JustOneMinute

Punt.

Sure, blocking the 1/6 Commission will make the whole thing go away.

Oh, Brother - A Summer of Grand Jury Leaks?

It was too much to hope for a slow news summer:

Prosecutor in Trump criminal probe convenes grand jury to hear evidence, weigh potential charges

NEW YORK — Manhattan's district attorney has convened the grand jury that is expected to decide whether to indict former president Donald Trump, other executives at his company or the business itself, should prosecutors present the panel with criminal charges, according to two people familiar with the development.

The panel was convened recently and will sit three days a week for six months. It is likely to hear several matters — not just the Trump case ­— during its term, which is longer than a traditional New York state grand-jury assignment, these people said. Like others, they spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. Generally, special grand juries such as this are convened to participate in long-term matters rather than to hear evidence of crimes charged routinely.

The move indicates that District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr.’s investigation of the former president and his business has reached an advanced stage after more than two years. It suggests, too, that Vance thinks he has found evidence of a crime — if not by Trump, by someone potentially close to him or by his company.

Team Trump surely engaged in all sorts of complicated transactions. Normally, one hires lawyers and accountants to advise and opine on these activities. At best, the transactions stay within the letter of the law; at worst, Team Trump can argue "No criminal intent" - they can say they hired lawyers to help them comply with the law, not break it.

Well. The process is the punishment, and they won't have legal opinions for everything.

Sunday Morning

Are you ready for some b-ball?

I've dusted off my legacy Dr J stuff and am all-Sixers. Trust The Process! And Big Ben.

Friday Afternoon

Probably something happening. I'm afraid to find out.

Standup Joe Biden

Biden did not bring his "A" material to the Coast Guard Academy commencement (or maybe he did.) When he didn't get the laughs he was looking for he decided to heckle the crowd:

“I can only assume that you will enjoy educating your family about how the Coast Guard is quote, ‘the hard nucleus around [which] the Navy forms in times of war,'” Biden said, to crickets, at the outdoor event in New London, Conn.

Biden then jeered his crowd: “You are a — you are a really dull class. I mean, come on, man, is the sun getting to you? I would think you would have an opportunity when I say that about the Navy to clap.”

Yes, he did mangle the Coast Guard quote by dropping the "which". Both Reagan and Cheney got it right, but Biden is in a different league.

As to his performance skills, Biden is improving! In 2016 when a joke fell flat Biden called the soldiers both "a dull bunch" and "stupid bastards". He's mellowing with age!

 

Another One Boards The Bus

Donald McNeil, also a former NY Times science writer, grumpily acknowledges that the Wuhan lab leak theory has legs. Its an extended essay illustrating a tough lesson for libs: some things can be true even though Trump said they are.

He defends Fauci in the Fauci/ Rand disputer about whether we funded "gain of function" research with the Wuhan Institute of Virology:

Also, Dr. Shi was trained by Ralph S. Baric of the University of North Carolina in building “chimera” viruses — taking, for example, the spike protein from a new virus and splicing it to the backbone of a known one like SARS. He invented “no-see-um” techniques that left no trace of the splice.

(Interestingly, Dr. Baric is one of the signers of the letter to Science demanding a more thorough investigation of all Wuhan labs.)

Then, to see if the new chimeras could infect people, they were tested against human airway cells and “humanized” mice — mice bred to have human ACE-2 receptors on their organs.

There is debate over whether this is truly “gain of function” research. Some argue that gain of function strictly involves taking a virus already known to endanger humans and trying to make it more lethal or more transmissible.

So Dr. Fauci was answering truthfully in his bitter exchange with Senator Rand Paul on May 11.

But many other scientists feel this is a distinction without a difference. They feel that building any new virus from suspect parts and then seeing if it infects humans is just as risky.

His "some argue" argument - its not a gain of function experiment unless you know in advance a dangerous pathogen will gain function - is at best off-brand hair-splitting for Fauci. I am not at all convinced his framing squares with the US definition at a link he provided:

New USG funding will not be released for gain-of-function research projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route. The research funding pause would not apply to characterization or testing of naturally occurring influenza, MERS, and SARS viruses, unless the tests are reasonably anticipated to increase transmissibility and/or pathogenicity.

The chimera experiments described in the 2015 and 2017 papers took place (I've read elsewhere) just before the 2014 pause or after the 2017 re-boot. As to "some argue" they are not gain of function experiments, well, other experts (Ebright, Esvelt) argue the opposite and say they are "gain of function" experiments.

As to what the researchers "reasonably anticipated" when they spliced specific combinations together, I find it hard to believe they weren't testing their concern that certain re-combinations could be dangerous. Identifying prospective danger is the point of these gain of function experiments, yes? Surely they didn't let a genomic randomizer just kick out possible combos which happened to include, for example, the human-endangering ACE attack point?

Well - the notion that the lab leak theory needs to be carefully examined is clearly the emerging CW.

I'll Take "Keep Bringin' The Cray-Cray" For $200

The Captain provides commentary as Ben Smith of the NY Times blasts some lib lunacy. Its a bipartisan dash for the tinfoil.

Saturday Morning

Here we go again.

Flooding The Zone

Israel's 'Iron Dome' has always been vulnerable to a high-volume attack. This has become a problem.

BIG IF TRUE: This reads like an IDF press release but still... 

The gist: The IDF positioned troops for a ground assault, then tweeted the assault had begun. The plan was to prompt Hamas to put their troops into their defensive tunnels and bunkers, and then bomb them. Still assessing whether it worked.

Its PolitiFact vs. PolitiFact and Dr. Fauci vs. Reality

Dr. Fauci and Sen. Rand Paul had a contentious exchange at a Senate hearing yesterday. The gist - Sen. Paul said the NIH funded 'gain of function' research (say what!) at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and Dr. Fauci emphatically denied it.

PolitiFact then ran a non-fact check interview with Dr. Fauci in which he denied it again.

But - awkward moment - in a Feb 2021 Fact Check, PolitiFact noted as an aside that, per MIT biologist Kevin Esvelt, the NIH had funded gain of function research at the WIV. In that article they exonerated Dr. Fauci of a broader claim, that he had funded research that directly led to the COVID-19 virus.

The Team Fauci spinners will be earning their paychecks today. Let's dive in.

First, Dr. Fauci's denial to PolitiFact:

Fauci told Paul at the hearing that the senator was "entirely and completely incorrect" as the NIH has never funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab.

Fauci reiterated his stance Tuesday afternoon during a conversation with PolitiFact’s Katie Sanders as part of the United Facts of America: A Festival of Fact-Checking.

"That’s actually preposterous," Fauci said. "It was just unfortunate that he said that. It was said in an accusatory way that just made no sense and was not based on any fact at all."

Now, watch Dr. Fauci try to shift the goalposts:

"In a very minor collaboration, as part of a subcontract of a grant, we had a collaboration with some Chinese scientists," Fauci said. "He conflated that … therefore we were involved in creating the virus, which is the most ridiculous, majestic leap I’ve ever heard of."

Well, no. Unlike the February dust-up, Sen. Paul wasn't accusing Dr. Fauci of funding development of the COVID-19 virus. Axios has a good excerpt:

• PAUL: "For years, Dr. Ralph Baric, a virologist in the U.S., has been collaborating with Dr. Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Virology Institute, sharing his discoveries about how to create superviruses. This gain-of-function research has been funded by the NIH. ... Dr. Fauci, do you still support funding of the NIH lab in Wuhan?"
• FAUCI: "With all due respect, you are entirely and completely incorrect. The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology."

Here is the PolitiFact piece from February which explained that yes, the NIH funded gain of function research at the WIV but no, there is no proof they funded COVID-19 research or that COVID-19 emerged from a lab. Different issues:

MIT biologist Kevin Esvelt reviewed a paper that appears to have been published with financial assistance from the grant. According to Esvelt, certain techniques that the researchers used seemed to meet the definition of gain-of-function research. But he told PolitiFact that "the work reported in this specific paper definitely did NOT lead to the creation of SARS-CoV-2" because the genetic sequences of the virus studied in the paper differ from that of the new coronavirus. 

...

Both the NIH and EcoHealth Alliance have denied that a grant to the Wuhan lab funded gain-of-function research, though a scientist told us that one paper published with assistance from the grant seems to describe techniques similar to gain-of-function. 

Well, then. The NIH denied it so we're all good?

Here is the paper in question, which acknowledges funding from the NIH. The bit on recombining genes and testing the lab creations for infectivity is excerpted below.

Does Team Fauci wants to insist this is not gain of function research? Given the partisan divide emerging on this, maybe hair-splitting will suffice. But I am pretty sure the no-GMO crowd, many of which live on the left, would consider this sort of gene manipulation to be of great concern.

And do note: Nicholas Wade, formerly of the NY Times, Science and Nature points an accusing finger at Dr. Fauci and the NIH funding process. As does Nicholson Baker in NY Magazine.

ERRATA:

C-SPAN has tape and transcript of the Paul/ Fauci exchange. A snippet:

 

Nicholas Wade on Dr. Fauci and the NIH / NiAID:

 

Enough for now.

UPDATE: This Newsweek fact check explains a 2015 paper with Dr. Ralph Baric of UNC - says the gain of function work was done in North Carolina. Seems overly legalistic and ignores the 2017 paper.

Origin Stories

Nicholas Wade, formerly of Nature, Science and the NY Times, takes a long look at the origin stories for the COVID virus. Lots of interesting science points to a lab leak rather than a direct jump from nature. 

One of many intriguing factoids - whatever folks may have thought a year ago, its weird that evidence supporting natural origin has not yet been found:

Doubts about natural emergence

Natural emergence was the media’s preferred theory until around February 2021 and the visit by a World Health Organization commission to China. The commission’s composition and access were heavily controlled by the Chinese authorities. Its members, who included the ubiquitous Dr. Daszak, kept asserting before, during and after their visit that lab escape was extremely unlikely. But this was not quite the propaganda victory the Chinese authorities may have been hoping for. What became clear was that the Chinese had no evidence to offer the commission in support of the natural emergence theory.

This was surprising because both the SARS1 and MERS viruses had left copious traces in the environment. The intermediary host species of SARS1 was identified within four months of the epidemic’s outbreak, and the host of MERS within nine months. Yet some 15 months after the SARS2 pandemic began, and a presumably intensive search, Chinese researchers had failed to find either the original bat population, or the intermediate species to which SARS2 might have jumped, or any serological evidence that any Chinese population, including that of Wuhan, had ever been exposed to the virus prior to December 2019. Natural emergence remained a conjecture which, however plausible to begin with, had gained not a shred of supporting evidence in over a year.

Mr. Wade also notes (as did Nicholson Baker of New York Magazine) that the global community of virologists has a stake in continued funding and research grants. A lowering of the Cone of Silence may have guided their pooh-poohing of the lab leak notion. Dr. Fauci gets dragged as well, since the NIH helped fund coronavirus research at the Wuhan lab in question.

4. The US Role in Funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology

From June 2014 to May 2019 Dr. Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance had a grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health, to do gain-of-function research with coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Whether or not SARS2 is the product of that research, it seems a questionable policy to farm out high-risk research to unsafe foreign labs using minimal safety precautions. And if the SARS2 virus did indeed escape from the Wuhan institute, then the NIH will find itself in the terrible position of having funded a disastrous experiment that led to death of more than 3 million worldwide, including more than half a million of its own citizens.

The responsibility of the NIAID and NIH is even more acute because for the first three years of the grant to EcoHealth Alliance there was a moratorium on funding gain-of-function research. Why didn’t the two agencies therefore halt the Federal funding as apparently required to do so by law? Because someone wrote a loophole into the moratorium.

The moratorium specifically barred funding any gain-of-function research that increased the pathogenicity of the flu, MERS or SARS viruses. But then a footnote on p.2 of the moratorium document states that “An exception from the research pause may be obtained if the head of the USG funding agency determines that the research is urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security.”

This seems to mean that either the director of the NIAID, Dr. Anthony Fauci, or the director of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, or maybe both, would have invoked the footnote in order to keep the money flowing to Dr. Shi’s gain-of-function research.

Troubling. We know the Chinese government would desperately want to cover up a lab leak. But the global virology community AND the esteemed Dr. Fauci of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases? Let's put it this way - instead of asking who benefits from a cover-up of the COVID origin, it might save time to ask "Who doesn't?".

Happy Mother's Day!

Happy Mother's Day!

OK, Back To Zoom Calls Everyone

The Biden Recovery hits a wall. Clearly the gloomy jobs report is due to fear of out-of-control Federal spending. Unless its due to a failure by Biden to propose free child care, pick up the tab on student debt, push for DC statehood, pack the Supreme Court and pound the table for the Green New Deal.

Or maybe this sort of recovery takes time? Nahh... crazy talk.

Go long candles. And start brushing up on your cave art.

Lock 'Em Up

Facebook continues its suspension of Trump. Trump has as much media access as anyone in the world, so I just can't get exercised about a 'free speech' issue here.

Banning lunatic fringe anti-vax groups gets closer to a danger zone. I generally think the anti-vaxxers are doing the public a disservice, but plenty of libs (and Facebook employees) would say the same about gun rights enthusiasts.

Now, if Facebook wants to ban their own highly lucrative practice of selling micro-targeted ads, we'd be getting somewhere. With their micro-targeting, good speech can't counter bad speech because (unlike radio, TV or print) most of those ads never hit the mainstream radar. Can't rebut what you haven't heard!

But yes, pigs will fly to the board meeting where FB changes their ad policies.

MORE: Trump has launched "From The Desk of Donald J. Trump". His latest missive suggests he has not yet Moved On:

Have You Herd?

'Herd immunity' for COVID probably won't happen, per the NY Times. Variants plus vaccine hesitancy mean we'll have COVID as background noise for a while:

Now, more than half of adults in the United States have been inoculated with at least one dose of a vaccine. But daily vaccination rates are slipping, and there is widespread consensus among scientists and public health experts that the herd immunity threshold is not attainable — at least not in the foreseeable future, and perhaps not ever.

Instead, they are coming to the conclusion that rather than making a long-promised exit, the virus will most likely become a manageable threat that will continue to circulate in the United States for years to come, still causing hospitalizations and deaths but in much smaller numbers.

How much smaller is uncertain and depends in part on how much of the nation, and the world, becomes vaccinated and how the coronavirus evolves. It is already clear, however, that the virus is changing too quickly, new variants are spreading too easily and vaccination is proceeding too slowly for herd immunity to be within reach anytime soon.

FWIW, its not just us. Circulating disease anywhere creates opportunities for new variants, and the developing world won't have a chance to get vaccinated (or not) for quite a while now.

Groan. Annual booster shots, like with the flu. Experts will study emerging variants and guess at the appropriate booster for the next season. I'll guess COVID season will overlap with flu season, since more of us are indoors breathing each others deadly air. 

And do keep in mind:

Herd immunity is often described as a national target. But that is a hazy concept in a country this large.

“Disease transmission is local,” Dr. Lipsitch noted.

“If the coverage is 95 percent in the United States as a whole, but 70 percent in some small town, the virus doesn’t care,” he explained. “It will make its way around the small town.”

Or vice versa. The Times presents a cool but sort of unreadable graphic showing poll results about vaccine hesitancy across the US. Northeasterners have a good shot at wanting a shot. Down South, less so.

Squint and see!

 

Saturday Afternoon

Away we go.

Energy Weapons Used Near White House?!?

This is the biggest story ever to be totally overlooked. From CNN:

Washington (CNN)Federal agencies are investigating at least two possible incidents on US soil, including one near the White House in November of last year, that appear similar to mysterious, invisible attacks that have led to debilitating symptoms for dozens of US personnel abroad.

Multiple sources familiar with the matter tell CNN that while the Pentagon and other agencies probing the matter have reached no clear conclusions on what happened, the fact that such an attack might have taken place so close to the White House is particularly alarming.

Defense officials briefed lawmakers on the Senate and House Armed Services Committees on the matter earlier this month, including on the incident near the White House. That incident, which occurred near the Ellipse, the large oval lawn on the south side of the White House, sickened one National Security Council official, according to multiple current and former US officials and sources familiar with the matter.

In a separate 2019 episode, a White House official reported a similar attack while walking her dog in a Virginia suburb just outside Washington, GQ reported last year.

 

Those sickened reported similar symptoms to CIA and State Department personnel impacted overseas, and officials quickly began to investigate the incident as a possible "Havana syndrome" attack. That name refers to unexplained symptoms that US personnel in Cuba began experiencing in late 2016 -- a varying set of complaints that includes ear popping, vertigo, pounding headaches and nausea, sometimes accompanied by an unidentified "piercing directional noise."

 

Apparently lawmakers have been briefed bit not Joe Biden. From Jim Geraghty:

 

Q    Mr. President, what do you know about this supposed direct energy attack on the Ellipse and the person who was injured?

THE PRESIDENT:  I don’t know anything about it.

Q    So you have not been briefed on it?

THE PRESIDENT:  I have not been briefed on it.

Like Obama, Biden gets the bad news by watching the news.

Now To Be Fair, I am mildly sympathetic to the decision to not brief the President. That would be a heck of a brief:

"Mr. President, we aren't sure what, if anything happened. We don't know who did it and we don't have any decisions to be made about how to respond. We've been investigating seemingly similar incidents for years and don't have many answers."

This is not actionable intel at this point and the intelligence services probably don't need to hear Biden rant at them to get to the bottom of this. On the other hand, the media went wild over the idea that Trump was giving a pass to Russians paying bounties for dead American soldiers in Afghanistan. Yes, Trump said it was Fake News and it remains unconfirmed, but still - we expect a but more energy from our Media Lapdogs Watchdogs.

Oh, Yeah, A Speech

Last night Joe Biden gave his big speech on his vision for this and that. Per CDC guidelines I maintained proper social distancing by watching the Yankees trounce the Orioles. WaPo coverage here. When its big news that both the VP and the House Speaker are women, well, we have known that for months.

I am more intrigued by this WSJ story describing bipartisan opposition to Biden's proposed capital gains tax hikes. Menendez, Manchin and Mark Warner and others are fretting out loud. I'd guess those rates go up, but by how much?

Gun Up!

After years of ducking Second Amendment cases the Supreme Court takes up a New York case about concealed carry permitting.

We all know what side they're on, but the NY Times provides useful coverage:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court said on Monday that it would review a New York law that imposes strict limits on carrying guns outside the home, setting the stage for its first major Second Amendment case in more than a decade.

...

The Supreme Court has turned down countless Second Amendment appeals since it established an individual right to keep guns in the home for self-defense in 2008 in District of Columbia v. Heller.

Since then, lower courts have generally sustained gun control laws. But they are divided on the fundamental and open question posed by the new case: whether states can stop law-abiding citizens from carrying guns outside their homes for self-defense unless they can satisfy the authorities that they have a good reason for doing so.

...

The new case is a challenge to a New York law that requires people seeking a license to carry a gun outside their homes to show a “proper cause.” Two men denied licenses, along with the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, sued, saying “the state makes it virtually impossible for the ordinary law-abiding citizen to obtain a license.”

California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island have similar laws, according to gun rights groups.

Showing "Proper cause" for a permit is required in the NY State law (NY Penal Law 400). But what does it mean? Ahh!  Various NY courts have concluded that it means the applicant must demonstrate (Klenosky v. N.Y. City Police Dep’t)

'a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.’ 

So "Its a dangerous world out there and I want to be ready for it" is not acceptable - its a dangerous world for all of us!

[Stray aside - as my years advance I'm wondering if I could go with a Tired Old Man permit application - the 'general public' has to be more agile, mobile and hostile than me, amirite? I need an Equalizer!]

Well. The 2008 Heller decision established a right (at the Federal level) to have a gun in the home as a means of self-defense, subject to reasonable regulation. That was expanded to a state-level right by the 2010 McDonald v. City of Chicago, and here we have sat for a decade.

The Times recaps some relevant cases. Some restrictive laws similar to NY have been upheld, most recently in Hawaii (last year the SC ducked a New Jersey case similar to this one.)

On the other hand, a restrictive Illinois law was struck down at the appeals level in 2012 Moore v. Madigan. Judge Posner wrote the decision and it is a likely roadmap for the current Supreme Court. Another case to consider as a possible roadmap is the 2017 Wrenn v. District of Columbia, which struck down restrictive concealed permitting there.

OK, lots of homework! My current guess is that everyone will hate the court's decision, whatever it is. I'll guess NY State will howl because the result will be a requirement of a more permissive process; gun enthusiasts will howl that the result does not go far enough.

Here is an exceprt from Posner, and I'll say it first - "Indians?!?". C'mon, man - 'Native Americans'!

We should be able to find plenty of thoughtful, sober evaluations of the Illinois experience post-Posner. No reason to think any of the research is politicized!

And do let me add: The Heller and McDonald decisions were a big deal establishing an individual right to bear arms but asking states to allow guns within the home didn't change much in most states (I'll guess a few cities were rocked.) Obliging states to lighten up on concealed carry laws is a MUCH bigger deal. The Court has a bit of a political and legitimacy crisis, so we'll see how Roberts navigates that.

On To The Next Crisis

Derek Chauvin was convicted so the left is moving on to the next crisis. What kind of country are we living in if a mere child of sixteen can't chase girls around with a knife and try to stab them?

Body cam footage starts at 6:35. Slo-mo replay around 8:30.

Getting Ready For The Weekend

Away we go again.

This Gun Control Op-Ed In The Times Was Widely Ignored. Too Bad.

A week ago the NY Times gave space to Dan Gross, who "was the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence from 2012 to 2017 and is a co-founder of the Center for Gun Rights and Responsibility".

He delivered a truth bomb to the Times readership about the irrelevance of an assault weapons ban and made good points on other topics.

No one cared.

I Helped Lead the Gun Control Movement. It’s Asking the Wrong Questions.

A campaign galvanized by mass shootings and assault weapons will inevitably find itself in a dead end. But there’s a way out.

He bonds with his target audience by noting that hs own brother was critically injured in a mass shooting years ago. Then:

It also breaks my heart to see gun control supporters, part of a movement I once helped to lead, repeat the mistakes that doom us all to the unacceptable status quo: tens of thousands of shooting deaths a year.

The pattern is as familiar as it is tragic: In the immediate aftermath of a mass shooting, the main demand of political leaders and gun control groups is a federal assault weapons ban. The news media, which seems to pay attention to gun laws only in the wake of mass shootings, amplifies that call, mostly taking at face value the idea that an assault weapons ban is the best way to prevent “gun violence.” Then, as headlines about the latest calamity fade, so do the hopes of federal policy change.

The problem as he sees it is that since assault weapons aren't the crux of the problem, going after then won't be much of a solution. That is a familiar argument on the right but a breakthrough insight for much of the left:

I believe that is the wrong question and illustrates the problem with the gun control debate in the United States. Though it does not grab national headlines, the daily toll of gun deaths and injuries is just as horrifying as our mass shootings, and more preventable as a matter of policy. The gun control movement should focus on the deaths and injuries that are most common, rather than be galvanized by mass shootings like the one that put my brother in a coma.

Of the nearly 40,000 deaths involving guns in 2019, well under 1 percent were caused by what the F.B.I. defines as “active shooter” incidents. In an average year, around 60 percent of deaths involving guns are suicides and upward of 30 percent are homicides that don’t meet the “active shooter” definition, like episodes of domestic and gang violence. Even unintentional shootings (about 1 percent of the total) outnumber mass shootings.

There are far more effective means to prevent these sadly routine tragedies than by focusing on assault weapons. And that means that it is both wrong and counterproductive for advocacy organizations and elected leaders to use the moments when the public is focused on gun control to push an assault weapons ban.

He reassures his audience that he personally would be fine with an AWB, then continues:

But the fact is that if one were to objectively list solutions based purely on how much they would lower the number of gun deaths in our country, an assault weapons ban would not be high on the list.

When an assault weapons ban is debated, the conversation inevitably becomes a technical and confusing one. While there is no standard definition of an “assault weapon,” much of the focus in the wake of mass shootings is on semiautomatic AR-15-style rifles. Yet most mass shootings, like most gun fatalities in this country, are committed with handguns.

No kidding.

The most meaningful way to deal with the problem, though, is not to look at how to keep certain guns from all people, but how to keep all guns from certain people — the people almost all of us agree should not have guns.

I have spent the past two years building relationships with leaders in the gun rights community, and have found that this framing leads us to common ground. And it points to five specific moves that together would have an enormous impact:

• Vigorously pursue and prosecute the small percentage of gun dealers who are knowingly contributing to the illegal gun trade (a trade that is disproportionately hurting communities of color).

• Identify opportunities to strengthen the background check system by adding prohibited purchasers that we all, including 90 percent of gun owners, agree should not have guns. For instance, federal rules governing privacy for health records could be modified to allow mental health clinicians to identify those who are a threat to themselves or others, so that they could be temporarily added to the National Instant Check System. This would have to include exemptions for private sales that may make some gun control supporters uncomfortable; but in the end, in combination with the other measures listed here, it would result in a significant improvement to public safety.

• Invest in a large-scale education and awareness campaign on the dangers of owning and carrying guns, and what can be done to mitigate those dangers. It is crucial that these efforts be led in partnership with gun rights groups and public health experts and that they remain free from any judgment about gun ownership or connection with political advocacy. There are many initiatives already, such as public education about the warning signs of mental illness and suicide, which have proved effective and could be models.

• Expand on the work of “violence interrupters” and similar programs proved to reduce gun violence in cities.

• Clearly define what it means to be a federally licensed firearm dealer, with standards that include sales volume. For years, gun control groups have talked about closing the “gun show loophole.” The real problem is not specifically gun shows but people who are regularly selling multiple guns to strangers, regardless of the venue, without being required to conduct the same background check that a federally licensed dealer must. Not only does this clearly contribute to straw-man purchasing and gun trafficking; it also puts honest dealers at a competitive disadvantage.

That laundry list does not terrify me. Points one and five seem to involve stricter enforcement of current laws.

Strengthening the background check system always sounds good (Don't just 'modify' it, "strengthen" it!). Obviously, rules and an appeal process are required; we don't want this to end up like the mysterious 'no-fly' list. I'd guess some sort of judicial oversight would be appropriate to turn a mental health professional's concerns into a court order.

A public education will be a nightmare to work out that satisfies both sides. Probably not possible, actually, given the current and ongoing fury of the culture wars.

And urban interventions, such as 'violence interrupters', should be happening anyway,as big city mayors try something other than defunding the police.

Now, do let me add: my theory as to the impetus for an assault weapons ban suggests his approach, however sensible, doesn't address the underlying psychology of the mass shooting hysteria.

He correctly notes that 60% of gun violence is suicide and 30% is somewhat predictable - abusive domestic partner or gang-adjacent lifestyle (member, customer, live in high-crime neighborhood.)

suburban moms (and dads!) have a pretty clear idea of their domestic violence risk and are in the suburbs in part to avoid urban violence. Bolt From The Blue school shootings freak them out in a way that Chicago gang violence does not. Only one is on the doorstep. Urban violence is someone else's worry and frankly, right now there aren't a lot of votes to expand stop and frisk and Incarceration Nation.

Urban gang-bangers are not shooting it out in suburban malls and schools. People are worried about the danger they might experience, not the one that they only read about as happening in a place they'll never be.

A Fateful Moment

It was Sunday afternoon at The Masters in 2016 that the earth wobbled in its space-time continuum, Jordan Spieth blew up, and a Year of Weirdness began. This may not be in order but subsequent surprises included the Leicester City Foxes (5,000-1 at the start of the season) winning the English Premier League; the LeBron's overcoming a 3-1 deficit to beat the mighty Warriors; Brexit; the Cubbies winning their first World Series in a century in extra innings of the seventh game (and after a rain delay); Trump; Tom Brady coming back from 28-3 in the Super Bowl; and the Academy Awards announcing the wrong "Best Picture" winner.

OK, some of that was kind of fun, but here's hoping Hideki Matsuyama can hold on.

We've Seen Worse

Per Gallup:

Quarterly Gap in Party Affiliation Largest Since 2012

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- In Gallup polling throughout the first quarter of 2021, an average of 49% of U.S. adults identified with the Democratic Party or said they are independents who lean toward the Democratic Party. That compares with 40% who identified as Republicans or Republican leaners. The nine-percentage-point Democratic advantage is the largest Gallup has measured since the fourth quarter of 2012. In recent years, Democratic advantages have typically been between four and six percentage points.

The gap has been wider in this millennium but this time does seem different, since the Republican Party is so clearly divided and adrift.

 

 

Oh, well. Negative partisanship is likely to bail out the Reps, unless Biden can keep his crazies under control.

The DeSantis Freight Train

FL Gov. DeSantis is neither the Second Coming nor the Anti-Christ, but he'll be depicted as both in the run up to 2024.

Trump, Ripping Off His Own Donors To Own The Libs?

I believe this unbelievable NY Times story about Trump fleecing his donors.

How Trump Steered Supporters Into Unwitting Donations

Online donors were guided into weekly recurring contributions. Demands for refunds spiked. Complaints to banks and credit card companies soared. But the money helped keep Donald Trump’s struggling campaign afloat.

The gist: website donors were met with a page that had two default options pre-checked: one box doubled the intended donation, the other made the intended donation a weekly event. Only the wary and diligent who unchecked both boxes avoided giving  lot more than intended.

Both the Biden and Trump campaigns had to refund some contributions, but...

The sheer magnitude of the money involved is staggering for politics. In the final two and a half months of 2020, the Trump campaign, the Republican National Committee and their shared accounts issued more than 530,000 refunds worth $64.3 million to online donors. All campaigns make refunds for various reasons, including to people who give more than the legal limit. But the sum the Trump operation refunded dwarfed that of Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s campaign and his equivalent Democratic committees, which made 37,000 online refunds totaling $5.6 million in that time.

Or, in pictures:

 

The Times does not explain how this got around the legal contribution limits problem. There was a buried hint (above) that they just took excessive donations now with the expectation of sorting it out later:

All campaigns make refunds for various reasons, including to people who give more than the legal limit.

There is also a suggestion that the 'Stop The Steal' fundraising was used to pay down the pre-election Ponzi scheme.

The recurring donations swelled Mr. Trump’s treasury in September and October, just as his finances were deteriorating. He was then able to use tens of millions of dollars he raised after the election, under the guise of fighting his unfounded fraud claims, to help cover the refunds he owed.

Well. Is this survivable? I haven't been right about Trump since 2016, but this seems as if it ought to be out of bounds for anybody.

What Matt Wants, Matt Gaetz?!?

Oh, great, a tawdry sex scandal. What happened to Make Scandals Great Again?

Investigators believe Joel Greenberg, the former tax collector in Seminole County, Fla., who was indicted last year on a federal sex trafficking charge and other crimes, initially met the women through websites that connect people who go on dates in exchange for gifts, fine dining, travel and allowances, according to three people with knowledge of the encounters. Mr. Greenberg introduced the women to Mr. Gaetz, who also had sex with them, the people said.

...

Mr. Gaetz denied ever paying a woman for sex.

Some of the possible charges seem like a stretch:

It is not illegal to provide adults with free hotel stays, meals and other gifts, but if prosecutors think they can prove that the payments to the women were for sex, they could accuse Mr. Gaetz of trafficking the women under “force, fraud or coercion.” For example, prosecutors have filed trafficking charges against people suspected of providing drugs in exchange for sex because feeding another person’s drug habit could be seen as a form of coercion.

So offering gifts is fine but offering cash is coercive? OK, go with that.

The joker in the deck is this:

The Justice Department inquiry is also examining whether Mr. Gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old girl and whether she received anything of material value, according to four people familiar with the investigation. The sex trafficking count against Mr. Greenberg involved the same girl, according to two people briefed on the investigation.

She's a minor, so Gaetz needs the Epstein Exception here.

I wonder what a Florida jury would make of all this. I have a suspicion that a decent portion of the Florida service economy relies on an equilibrium between fiscally appealing men and physically appealing women. Maybe I'm thinking of Vegas.

AstraZeneca Blues

This may be a death knell for the AZ vaccine, in Europe and the US anyway:

Germany suspends use of AstraZeneca’s Covid shot for the under-60s, dealing another blow to drugmaker

Germany has suspended use of the coronavirus vaccine created by AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford in the under-60s, due to renewed concerns over reports of blood clots.

The move comes after the country’s medicines regulator found 31 cases of a rare type of blood clot in a small number of people immunized with the coronavirus vaccine produced by the Anglo-Swedish drugmaker. The suspension is likely to deal yet another blow to its vaccine’s reputation.

It seems like only yesterday the Euro regulators were only allowing the AZ vaccine for the under-65 crowd, saying the data for oldsters was too sparse. But that was late January!

Well. No one will blame these bureaucrats if thousands die of COVID and this action may even prevent a few dozen deaths from a weird clotting disease. Weird the Brits aren't seeing it in there much larger vaccinated population, but do we trust them to tell the truth?

As to the US, AZ is preparing their trial data but has not yet applied for an EUA. As I understand it, the US vaccine supply situation is already in good shape between Pfizer, Moderna and J&J. We bet on a lot of horses, a lot have crossed the line, and we may not need the AZ product (which people won't take anyway.) And Novavax is lurking in the wings!

For the rest of the world, this is a blow. AZ used refrigerator storage, which made distribution easier in less developed countries.

BONUS SPECULATION: My understanding is that if the US approves an EUA for the AZ vaccine they are contractually obliged to deliver (and the US to pay for) 300MM doses. Or that may be a US option to buy, and we could decline.

I suppose we could buy them and donate them to the global organization, COVAX. Or we could quietly suggest to AZ that a US rejection of their EUA is likely, so just hold off.

Whatever Floats Your Boat

Its alive! The Ever Given effort to unblock the Suez Canal had a major breakthrough. But lots of work remains, so reports of its successful re-launch are premature.

Jump Ball!

Big basketball weekend. I've inherited Michigan from my big sister (who also bequeathed me Tom Brady, so, WINNING!).

And the Lady Huskies have the team and the player to put on a show.

Getting Ready For Sleepy Joe

Pres. Biden will have his first press conference at 1:15 ET today. If you enjoy afternoon naps, tune in and see if you doze off before Sleepy Joe does.

Late In The Process, But AstraZeneca Gets Strong Trial Results For Its Vaccine

AZ gets good results in its long-awaited US trial. However, they don't seem to be in a hurry to apply to the FDA for an Emergency Use Authorization and, given vaccine availability in the US, the FDA isn't in a hurry to approve them.

Barring major production setbacks from Moderna, Pfizer and/or Johnson & Johnson, the AZ trial seems to have been for science and show here in the US. Which is fine, since the rest of the world can use the reassurance.

HERE WE GO AGAIN: And now questions have been raised about their data.

Longing For a New Front In The Race Wars

Its very important to progressives that Asian-Americans feel themselves to be threatened by whites. Far too important an agenda item to be left to mere facts and fate.

From a different direction, Slate chatted with a properly progressive prof who was intent on explaining that any notion of Asian-American tension with Blacks is just lazy thinking. Are you remembering Korean-American shopkeeprs standing on their store rooftops during the LA riots? Or Al Sharpton leading protests against Asian-American deli owners in NYC? Don't be lazy!

And if you use that frame, you make it an Asian-Black thing, you’re focusing on the two groups and taking attention away from the larger structures of power in which they’re embedded—not just racial structures, but also capitalism. Think about the relationship between Korean merchants buying a liquor store in Compton, and their Black customers. This is about capitalism, the way it creates divisions between groups and deems certain people disposable.

Slate closes with solid advice from the professor - even if you're getting assaulted by a Black person, remember the real enemy!

But I think it’s important, when looking at violence against Asian Americans, not to lose that context. When Asian Americans understandably feel fear and anger and sorrow about these attacks on our own communities, I think we also have to ask ourselves, Are we fighting for Black lives as hard as we’re fighting for our own? It’s in moments like this that it’s really difficult to remember, because we’re afraid and upset. But to remember that we are advantaged, compared to Black people, is what it takes to be a good ally—even though it can be very hard, at times like these. But I think these are the moments when it’s the most important to do it.

That Went Well

This pre-fight weigh-in had the usual theatrics:

First U.S.-China meeting under Biden gets off to a rocky start

• • The first high-level gathering of U.S. and Chinese officials under President Joe Biden kicked off with an exchange of insults at a pre-meeting press event Thursday, according to NBC News.
  • The two-day talks are set to conclude Friday.
  • A planned four-minute photo session for the officials to address reporters ended up lasting one hour and 15 minutes due to a frothy exchange, according to NBC News

Dialing Back March Madness

For the first time in decades I had already sent in most of my tax stuff. Why bother?

IRS to Delay Tax Deadline to Mid-May After Chaotic Year

 

 

How The West Lost COVID

Solid New York Magazine overview of what went right (not much, except vaccines!) and wrong with our COVID response in the West and around the world:

How the West Lost COVID

How did so many rich countries get it so wrong? How did others get it so right?

I especially liked this passage:

In the U.S., the story of the pandemic year has been dominated by the character of the president who presided over it so ineptly, often with such indifference it seemed he was rooting for the disease. But the problem with assigning Donald Trump all, or even most of, the blame for America’s suffering is that the country’s failure isn’t unique. In fact, before the arrival of vaccines, the American experience of the coronavirus was not exceptional but typical — at least among those European nations it typically considers its peers. And as the New Year has brought a new administration, experts in fields from public health to economics have grown more comfortable acknowledging that catastrophe was much bigger and deeper than the denier-in-chief and indeed much more “normal” than Americans outraged or mourning are likely to understand.

Yes, the truth can now be told - the US was middle-of-the-pack among its obvious Euro-peers.

Live, Its Saturday Day!

Away we go.

Metaphor Alert!

Bite me. From CNN:

Biden German Shepherd has aggressive incident and is sent back to Delaware

"Aggressive behavior incident"? And what was the ABI?

Major, who was adopted by Biden in November 2018 from a Delaware animal shelter, had what one of the people described as a "biting incident" with a member of White House security. The exact condition of the victim is unknown, however, the episode was serious enough that the dogs were subsequently moved to Wilmington, Delaware, where they remain.

A biting incident? But not a 'man bites dog', I guess.

Major is a young-at-heart three year old; Champ is thirteen and apparently on a similar program to Sleepy Joe:

Major, who is 3 years old, is the younger of the two Biden dogs, and has been known to display agitated behavior on multiple occasions, including jumping, barking, and "charging" at staff and security, according to the people CNN spoke with about the dog's demeanor at the White House. The older of Biden's German Shepherds, Champ, is approximately 13 and has slowed down physically due to his advanced age.

So can Team Sleepy keep control of the aggressive, barely controlled youngsters like AOC? Sorry, Major Trouble? Who else will get savaged as they try to keep a lid on this?

Hearts must be racing at CNN.

Yet Another Cuomo Accuser

A third former Cuomo aide, Ana Liss, becomes his fourth accuser: [AND Then There Were Five, below]

ROCHESTER, N.Y.—A former aide of Gov. Andrew Cuomo said he asked her if she had a boyfriend, called her sweetheart, touched her on her lower back at a reception and once kissed her hand when she rose from her desk.

Ana Liss, now 35 years old, served as a policy and operations aide to Mr. Cuomo between 2013 and 2015. She said the actions by Mr. Cuomo were unsolicited and occurred in the first year while she sat at her desk, which was near his office in the Executive Chamber of the New York State Capitol in Albany.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Ms. Liss said she initially perceived Mr. Cuomo’s conduct as harmless flirtations. Over time, she said, she has come to see it as patronizing, and she added it diminished her from an educated professional to “just a skirt.”

“It’s not appropriate, really, in any setting,” she said.

In response to questions about Ms. Liss, Rich Azzopardi, a senior adviser to Mr. Cuomo said Saturday: “Reporters and photographers have covered the governor for 14 years watching him kiss men and women and posing for pictures. At the public open-house mansion reception, there are hundreds of people, and he poses for hundreds of pictures. That’s what people in politics do.”

PILING ON: A fifth woman sashayed forward, smiling provocatively... No, NO, NOOOO!

Former press aide Karen Hinton endured a “very long, too long, too tight, too intimate” embrace from Cuomo in a dimly lit Los Angeles hotel room in December 2000, she told the Washington Post.

The married Hinton pulled away, but “he pulls me back for another intimate embrace,” she told the paper. “I thought at that moment it could lead to a kiss, it could lead to other things, so I just pull away again, and I leave.”

At the time, Cuomo led the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

A current rep for Cuomo strongly denied Hinton’s allegation to the newspaper, claiming “this did not happen.”

 

The Cuomo Cover-Up

The Cuomo cover-up of his nursing home disaster began well before there was talk of a Federal investigation. That, as the Times notes, quashes Cuomo's "Orange Man Made Me Lie" defense.

Cuomo Aides Rewrote Nursing Home Report to Hide Higher Death Toll

The intervention was the earliest action yet known in an effort by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo that concealed how many nursing home residents died in the pandemic.

...

After the state attorney general revealed earlier this year that thousands of deaths of nursing home residents had been undercounted, Mr. Cuomo finally released the complete data, saying he had withheld it out of concern that the Trump administration might pursue a politically motivated inquiry into the state’s handling of the outbreak in nursing homes.

But Mr. Cuomo and his aides actually began concealing the numbers months earlier, as his aides were battling their own top health officials, and well before requests for data arrived from federal authorities, according to documents and interviews with six people with direct knowledge of the discussions, who requested anonymity to describe the closed-door debates.

Somewhat buried - the coverup was underway as Cuomo explored a book deal:

But the July report allowed Mr. Cuomo to treat the nursing home issue as resolved last year, paving the way for him to focus on touting New York’s success in controlling the virus.

“I am now thinking about writing a book about what we went through,” Mr. Cuomo said four days after the report’s release, his first public comments about a possible book.

By that point, he was already seeking formal approval from a state ethics agency to earn outside income from book sales, according to a person with knowledge of his planning at the time.

A cover-up for a book deal? Yeah, book 'em.

Back At It

My loving wife and I got our first round of shots yesterday. Pfizer. So far the only side effect is I won't be throwing fastballs with my left arm. Which, being right-handed, is not a big deal.

Sunday at CPAC

Trump reprised his greatest hits at CPAC.

Saturday Afternoon

Here we go again!

Meanwhile, Back At Smith College

The NY Times cover the clash of an elite college mindset about race and racism with the ordinary lives of working class Joes. And Janes.

We've only seen the setup a million times:

NORTHAMPTON, Mass. — In midsummer of 2018, Oumou Kanoute, a Black student at Smith College, recounted a distressing American tale: She was eating lunch in a dorm lounge when a janitor and a campus police officer walked over and asked her what she was doing there.

The officer, who could have been carrying a “lethal weapon,” left her near “meltdown,” Ms. Kanoute wrote on Facebook, saying that this encounter continued a yearlong pattern of harassment at Smith.

“All I did was be Black,” Ms. Kanoute wrote. “It’s outrageous that some people question my being at Smith College, and my existence overall as a woman of color.”

Folks who overcome their "Here we go again" instinct and press on to the fifth paragraph hit the plot twist:

The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN picked up the story of a young female student harassed by white workers. The American Civil Liberties Union, which took the student’s case, said she was profiled for “eating while Black.”

Less attention was paid three months later when a law firm hired by Smith College to investigate the episode found no persuasive evidence of bias. Ms. Kanoute was determined to have eaten in a deserted dorm that had been closed for the summer; the janitor had been encouraged to notify security if he saw unauthorized people there. The officer, like all campus police, was unarmed.

Smith College officials emphasized “reconciliation and healing” after the incident. In the months to come they announced a raft of anti-bias training for all staff, a revamped and more sensitive campus police force and the creation of dormitories — as demanded by Ms. Kanoute and her A.C.L.U. lawyer — set aside for Black students and other students of color.

But they did not offer any public apology or amends to the workers whose lives were gravely disrupted by the student’s accusation.

This is a tale of how race, class and power collided at the elite 145-year-old liberal arts college, where tuition, room and board top $78,000 a year and where the employees who keep the school running often come from working-class enclaves beyond the school’s elegant wrought iron gates. The story highlights the tensions between a student’s deeply felt sense of personal truth and facts that are at odds with it.

The Smith administrators seems to be facing the same problem opportunity as whomever is trying to mind the NY Times sand box newsroom.

Monday Morning

Shoveling out and pressing on!

R.I.P Rush

Rush Limbaugh has passed away, and its complicated.

I am somewhere in the space sketched by Jonah Goldberg, Peggy Noonan and David French.

I Guess You Can Mess With Texas

Power failure! Mother Nature 1,Texas 0.

Long term investment in winterization prep seems to be the problem.

Its one thing when an ice storm hits Atlanta and we all learn they have less salt and plows on hand then Buffalo.

But Texas is going to have to dial it up after this. The last Epic Fail was 2011 and there have been others.

By Eerie Coincidence, geothermal power was in the news yesterday:

Chevron and BP back renewable start-up focused on geothermal energy

When last I waxed enthusiastic on geothermal in 2009 there were earthquake issues causing PR problems.

This startup, Eavor Technologies, has an ingenious closed loop system that sidesteps all of that. Basically, they leverage drilling technigues developed by the frackers to lay pipe deep underground with flow like a radiator. Water gets heated underground, rises up the intake pipe, passes heat to a heat exchanger which powers a turbine, and, having been cooled, flows down the, well, down pipe.

David Roberts, formerly of Vox, ran an extensive overview last fall. The eye-catching stat:

The ARPA-E project AltaRock Energy estimates that “just 0.1% of the heat content of Earth could supply humanity’s total energy needs for 2 million years.” 

Clean, green baseload power potentially available anywhere. A BFD.

Also investing: The Breakthrough Energy Ventures fund backed by Gates, Bezos, and wealthy investors who can toss the odd billion at wild tech which may never pay off.

Tine will tell, and maybe not that much time. Deeper drills are hotter, and potentially cheaper than any other baseload power system. YES, including natural gas plants. We need advances in materials technology. On the other hand, this looks more do-able than nuclear fusion the other Eternal Product of Tomorrow.

I Guess You Can Mess With Texas

Power failure! Mother Nature 1,Texas 0.

Long term investment in winterization prep seems to be the problem.

Its one thing when an ice storm hits Atlanta and we all learn they have less salt and plows on hand then Buffalo.

But Texas is going to have to dial it up after this. The last Epic Fail was 2011 and there have been others.

By Eerie Coincidence, geothermal power was in the news yesterday:

Chevron and BP back renewable start-up focused on geothermal energy

When last I waxed enthusiastic on geothermal in 2009 there were earthquake issues causing PR problems.

This startup, Eavor Technologies, has an ingenious closed loop system that sidesteps all of that. Basically, they leverage drilling technigues developed by the frackers to lay pipe deep underground with flow like a radiator. Water gets heated underground, rises up the intake pipe, passes heat to a heat exchanger which powers a turbine, and, having been cooled, flows down the, well, down pipe.

David Roberts, formerly of Vox, ran an extensive overview last fall. The eye-catching stat:

The ARPA-E project AltaRock Energy estimates that “just 0.1% of the heat content of Earth could supply humanity’s total energy needs for 2 million years.” 

Clean, green baseload power potentially available anywhere. A BFD.

Also investing: The Breakthrough Energy Ventures fund backed by Gates, Bezos, and wealthy investors who can toss the odd billion at wild tech which may never pay off.

Tine will tell, and maybe not that much time. Deeper drills are hotter, and potentially cheaper than any other baseload power system. YES, including natural gas plants. We need advances in materials technology. On the other hand, this looks more do-able than nuclear fusion the other Eternal Product of Tomorrow.

Presidents Day

Will there ever be a Biden Day? A Trump Day? Doubtful. Reagan and FDR have a shot though.

Let's Put Cuomo In A Nursing Home

The Times uses the phrase "cover-up" in their web hed on the latest in the Cuomo cover-up.

 

I guess they ran out of space on the front page, however, where the story was placed below the fold:

"Cuomo Faces New Scrutiny Of Death Data"

Whatever. Their long journey back to reality may have begun. And we'll see if "Granny died and we lied because Trump" really cuts it as an excuse.