JustOneMinute

Trump Hospitalized?!?

Let's hope this is just a sensible precaution. I've read there is a Presidential Suite at Walter Reed used exclusively by, believe it or not, the POTUS.

Trump is taking a Regeneron antibody cocktail drug that is still in trials. FDA has approved compassionate use for other patients (so they company says) and now for Trump.

Their Sept 29 upbeat press release with preliminary results is here.

Eli Lilly also has an antibody cocktail which worked well, so this medical decision made lots of sense. There results are also more comprehensible, as presented here:

Eli Lilly reports this morning interim results from a placebo-controlled trial of one such compound, cloned in quantity from an antibody captured from the blood of a patient who recovered from COVID-19. In June, the company began a trial delivering either placebo or one of three doses of the antibody, called LY-CoV555, to 452 patients. These were not gravely ill people, but patients with mild or moderate symptoms who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within the past 3 days and had not been hospitalized.

Five of 302 patients who received the drug ended up being hospitalized—1.7%. But nine of the 150 placebo patients ended up in the hospital—6%—meaning there was a 72% reduced risk of being hospitalized for patients who received the antibody versus those who received a placebo. The drug produced no serious side effects, the company reports.

So - among people with mild to moderate symptoms (like Trump, so far) 94% on placebo avoid serious illness, versus 98.3% of those who got the Eli Lilly treatment. Great odds versus even better odds, in other words, although that is across a range of ages and pre-existing conditions.

Trump, Melania Test Positive For COVID

OK, the first October Surprise of October is a big one - POTUS and FLOTUS test positive for COVID. (Pence tested negative.) So, stray synapses firing here:

First, c'mon, man, it's 2020. Biden and/or Trump getting a late case of COVID was always on the menu, a point I (and many) have made before.

A typical case progression can unfold over two-three weeks. Will anyone believe the daily reports coming from the White House? The same question would apply to Joe's basement, and there's still time for a two-fer.

Does this give Trump a face-saving excuse to avoid likely defeat and withdraw in favor of Pence? That wouldn't happen today, but if Trump gets sicker, keep it in mind. And what if, against the odds, its Melania that really spirals down? Again, face saving withdrawal?

IF Trump has a serious case (as a 73 year old heavy-set guy, his outlook isn't great), how long until he (and we) know if he's recovered? "Surviving" does not equal "thriving"?

Well, lots to think about...

The Yankees Win!

I'm not playoff-ready. I can't stay up to 1 AM watching this stuff. But yea!

It's Live!

OK, the Yankees lead 7-2 and we are going to watch this debate (mostly). Can Joe Biden stay awake for ninety minutes? Can we? Let's find out!

Wait, no commercial breaks?!? 

Red Meat For The Debate Buffet

I hope I'm watching the Yankees trounce the Indians tonight rather than watching Biden and Trump trounce reality but just in case - here is some red meat for your debate buffet table. "The Weak Leading The Woke" takes a long, LOL look at Biden's long, LOL history.

My fave line so far as the author ponders the many questions about Joe Biden:

Is Biden still, you know, all there?

It is especially hard to gauge the cognitive decline of a public figure whose cognitive peak was neither recent nor lofty.

Ouch.

Trump's Taxes

I have a hard time seeing the Times story about Trump's taxes changing any minds. Jim Geraghty notes an unsurprising gap between Trump's rhetoric and behavior. More shoulder shrugging from Reason - active real estate investors get plenty of tax breaks.

Whatever. It saves the media from wondering why the FBI relied on a possible Russian agent for the FISA requests backed by the Steele dossier.

Interestingly, Mr. Danchenko co-authored a paper with Fiiona Hill, a star of the Trump Impeachment Show.

Ms. Hill went on to join President Trump’s National Security Council staff as a senior European specialist in 2017. She also testified at his House impeachment hearing. She said she believed Mr. Steele, with whom she once worked while he was a British intelligence officer, was played by Russian disinformation.

Steele, duped?

Here We Go Again

LeBron is back in the NBA Finals. Does this mean the natural order is restoring itself? About time!

Traditional ACB Open Thread

Sound the bell for Round One. One hundred, that is - we've begun a new chapter in the Judicial Neverending War, Judicial Subdivision.

What's The Rush?

We're hidin' with Biden, who tap-dances on the line between "Prudent" and "Out of touch" when asked about Breonna Taylor and the RBG Mad Dash. Whatever is taking his pollsters so long? Come on, man, someone tell Joe what he thinks!

On To Crazytown!

Portlandia is crazier than you think and the Times is getting nervous.

Protestors are taking their noise to the white neighborhoods (are there any others in Portland?). In once incident they threatened to burn down the home of a white guy flying an American flag. A Black neighbor white-knighted him, so I guess that made it safe to report.

Still, this isn't exactly Biden 2020 outreach at its best. And its not just Portland.

RBG Delivers An RPG To The Election

I am contemplating the RBG news from my window ledge. Hey, its first floor, so its really only the shrubs we need to worry about.

Ross Douthat explains why the Republicans are likely to just go for it and seat a third Trump judge. (He does not say "Effin' go for it!", but he might have!).  His gist - from a conservative's perspective the Supreme Court has had a legitimacy problem since Roe v. Wade in 1973. The Republican Establishment has had a festering legitimacy problem developing over decades of "Republican" judges drifting left, like Souter, Kennedy and Breyer. With that background, if they hesitate a few steps short of the finish line and look for some vague pre-election Democratic promises of Supreme Court "reform" , the party is over:

But that [promises of high minded reform] might be an idealist’s fancy. Suppose that Ginsburg isn’t replaced this fall, Biden is elected, and he fills her seat and then replaces at least one conservative justice as well, flipping the court back to liberal control. The Democratic incentive to reform our juristocracy would diminish or evaporate, and liberalism’s self-understanding as the party of hyper-educated mandarins would come back to the fore, making progressives enthusiastic about judicial power once again.

Meanwhile, conservatives would have all of their suspicions about establishment Republicans confirmed yet one more time, and they could add the Supreme Court to the lengthening list of elite institutions in which cultural liberalism’s power seems more consolidated every day.

The likely result would be a right-wing coalition that’s angrier and Trumpier than the G.O.P. that nominated Trump himself four years ago. So our imagined Republican senator’s reward for his high-minded vote could easily be a longer-term defeat for moderate conservatism: The judiciary would be handed over to ambitious liberals, and his own party would become more populist, paranoid and hostile to any form of compromise.

Sometimes you just have to keep throwing punches:

Of course I am speculating, but my point is to suggest the inherent unknowability of some “what’s best for the republic” outcome as our Republican senator contemplates his vote. It might be that a high-minded renunciation of power saves us from a crisis … but it might just as easily be that the only way out of the crisis is through, meaning for both sides to contest frankly for the power to change a broken system, and to look for new norms on the other side rather than propping up old ones that clearly don’t work anymore.

I'm leaning towards "fine, fight on!". And of course Trump is - he loves a brawl, never saw a scuffle he couldn't escalate, and may have reached peak popularity with the Never-Trumpers during the Kavanaugh imbroglio. If I were a Republican strategist, would I want to spend six weeks debating COVID or RBG? It's a no-brainer. Do unto others before they do unto you, amirite? And Cocaine Mitch tied the 2016 and 2018 elections to the Supreme Court, and came up a winner each time. I don't see a prospect for peace for out time.

That said, as an example of high-minded compromise, the invaluable (and clearly shaken) David French offers this suggestion.

What can be done? An increasing number of center-right legal scholars, including the American Enterprise Institute’s Adam White and George Mason Law School professor Ilya Somin are proposing a variant of an approach best summed up as “make them keep their word.” It goes something like this:

First, Trump makes his pick.

Second, the Senate applies the Schumer principle and gives the nominee a hearing. This will have the benefit of giving the American people a more-complete picture of the qualifications and philosophy of the nominee and thus the stakes of the presidential election.

Third, the Senate then applies the Graham/Rubio/Cruz rule and does not vote before the election. If Trump wins, they then vote on the nominee.

But what if Trump loses? What principle comes into play? Joe Biden’s own words provide the guide.

In the October 2019 Democratic debate, Joe Biden clearly expressed his opposition to court-packing. “I’m not prepared to go on and try to pack the court,” he said, “because we’ll live to rue that day.” He continued, “We add three justices. Next time around, we lose control, they add three justices. We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all.”

He’s right. Court-packing is dangerous. Yet if the GOP violates its principles to jam through a nominee in Trump’s last days in office, the pressure from congressional Democrats to pack the court may well be overwhelming. So Biden should make a deal with the lame-duck Senate. Keep the seat open, and he’ll pledge not to sign any legislation packing the Supreme Court while he’s in office.

A promise - pardon me, "pledge" - from Joe Biden? Frankly, I don't think for a second there is enough trust on either side to make it work, and Trump is the one guy committed to screaming matches.

We're just going to do this. And to be honest, although I feel as if I'm ODing on history right now, the "Hmm, Can This Really Burn Down?" side of me is kinda fascinated. Maybe I should try watching NASCAR for the crashes or hockey for the fights.

Kind of a BFD

Eli Lilly's new monoclonal antibody therapy for COVID seems to succeed at mitigating COVID when administered early:

A single infusion of an experimental drug markedly reduced levels of the coronavirus in newly infected patients and lowered the chances that they would need hospitalization, the drug’s maker announced on Wednesday.

...

More than 450 newly diagnosed patients received the monoclonal antibody or a placebo infusion. Some 1.7 percent of those who got the drug were hospitalized, compared with 6 percent of those who received a placebo — a 72 percent reduction in risk, Eli Lilly reported.

Well. First, 94% of untreated patients did not need hospitalization. A positive test result is hardly a death sentence, as we all know.

That said, a 1.7% chance of progressing to hospitalization is better than a 6% chance. A breakdown on how this therapy affected different age groups would be of tremendous interest to the old-timers out there, not to mention at the keyboard.

Glide Path, Interrupted

Peace and prosperity first-termers are nearly invincible with economic numbers like this. (Hardly seems Fair, amirite?) Trump's tight labor market (President's always get too much credit!) drove low-end wage increases, poverty reduction, and improved health coverage.

Well. Rear view mirror. But looking ahead, is there time for Trump to convince people that Biden's backers want to defund the police, burn the suburbs, and end all jobs? Maybe! In my humble (also fearful and reflexive) opinion, some progressives equate work with exploitation and view a tight labor market as a policy failure.

Obviously, Biden talks about creating jobs and may personally believe it, but who thinks he'll be making policy? After the Dems abolish ICE and open the borders we'll see how tight a labor market we get, and how low-skill workers fare. Good luck to them!

Plenty Of Blame To Go Around

Ross Douthat ruminates on how much blame for the COVID debacle should be shouldered by Trump.

He mentions the February testing debacle at the CDC and the slow-walking of Emergency Use Authorizations by the FDA and links to a ProPublica piece. The NY Times and the WaPo had similar coverage and a similar theme - it was careerists, not Trump, that let the process drift.

Which brings us to a "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" point - Trump was not elected on a "Trust The Bureaucrats" platform. Yet that's what he did in February. Ooops. But when he learns his mistake, shifts gears and starts pounding the table for plasma, vaccines, or hydroxychloroquine, the usual suspects gasp that he is politicizing the process rather than trusting the professionals.

Probably for space reason Ross slides past an interesting conversation:

Framed this way, the debate over Trump’s coronavirus culpability resembles other debates in the Trump era, dividing those who treat the president’s incompetence or malice or authoritarianism as an emergency that throws every other problem into shadow from those who think that the trends that gave us Trump are still the more important forces and that the president himself captures too much of our attention.

I've said since 2015 that Trump is a symptom, not a cause, of a badly divided country. The culture wars, Rust Belt job losses and immigration debate have been around for decades. However, if I'm sticking with medical metaphors I'd add that Trump is a symptom that compounds the disease - he thrives on the underlying divisions and exacerbates and exploits at every opportunity. Just for example - why in the world did we have a sitting President tweeting about NFL players kneeling during the anthem? To kinda-quote a forgotten French leader, Trump missed a good opportunity to shut up.

Well. Bush 43 ran as a "Uniter, not a Divider" and we saw how that worked. Obama talked about "there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America" and we saw how that played. The forces of division are strong - Trump wasn't going to overcome them, but he didn't have to choose to amplify them.

Also Kind Of A Big Deal

A long-time aide to Bull Durham resigns? This is no doubt Deeply Meaningful, but what does it mean?

Here is the Hartford Courant lede:

Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to U.S. Attorney John H. Durham in his Russia investigation, has quietly resigned — at least partly out of concern that the investigative team is being pressed for political reasons to produce a report before its work is done, colleagues said.

COVID delays, fear that if Trump loses any final report will be buried, and other speculation.

Kind Of A Big Deal - One

Bahrain normalizes ties with Israel. The Bahraini leadership is backed by the Saudis so this is a useful weathervane but... the Saudis are unlikely to take the plunge themselves any time soon:

Its importance is mostly because it’s an indication that the new leadership in Saudi Arabia supports normalization,” Ms. Fontenrose said. “Bahrain doesn’t make a foreign policy move without Saudi Arabia’s express permission.”

Toby Matthiesen, a research fellow at St. Antony’s College, Oxford University, said that the Saudis “could be testing the waters” for their own normalization with Israel. But, he noted, Saudi Arabia participated in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and has a long history of support to the Palestinian cause, and its autocratic leaders are sensitive to public opinion on such issues.

After Mohammed bin Salman, the powerful Saudi crown prince, appeared to make an overture toward Israel in 2018 by saying in an interview that Israelis “have the right” to a homeland, his father, King Salman, quickly countered with a rare public rebuke.

Israeli experts hold little hope of normalization with Saudi Arabia as long as King Salman retains power, saying that the country’s custody of Islamic holy sites complicates its ability to strike a deal with Israel if the Palestinians see it as a betrayal.

“I hope I’m wrong, but I cannot imagine them signing a normalization of relations with us,” General Gilead said.

Baby steps are fine. FWIW, King Salman is 84, so tick-tock.

 

 

Mother Nature Versus The West

Between COVID and wildfires, if this was a fight the ref would stop it. I'm puzzling over the residential real estate model for San Francisco: a bunch of people earning lots of money from companies that are urging them to work remotely are paying outlandish rent to live in a city that has gruesome air quality each summer and a year-round homeless challenge. Sustainable?

AstraZeneca Vaccine Trial On Pause

A participant in the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine trial has developed a dire inflammatory disease which can be a result of infection, or, er, things that mimic infection, such as vaccines.

The program is on pause pending a safety review. Obviously they are not un-vaccinating anyone, but no new patients will get jabbed. And since the protocol (in the US anyway) calls for two vaccinations 4 weeks apart, a long safety pause will disrupt that timing for those awaiting their second shot.

Derek Lowe has more.

Where It's Happening

Politico looks at eight battleground states.

COVID and the Common Cold

Per a recent study noted by Glenn, an infection by the common cold may prevent the flu by activating the interferon portion of the body's immune defenses. Although hard to test, this leads the researchers to speculate that colds may also stave off COVID.

Well. One message here - always trust wild speculation from Dr. Tom! Back in June the tireless research chemist and pharma follower Derek Lowe outlined the mechanisms by which COVID jams up our body's natural defenses.

From the article and comments a couple of ideas emerged, which I tweeted about:

1 - interferon therapy MAY mitigate a COVID infection;

2- co-infection by anything that activates the interferon system, such as colds (or the normal flu?) MAY help beat back COVID.

My punchline:

*IF* co-infection mitigates COVID the implications are notable. First, the advent of the fall cold/flu season may see a *reduction* in COVID spread/severity. *PLOT TWIST*!

Second, would it be better for the low-risk to skip the annual flu shot? And how would this be tested?

I can't imagine our public health leaders advising at-risk groups such as seniors to skip the annual flu shot (I know I'm not.) Frankly, I can't imagine them urging the young, hale and hearty to skip the regular flu shot - it MIGHT be a great idea, but it would be a heck of a roll of the dice.

As to testing the hypothesis, my only brainwave was to remark on the high levels of asymptomatic COVID cases found in some homeless shelters. Not to stereotype, but that seems like a plausible environment for co-infection with colds or other ailments.

1. WBUR: Testing Reveals 'Stunning' Asymptomatic Coronavirus Spread Among Boston's Homeless

2.  Baltimore Sun: Coronavirus spreading in homeless shelters; many cases are asymptomatic | COMMENTARY

 

 

3. CDC: Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Prevalence in Homeless Shelters — Four U.S. Cities, March 27–April 15, 2020

 

I don't know what it means but... stay sniffly, my friends.

Labor Day Weekend!

Celebrate Labor Day by relaxing!

Deficits As Far As The Eye Can See

The NY Times ponders the national debt, which is poised to surpass 100% of GDP. But even long-time deficit hawks admit that this is the srt of economic emergency that ought to be met with deficit spending (I agree!).

But why do deficits matter? Well, if Biden is elected Republicans will trot out all the familiar arguments, just as Democrats trot them out when Republicans want to cut taxes. The Times reprises the familiar "crowding out" argument (Reagan-ear flashbacks, anyone?) but ignores an interesting implication:

For decades, analysts argued that an explosion of government borrowing risked devouring a large part of the nation’s savings, leaving less cash available for private businesses to use for investment.

Those companies would then be forced to pay higher interest rates to gain access to that smaller pool of funds. And those higher borrowing costs, it was argued, would curtail investment and hurt economic growth. The process is known as “crowding out,” and there is no sign that it is happening now. Interest rates remain low and inflation is muted.

Hmm. If the goal is to expand the net saving pool by raising taxes, that can only happen if the money handed over in taxes would have otherwise been consumed, rather than saved. Economists love to contemplate the "marginal propensity to consume". The gist is, a low-earner living paycheck to paycheck spends roughly 100% of new income; a high earner applies their income to a combination of consumption (eg, stylin' vacations and fine dining) and savings. Reducing their savings to increase government "savings" does not reduce any "crowding out" effect.

And at the extreme, if 'crowding out' is the concern, our Super-Billionaires, such as Jeff Bezos, the $200 Billion Man, are Too Big To Tax! Go ahead - hit Bezos with a $100 billion tax bill. Will that make him cut down on private jets, yachts and mansions? Host fewer parties? Unless his dinner party guests routinely find a deed to a LearJet in their party favor bag, I don't think Bezos could be spending anywhere near what he rakes in.

Which means that every tax dollar he pays is a reduction in private saving, fully offsetting the increase in public 'saving'. The 'crowding out' impact is zero. So why bother?!?

That said, there may be other reasons to tax Bezos / Buffet / Gates / Zuckerberg et al. Public support for our tax system is no doubt driven in part by a perception of fairness. And the switch from private to public savings means We The People can decide to invest in bridges and roads, rather than let Bezos invest in rocket ships. How sensible the public decision-making process is relative to private actors is a different question.

BONUS QUERY: If the Democrats are ascendant in 2012, will they really want to put up a tax bill that hits high-earners such as doctors and small business owners? Post-pandemic, that might not be the place to start. And with deficit hawks in retreat, Biden might just decide to skip the scuffle over a tax bill and focus on spending. Maybe! (Now I'm having Clinton '93 flashbacks, with the Bond Vigilantes, Greenspan and Clinton's insistence on tax hikes and limited new spending. I don't see Biden re-walking that road.)

Con Air?

President Donny-from-Queens rehashes some conspiracy theories that ought to be left to call-in radio. I kind of like "Con Air":

Trump added on "The Ingraham Angle" that an RNC attendee had traveled to Washington "on a plane from a certain city, and in the plane it was almost completely loaded with thugs wearing these dark uniforms, black uniforms with gear and this and that."

The president declined to say who had told him the story, but promised Ingraham he would reveal it "sometime.

"This person was coming to the Republican National Convention and there were like seven people in the plane [with] this person, and then a lot of people were on the plane to do big damage," Trump insisted. "This is all happening."

What?!? To be fair-ish, Sen. Rand Paul made a similar claim after he was harassed by protestors in DC a few days ago:

Paul hypothesized the protesters were compensated and flown in to instigate a violent riot, but didn't offer any suggestions on who might have paid them or evidence to support his assertion. That protesters are paid to cause disruption is a common talking point among some conservative figures for which there is no substantive evidence. Such claims have been regularly challenged by fact-checkers.

"You just think, Oh, these are some normal hoodlums from a big city. I promise you that at least some of the members and the people who attacked us were not from D.C. They flew here on a plane," he said. "They've all got fresh, new clothes."

Where are they getting this stuff?

Self Defense In Portland Shooting?

Per the Times video analysis, it may be the case that the shooter was about to be maced by the victim. But who drew first?

The livestream shows the man in white walking by himself toward the Justice Center and crossing the street one block south. One minute and 43 seconds later, Mr. Dunlap turns his camera toward the sound of shouting.

What happens next occurs within six seconds.

The man in white and another man dressed in black can be seen crossing the street, apparently to confront Mr. Danielson and Mr. Pappas.

There is shouting that is hard to hear on Mr. Dunlap’s livestream, but in a second video filmed by Nathan Millsap, a Portland videographer, the audio is clearer.

A man, who Mr. Pappas later contends is the gunman, shouts: “Hey, we got some right here. We got a couple right here.”

Another man says, “He’s macing you, he’s pulling it out.”

The sound of spraying is audible, followed immediately by two gunshots.

Mr. Dunlap captures the shooting on his livestream. Mr. Danielson can be seen raising his arm and beginning to spray a pepper spray-like substance, followed almost immediately by the gunshots. The man in white backs away with his arm raised and then runs, along with the man dressed in black.

The Times links to this video for their take on the verbal exchange before the shooting. Come in at about 15 seconds. Times version seems OK to me. I would say that its unclear whether the macing was a gratuitous first step or a reasonable response to a provocation from the shooter. Was his gun visible and threatening? Jiminy. Good luck finding reliable witnesses to this.

We have a President who is hoping to ride this violence back into the White House and a challenger whose party can't or won't rein itself in. Helluva way to run a country.

Shooting It Out In The Streets

One man, a right-wing Trump supporter, fatally shot in Portland.

Please Let This Be A Slow News Day

Here we go again.

Do Let Me Add: The quote du jour comes from Marcus Aurelius by way of Andrew Sullivan:

In the current chaos, I’ve come to appreciate Marcus Aurelius’s maxim that “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” 

He makes the devastating point that a notable part of the left (possibly including Biden and Harris) have internalized the Marxist/BLM notion that the police are instruments of the rich and the white:

Remember the pivotal moment earlier this summer when the New York Times caved to its activist staff and fired James Bennet? It’s no accident this was over an op-ed that argued that if New York City would not stop the rioting in the streets, the feds should step in to restore order. For the far left activists who now control that paper, the imposition of order was seen not as an indispensable baseline for restoring democratic debate, but as a potential physical attack on black staffers. They saw restoring order within the prism of their own critical race ideology, which stipulates that the police are enforcers of white supremacy, and not enforcers of the rule of law in a liberal society. It was a sign that the establishment left were willing to tolerate disorder and chaos if they were directed toward the ideologically correct ends — which is how Democratic establishments in Minneapolis and Seattle and Portland responded. The NYT, CNN and the rest tried to ignore the inexcusable, and find increasingly pathetic ways to dismiss it. This week, their staggering bias was exposed as absurd.

Trump gets bashed as well, needless to say. But Sully acknowledges that betting on Biden to right the ship is a desperation move.

 

 

 

Joe The Plumber Has Arrived!

Biden says this election is a battle for the soul of America. Trump's response is that it is a battle for the streets of America. The NY Times goes to Wisconsin and finds Joe the Plumber 2020 in the person of John Geraghty, a 41 year old ex-Marine who is, hmm, politically detached but troubled by Democratic passivity during these protests/riots.

And after feeling “100 percent on the fence” about who he will vote for in November, he is increasingly nervous that Democratic state leaders seem unable to contain the spiraling crisis.

“It’s crazy that it’s now happening in my home city,” he said. “We have to have a serious conversation about what are we going to do about it. It doesn’t seem like the powers that be want to do much.”

...

Mr. Geraghty, a former Marine, said he was disturbed to see his town looking like “a war zone,” and he feared that the Democrats in charge were “letting people down big time.”

Politics for him had long been like a sport he did not follow. In his late 20s, he voted for Barack Obama, the first vote of his life. He did not vote in 2016, and he called the president’s handling of the coronavirus “laughable.”

But, believe it or not, Democratic "outreach" to him has fallen a bit short:

Mr. Geraghty said he disliked how Mr. Trump talked but said the Democratic Party’s vision for governing seemed limited to attacking him and calling him a racist, a charge being leveled so constantly that it was having the effect of alienating, instead of persuading, people. And the idea that Democrats alone were morally pure on race annoyed him.

“The Democratic agenda to me right now is America is systematically racist and evil and the only people who can fix it are Democrats,” he said. “That’s the vibe I get.”

Quick - get this guy to a workshop on White Privilege and White Fragility!

Mr. Geraghty said he understood peaceful protesting but felt frustrated with Democratic leaders who seem afraid of confronting crowds when things turn violent. He was angry at the statement by Gov. Tony Evers on Sunday, which in his view took sides against the police in a knee-jerk way that worsened the situation. On Tuesday, Mr. Evers, a Democrat, did condemn the looting and fires, while reiterating protesters’ rights to assemble.

“I’m not 100 percent sure of anything yet,” Mr. Geraghty said of November. “But as of now I’m really not happy about how Democrats are handling any of this.”

Fluid indeed. If I were a Republican strategist... yeah, if I were a Republican strategist, go long botox because I would need all the help in the world keeping a straight face. But I would exhort Trump et al to make a strong statement urging these militia guys to stay home and let the police handle this. If they ignore it, fine, it shows the President is not really their leader, a point his defenders often put forward. If it works, take the win and challenge Biden to show similar sway over antifa (yeah, they'll listen!).

DO FACTS EVEN MATTER? Back to the Jacob Blake shooting that started this: Per the information available, it appears that:

1. Blake's presence violated some sort of restraining order and a woman had called the police to report his presence;
2. There was an arrest warrant out for Blake based on a seemingly-similar violation in July;
3. While ignoring the police (and a Taser!?! Or did it malfunction?) Blake walked around his SUV, opened the driver-side door and reached towards the area where he had a knife.

IMHO this doesn't really justify the shooting - police sometimes reacts as if they are scared and lack imagination, and this looks like one of those times. However, ignoring lawful orders to stop and engaging in potentially threatening behavior can get people shot and police acquitted, or not even charged.

Trump Week!

It begins.

Away We Go!

Ready for the weekend.

Geez, Trump And The Media

ZOMG, the media asked Trump about QAnon so they can write scare stories about the President publicizing QAnon. Naturally Trump didn't disavow Q because he is oppositional - he has trouble denouncing Putin or David Duke or questions about Kamala Harris' eligibility for the VP slot or any other damn thing because he can't give the press the satisfaction.

Well. We'll wait for the press to ask Joe Biden about the antifa. But not with bated breath.

Can't Fight The Establishment

The final Senate report on Russian Collusion does not help Trump. With time I'd try to figure whether this is mostly serious or mostly a lifeline by Mitch to endangered swing-state Republicans.

Senate Intelligence Committee Releases Final Report From Russia Investigation

Committee made DOJ referrals about some witnesses it says may have misled Congress; Manafort was ‘grave counterintelligence threat’

By: Dustin Volz and Warren P. Strobel

WASHINGTON—Members of the 2016 Trump campaign represented a major counterintelligence risk to the U.S. due to their frequent contacts with individuals with close ties to the Russian government, a bipartisan Senate investigation has concluded, though it found no evidence of direct collusion between the campaign and Moscow.

The Senate Intelligence Committee released the fifth and final volume of its Russia investigation Tuesday. The report is nearly 1,000 pages and largely supports some of the key findings made by former special counsel Robert Mueller.

Among other findings, the committee wrote that Russia took advantage of the inexperience in government of members of President Trump’s transition team and its opposition to Obama administration policies, as well as Mr. Trump’s desire to strengthen ties with Russia, “to pursue unofficial channels through which Russia could conduct diplomacy.”

“The lack of vetting of foreign interactions by Transition officials left the Transition open to influence and manipulation by foreign intelligence services, government leaders, and co-opted business executives,” the report said.

A substantial portion of the report focuses on the connections of one-time Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort with Konstantin Kilimnik, whom the report describes as a Russian intelligence officer, and Russia-aligned oligarchs in Ukraine. Mr. Manafort’s high-level campaign access and willingness to share information with Mr. Kilimnik and others “represented a grave counterintelligence threat,” the report concluded.

Mr. Manafort was sentenced to more than seven years in prison due to tax and bank fraud as part of a prosecution that spun off from the Mueller probe. He was released from a federal prison due to coronavirus concerns. Mr. Manafort couldn’t immediately be reached for comment.

The report’s bipartisan conclusions don’t cleanly bolster President Trump’s argument that Russian interference in the election was an exaggeration or hoax, nor the belief among some Democrats that it was an orchestrated conspiracy between Mr. Trump and Russia.

Well, Manafort was fired pretty quickly.

I should find a bootleg link eventually.

Send More Marxists!

I am channeling my Inner Tom Maguire (yes, the noted Irish socialist) for this next one. The NY Times covers an intellectual scuffle between a Black Marxist professor and some young socialists. The professor would like to see Democrats and socialists display a bit more class solidarity with working class whites; the youngsters think the focus must be kept on race, race and race.

Along the way, [Prof. Reed] acquired the conviction, controversial today, that the left is too focused on race and not enough on class. Lasting victories were achieved, he believed, when working class and poor people of all races fought shoulder to shoulder for their rights.

...

The decision to silence Professor Reed came as Americans debate the role of race and racism in policing, health care, media and corporations. Often pushed aside in that discourse are those leftists and liberals who have argued there is too much focus on race and not enough on class in a deeply unequal society. Professor Reed is part of the class of historians, political scientists and intellectuals who argue that race as a construct is overstated.

Prof. Reed's political strategy:

They readily accept the brute reality of America’s racial history and of racism’s toll. They argue, however, that the problems now bedeviling America — such as wealth inequality, police brutality and mass incarceration — affect Black and brown Americans, but also large numbers of working class and poor white Americans.

The most powerful progressive movements, they say, take root in the fight for universal programs. That was true of the laws that empowered labor organizing and established mass jobs programs during the New Deal, and it’s true of the current struggles for free public college tuition, a higher minimum wage, reworked police forces and single-payer health care.

Those programs would disproportionately help Black, Latino and Native American people, who on average have less family wealth and suffer ill health at rates exceeding that of white Americans, Professor Reed and his allies argue. To fixate on race risks dividing a potentially powerful coalition and playing into the hands of conservatives.

I am not a Marxist (srsly!) but I am very sympathetic to the view expressed by Prof. Reed.

To take the NY Times as an easy example, they routinely describe as a race issue (framed as "Blacks/Hispanics hardest hit") problems that obviously have a partial explanation in economic class.

Eg, job losses as of May - The NY Times looked at if by gender, age, and race. Other outlets noted educational attainment was important too - some blue collar types had essential jobs but most college-educated professionals could work remotely.

Or, hit hard by COVID as of July. Per the Times, key factors included obvious "class" factors such as inability to work remotely, mass transit usage and crowded living quarters. Their takeaway - ethnics hardest hit.

Experts point to circumstances that have made Black and Latino people more likely than white people to be exposed to the virus: Many of them have front-line jobs that keep them from working at home; rely on public transportation; or live in cramped apartments or multigenerational homes.

Its interesting to think about why the Democrats (I'm Boldly Assuming the Times leans left) prefer this framing. My *guess* - for the same reasons working class whites have been drifting right since the Vietnam War, when union guys slugged it out with hippies. College educated whites, the other key part of the Dem coalition, see working class whites as racist, bible-thumping, gun-waving Walmart shoppers. Back in the early 70's, Archie Bunker would have been a union Democrat (later a Reagan Republican).

For a different but equally cynical take, the Democratic Party has an uneasy alliance with working class blacks. The basic arrangement is that in exchange for protection from hate-filled racist Republicans, working class blacks will support a de facto open borders policy which brings in a lot of unskilled competitors for working class jobs. One day this influx of new voters will allow the Democrats to Tax The Rich and provide a generous safety net to, hmm, anyone who can get here? Or will the Democrats decide we need to be More Like Europe (and Japan, and Australia) and adopt stricter immigration controls?

That bridge may be crossed one day. But since the socialist/Democrat agenda also includes billions for student loan relief (VERY friendly to young socialists!) and reparations for blacks (a Never Happen carrot which may dangle for years), their coalition may survive the wage-depressing effects of bringing in new workers for a while.

Well. In 2017 reliably left Peter Beinart described the Dem evolution on immigration more charitably, but admits it is an unsquared circle. His article is well worth reading. He describes the alliance of Big Business and Emerging Democratic Majority theorists at the expense of the working class, and what the Dems might realistically do about it. But they won't be realistic.

ECONOMIC THEORY: This New Republic analysis of the Earned Income Tax Credit is a progressive classic - encouraging people to work increases the labor supply, thereby decreasing wages and acting as Corporate Welfare:

But programs like the EITC are the leaky bucket we should really worry about. Because the credit is conditioned on work, it expands the supply of available labor and increases the power of employers relative to workers. The program thus drives wages down to the extent that a dollar spent on EITC only raises worker wages by around 70 cents, while employers keep the rest, according to research by economist Jesse Rothstein. (Other scholars have reached similar conclusions.) So a substantial chunk of the $60-plus billion spent on the EITC every year really is the type of “corporate welfare” that Sanders rightly decries. 

Now do immigration!

It's Happening!

I don't know what's happening but I'm sure its big!

Any Day Now!

With all the downed trees and power outages my internet is not what it once was. Or will be again! On Thursday, or my service is sub-Optimum.

Away We Go!

David Brooks will get brutalized AND ignored with this vivisection of the nearly "brain-dead" Republican Party, but I liked it.

Three Billboards Outside Sedalia, Missouri

The NY Times front-pages the story of Hanna Fizer, a young rural white woman shot by a Sheriff's deputy during a traffic stop in South Succotash MO.

The Times acknowledges that enlisting Trump Country in outrage against the police is a tough sell but its nice of them to notice that class, as well as race, may play a role in who gets shot by the police:

Ms. Fizer’s relatives said that a divide in money and class between them and authorities in Pettis County had made them feel like second-rung citizens. Ms. Fizer was not rich, and members of her family had been in and out of prison and struggled with drug addictions.

“If you’re on the outer fringes of society you’d know,” Amy Fizer said. “They pull you over. They do what they want, when they want.”

I have not yet found a study tracking the police use of deadly force with educational attainment as well as race. My strong impression is that a thirty year old white guy in a suit and tie, or business casual, will fare better during a traffic stop than a thirty year old white guy with a denim jacket and neck tattoos.

Since I am just guessing, I'll also guess that in an exhaustive statistical analysis, educational attainment and race would be significant variables. Blacks are probably over-represented in the "non-college grad" group, but over-represented by even more in the "victim of deadly force" group.

My Magic Eight Ball goes dark when asked if White HS grads are at greater or lesser risk than Black college grads. But I'll guess anyway - its still safer to be white.

More details on the traffic stop here.

Blown Away!

So electricity, cable and cell service is all disrupted in most of my town. I can get online intermittently from a secure remote location. The normal sounds of suburbia have been replaced by the roar of generators and chainsaws. First world problems!

Here Comes The Rain Again

Storm warnings! Rain AND wind!

Tammy Duckworth For VP?

Valentine's Day arrives in August as the NY Times goes mad for Sen. Duckworth.

Politically she seems to fall in the center of the Democratic Party. Her personal story of military service and sacrifice gives her natural appeal to folks further to the right. Which inspires my current Mad Hope: Biden taps Duckworth and chases centrists and disaffected Republicans. He win in a rout while progressives pout and his new administration makes a serious (and successful!) effort to work with chastened Republicans.

In that world, we still get "comprehensive" immigration reform as a cram-down. Per Kausian Logic, the amnesty and path to citizenship will be implemented quickly and flawlessly; any faux efforts at border security and workplace enforcement will be tied up in the courts and eventually abandoned. Not Good!

However, Biden ran as a centrist and remembers well the 1994 and 2010 repudiations of a newly elected Dem President. After immigration, if Republicans show some flexibiity, there is an impressive progressive wish-list that Biden might bury:

 - We won't see the filibuster eliminated (Mend It, Don't End It? How about a 55 vote cloture rule? It was 67 when I was a lad!).

 - We won't see the Supreme Court augmented with 2 new justices; consequently, we won't see the critical DC v. Heller gun rights case overturned by a 6-5 vote (after which Dems would have resumed chanting about the importance of respecting precedent as they dug in around Roe v. Wade.)

 - We won't see Washington DC and Puerto Rico granted statehood to ensure four new Democratic senators.

Look, this is not the best of all possible worlds. But the Republican Party has brought this upon itself. Peggy Noonan pounded the table on that point [link]: Trump didn't fall from the sky - his insurgency succeeded because the Republican establishment delivered two belly-flop wars and a housing collapse while mocking the rubes on immigration. Sadly, the Trump experiment has not gone well (IMHO.) So now the Republican Party has no clear message or trusted leaders. Not helpful! But she predicts reform will "bubble up" from the states, and I'll Boldly Predict the 2024 nominee will be famous as a governor, not Senator.

We'll see. This all starts with Biden committing to a centrist strategy and pulling it off. I guess Plan B is a Trump miracle. Biden pandering to and governing like a progressive, with a 2022 public revolt and Republican re-conquest of the House and/or Senate, is Plan C Ya Later.

Biden's VP Pick

Might not be Susan Rice.

Delay The Election?!?

Trump had a baffling tweet suggesting we might need to delay the election until it was safe to vote.

In a calm, measured reaction the head of the Federalist Society said a speculative tweet like this is grounds for immediate impeachment. OK, that's a bit of an over-reaction but it is revealing that a prominent conservative and beneficiary of the Trump/McConnell Judge Confirmation Assembly Line would openly rebel over, well, nothing.

Yuval Levin of National Review takes us through election law. Timing is up to Congress and some tweaks might make sense for 2020 since we will have a surge of mail-in ballots to count:

But there may well be a way for Congress to help the election go more smoothly in those later two parts of the code I just cited above. The problem mail-in voting can create, especially in jurisdictions that aren’t used to so much of it, isn’t about fraud but about delays in counting and verifying results. So what may need to be adjusted is not the date of the election but the Electoral College deadlines that follow it.

I made a case for a reform like this (with Kevin Johnson of the Election Reformers Network) earlier this month in the Washington Post. As things now stand, election day is November 3, states need to finalize their results by December 8 to avoid their being challenged in Congress, and then members of the Electoral College are to meet on December 14. Congress certifies the results on January 6, and the winner is inaugurated January 20. That means that there are 78 days between the election and the inauguration, but states have only 35 of those days to finalize their results. As we’ve seen in some primaries this year, that simply may not be enough time in some contested states.

So rather than changing the election date, Congress should act to push back—just for this year—the date by which states have to finalize results and the date on which the electors meet. Pushing those back by two or three weeks could give contested states a lot more breathing room to deal with the actual challenges involved in mail-in voting while the election, certification, and inauguration would all go on as scheduled.

 

The Year Of Weird

Change we can believe in - in an Eerie Coincidence, the first US commemorative quarter of 2020 came out in February and features - I kid you not - a bat.

 

Too weird. 

 

Biden's VP Pick

Per Politico there is no obvious pick for Biden's as VP. Instead, its the "Yes, but..." list.

Biden's VP shortlist comes up short

Plenty of the contenders are fine or even good. But all of them come with a “but” attached. “There is no one ideal home run choice,” one adviser says.

I find this insightful:

Many Democrats agree that the running mate decision is so personal that it will be made primarily by Biden himself rather than, like some policy issues, a committee of his closest advisers. That has created a parlor game for many Democrats trying to get inside the candidate’s head.

“Put yourself in the mind of Joe Biden,” said one Democratic strategist. “Who is Joe Biden? He spent his entire adult life in the United States Senate. He’s a foreign policy maven. He really takes it seriously. So when he says I need someone on Day One to take over, that specifically means they can deal with China and Russia on Day One. To me, that means it’s not going to be a mayor. And maybe not even a governor. He has a bias towards senators. But it also has to be next generation. So not Warren, who is 71. She performed significantly under expectations. That would lead you to two senators: Kamala Harris and Tammy Duckworth. Who else meets that mold? Susan Rice: ready on Day One for Russia and China.”

Finding a VP who will back Biden, not start running for the 2024 nomination immediately, will also be a problem.

From another perspective, put yourself in the shoes of Biden's longtime Inner Circle of advisers. An experienced Washington hand will be a rival power center; a charismatic unknown may help boost the ticket in a swing state but will not have the independent power of a Dick Cheney.

Can an unknown be ready from Day One? I like Congressperson Val Demings, former Orlando police chief. Key swing state, Law and Order cred. Sen. Tammy Duckworth may look more prepared to stare down the Russkies. She's a Woman of Color, although Thai not Black,so that may be a problem.

 

 

A Win For Trump!

A Federal judge denies an injunction that would have modified Federal policing in Portland:

Oregon Loses Request for Injunction Against Federal Agents in Portland

Judge says state’s attorney general presented no evidence that allegedly illegal seizures by federal agents have happened frequently during protests

By Deanna Paul and Alejandro Lazo     Updated July 24, 2020

A federal judge Friday denied a temporary injunction sought by Oregon’s top law-enforcement officer, handing the Trump administration a victory in a legal battle over its deployment of federal agents to Portland.

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum filed the lawsuit last week, asking the court to require agents to identify themselves, their agency and reasons for a stop before taking anyone from the streets without probable cause.

In a 14-page order, U.S. District Judge Michael W. Mosman ruled that the state lacked legal standing to bring the suit and had “presented no evidence that these allegedly illegal seizures are a widespread practice.”

“Despite the broad language in the complaint, Oregon has shown—at most—that this type of seizure has happened twice,” Judge Mosman wrote.

Earlier Friday, the Justice Department announced charges against 18 people in Portland for federal crimes allegedly committed during protests that have grown in size and drawn national attention during the past week.

The charges, all of which involve alleged crimes that took place at a federal courthouse, include assaulting federal officers, trespassing on and damaging federal property and arson, Billy J. Williams, U.S. attorney for the District of Oregon, said in a statement Friday.

Protesters have been out on the streets of Portland every day since shortly after the death of George Floyd, who was killed on Memorial Day while he was in the custody of Minneapolis police. Largely peaceful demonstrations sometimes ended in violence and property damage at night, prompting the White House to send federal agents to Portland on July 1 with a mission to protect federal property.

“Protests in downtown Portland have been followed by nightly criminal activity,” Mr. Williams said, adding that the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse had been a “target of vandalism during evening protests and riots, sustaining extensive damage.”

Well. Nice to see a judge take Trump's side.

Neverending Nightmare

Dr. Fauci might want to work on his bedside manner:

Fauci: COVID-19 is "almost your worst nightmare"

Oy. Can we go back to being told that one day it will just disappear, as if by magic?

His rationale:

"It's the perfect storm," Fauci says. "We often talk about outbreaks and pandemics, be they influenza or other pathogens, that have to have a few characteristics that make them particularly formidable. Well, this particular virus has that."

• For a public health official, this is "almost your worst nightmare," Fauci adds.
• He points out that SARS-CoV-2 jumps species, is a new pathogen with no known innate human immunity, and is a respiratory-borne virus that is "spectacularly efficient" at spreading from human to human and has a "substantial degree of morbidity and mortality, particularly in certain populations of people."

Plus, "the spectrum of involvement with the same pathogen is very unique," Fauci says.

• "I've never seen an infection in which you have such a broad range — of literally nothing, namely no symptoms at all, in a substantial proportion of the population; to some who get ill with minor symptoms; to some who get ill enough to be in bed for weeks and have post-viral syndromes; [to] others [who] get hospitalized, require oxygen, intensive care, ventilation and death."

The broad range of symptoms, from "none" to prolonged shortness of breath and then death, is weird. But my worst nightmare would include a bug like the Spanish flu of 1918/19, which had a special affinity for working-age people.

Not to be cold, but COVID is providing a bit of relief to Social Security and Medicare on the liability side (the absence of payroll and hence, payroll taxes, is a bit of a negative. Just a speedbump!). The Spanish flu would have buried them.

Who Is That Masked Man? (Ongoing...)

At a Tuesday press briefing Trump warned that COVID would probably get worse before it got better and that we should Mask Up!

These would have been more helpful messages in March. Or April. Or May. Or June. But welcome to the party!

Bah. Trump's polls must be dreadful and now I am fuming about this latest example of regulatory capture:

Climate Change Poses ‘Systemic Threat’ to the Economy, Big Investors Warn

Financial regulators should act to avoid economic disaster, according to a letter from pension funds and other investors representing almost $1 trillion in assets.

Oh, groan. This is classic 'death by a thousand cuts'. Generally, big companies favor ever-more regulation to choke out any smaller emerging competitors, who can't spread compliance costs over as broad a base.

In this case, the new regs are being proposed by steely-eyed investors:

WASHINGTON — Climate change threatens to create turmoil in the financial markets, and the Federal Reserve and other regulators must act to avoid an economic disaster, according to a letter sent on Tuesday by a group of large investors.

“The climate crisis poses a systemic threat to financial markets and the real economy, with significant disruptive consequences on asset valuations and our nation’s economic stability,” reads the letter, which was signed by more than three dozen pension plans, fund managers and other financial institutions that together manage almost $1 trillion in assets.

That financial threat, combined with the physical risks posed by climate change, may create “disastrous impacts the likes of which we haven’t seen before,” the letter says. It urges the Fed, the Securities and Exchange Commission and other agencies to “explicitly integrate climate change across your mandates.”

Investors worry that if regulators do not act, climate change may cause the price of some companies to fall suddenly, the effects of which may ricochet through the economy. Providing more information about that risk — for example, by requiring companies to disclose more about their greenhouse gas emissions, or which of their facilities are at risk from rising seas — could help investors make better decisions.

Oh, brother. More mandated disclosure can also help trial lawyers file more silly class-action suits. Who is pushing this again?

The letter was signed by some of the largest pension funds in the country, including the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, or CalSTRS, which manages $246 billion; the New York City Comptroller’s Office, which oversees pension funds worth $206 billion; and the New York State Comptroller’s Office, which manages the state’s $211 billion retirement fund.

Uh huh, NY and California? I don't think politics has anything ta all to do with this. Next week we can read virtually the same letter. Replace "climate change" with "social justice", change the risks to include protests, riots and consumer boycotts, et voila - we need more disclosure on what companies are doing to advance racial and gender equality.

This is baffling, if you make the mistake of thinking this is any sort of good faith proposal:

Liz Gordon, executive director of corporate governance for New York State’s fund, said that even large institutional investors with skilled researchers could not protect their holdings against climate risk. “We do a lot of engagement with companies individually,” Ms. Gordon said. “But that’s not going to solve the broader problem.”

She said the S.E.C., which regulates the stock market and requires publicly traded companies to regularly disclose information about a range of perils they face, should also require those companies to better disclose the financial risks they confront from climate change.

Not going to solve what problem? It reads as if the huge NY State fund can chat with companies all day to get the info they want. I am highly confident that if a large lender - eg, JP Morgan Chase - is curious about these risks the company will be forthcoming.

This is just yet another way to push the climate change agenda without the tedium of new laws that can't be passed. The Times is kind enough to explain this:

“Every medium and large business has bank loans and has insurance,” said Steven Rothstein, managing director of the Ceres Accelerator for Sustainable Capital Markets, a group that works with investors and which organized the letter.

The letter calls on regulators to adopt the steps Ceres outlined last month in a report that makes 51 recommendations to eight federal agencies. At its core are two demands: that the agencies treat climate change as a systemic risk, and that the S.E.C. ensures mandatory and consistent disclosure of climate threats facing companies.

According to Ceres, regulators can adopt each of its recommendations without new legislation from Congress. Still, during the Trump administration, even agencies that are meant to have a degree of independence from the White House have been reluctant to address climate change. President Trump has called global warming a hoax, and he has reversed nearly 70 environmental rules, with another 30 in progress.

Nevertheless, Ceres’s recommendations offer a blueprint for how a Democratic administration might begin to tackle climate change, should former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. win the presidency in November. Last month, Democrats on the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis released a report that echoed some of the recommendations from Ceres, particularly ones regarding the disclosure of financial risks.

The letter on Tuesday suggests that those recommendations have significant support among investors as well.

So in essence, under Team Biden climate activists will promote a thousand new regs to tie up business. This is the sort of thing the corporatist/statist Democrats like Hillary and Sleepy Joe live for. Its why they are so keen to see the Clinton Restoration - every business will need a friend in the BidenWorld and their will be plenty of lobbyists ready to help.

Hillary did a great job of monetizing this directly - if you wanted access to a Senator/SecState, write a check to Bill. Biden has done a decent job of securing lucrative lifetime employment for his deadweight son. This is not a great time for Trump to be losing an election over a failed COVID response.

But justice! Sorry, I'm ahead of myself - but climate!

Away We Go

It feels like 100 degrees out there and baseball opening day is coming soon!

We Are Ruled By Children. And Owned By Them

The Times seems to have talked with a couple of stooges involved in the big Twitter hack. These two helped bring Twitter and the media to their knees:

“lol” did not confirm his real-world identity, but said he lived on the West Coast and was in his 20s. “ever so anxious” said he was 19 and lived in the south of England with his mother.

The ringleader, Kirk, took 'slacktivism' to a new level. HR departments across the world should take note:

Mr. O'Connor said other hackers had informed him that Kirk got access to the Twitter credentials when he found a way into Twitter’s internal Slack messaging channel and saw them posted there, along with a service that gave him access to the company’s servers. People investigating the case said that was consistent with what they had learned so far. A Twitter spokesman declined to comment, citing the active investigation.

Slack disparagement of Bari Weiss led to her departure as well, and one of the most glorious "Here's What I REALLY Think" resignation letters ever. EVER!

As to Why We Care, sure, Twitter can bite me. But an Election Day news panic (Biden Heart Attack!) or Public Service messages announcing poll closings and active shooter situations could easily de-legitimize a close election.

The NY Times explores a few scenarios but leaves out two obvious one. Harder would be a simultaneous hack of CNN and the NY Times. If they both start reporting Air Force One has gone down in a fireball, well, by the time we figure it out who knows how much shit will have hit the fan?

Easier (and why do I give away my best ideas?) would be to hack Matt Drudge. As we all know, he mostly links to other sites with big stories. Fine, let him link to Spoof NY Times and CNN sites. The URLs won't match but enough people will be fooled that the panic and "WTF is happening" will be nuts. (Hmm, I'm kinda getting excited to see this... Talk about 2020 going out with a bang.)

The spoof website idea is so easy that long-time readers will remember I used to deploy it with my faux NY Times account. Never should have let that account lapse. I'm still looking for a John Kerry basher from 2004, with John Kerry waving good-bye to his electoral chances. Any minute now.

The Future Is Coming Like A Melting Glacier...

Joe Biden's climate plan. Not as crazy as Bernie's! Still pretty woke though. Biden backs next-gen modular reactors, so there's that small bit of hope.

Meanwhile, Back In Wuhan...

A respected doctor has questions he'd like WHO to ask China about the COVID-19 origin story. Questions six, seven and eight relate to a lab origin.

Oh, my. Hard to imagine China's leadership deliberately 'fessing up, if there is a lab connection. "Proof" will probably be disputable, which could make for a contentious October Surprise.

Picture the Times desperately debunking intel community assessments that COVID come from a Chinese lab while desperately promoting intel community assessments that the Russians were paying off the Taliban and Trump ignored it.

Good times!

PILING ON: James Geraghty of NRO had lots of background in April. For my money it came from a lab, the cover-up will never be broken, and we may as well start unifying conspiracies and mumbling "Epstein didn't handle those bats himself."