Archive for 2020

TENNESSEE IS NOW REPORTING “PROBABLE” CASES OF CORONAVIRUS: “A probable case could meet clinical criteria and epidemiological evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed; meet presumptive laboratory evidence and either clinical criteria or epidemiological evidence; or meet vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed, per the CDC. In order for it to be counted as confirmed, it must meet confirmatory laboratory evidence.”

RADICAL FEMINIST WHO ARGUED FOR THE EXTERMINATION OF MEN GLORIFIED IN THE NY TIMES: 

Valerie Solanas was a writer, of sorts, whose main claim to fame is that she put a bullet in Andy Warhol in 1968. She apparently thought that Warhol and his friend, French publisher Maurice Girodias, were conspiring against her so she walked into Warhol’s New York apartment and shot him.

Warhol survived and Solanas ended up in a mental institution for a few months. But as a radical feminist, her obscure, nonsensical writing somehow survives.

It is her book Scum Manifestor that still receives attention today. It’s a threatening rant against all men, where she proposes exterminating all males.

Even more so than during the Howell Raines/Jayson Blair era, the New York Times is really living out Robert Conquest’s Third Law of Politics these days: “The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.”

WHY ARE THEATER DEPARTMENTS AT SMALL, LEFTIST LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES SUCH CESSPITS OF RACISM? Theater prof cites ‘white rage,’ fear of white students as reason for leaving job. “Gibbs, in her email, invoked the death of George Floyd, who died after a Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for over eight minutes, to further explain her disdain for white students at the small Minnesota college.”

To be honest, she sounds kind of racist.

KIMBERLEY STRASSEL: Judging FBI Conduct: The D.C. Circuit becomes the first court to acknowledge the FBI’s 2016 abuse.

House Judiciary Committee Democrats were back at their “politicized Justice Department” theme this week, calling a disgruntled former lieutenant of special counsel Robert Mueller to accuse the department of giving special treatment to President Trump’s allies. Too bad the testimony came on the very day a federal court confirmed that Mr. Mueller’s team and the Federal Bureau of Investigation engaged in misconduct.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit did so via an order requiring Judge Emmet Sullivan to dismiss charges against former national security adviser Mike Flynn. Most of the focus has been on the legal merits of the ruling. Judge Neomi Rao’s compelling opinion rebuked Judge Sullivan for ignoring the department’s call to drop the case and instead setting himself up as both prosecutor and jury. This was a win for the separation of powers, even as it was a step toward justice for Mr. Flynn.

Largely overlooked was the decision’s rebuke of the FBI and the Mueller team. The D.C. Circuit became the first federal court to acknowledge the misconduct that Attorney General William Barr is trying to bring to light. Most of the courts that oversaw Mr. Mueller’s prosecutions were asked to do no more than rubber-stamp a plea deal or sign off on a jury verdict. But Mr. Flynn, backed by tenacious lawyer Sidney Powell, fought the charges—forcing the Justice Department to review its actions, acknowledge its bad acts, and move to dismiss its case. Democrats and the press cast this outcome as evidence of Mr. Barr’s “politicization.” The circuit court begs to differ.

The Justice Department’s credibility was at stake here. Judge Sullivan bought into the same Democratic conspiracy theories, which is why he refused Justice’s motion to dismiss and appointed retired judge John Gleeson to act as shadow prosecutor. He argued the Justice Department wasn’t entitled to the usual “presumption of regularity.” And if the circuit judges thought there was anything to claims that Mr. Barr was playing political favorites, it could have allowed the process to continue.

Instead they bluntly noted that there was no “legitimate basis” to question the department’s behavior. They even slapped Mr. Gleeson for relying on “news stories, tweets and other facts outside the record.” By contrast, Judge Rao’s opinion notes: “The government’s motion includes an extensive discussion of newly discovered evidence casting Flynn’s guilt into doubt.” It points out that this includes “evidence of misconduct by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” It finishes by noting that each government branch must be encouraged to “self correct when it errs.”

The court’s conclusion is obvious. All it had to do was look at the voluminous evidence the Justice Department supplied. Its briefs proved the FBI had improperly pursued Mr. Flynn, keeping open an investigation that produced no evidence, ginning up a “violation” of the seldom-enforced Logan Act, sandbagging Mr. Flynn with an interview that had no “legitimate investigative basis.” It even provided new FBI notes this week suggesting that then-President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were improperly engaged in the investigation. The department’s filings showed that the Mueller team had consistently denied defense attorneys exculpatory information. And it explained the straightforward process by which it had reached its decision to withdraw: Mr. Barr in February appointed veteran U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen to review the case, and in May Mr. Jensen concluded dismissal was “the proper and just course.”

But Nadler will run interference for this, with the media’s help, because they’re all on the same OrangeManBad team.