in electric vehicles , I think we can become the leader in the world in wind and energy in a new transmission capacity across the United States.
” Biden ’ s plans for a new energy economy flies in the face of reason when the U.S. has its oil reserves full to brimming over , and will need to create jobs that take advantage of our existing strengths , not ones that will enhance our already ballooning deficit .
Inslee went on to laud Biden ’ s previous efforts on climate change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate in the 1980 ’ s he introduced legislation to deal with the environmental impacts of climate change .
However , if legislation was introduced in the 1980 ’ s to deal with the climate change crisis , and this crisis is still so out of control that it is still a crisis , then perhaps it ’ s not really a crisis .
We can ’ t call climate change a crisis if it has gone on for more than 40 years and our lives and economy were not only extant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything .
After a half a century of looking at climate models the U.S. is still generally maintaining the course .
We ’ ve had a few modest adjustments to the energy industry in the form of incentives for sustainable and renewable energy , offsets , and the like .
However when the coronavirus modeling hit , with the precedents of mass cases experienced by so many nations in Europe , the U.S. did the very thing climate change activists have been begging society to do for some time : we turned off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good , shrunk our carbon footprints , and turned off the engine of labour and industry that powers our nation .
While we won ’ t know the long term impact of coronavirus , we know that in the short term unemployment is near 27 million and many of those businesses that closed will never be coming back .
After the coronavirus didn ’ t actually kill half the population in a matter of months , no one is going to believe these climate change naysayers .
And as more and more of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and renewable energy sources turn out to not be the ultimate fix , we have to learn to stop living in crisis mode .
The 27 million people who are out of work are already in crisis .
They should no more be reeducated to become solar panel installers than they should all sign up to work for Amazon .
The calls for us to be worried and outraged all the time have to stop .
Once this has passed , we need to grab hold of those things in our economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them as much as possible , not divert our efforts into tackling some new , half century old crisis .
Libby Emmons is a senior editor atThe Post Millennial and a playwright , living in Brooklyn , New York .
She has written for The Federalist , Quillette , and Arc Digital , among other publications .
You can follow her on Twitter @ li88yinc .

We know what a crisis looks like. We know how to define an emergency. Perhaps we weren’t totally sure of these definitions before the coronavirus wreaked havoc on our lives and livelihoods, but we know now. Yet Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is still using this same rhetoric about urgency and emergency to push his economy-changing climate change agenda.
Biden is effectively trying to shift the focus of our fear from coronavirus to climate change. It’s as though he believes that once this crisis has done with us, the American public will be ready to take their anxiety to a whole new economy disrupting level and tackle climate change as though it too is a coronavirus level crisis. It isn’t.
Speaking to Washington State Governor Jay Inslee on his “Here’s the Deal” podcast, Biden said that climate change is an “existential threat” and that bad things will happen if we don’t take “bold action.”
“What lessons can the American people learn from this pandemic to help ensure that we move quickly to address climate change before it’s too late, or is there a connection?” Biden asked Inslee from his Delaware basement studio.
“Oh yeah, big connection,” Inslee said. “Y’know you could think of COVID-19 as a metaphor for the, it’s kind of a fast acting climate change. Climate change is much slower but equally fatal, and the COVID-19 situation is kind of a metaphor for the whole effort we’re now engaged in. Number 1 it means that you need to act early and we need bold leadership to do that, and that’s why I’m looking forward to your leadership in the White House on this.”
But coronavirus is not a metaphor. It’s a virus that has uniquely invasive properties. We know that the bad things it can cause include death and total economic devastation. The impact of that is being seen worldwide. Our national and local leaders effectively dealt with the coronavirus by doing anything they could think of, no matter how absurd sounding. This has been the call to action of climate change activists for years.
Greta Thurnberg told us to behave as though our house was on fire, to be enraged, to freak out. But this coronavirus crisis is what freaking out looks like, and it turns out that not only is climate change not a “house on fire” scenario, but that behaving as though your house is on fire leaves a vibrant economy in free fall and 27 million people unemployed through no fault of their own.
Biden went on to say that “I think that we have an opportunity… to turn the changing, the climate, generating a fundamentally green infrastructure and turning it around in a way that can be the very thing that helps us get through this existential threat to our economy.”
Biden is here in line with Secretary General of the UN António Guterres, who believes that the recovery from the coronavirus “is an opportunity to build more sustainable and inclusive economies and societies.” Guterres is also on board with spending trillions on a “green transition,” not bailing out industries that rely on fossil fuels, urging investors to invest altruistically, and to “work together as an international community.”
Climate change activists like Greta Thurnberg, Extinction Rebellion, and the more moderate environmental reactionaries like Al Gore, have long been saying that the global economies need to stop in their tracks, regroup, and move in a different, more sustainable direction. Biden and Inslee say that we can use this crisis as something of a model in itself as to how we can be “bold” and “decisive” with climate change action.
No doubt some of those climate change activists who wanted us to freak out are watching the reversal of the industrial impacts on the environment with glee. But as they mark the reduction of carbon dioxide and emissions as a necessary correction or reckoning, we need to be aware of the human cost. We need to care for the planet, but not at the cost of human industry and progress.
“I think we can become a net exporter of the climate change technology,” Biden said. “I think we can become the leader in the world in electric vehicles, I think we can become the leader in the world in wind and energy in a new transmission capacity across the United States.”
Biden’s plans for a new energy economy flies in the face of reason when the U.S. has its oil reserves full to brimming over, and will need to create jobs that take advantage of our existing strengths, not ones that will enhance our already ballooning deficit.
Inslee went on to laud Biden’s previous efforts on climate change, noting that when Biden was in the Senate in the 1980’s he introduced legislation to deal with the environmental impacts of climate change.
However, if legislation was introduced in the 1980’s to deal with the climate change crisis, and this crisis is still so out of control that it is still a crisis, then perhaps it’s not really a crisis. We can’t call climate change a crisis if it has gone on for more than 40 years and our lives and economy were not only extant but thriving before the coronavirus shut down everything.
After a half a century of looking at climate models the U.S. is still generally maintaining the course. We’ve had a few modest adjustments to the energy industry in the form of incentives for sustainable and renewable energy, offsets, and the like.
However when the coronavirus modeling hit, with the precedents of mass cases experienced by so many nations in Europe, the U.S. did the very thing climate change activists have been begging society to do for some time: we turned off the factories, parked our cars for good, shrunk our carbon footprints, and turned off the engine of labour and industry that powers our nation. While we won’t know the long term impact of coronavirus, we know that in the short term unemployment is near 27 million and many of those businesses that closed will never be coming back.
After the coronavirus didn’t actually kill half the population in a matter of months, no one is going to believe these climate change naysayers. And as more and more of their predictions don’t pan out, and renewable energy sources turn out to not be the ultimate fix, we have to learn to stop living in crisis mode.
The 27 million people who are out of work are already in crisis. They should no more be reeducated to become solar panel installers than they should all sign up to work for Amazon.
The calls for us to be worried and outraged all the time have to stop. Once this has passed, we need to grab hold of those things in our economy that are in our favor and explore them as much as possible, not divert our efforts into tackling some new, half century old crisis.
Libby Emmons is a senior editor at The Post Millennial and a playwright, living in Brooklyn, New York. She has written for The Federalist, Quillette, and Arc Digital, among other publications. You can follow her on Twitter @li88yinc.


theamericanconservative--2020-05-08--Green New Deal Would Make Government’s Pandemic Footing Permanent


theamericanconservative--2020-05-11--We Could All Be General Michael Flynn Tomorrow

The Department of Justice ’ s case against retired Army Lieutenant General and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn has exposed an ugly reality involving the abuse of power at the highest levels of the Executive Office all the way down the justice system this country ostensibly holds so dear .
Plea bargains are an unfortunate reality of an American system of justice which finds merit in coercing people to admit guilt for crimes they didn ’ t commit in order to avoid the expense of a trial and to prevent friends and family from potential legal liability .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power is to fight actual crime , the American people have grown accustomed to turning a blind eye .
But if the purpose is to exact political revenge on someone who has incurred the disfavor of those in power , then the plea bargain system is a direct assault on the Constitution that should insult every American , regardless where they stand on the respective merits of the case .
General Flynn ’ s case falls firmly in the latter category .
Mike Flynn isn ’ t everyone ’ s cup of tea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best known for his short 24-day tenure as President Trump ’ s National Security Advisor , relieved of his duties for allegedly lying about a conversation he had with then-Russian Ambassador to the United States , Sergei Kislyak .
The FBI claimed Flynn had lied about this conversation to its agents during a January 24 , 2017 interview , a charge Flynn subsequently pled guilty to .
But in a surprising turn of events , the Department of Justice has dropped its case against Flynn on the eve of his being sentenced in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the case , the Justice department concluded that the FBI ’ s interview with Flynn was “ conducted without any legitimate investigative basis ” and that the questioning was “ untethered to , and unjustified by , the F.B.I.
’ s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn.
” Flynn ’ s many critics have cried foul , claiming the dismissal is nothing short of a perversion of justice carried out at the behest of President Trump by an overly partisan Attorney General , William Barr .
Flynn ’ s supporters have praised this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the face of corrupt FBI agents who abused the extraordinary powers they wield to engage in Constitutionally impermissible conduct designed to frame the former General .
In 2018 , the Department of Justice initiated approximately 80,000 federal prosecutions .
Two percent of these cases went to trial , with an 83 percent conviction rate .
Of the remaining 98 percent of the cases , some 90 percent ended with the defendant pleading guilty ; the remaining 8 percent were dismissed .
The plea process is so prevalent and pervasive in the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s 2012 decision in Missouri v. Frye , Justice Steven Kennedy , writing for the majority , quoted a prominent law review article which concluded that “ [ Plea bargaining ] is not some adjunct to the criminal justice system ; it is the criminal justice system.
” Federal prosecutors are equipped with a considerable range of legal weapons that can be used to compel confessions and discourage a jury trial , including charge-stacking ( charging multiple criminal counts derived from a single act ) , mandatory-minimum sentences which eliminate discretion on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretrial confinement , inordinately high bail , threats against friends and family , and the reality that any sentence handed down after trial will be substantially greater than one that could be reached via a plea bargain .
The upside of such a process is a streamlined criminal justice system which places a premium on convictions and incarceration without the cost of a trial .
The downside , however , is an unacceptably high rate of false confessions obtained by the plea deal process—the National Registry of Exonerations estimates that as many as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are false .
The reason for such a high rate of occurrence rests in the coercive reality attached to the tools used by the prosecutor to leverage a plea in the first place .
For someone who is guilty of a crime , a plea deal that reduces a potential 20-year sentence to five is very attractive .
For an innocent person , however , the prospect of not being able to afford competent legal representation ( an all-too reality , especially in one is subjected to pre-trial confinement and as such unable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with potential threats made to prosecute family and friends , make pleading guilty to a crime not committed a viable option .
The plea bargain process also facilitates prosecutorial misconduct .
By pleading guilty , a defendant cedes control of the processes of justice to the prosecution ; issues related to discovery—the requirement on the part of the prosecution to turn over all evidence relating to the charged conduct , even if exculpatory in nature—are often brushed aside , since guilt is admitted and no challenge to the charges will be mounted .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ way into a coerced plea agreement , even when they know that their case would not withstand scrutiny , because simple statistics have proven that more often than not they can get away with it .
The prosecution of General Flynn is a text-book example of clear prosecutorial abuse designed to obtain a guilty plea .
The FBI initiated a counterintelligence-scope investigation against General Flynn not because he was accused of committing a crime , but rather because he had incurred the wrath of the Obama administration .
When the FBI opened its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 31 , 2016 , its scope was limited to allegations that a Trump campaign advisor , George Papadopoulos , was in contact with persons working on behalf of the Russian government who were involved in the alleged theft of documents from the Democratic National Committee server .
Flynn had no connection whatsoever to this issue .
However , the FBI used the Crossfire Hurricane investigation as cover to open a separate investigation , known as Crossfire Razor , against Flynn based upon contacts he had with Russia Today , a state-sponsored media outlet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crossfire Razor was not a bona fide counterintelligence investigation in so far as it lacked proper predication and Flynn ’ s Russian connections were not materially relevant .
In January 2017 the FBI was preparing to shut down Crossfire Razor when FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok argued that it remain open so that he could conduct an interview with Flynn about his telephone call with Ambassador Kislyak in December 2016 .
This is where the Flynn case loses touch with its foundation of legality .
The Flynn-Kislyak phone call was monitored by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of any U.S. citizen so monitored is “ masked , ” or hidden , from any consumer of the intelligence .
On certain occasions , select senior officials may request that an identity be “ unmasked ” to allow for a greater understanding of the context of the conversation .
Flynn ’ s identity was “ unmasked ” using this procedure , most likely on the orders of then-FBI Director James Comey .
According to Comey , he then briefed Director of National Intelligence , James Clapper , who in turn briefed President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Flynn , Clapper and Obama .
On November 10 , 2016 , when Obama met with President-elect Trump in the White House , he warned Trump not to hire Flynn as his National Security Advisor , ostensibly because of his behavior while serving as the Director of DIA ; Trump ignored this advice , naming Flynn as the incoming NSA on November 18 .
Clapper was the man who fired Flynn at the DIA in 2014 .
On January 12 , David Ignatius published an article in The Washington Post which detailed Flynn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sydney Powell , Flynn ’ s laywer , has filed documents with the Federal Court asserting that Ignatius had received this highly classified information in violation of the law , and furthermore that is was Clapper who cleared Ignatius to “ take the kill shot on Flynn ” by publishing the details of the Flynn-Kislyak conversation .
If the potential for collusion between the FBI Director ( Comey ) , the Director of National Intelligence ( Clapper ) and the President of the United States ( Obama ) to undermine Flynn wasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ignatius ’ article enabled the FBI to conduct an interview on January 24 with Flynn that has been described by William Barr as “ a perjury trap ” should seal the deal .
Flynn was subsequently fired as the NSA , charged with lying to the FBI , bankrupted in the process of trying to defend himself , and threatened with the prosecution of his son if he opted to take the matter to trial .
Like many before him , Flynn pled guilty to a crime he never should have been charged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the diligence of Flynn ’ s current legal team in forcing disclosure of exculpatory information , combined with William Barr ’ s efforts to expose wrongdoing by the FBI and the Intelligence Community in investigating alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia , made the dismissal of Flynn ’ s case possible .
It doesn ’ t matter where one stands on the issue of Mike Flynn , the man .
I for one am personally disturbed by his overly partisan approach toward national security , and the liberty he takes with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t believe he was the right person to serve as Trump ’ s National Security Advisor .
Apparently neither did President Obama and his national security team .
But we don ’ t have a vote in this matter ; the National Security Advisor is President Trump ’ s responsibility to select .
Elections have consequences .
The Obama national security team abused its power by unmasking Flynn ’ s identity , then leaked Flynn ’ s identity to the press , using this press reporting to justify the continuance of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set a perjury trap intended to place Flynn in legal jeopardy .
This is not how American justice is supposed to be dispensed , and the fact that Flynn had to undergo this ordeal should send a shiver down every American ’ s spine , because if left unchecked , there but for the grace of God go us all .
Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties , in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm , and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He is the author of several books , including his forthcoming , Scorpion King : America ’ s Embrace of Nuclear Weapons From FDR to Trump ( 2020 ) .

The Department of Justice’s case against retired Army Lieutenant General and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn has exposed an ugly reality involving the abuse of power at the highest levels of the Executive Office all the way down the justice system this country ostensibly holds so dear.
Plea bargains are an unfortunate reality of an American system of justice which finds merit in coercing people to admit guilt for crimes they didn’t commit in order to avoid the expense of a trial and to prevent friends and family from potential legal liability. If the purpose behind such procedural abuse of power is to fight actual crime, the American people have grown accustomed to turning a blind eye. But if the purpose is to exact political revenge on someone who has incurred the disfavor of those in power, then the plea bargain system is a direct assault on the Constitution that should insult every American, regardless where they stand on the respective merits of the case. General Flynn’s case falls firmly in the latter category.
Mike Flynn isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. The controversial intelligence officer is perhaps best known for his short 24-day tenure as President Trump’s National Security Advisor, relieved of his duties for allegedly lying about a conversation he had with then-Russian Ambassador to the United States, Sergei Kislyak. The FBI claimed Flynn had lied about this conversation to its agents during a January 24, 2017 interview, a charge Flynn subsequently pled guilty to.
But in a surprising turn of events, the Department of Justice has dropped its case against Flynn on the eve of his being sentenced in a Federal Court. In their dismissal of the case, the Justice department concluded that the FBI’s interview with Flynn was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis” and that the questioning was “untethered to, and unjustified by, the F.B.I.’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn.”
Flynn’s many critics have cried foul, claiming the dismissal is nothing short of a perversion of justice carried out at the behest of President Trump by an overly partisan Attorney General, William Barr. Flynn’s supporters have praised this outcome as a clear case of exoneration in the face of corrupt FBI agents who abused the extraordinary powers they wield to engage in Constitutionally impermissible conduct designed to frame the former General.
In 2018, the Department of Justice initiated approximately 80,000 federal prosecutions. Two percent of these cases went to trial, with an 83 percent conviction rate. Of the remaining 98 percent of the cases, some 90 percent ended with the defendant pleading guilty; the remaining 8 percent were dismissed. The plea process is so prevalent and pervasive in the U.S. Court system that in the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Missouri v. Frye, Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, quoted a prominent law review article which concluded that “[Plea bargaining] is not some adjunct to the criminal justice system; it is the criminal justice system.”
Federal prosecutors are equipped with a considerable range of legal weapons that can be used to compel confessions and discourage a jury trial, including charge-stacking (charging multiple criminal counts derived from a single act), mandatory-minimum sentences which eliminate discretion on the part of a sentencing judge, pretrial confinement, inordinately high bail, threats against friends and family, and the reality that any sentence handed down after trial will be substantially greater than one that could be reached via a plea bargain.
The upside of such a process is a streamlined criminal justice system which places a premium on convictions and incarceration without the cost of a trial. The downside, however, is an unacceptably high rate of false confessions obtained by the plea deal process—the National Registry of Exonerations estimates that as many as 20 percent of all plea deal-related confessions are false.
The reason for such a high rate of occurrence rests in the coercive reality attached to the tools used by the prosecutor to leverage a plea in the first place. For someone who is guilty of a crime, a plea deal that reduces a potential 20-year sentence to five is very attractive. For an innocent person, however, the prospect of not being able to afford competent legal representation (an all-too reality, especially in one is subjected to pre-trial confinement and as such unable to earn a living), combined with potential threats made to prosecute family and friends, make pleading guilty to a crime not committed a viable option.
The plea bargain process also facilitates prosecutorial misconduct. By pleading guilty, a defendant cedes control of the processes of justice to the prosecution; issues related to discovery—the requirement on the part of the prosecution to turn over all evidence relating to the charged conduct, even if exculpatory in nature—are often brushed aside, since guilt is admitted and no challenge to the charges will be mounted. Prosecutors more often than not bully their way into a coerced plea agreement, even when they know that their case would not withstand scrutiny, because simple statistics have proven that more often than not they can get away with it.
♦♦♦
The prosecution of General Flynn is a text-book example of clear prosecutorial abuse designed to obtain a guilty plea. The FBI initiated a counterintelligence-scope investigation against General Flynn not because he was accused of committing a crime, but rather because he had incurred the wrath of the Obama administration.
When the FBI opened its Crossfire Hurricane investigation was opened on July 31, 2016, its scope was limited to allegations that a Trump campaign advisor, George Papadopoulos, was in contact with persons working on behalf of the Russian government who were involved in the alleged theft of documents from the Democratic National Committee server. Flynn had no connection whatsoever to this issue. However, the FBI used the Crossfire Hurricane investigation as cover to open a separate investigation, known as Crossfire Razor, against Flynn based upon contacts he had with Russia Today, a state-sponsored media outlet.
William Barr has since determined that Crossfire Razor was not a bona fide counterintelligence investigation in so far as it lacked proper predication and Flynn’s Russian connections were not materially relevant.
In January 2017 the FBI was preparing to shut down Crossfire Razor when FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok argued that it remain open so that he could conduct an interview with Flynn about his telephone call with Ambassador Kislyak in December 2016. This is where the Flynn case loses touch with its foundation of legality. The Flynn-Kislyak phone call was monitored by the U.S. intelligence community. Normally the identity of any U.S. citizen so monitored is “masked,” or hidden, from any consumer of the intelligence. On certain occasions, select senior officials may request that an identity be “unmasked” to allow for a greater understanding of the context of the conversation. Flynn’s identity was “unmasked” using this procedure, most likely on the orders of then-FBI Director James Comey. According to Comey, he then briefed Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, who in turn briefed President Obama.
There was bad blood between Flynn, Clapper and Obama. On November 10, 2016, when Obama met with President-elect Trump in the White House, he warned Trump not to hire Flynn as his National Security Advisor, ostensibly because of his behavior while serving as the Director of DIA; Trump ignored this advice, naming Flynn as the incoming NSA on November 18. Clapper was the man who fired Flynn at the DIA in 2014.
On January 12, David Ignatius published an article in The Washington Post which detailed Flynn’s December conversation with Kislyak; Sydney Powell, Flynn’s laywer, has filed documents with the Federal Court asserting that Ignatius had received this highly classified information in violation of the law, and furthermore that is was Clapper who cleared Ignatius to “take the kill shot on Flynn” by publishing the details of the Flynn-Kislyak conversation.
If the potential for collusion between the FBI Director (Comey), the Director of National Intelligence (Clapper) and the President of the United States (Obama) to undermine Flynn wasn’t disturbing enough, the fact that Ignatius’ article enabled the FBI to conduct an interview on January 24 with Flynn that has been described by William Barr as “a perjury trap” should seal the deal.
Flynn was subsequently fired as the NSA, charged with lying to the FBI, bankrupted in the process of trying to defend himself, and threatened with the prosecution of his son if he opted to take the matter to trial. Like many before him, Flynn pled guilty to a crime he never should have been charged with in the first place. Only the diligence of Flynn’s current legal team in forcing disclosure of exculpatory information, combined with William Barr’s efforts to expose wrongdoing by the FBI and the Intelligence Community in investigating alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, made the dismissal of Flynn’s case possible.
It doesn’t matter where one stands on the issue of Mike Flynn, the man. I for one am personally disturbed by his overly partisan approach toward national security, and the liberty he takes with facts when making an argument. I don’t believe he was the right person to serve as Trump’s National Security Advisor. Apparently neither did President Obama and his national security team. But we don’t have a vote in this matter; the National Security Advisor is President Trump’s responsibility to select. Elections have consequences.
The Obama national security team abused its power by unmasking Flynn’s identity, then leaked Flynn’s identity to the press, using this press reporting to justify the continuance of a baseless counterintelligence investigation in order to set a perjury trap intended to place Flynn in legal jeopardy. This is not how American justice is supposed to be dispensed, and the fact that Flynn had to undergo this ordeal should send a shiver down every American’s spine, because if left unchecked, there but for the grace of God go us all.
Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. He is the author of several books, including his forthcoming, Scorpion King: America’s Embrace of Nuclear Weapons From FDR to Trump (2020).


theamericanconservative--2020-05-11--Justice Alito Reminds Us How to Argue

Justice Alito Reminds Us How to Argue

Associate Justice Samuel Alito participates in the swearing-in ceremony for Defense Secreaty Mark Esper in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington , DC , on July 23 , 2019 .
( NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images ) Last month , the United States Supreme Court , in Ramos v. Louisiana , held that the Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous jury verdict to convict a defendant of committing a serious offense in state court .
The decision rectified a lingering injustice in two outlier states—Louisiana and Oregon still allowed non-unanimous juries ’ verdicts to convict defendants .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current Court ’ s composition might decide questions of constitutional interpretation .
The majority decision was held together by a vote of six to three , with four justices writing separately .
It is the kind of fractured decision that gets lawyers , academics , and court watchers frisky , ready to opine on the rigors of Justice Gorsuch ’ s history or whether Justice Kavanaugh should have required grievous and egregious error as a necessary condition to overturning precedent .
I leave it to others to do that .
I write to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Justice Alito delivered in his dissenting opinion .
We live in polarized times .
There is a deficit of trust in institutions , elites , and our fellow citizens .
One 2019 survey found that more than half of self-identified Democrats and Republicans believe the other side holds “ extreme views.
” This moment has enabled the loud , ill-informed , and disrespectful to ascend in public life .
( What else can explain an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , an Ilhan Omar , or a Steve King ? )
Public debate has degraded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those leading it .
First-order matters of honest argumentation have been replaced with name-calling and the impugning of motives .
In Ramos , Justice Alito took judicial notice : “ Too much public discourse today is sullied by ad hominem rhetoric , ” he wrote , “ that is , attempts to discredit an argument not by proving that it is unsound but by attacking the character or motives of the arguments proponents .
The majority regrettably succumbs to this trend.
” Justice Alito is referring to the logical fallacy of ad hominem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hominem is “ argument to the man.
” When one advances an argument , it ’ s supposed to be judged on the merits of its claim ; it makes no difference whether Pope Francis argues it or Vladimir Putin does .
( A claim , however , that Putin is “ a murderer and a thug , ” as the late John McCain said , is ad hominem but not an ad hominem fallacy because Putin ’ s person is the issue—and , of course , he is a murderer and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at once divisive and politically expedient because it confuses rather than clarifies questions of public import with sophist attacks on personalities .
For instance , if President Trump announced that we must reorient our policy towards containing China because of its duplicity in managing the spread of the Wuhan virus , its militarization of the South China Sea , its massive theft of intellectual properties , and its stealth infiltration of international organizations , a critic would commit a fallacious ad hominem argument by responding that this is bad policy because Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the merits of containment .
One need only sit through CNN ’ s coverage of the president ’ s daily pandemic press briefings to see some very unsubtle uses of ad hominem .
In disagreeing with the majority ’ s holding , Justice Alito rejected the Court ’ s interpretative paradigm that suggests otherwise neutral laws should be invalidated because of shameful historical origins .
“ If Louisiana and Oregon originally adopted their laws allowing non-unanimous verdicts for [ racist ] reasons , that is deplorable , ” he wrote , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the broad constitutional question before us ?
The answer is : nothing.
” Justice Alito ’ s concern is that the mischief that ad hominem has caused in our national politics will find its way to the Supreme Court on a more permanent basis : “ Some year ago the British Parliament enacted a law allowing non-unanimous verdicts .
Was Parliament under the sway of the Klan ?
…So all the talk about the Klan , etc.
, is entirely out of place.
” Instead , he counseled , the High Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and civil discourse instead of contributing to the worst current trends.
” Justice Alito ’ s succinct discourse makes the case for a return to respectful and reasoned argument , dispensing with insult , accusation , and interrogation of motives .
Republican government requires honest and even passionate disagreement but is undermined by self-righteous invective that inflames rather than informs .
In Federalist No .
55 , James Madison alluded to the civic virtues—the “ other qualities ” of self-restraint , prudence , and goodwill—that citizens needed to possess to ensure the integrity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of liberty , who give themselves up to the extravagancies of this passion , are not aware of the injury they do their own cause .
As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust , so there are other qualities in human nature which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence .
Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form .
In our political disagreements , not everyone can be expected to exercise the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we all can and should do better than the emotional tantrums of Rachel Maddow .
Craig Trainor is a criminal defense and civil rights attorney in New York City .
Follow him on Twitter @ TrainorLaw .

Last month, the United States Supreme Court, in Ramos v. Louisiana, held that the Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous jury verdict to convict a defendant of committing a serious offense in state court. The decision rectified a lingering injustice in two outlier states—Louisiana and Oregon still allowed non-unanimous juries’ verdicts to convict defendants. It also provided a window into how the current Court’s composition might decide questions of constitutional interpretation.
The majority decision was held together by a vote of six to three, with four justices writing separately. It is the kind of fractured decision that gets lawyers, academics, and court watchers frisky, ready to opine on the rigors of Justice Gorsuch’s history or whether Justice Kavanaugh should have required grievous and egregious error as a necessary condition to overturning precedent. I leave it to others to do that. I write to address the brief lesson in civic virtue that Justice Alito delivered in his dissenting opinion.
We live in polarized times. There is a deficit of trust in institutions, elites, and our fellow citizens. One 2019 survey found that more than half of self-identified Democrats and Republicans believe the other side holds “extreme views.” This moment has enabled the loud, ill-informed, and disrespectful to ascend in public life. (What else can explain an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, an Ilhan Omar, or a Steve King?) Public debate has degraded in proportion to the character deformities of those leading it. First-order matters of honest argumentation have been replaced with name-calling and the impugning of motives.
In Ramos, Justice Alito took judicial notice: “Too much public discourse today is sullied by ad hominem rhetoric,” he wrote, “that is, attempts to discredit an argument not by proving that it is unsound but by attacking the character or motives of the arguments proponents. The majority regrettably succumbs to this trend.”
Justice Alito is referring to the logical fallacy of ad hominem argument. The literal translation of ad hominem is “argument to the man.” When one advances an argument, it’s supposed to be judged on the merits of its claim; it makes no difference whether Pope Francis argues it or Vladimir Putin does. (A claim, however, that Putin is “a murderer and a thug,” as the late John McCain said, is ad hominem but not an ad hominem fallacy because Putin’s person is the issue—and, of course, he is a murderer and a thug.) The ad hominem is at once divisive and politically expedient because it confuses rather than clarifies questions of public import with sophist attacks on personalities.
For instance, if President Trump announced that we must reorient our policy towards containing China because of its duplicity in managing the spread of the Wuhan virus, its militarization of the South China Sea, its massive theft of intellectual properties, and its stealth infiltration of international organizations, a critic would commit a fallacious ad hominem argument by responding that this is bad policy because Trump is a bad person—arguing to the man rather than the merits of containment. One need only sit through CNN’s coverage of the president’s daily pandemic press briefings to see some very unsubtle uses of ad hominem.
In disagreeing with the majority’s holding, Justice Alito rejected the Court’s interpretative paradigm that suggests otherwise neutral laws should be invalidated because of shameful historical origins. “If Louisiana and Oregon originally adopted their laws allowing non-unanimous verdicts for [racist] reasons, that is deplorable,” he wrote, “but what does that have to do with the broad constitutional question before us? The answer is: nothing.”
Justice Alito’s concern is that the mischief that ad hominem has caused in our national politics will find its way to the Supreme Court on a more permanent basis: “Some year ago the British Parliament enacted a law allowing non-unanimous verdicts. Was Parliament under the sway of the Klan? …So all the talk about the Klan, etc., is entirely out of place.” Instead, he counseled, the High Court “should set an example of rational and civil discourse instead of contributing to the worst current trends.”
Justice Alito’s succinct discourse makes the case for a return to respectful and reasoned argument, dispensing with insult, accusation, and interrogation of motives. Republican government requires honest and even passionate disagreement but is undermined by self-righteous invective that inflames rather than informs. In Federalist No. 55, James Madison alluded to the civic virtues—the “other qualities” of self-restraint, prudence, and goodwill—that citizens needed to possess to ensure the integrity of American self-government:
The sincere friends of liberty, who give themselves up to the extravagancies of this passion, are not aware of the injury they do their own cause. As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust, so there are other qualities in human nature which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.
In our political disagreements, not everyone can be expected to exercise the sage wisdom of James Madison. But we all can and should do better than the emotional tantrums of Rachel Maddow.
Craig Trainor is a criminal defense and civil rights attorney in New York City. Follow him on Twitter @TrainorLaw.


theamericanconservative--2020-05-12--The Coronavirus Could Create a New Populist Backlash

The political establishment thought they could breathe a sigh of relief in 2020 .
Left-wing populists like Bernie Sanders had seen their political revolutions fail .
They had successfully marginalized progressives after Democrats united behind former vice president Joe Biden .
On the right , Donald Trump ’ s administration had been co-opted by establishment figures who have made sure it remains business as usual , except for the occasional tariff on China and reduction to illegal immigration to appease the base .
The establishment believed they had finally halted the rising tide of populism and nationalism .
Now the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As the pandemic leaves a path of death , illness , and economic collapse in its wake , Americans are re-evaluating their positions on globalization , immigration , and the economy .
They are taking a long hard look at why these supposed panaceas aren ’ t benefiting the working class .
The public has awoken to the downsides of globalization and trade , especially in the context of China .
According to Pew Research , the portion of Americans with an unfavorable view of China rose from 47 percent in 2017 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number on record .
For the first time , a majority of younger Americans also shared this opinion of the communist nation .
The poll also found that 85 percent of Americans see the trade deficit with China as either a “ very serious ” or “ somewhat serious ” concern .
A similar percentage had similar feelings on the loss of jobs to China and the growing military and technological threat they pose .
The shift is most noticeable even among conventional free traders like Senator Marco Rubio .
Back in 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mentioning the prospect of tariffs on China .
Now he has become one of the biggest China hawks in Congress .
In a recent Fox News interview , he stated that China must pay “ diplomatically , economically , and beyond ” for their role in the coronavirus .
However , Congress has yet to act in any forceful way .
Immigration is another issue where Americans have turned against the globalist consensus .
Polls by The Washington Post and USA Today have found that 65 percent and 79 percent , respectively , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration during the coronavirus outbreak .
That ’ s a position more populist and nationalist than anything that Trump has implemented .
At the same time , there ’ s been a renewed understanding of the class divide in the United States .
The economic toll of the virus and the subsequent shutdown is predominately felt by young and working-class Americans , a majority of whom say they ’ ve experienced some job upheaval .
Loopholes in the Paycheck Protection Program that were supposed to prevent small business layoffs have allowed funds to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the LA Lakers , and Shake Shack .
( Those three did later reject the money after being publicly shamed . )
As Main Street shuttered and over 30 million Americans headed for the unemployment line , America ’ s billionaires added $ 238 billion to their fortunes .
The contrasting experiences between the working class and the upper class has all the ingredients of a populist backlash .
Washington has thus far proven incapable of acting on voters ’ demands to punish China and halt immigration .
While millions of Americans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether they ’ ll be able to feed their families , Speaker Nancy Pelosi showcases her $ 25,000 freezer full of ice cream to late-night TV hosts .
The reality is that the Washington political class is more concerned with protecting its donors ’ supply of cheap labor and products than with helping everyday Americans .
The coronavirus crisis has left neoliberals on both sides of the aisle scrambling to defend the institutions that have failed Americans and the world during this crisis .
The managing director of the George W. Bush Institute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manipulating the market ” to bring American manufacturing back to its shores .
Likewise , former President Jimmy Carter attacked President Trump for defunding the World Health Organization .
Media outlets have also published stories sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party ( CCP ) .
Americans are desperate for a government that can react to the current crisis and respond to their needs .
If politicians fail , the populists of the future will look a lot more compelling to voters than Bernie Sanders—and a lot more dangerous to the current political establishment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the author of They ’ re Not Listening : How the Elites Created the National Populist Revolution .
He is a contributing editor to TAC and a host of Right Now .

The political establishment thought they could breathe a sigh of relief in 2020. Left-wing populists like Bernie Sanders had seen their political revolutions fail. They had successfully marginalized progressives after Democrats united behind former vice president Joe Biden. On the right, Donald Trump’s administration had been co-opted by establishment figures who have made sure it remains business as usual, except for the occasional tariff on China and reduction to illegal immigration to appease the base.
The establishment believed they had finally halted the rising tide of populism and nationalism. Now the coronavirus could reverse all of that.
As the pandemic leaves a path of death, illness, and economic collapse in its wake, Americans are re-evaluating their positions on globalization, immigration, and the economy. They are taking a long hard look at why these supposed panaceas aren’t benefiting the working class.
The public has awoken to the downsides of globalization and trade, especially in the context of China. According to Pew Research, the portion of Americans with an unfavorable view of China rose from 47 percent in 2017 to 66 percent in 2020, the highest number on record. For the first time, a majority of younger Americans also shared this opinion of the communist nation. The poll also found that 85 percent of Americans see the trade deficit with China as either a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” concern. A similar percentage had similar feelings on the loss of jobs to China and the growing military and technological threat they pose.
The shift is most noticeable even among conventional free traders like Senator Marco Rubio. Back in 2016, he attacked then-candidate Trump for even mentioning the prospect of tariffs on China. Now he has become one of the biggest China hawks in Congress. In a recent Fox News interview, he stated that China must pay “diplomatically, economically, and beyond” for their role in the coronavirus. However, Congress has yet to act in any forceful way.
Immigration is another issue where Americans have turned against the globalist consensus. Polls by The Washington Post and USA Today have found that 65 percent and 79 percent, respectively, want a temporary freeze on all legal immigration during the coronavirus outbreak. That’s a position more populist and nationalist than anything that Trump has implemented.
At the same time, there’s been a renewed understanding of the class divide in the United States. The economic toll of the virus and the subsequent shutdown is predominately felt by young and working-class Americans, a majority of whom say they’ve experienced some job upheaval. Loopholes in the Paycheck Protection Program that were supposed to prevent small business layoffs have allowed funds to go to billion-dollar businesses, like Harvard, the LA Lakers, and Shake Shack. (Those three did later reject the money after being publicly shamed.)
As Main Street shuttered and over 30 million Americans headed for the unemployment line, America’s billionaires added $238 billion to their fortunes.
The contrasting experiences between the working class and the upper class has all the ingredients of a populist backlash. Washington has thus far proven incapable of acting on voters’ demands to punish China and halt immigration. While millions of Americans are going to bed uncertain as to whether they’ll be able to feed their families, Speaker Nancy Pelosi showcases her $25,000 freezer full of ice cream to late-night TV hosts.
The reality is that the Washington political class is more concerned with protecting its donors’ supply of cheap labor and products than with helping everyday Americans.
The coronavirus crisis has left neoliberals on both sides of the aisle scrambling to defend the institutions that have failed Americans and the world during this crisis. The managing director of the George W. Bush Institute published an article condemning tariffs and “manipulating the market” to bring American manufacturing back to its shores. Likewise, former President Jimmy Carter attacked President Trump for defunding the World Health Organization. Media outlets have also published stories sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Americans are desperate for a government that can react to the current crisis and respond to their needs. If politicians fail, the populists of the future will look a lot more compelling to voters than Bernie Sanders—and a lot more dangerous to the current political establishment than Donald Trump.
Ryan Girdusky is the author of They’re Not Listening: How the Elites Created the National Populist Revolution. He is a contributing editor to TAC and a host of Right Now.


theamericanconservative--2020-05-12--No More Open Carrying at Political Protests

By all means , let 's protect the Second Amendment .
But let 's also not enable a situation where tensions boil over and result in violence .
A protester open carries an AR style black military type rifle during the demonstration .
( Photo by Jeremy Hogan/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images ) When gun-toting protesters descended on the state capitol in Richmond back in January ( God , it seems like a lifetime ago ) to protest Governor Ralph Northam ’ s gun control proposals , I was slow to condemn them .
I ’ m a staunch ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Second Amendment , and the rally ended up being entirely peaceful .
There was a certain logic to it : Northam wants to restrict our gun rights , so we ’ ll demonstrate our ability to exercise them responsibly .
Look !
We ’ re all standing around with AR-15s , and nobody ’ s getting hurt .
Little did I know that guns would soon become a permanent fixture at right-wing protests , whether they had anything to do with gun rights or not .
I sympathize to a degree with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lansing in recent weeks , but the sheer number of firearms frightened me .
The stories and images of armed protesters menacing Kevlar-clad Michigan legislators were nothing short of stomach-turning .
People who show up to protests with assault weapons imagine themselves to be the authentic representatives of the Spirit of ’ 76 .
They ’ re fond of quoting Benjamin Franklin ’ s advice about the foolishness of giving up “ essential Liberty , to purchase a little temporary Safety ” and Thomas Jefferson ’ s proclamation that the “ tree of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
” For them , American freedom means an unending Mexican standoff between an armed populace and an armed government , Clint Eastwood facing down Lee Van Cleef , and God help the one who blinks .
Vigilance may be the price of freedom , but armed paranoia is no basis for a stable or livable society .
If these people want to own guns , that ’ s their business , but that isn ’ t enough for them .
They need to be armed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I once worked in a gun store where every employee ( except me ) wore a full-sized pistol on his hip , but when they were off the clock , they carried concealed .
There were two reasons for this .
The first is that carrying a firearm openly for self-defense is stupid .
Experts , such as this police veteran writing for American Handgunner magazine , agree : I like carrying concealed , as opposed to open carry , for a couple of reasons .
Surprise is still one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any military leader .
It gives you time to assess the situation .
… Carrying concealed also makes you less of a target .
If a bad guy sees you armed , you ’ re the immediate threat to his success of doing whatever dastardly deed he ’ s intent on doing — and he will react accordingly .
Carrying concealed at least puts the time-line more on your terms .
The second reason is common courtesy .
Nobody looks askance at someone wearing a gun in a gun store ( well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made fun of them after they left ) , but somebody walking down the street with a gun makes everyone uneasy .
Open carry has several disadvantages and only two advantages : possibly deterring crime and intimidating the people around you .
And I don ’ t just mean gun-phobic liberal pansies .
I know my way around a gun better than a lot of civilians , and even I get nervous in the presence of an open carrier .
It ’ s not an irrational fear of guns ; it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Such people need to see fear in the eyes of others .
They then threaten and mock anyone who takes it as a threat .
When mobs carry guns on city streets while making political demands , they extend this threat exponentially .
They want everyone in a several-block radius , perhaps in the entire country , to know that they are ready to kill .
For all their talk of liberty , these armed protesters scorn the non-aggression principle that true libertarians hold sacred .
The armed Reopeners who terrorized Michigan ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Davidians or Cliven Bundy ’ s militia allies .
They don ’ t just want government to leave them alone ; they want to shape policy , and not with the ballot but with the bullet .
When I saw those American citizens using firearms to intimidate lawmakers in the halls of government , I thought of another March on Rome , the bloodless coup that brought Mussolini to power and inspired Hitler ’ s Beer Hall Putsch .
On October 24 , 1922 , Mussolini announced his intention to depose the elected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of thousands of armed Italian civilians , organized into paramilitary militias and claiming to be stalwart patriots , responded to his call .
They descended on the capital and forced King Victor Emmanuel III to hand control of government to the Fascists .
It was all perfectly constitutional , except for the fact that it was done at gunpoint .
Nonviolent protest is a noble pursuit and an important part of any functioning democracy .
A large and vocal crowd makes grievances visible and impossible to ignore .
Civil disobedience can open dialogue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the threat of violence , on the other hand , is mere thuggery .
It ’ s November 4 , 2020 .
The votes have been counted .
It doesn ’ t matter who won ; people are furious either way .
Both sides are convinced that the current system presents insurmountable barriers , whether the Electoral College or the Deep State , to their vision of what America should be .
Protests and counter-protests spring up in every major city .
The right-wingers bring their guns because that ’ s just what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maybe Antifa brings some guns as well .
Curses and threats fill the air as the cops turn out in force to keep the two sides from killing each other .
Somebody grabs at somebody ’ s sign .
A punch is thrown .
A shot rings out—a shot heard ’ round the world .
Before anyone knows what ’ s happening , pitched battles are raging in the streets with thousands of armed combatants on each side .
Government buildings become besieged fortresses , and legislators and bureaucrats are taken hostage .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ police officers , National Guard members , and federal troops try to choose between conflicting loyalties .
The America we knew is gone .
And all because some conspiracy-addled nutjob couldn ’ t control his trigger finger .
I support every American ’ s right , including my own , to protest any infringements on their freedom .
What I don ’ t support is the right of an armed minority to rob me of my security , destabilize my country , and draft me into a war of all against all .

When gun-toting protesters descended on the state capitol in Richmond back in January (God, it seems like a lifetime ago) to protest Governor Ralph Northam’s gun control proposals, I was slow to condemn them. I’m a staunch (though not fanatical) supporter of the Second Amendment, and the rally ended up being entirely peaceful.
There was a certain logic to it: Northam wants to restrict our gun rights, so we’ll demonstrate our ability to exercise them responsibly. Look! We’re all standing around with AR-15s, and nobody’s getting hurt.
Little did I know that guns would soon become a permanent fixture at right-wing protests, whether they had anything to do with gun rights or not. I sympathize to a degree with the Reopeners who have rallied in Harrisburg and Lansing in recent weeks, but the sheer number of firearms frightened me. The stories and images of armed protesters menacing Kevlar-clad Michigan legislators were nothing short of stomach-turning.
People who show up to protests with assault weapons imagine themselves to be the authentic representatives of the Spirit of ’76. They’re fond of quoting Benjamin Franklin’s advice about the foolishness of giving up “essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety” and Thomas Jefferson’s proclamation that the “tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” For them, American freedom means an unending Mexican standoff between an armed populace and an armed government, Clint Eastwood facing down Lee Van Cleef, and God help the one who blinks. Vigilance may be the price of freedom, but armed paranoia is no basis for a stable or livable society.
If these people want to own guns, that’s their business, but that isn’t enough for them. They need to be armed and let everyone around them know it. I once worked in a gun store where every employee (except me) wore a full-sized pistol on his hip, but when they were off the clock, they carried concealed. There were two reasons for this.
The first is that carrying a firearm openly for self-defense is stupid. Experts, such as this police veteran writing for American Handgunner magazine, agree:
I like carrying concealed, as opposed to open carry, for a couple of reasons. Surprise is still one of the best tactics out there. Just ask any military leader. It gives you time to assess the situation. … Carrying concealed also makes you less of a target. If a bad guy sees you armed, you’re the immediate threat to his success of doing whatever dastardly deed he’s intent on doing — and he will react accordingly. Carrying concealed at least puts the time-line more on your terms.
The second reason is common courtesy. Nobody looks askance at someone wearing a gun in a gun store (well, a few people did, and we made fun of them after they left), but somebody walking down the street with a gun makes everyone uneasy. Open carry has several disadvantages and only two advantages: possibly deterring crime and intimidating the people around you. And I don’t just mean gun-phobic liberal pansies. I know my way around a gun better than a lot of civilians, and even I get nervous in the presence of an open carrier. It’s not an irrational fear of guns; it’s a very rational fear of people. Such people need to see fear in the eyes of others. They then threaten and mock anyone who takes it as a threat. When mobs carry guns on city streets while making political demands, they extend this threat exponentially. They want everyone in a several-block radius, perhaps in the entire country, to know that they are ready to kill. For all their talk of liberty, these armed protesters scorn the non-aggression principle that true libertarians hold sacred.
The armed Reopeners who terrorized Michigan’s state legislators aren’t Branch Davidians or Cliven Bundy’s militia allies. They don’t just want government to leave them alone; they want to shape policy, and not with the ballot but with the bullet.
When I saw those American citizens using firearms to intimidate lawmakers in the halls of government, I thought of another March on Rome, the bloodless coup that brought Mussolini to power and inspired Hitler’s Beer Hall Putsch.
On October 24, 1922, Mussolini announced his intention to depose the elected government and “rule Italy.” Tens of thousands of armed Italian civilians, organized into paramilitary militias and claiming to be stalwart patriots, responded to his call. They descended on the capital and forced King Victor Emmanuel III to hand control of government to the Fascists. It was all perfectly constitutional, except for the fact that it was done at gunpoint.
Nonviolent protest is a noble pursuit and an important part of any functioning democracy. A large and vocal crowd makes grievances visible and impossible to ignore. Civil disobedience can open dialogue and sway the conscience. Protest with the threat of violence, on the other hand, is mere thuggery.
Imagine a scenario:
It’s November 4, 2020. The votes have been counted. It doesn’t matter who won; people are furious either way. Both sides are convinced that the current system presents insurmountable barriers, whether the Electoral College or the Deep State, to their vision of what America should be. Protests and counter-protests spring up in every major city. The right-wingers bring their guns because that’s just what one does at a protest now. Maybe Antifa brings some guns as well. Curses and threats fill the air as the cops turn out in force to keep the two sides from killing each other. Somebody grabs at somebody’s sign. A punch is thrown. A shot rings out—a shot heard ’round the world.
Before anyone knows what’s happening, pitched battles are raging in the streets with thousands of armed combatants on each side. Government buildings become besieged fortresses, and legislators and bureaucrats are taken hostage. Politicians and pundits take sides, while police officers, National Guard members, and federal troops try to choose between conflicting loyalties. The America we knew is gone. And all because some conspiracy-addled nutjob couldn’t control his trigger finger.
I support every American’s right, including my own, to protest any infringements on their freedom. What I don’t support is the right of an armed minority to rob me of my security, destabilize my country, and draft me into a war of all against all.
Grayson Quay is a freelance writer and M.A. at Georgetown University.