“The Long Night,” the third episode of the final season of Game of Thrones contained one of the most epic sustained action sequences ever captured on film. The problem is, no one could see it. The episode was so dark that it was hard to follow the action. Fans were not happy.
Don't forget, if you missed last night's Game of Thrones, you can easily replicate the experience by taping two dirty gauzes to your eyes and imagining no significant deaths
Now, Fabian Wagner, the episode’s cinematographer, is speaking out to explain what happened. Wagner says that he filmed the episode properly, but he faults HBO’s digital compression for the muddy, monochromatic final product. “I know it wasn’t too dark because I shot it,” Wagner told TMZ.
“[GoT] has always been very dark and a very cinematic show,” Wagner said. He described the particularly dark style of the episode as a creative choice by the director and showrunners intended to immerse the viewer the chaos and confusion of the onscreen battle. John Bradley, who plays Samwell Tarly on the show, told USA Today that the darkness of the episode “reflects how the characters are feeling a sense of confusion and fighting blind, literally stabbing in the dark.”
Actual screen grab from Game of Thrones Season 8, Episode 3
Compression is the Culprit
Still, by the time the episode reached viewers’ screens, it was darker than the show’s creators probably intended. The culprit is the compression technology cable companies and streaming services use to squeeze digital video into the least possible bandwidth.
Compression works by reducing the amount of information that needs to be transmitted. The compression process discards elements that repeat or that are deemed unnecessary by the compression algorithm. The result is a smaller, more manageable file. However, the process inevitably loses some of the image information along the way.
Most of the time, the compressed video still looks good enough that you wouldn’t notice. But, for a variety of technical reasons, compression algorithms have a harder time dealing with dimly lit scenes. Because “The Long Night” was darker to begin with, the quality loss resulting from the compression process is more apparent — especially when watching on streaming services with slow internet connections.
Do Adjust Your Set
Wagner says he understands fans’ concerns. He suggests that viewers watch the episode in a darkened room and crank up the brightness on their TV. Making sure your internet connection is as fast as possible will improve the image quality as well. “The Long Night” is remarkable television and well worth the extra trouble.
The Mueller Report is in the books. Nicholas Grossman, international relations professor at the University of Illinois and editor at Arc Digital, joins Taylor to sort through what we learned.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report is coming Thursday. If Attorney General William Barr’s summary is to be believed, those hoping for a grand expose of collusion between President Trump and Russia will be disappointed. But, it will not be the complete exoneration Mr. Trump claimed either. The picture of Mr. Trump and his team it will paint, while not criminal, is likely to be unflattering. This realization may be the motivation for Mr. Trump’s renewed attacks on Mr. Mueller and his team.
The Mueller Report, which was written by 18 Angry Democrats who also happen to be Trump Haters (and Clinton Supporters), should have focused on the people who SPIED on my 2016 Campaign, and others who fabricated the whole Russia Hoax. That is, never forget, the crime…..
Mr. Mueller’s report will likely depict the Trump campaign as a group of unscrupulous neophytes blundering around the fringes of Russia’s election meddling efforts. It may show that Mr. Trump welcomed Russia’s help and was anxious to avoid displeasing Moscow. While no one in Trump world directly conspired with the Kremlin, they would have been more than willing to do so had they been given the opportunity. This is not criminal conspiracy, but it could be politically embarrassing all the same.
The enthusiasm within Trump-world for Russia’s intervention is apparent in what we know already. The infamous Trump Tower meeting is perhaps the starkest example. When an acquaintance offered Donald Trump, Jr. damaging information about Hillary Clinton, courtesy of the Russian government as part of its “support for Mr. Trump,” his response was “I love it.” He scheduled a meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer who was to deliver the goods. While the meeting was a bust and the dirt on Hillary never materialized, the episode demonstrates the Trump Campaign’s ambivalence about receiving the assistance of a foreign adversary and illustrates an “enemy-of-my-enemy is my friend” mindset that, although not illegal, many would find morally repugnant.
Further, Mr. Mueller’s report could bolster the notion that Mr. Trump’s fawning over Mr. Putin was motivated, at least in part, by gratitude for Russia’s intervention and a desire to encourage it. Mr. Trump’s desire to score a lucrative Trump Tower Moscow deal may have also been part of his motivation to avoid offending the Kremlin.
The Trump Tower Moscow talks ended before the election, but months later than the Trump camp initially claimed. This doesn’t mean that Trump abandoned the idea. Trump himself suggested as much. “There would be nothing wrong if I did do it,” Trump said in November of last year. “I was running my business while I was campaigning. There was a good chance that I wouldn’t have won, in which case I would have gotten back into the business. And why should I lose lots of opportunities?”
There’s nothing necessarily criminal about that. But, it does suggest a motivation for Trump’s reluctance to say or do anything that might offend Moscow during the campaign.
The Obstruction of Justice Question
Then there is the question of the extent to which Mr. Trump used the power of his office to thwart scrutiny of his dealings with Russia. Among other things, Mr. Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, at least in part, out of frustration with the Russia probe. Mr. Mueller declined to take a position on whether these actions broke the law. Mr. Barr, however, concluded that they didn’t.
“While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” Mr. Barr quoted the Special Counsel’s report as saying. Mr. Barr said that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein did not think that the evidence supported a charge of obstruction of justice. “The evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense,” Mr. Barr wrote.
Mr. Trump’s frustration with Mr. Comey appears more justified in the absence of an underlying crime. Still, there’s room for reasonable debate about whether Mr. Trump’s actions were appropriate. Is a President’s use of the powers of his office to throw sand into the gears of an investigation ok if it is merely motivated by a desire to avoid political embarrassment rather than legal consequences? The answer to that question will break along partisan lines. But, Mr. Mueller’s report may add more details that bolster the case of Mr. Trump’s opponents.
Still, at the end of the day, Mr. Trump’s claims that there was no collusion with Russia look to be vindicated. This simple fact may well outshine any troubling new information the Mueller report reveals. Mr. Trump’s opponents, and their lofty expectations of a grand conspiracy between Mr. Trump and the Kremlin, set a bar that the Mueller report will probably not clear.
Attorney General William P. Barr provided Congress with a letter summarizing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. The letter marked the conclusion of Mr. Mueller’s probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 Presidential election.
Mr. Barr says that Mr. Mueller did not find that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. However, he said that Mr. Mueller did not reach a conclusion on whether President Trump obstructed justice. “While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” Mr. Barr quoted the Special Counsel’s reports as saying.
Still, Mr. Barr’s letter states that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein did not think that the evidence supported a charge of obstruction of justice. “The evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense,” Mr. Barr wrote.
While Mr. Barr’s letter presents the principal conclusions of Mr. Mueller’s investigation, it provides few details on how he reached them. However, Mr. Barr committed to releasing more of Mr. Mueller’s report. “[M]y goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel’s report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies,” he wrote.
Mr. Mueller’s report contains confidential grand jury material and other sensitive information that must be scrubbed from the report before its release. Further, information relating to ongoing matters must also be redacted from any public report. So, it may be some time before the public is granted a more complete view of Mr. Mueller’s findings.
What the Barr Letter Means
The Barr letter brings to a close the question of whether the Trump campaign was in on Moscow’s scheme to influence the U.S. election. Although there were a number of interactions between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and individuals or entities linked with Russian government, there was no active conspiracy between them.
There is considerably more room for interpretation on the question of whether the President abused his power in an attempt to derail the investigation. But, it is hard to sustain an accusation that the President obstructed justice in the absence of an underlying crime. Ultimately, whether Mr. Trump’s actions were right or wrong will now be decided by voters rather than the legal process.
The amount of drugs seized between legal points of entry has become a key point in the debate over President Trump’s proposed border wall. Critics argue that if most drugs are coming in through legal border crossings, a wall is not likely to have a significant impact.
James Carroll, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, threw a wrinkle into this debate at a House hearing last week. Testifying before the House Government oversight committee, Mr. Carroll said that by weight, more drugs were intercepted between ports of entry.
Yet, earlier in the hearing, Mr. Carroll seemed to agree with Congresswoman Deborah Wasserman Shultz when she said that 90% of drugs were seized at legal points of entry. So, which is right? The answer depends on the basis you use to measure the amount of drugs coming into the country. And further, the types of drugs we’re talking about.
What the Data Says
We looked at U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB) data for Fiscal Year 2018. CPB breaks data down between the U.S. Customs Office of Field Operations, which staffs legal border crossings, and the Border Patrol, which maintains responsibility for the rest of the border.
The data shows that far more high value narcotics like cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and fentanyl were seized at border checkpoints then between them. For example, 89% of cocaine and 90% of heroin were seized by Customs Agents at legal points of entry. However, 61% of marijuana was seized by Border Patrol agents between checkpoints.
Author’s calculation based on CBP FY2018 Enforcement Statistics.
Marijuana, by weight, accounts for 85% of all drugs seized by CPB. So, when looking at the data in those terms, Mr. Carroll is correct that more total pounds of drugs are seized between border checkpoints. But, this is misleading. By value, marijuana accounts for a far smaller proportion, only 19%, of drug seizures.
More Seized at Border Checkpoints By Value
If we measure by the street value, 76% of drugs seized arrived through legal ports of entry. That’s short of the 90% Ms. Wasserman-Shultz cited, but still a substantially different story. (We assume she mistook the statistic for heroin for all drugs.)
Author’s calculation of FY2018 CBP enforcement data. Values of various drugs were based on recent CBP press releases.
President Trump’s Claim
President Trump has argued that a border wall is needed because drugs were mostly entering the country between points of entry. “And they don’t come in through the portals, they come in between the portals where you have no barrier,” he said in January.
By our calculations about 54% of drugs, by weight, come in between points of entry. However, by value it’s only 24%. Mr. Trump’s statement is way off the mark by any measure.
The Bottom Line
President Trump is wrong to suggest that drugs are coming in exclusively between ports of entry, or “portals” in his words. With the exception of marijuana, most of the drugs seized are at legal border checkpoints.
Still, a lot of the drugs coming in between checkpoints may go undetected and wall might help disrupt this. However, it’s only part of the solution. Drug traffickers are likely to find ways around physical border barriers. They may simply toss drugs over the top of, or dig tunnels under, any wall.
While President Trump is overselling the value of a wall in aiding drug interdiction, it cannot be discounted altogether. In this case, like most these days, the reality is far more complex than the rhetoric coming from Washington.
Recent commercial satellite images show new construction work at the Sohae (Tongchang-ri) Launch Facility in North Korea. The new activity comes just days after President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un left a summit in Hanoi without a deal. However, is unclear whether the construction at the site is directly related to the summit’s outcome.
Still, some speculate that the recent activity at the closely-watched facility might be intended to send a message. Following his first summit with Mr. Kim in Singapore last year, Mr. Trump toutedreports that North Korea had begun dismantling the Sohae facility. So, restarting work there could be a veiled warning to Mr. Trump.
Trump Walks Away
At the Hanoi summit, Mr. Kim offered to dismantle some parts of the Yongbyon nuclear facility in exchange for sanctions relief. Yongbyon is the primary manufacturing facility for the plutonium and highly enriched uranium used in its bombs. Dismantling it would theoretically diminish North Korea’s ability to build new weapons.
However, Mr. Trump concluded that this was too meager a concession to justify lifting the sanctions. “They were willing to give us areas but not the ones we wanted,” he said at a press conference following the summit. “[W]e had to walk away from that particular suggestion.”
Nicholas Grossman, an international relations professor at the University of Illinois, quipped on Twitter that “North Korea’s heard of the walk away move too.”
Still, the value of what Kim was offering was indeed dubious. Analysts believe that North Korea has other newer enrichment sites that could take the place of Yongbyon. Last year, an article in The Diplomat revealed a covert enrichment site just outside of Pyongyang. Further, even if the North Koreans are taken at their word, this concession would only limit North Korea’s ability to build new weapons. It does nothing to address the existing ones.
If Mr. Trump were to make this deal, he would surrender the most important leverage that the U.S. has over North Korea. The UN sanctions from which Mr. Kim sought relief cut far more deeply than the U.S. sanctions that would remain in place. North Korea cares far more about these sanctions because under them, they are restricted from lucrative trade with South Korea and China.
What’s Happening at the Sohae Launch Facility
Roughly Explained
The Sohae Launch Facility, also known as Tongchang-ri, lies on the coast northwest of Pyongyang near the Chinese border. Sohae is the main site of North Korea’s satellite launches, some of which western analysts believe to be pretenses for missile tests.
Following the Singapore summit last year, Mr. Trump said that Mr. Kim had committed to dismantling the engine test stand at the site. However, this was not part of the official agreement. Now, it appears that Mr. Kim is reneging on that private agreement.
A rocket readied for launch at the Sohae Launch Facility in April 2012. Sungwon Baik / VOA
According to analysis by 38 North and CSIS Beyond Parallel, satellite imagery showed construction work at the engine test stand and launchpad just days after the Hanoi Summit concluded. The imagery was acquired by commercial satellite imaging firm Digital Globe on March 2nd. Further, 38 North reported that new imagery from March 6 shows clearing of construction materials at the site. This, they speculate, indicates it may be returning to normal operations. You can view the imagery here and here. For reference, here’s an older image of the engine test stand at the site from October 1, 2017.
An image from 10/1/2017 shows the Sohae Satellite Launch facility engine test stand. Google Earth
We don’t know for sure what this construction work is all about. North Korea has performed most of its actual intercontinental ballistic missile tests from mobile launchers rather than fixed launch facilities like Sohae. So, the activity at the site does not necessarily mean they are prepping for a new missile test. But, the Sohae site is important for engine testing. “Additional work at this stand—such as the construction of a new environmental shelter on the entrance ramp—could indicate deliberate preparations to test rocket engines again,” Joseph Bermudez and Victor Cha of CSIS say.
Bottom Line
It’s unclear if the construction at the site is connected to the outcome of the summit. But, if it is, it could be significant. Mr. Bermudez and Mr. Cha of CSIS speculate that it “may indicate North Korean plans to demonstrate resolve in the face of U.S. rejection of North Korea’s demands at the summit to lift five UN Security Council sanctions enacted in 2016-2017.” On Wednesday, when asked about the activity at Sohae, Mr. Trump told reporters that “I would be very disappointed if that were happening.”
https://prodroughlyexp.wpengine.com/2017/11/the-north-korea-nuclear-threat-explained/
The national debt is unimaginably large and it is growing larger. The costs of caring for an aging population are driving unsustainable budget deficits far into the future. These five charts explain the problem.
1As a share of the economy, the federal debt is now larger than at any time since the end of WWII.
The national debt will soon be larger than at any time since the end of WWII. (CBO)2 The Congressional Budget Office projects that government spending will substantially exceed government revenue over the next decade. This will result in large deficits and mounting government debt.
Spending that exceeds revenue will drive large government deficits (CBO)3 The rising costs of popular programs such as Social Security and Medicare are the primary reason the debt is growing. However, interest payments are also a significant factor. Spending on everything else is falling as a share of the economy. So, cuts in spending in other areas, including defense, are unlikely to make a significant difference.
Increased costs of Social Security and Medicare are driving growth in the debt. (CBO)4 Over the next decade, the cost of interest payments on the debt will exceed the cost of national defense. An unexpected rise in interest rates would make things far, far worse.
Interest payments on the debt with exceed spending on defense by 2025. (Roughly Explained; CBO data)5 The cost of paying the interest on the debt is the fastest growing part of the Federal budget. As interest payments grow, there will be less money to spend on other priorities that benefit the general population. Think of it as a tax on our failure to address the debt problem.
Net Interest Relative to Other Forms of Spending (Peter G. Peterson Foundation)
The Bottom Line
We have yet to feel the effects of unsustainable government spending. This is because the demand for U.S. dollars around the world has kept interest rates relatively low. Someday the world might not need so many dollars.
When that day comes, investors will demand higher interest rates in exchange for loaning money to the U.S. government. This means the cost of interest payments will skyrocket. The government will have no choice but to impose steep tax increases and deep spending cuts to make up the gap. Also, interest rates on everything from mortgages to auto loans will likely rise as well. As a result, consumers will be less able to buy things and the economy will slow dramatically. However, by then it will be too late.
The consequences of ignoring the growing federal debt range from bad to catastrophic. The longer we wait to address it, the harder fixing it becomes.
UPDATE: On Thursday, the North Carolina State Board of Election ordered a new election in the Ninth Congressional District. The vote was unanimous. The State Board of Elections did not set a date for the new contest at Thursday’s meeting. Mr. Harris has not decided whether he will run again.
Republican candidate Mark Harris is calling for a new election in the NC09 congressional race that he narrowly won last November. But, the North Carolina State Board of Elections refused to certify the election after allegations of ballot fraud emerged late last year.
Citing new evidence that a contractor working for his campaign had engaged in a fraudulent absentee ballot harvesting operation, Mr. Harris told a NC State Board of Elections hearing on Thursday that “a new election should be called.”
https://prodroughlyexp.wpengine.com/2018/12/the-election-fraud-allegations-in-north-carolinas-9th-congressional-district-explained/
This was a surprising reversal. Previously, Mr. Harris had argued that the Board should certify him as the winner.
Mr. Harris’ call for a new election capped a dramatic week of hearings held by the state board of elections. A decision could come as soon as Thursday about whether to certify the race or hold a new election.
John Harris’ Warnings
In an emotional statement at a North Carolina State Board of Elections hearing on Wednesday, Mr. Harris’ son, John Harris, said that he had warned his father about hiring Leslie McCrae Dowless, the independent contractor at the center of the fraud allegations.
“I thought what he was doing was illegal. And I was right.”
“I thought what he was doing was illegal,” John Harris told the State Board of Elections. “And I was right.”
John Harris’ testimony and emails he provided to the Board of Elections document his dogged efforts to warn his father that Mr. Dowess’ methods were at the very least shady, if not illegal.
“I raised red flags at the time the decision was made to hire Mr. Dowless,” John Harris said Wednesday. But, he said, his father brushed aside his concerns.
“I had no reason to believe that my father actually knew, or my mother or any other associate with the campaign had any knowledge,” John Harris told the board as his father watched on choking back tears. “I think Dowless told them he wasn’t doing any of this, and they believed him.”
What Happens Next
Mr. Harris narrowly defeated his Democratic rival, Dan McCready, by a scant 905 votes in North Carolina’s Ninth District Congressional race. But, it now seems increasingly likely that the Board will order a new election. Even if they were to certify the election, there’s little chance the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives will seat Mr. Harris. One way or another, voters in NC09 will have to return to the polls.
The big question is whether a new election will be held in the primary as well. Republicans fear that Mr. Harris has been irreparably tarnished by the scandal and would almost certainly lose a head-to-head rematch with Mr. McCready. A new primary would give Republicans a chance to put a new GOP candidate on the ballot with a better shot at winning.
https://prodroughlyexp.wpengine.com/2019/02/podcast-drama-in-nc09-ballot-fraud-case/?fbclid=IwAR0sNDTL6bjPvhbp_hzoyTAx0uavkipaeCrjNrkToFzdZfLobGdFcp055vQ
John Harris delivers an emotional statement in the NC-09 ballot fraud case. CREDIT: NC State Board of Elections video.
As the NC State Board of Elections prepared to decide his father’s fate, Mark Harris’ son took the stand. in an emotional statement, John Harris described his warnings to his father before his campaign hired Leslie McCrae Dowless for the NC09 race. Nevertheless, John Harris said, his parents believed Mr. Dowess, “I didn’t.” It was Mr. Dowless’ shady absentee ballot operation is now at the center of fraud allegations in last November’s NC09 Congressional race. Plus, we unpack President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency. How will it fair in the courts?
UPDATE: On Thursday, the North Carolina State Board of Election ordered a new election in the Ninth Congressional District. The vote was unanimous. Earlier in the day, Republican candidate Mark Harris told the Board that a new election was needed. This was a surprising reversal. Previously, Mr. Harris had argued that the Board should certify him as the winner.
“It’s become clear to me that the public’s confidence in the 9th District seat general election has been undermined to an extent that a new election is warranted,” Mr. Harris said Thursday.
However, Mr. Harris maintained that he was in the dark about the illegal methods allegedly employed by a contractor working for his campaign.
The State Board of Elections did not set a date for the new contest at Thursday’s meeting. As of now, Mr. Harris has yet to decide whether he will run again.
If you are interested in scandal-free government, do not ask Virginia Democrats. Over the past few weeks scandals have ensnared many of the Commonwealth’s top elected officials, including Virginia Governor Ralph Northam, Lt. Governor Justin Fairfax and Attorney General Mark Herring.
Gov. Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook page depicts two men, one in blackface and another in Ku Klux Klan Robes. (Eastern Virginia Medical School)
A scandal over racist overtones in his college and medical school yearbooks has enveloped Virginia Governor Ralph Northam. Mr. Northam’s college yearbook lists “Coonman” as his nickname. His medical school yearbook page includes a photograph of two men, one in blackface and the other dressed as a Ku Klux Klansman. Mr. Northam initially acknowledged, then denied, that he was the one in blackface.
Separately, Mr. Herring acknowledged that he too had once worn blackface in college when he dressed in costume as an African-American pop musicians. Finally, a woman recently came forward to accuse Mr. Fairfax of sexual assault.
What’s Oppo and Vulnerability Research
Opposition research is a deep dive into your opponent’s background to uncover anything that potentially could be used against him or her. Vulnerability research is the same thing conducted on yourself.
A Google search or a news media dump alone does not qualify as research. Those are merely starting points. Researchers must step away from their computers and go through the target’s entire life. That means trips to courthouses, deed offices, libraries and dusty archives, and interviews with people who knew the candidates earlier in their careers of in college.
None of the people who ran against the governor, lieutenant governor or attorney general in either the primary or the general election apparently did not conduct effective oppo research. The campaigns also either did not hire a vulnerability researcher, the candidates forgot their earlier transgressions or neglected to tell their staff and consultants about their pasts.
How Not to Handle a Scandal
Mr. Northam’s response to the scandals was horrific. Future college textbooks may well cite it as the penultimate example of what not to do when faced with a political scandal and public relations disaster.
Hours after a conservative blog revealed Mr. Northam’s medical school photo, he issued a press statement acknowledging that it was he in the photo. “I am deeply sorry for the decision I made to appear as I did in this photo and for the hurt that decision caused then and now,” he said.
Less than 24 hours later, he called a press conference to deny it. “I reflected with my family and classmates from the time and affirmed to [sic] my conclusion that I am not the person in that photo,” he said. Mr. Northam then proceeded to make things worse. He admitted that his Virginia Military Institute classmates did call him “Coonman,” but claimed to not know why. The actual headline from a Politico report on the press conference was “6 Moments of Weirdness with Ralph Northam.”
White Men in Black and Brown Face
In an apparent effort get ahead of another damaging story that had begun to circulate among political insiders, Mr. Northam said he took part in a dance contest where he “darkened” his face in a portrayal of Michael Jackson. He said he had only used a little bit of shoe polish on his face “because, I don’t know if anybody has ever tried that, but you cannot get shoe polish off.” Mr. Northam said he had won the contest because of his moonwalk dance and seemed on the verge of demonstrating it to reporters.
Further, Mr. Herring issued a February 6th statement acknowledging that he had worn blackface while imitating an unidentified rap star at a college party.
White male statewide Virginia elected officials seem to have a great sense of respect for the Witmark brothers — the vaudeville actors who blackened their faces and performed in minstrel shows. The brothers also wrote “Coon Tunes.” Unlike office holders in the Old Dominion, this author knows how racist and offensive that sounds, but that is what people called these songs in the late 1800s and early 1900s.
Thank Heaven for Life’s Little Ironies
For those who appreciate irony, the current Mr. Fairfax and Mr. Herring scandals are for you. A college professor from California claims Mr. Fairfax forced her to perform oral sex on him during the 2004 Democratic National Convention.
If that sounds familiar, it should. In the midst of his confirmation hearings, a California college professor accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault. The only difference between Mr. Fairfax and Mr. Kavanaugh is that, as of February 7th, not a single Democratic elected official has demanded that Mr. Fairfax step aside.
Before Mr. Herring admitted that he also had blacked his face in college, and after Mr. Northam’s Moonwalk press conference, the attorney general had demanded that the governor resign. Mr. Herring said, “It is no longer possible for Governor Northam to lead our Commonwealth and it is time for him to step down.” It goes without saying that Mr. Herring has not called on himself to quit.
The past week has left Virginia a political laughing stock, known for scandals and political incompetence.
Matthew Tallmer is a former congressional staffer who has been involved in Virginia politics.
