tv The Journal Editorial Report FOX News July 31, 2021 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
an... to search for it. welcome to the journal editorial report. i'm paul gigot. the debate over vaccine and mask mandates heating up this week as the white house scrambles to get more americans vaccinated against covid 19 amid the spread of the highly contagious delta variant. president biden outlining the next steps in the administration's vaccine push announcing that all federal workers must be vaccinated or submit to regular testing, masking, and other protocols. this as cities across the country reimpose their own covid
restrictions with washington, d.c., atlanta, st. louis, kansas city, and savannah all issuing mask mandates this week. broadway's theater owners and operators also saying, friday, that they will require theater goers to be vaccinated and wear masks to attend performances. let's bring in "wall street journal" columnist dan henninger. >> what are you learning that you didn't know before and that we should be concerned about? >> well, the cdc's hair is obviously on fire over the possibility that some vaccinated person will transmit covid to some unvaccinated person. the evidence apparently shows that people who have been vaccinated can pick up this delta variant. they may or may not show symptoms and they may or may not be capable of spreading it, but the cdc is very worried they are going to spread it. >> paul: what about the data?
is there any new information on just how serious disease you will get if you're vaccinated and you get the delta variant? any change on that information? because that's what i think most people are worried about. >> it's pretty clear that if you're vaccinated, you are well protected against this severe case or death. there is some evidence, and there always has been, the suspicion that with very old people the vaccine will wear off after a while. you may need a booster shot. you're always everyone if you're vaccinated vulnerable as an outside risk to a serious disease or even death. you know, no vaccine is perfect, but we knew that. >> paul: all right. scott gottlieb, the former fda commissioner and our frequent contributor said on friday that he wouldn't be surprised if there were a million new infections a day in the united states, which sounds like an alarming number. put that into context for people. >> we have always grossly underestimated how much covid is
going around because we rely on voluntary testing, where people with symptoms show up and try and figure out what they've got. we have always known that four or five or maybe now scott says ten times as many people are actually spreading the disease. the reason he goes for such a big number now is that so many people are vaccinated. so many people have already had covid and have some immunity. among those who aren't vaccinated, so many are young and will have very mild symptoms. there are a very large number of people who have mild or symptomless covid that we never discover through testing. >> paul: dan, with all of that as background, putting in that context, what do you make of the new mask mandates so that the biden administration -- that the biden administration is imposing and some localities are imposing? >> it essentially leads to the mass confusion about the coronavirus at this point. there's clearly virus fatigue across the country. the question i think should be
asked and people are wondering is what is the point of all this? what is the goal? what is the end point? where are we going? the authorities keep giving the impression as the cdc does that their goal is to eradicate coronavirus or kill it or conquer it. they know as well as anyone that this virus is going to be with us for a generation. everyone eventually virtually is going to be infected. so i think israel is pointing the way. they have decided it is a chronic disease. they will treat the most seriously ill people. they are in fact going to recommend a third vaccination booster shot for people. but our system just seems to be floundering around without giving the public any clear idea of what the future is. for instance, the mask mandates that are coming back into place. is this for the next five months? or in fact, is it for the next five years? because that would be the logic
of their position on viral loads from the delta variant. >> paul: homan, vaccine mandates, the president saying that federal employees will have to show proof of vaccination or have frequent testing. a lot of private employers and private venues, restaurants and things are now saying you will have to show proof of vaccination too to either go into the office or go to a restaurant. what do you make of those? >> well, you know, employers face liability risk if someone decides to sue them because either an employee or a customer claim they got covid by patronizing their establishment. when covid started, the first people to cancel events were the nba for this very reason. it's sensible for businesses to impose mandates on their employees and customers that are going to reduce the risk of covid lawsuits, and, you know, businesses do that all the time. they control who can consume their services and on what terms.
i think the federal government and the state governments might run into some risk of lawsuits from employees who say my job doesn't put me at any risk to someone else and i'm not at any risk and therefore why is this being imposed on me. that's why they're not really mandating vaccination. they say you are either get vaccines or get a regular test. i think some people will opt for the test. it's sensible for most people in most circumstances to get the vaccine, but not everybody is on board with that. >> paul: dan, just quickly, we don't have much time, but vaccine private employer mandates, do you have a problem with that? >> i do not have a problem with that to tell you the truth. the one thing we know for sure is that the vaccination does reduce your possibility of getting seriously ill or dying. it's the one clear piece of information we've gotten in the last year. the vaccines work. the vaccines are going to turn it into a chronic disease, and the faster we do it, the better off we will be. >> paul: sound advice. when we come back, amid the war of words between senator rand
paul and dr. anthony fauci, a closer look at the complicated story of the wuhan lab and gain of function research. limu emu... and doug. so then i said to him, you oughta customize your car insurance with liberty mutual, so you only pay for what you need. oh um, doug can we talk about something other than work, it's the weekend. yeah, yeah. [ squawk ] hot dog or... chicken? [ squawk ] only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ rock the boat don't rock the boat, baby ♪ ♪ rock the boat don't tip the boat over ♪ here we go.
go with simparica trio it's triple protection made simple! simparica trio is the first and only monthly chewable that covers heartworm disease, ticks and fleas, round and hookworms. dogs get triple protection in just one simparica trio! this drug class has been associated with neurologic adverse reactions, including seizures. use with caution in dogs with a history of these disorders. protect him with all your heart. simparica trio. protect him with all your heart. ♪ ♪ ♪ simparica trio. ♪ ♪ ♪
deposit, plan and pay with easy tools from chase. simplicity feels good. chase. make more of what's yours. >> dr. fauci knowing it is a crime to lie to congress, do you wish to retract your statement on may 11th where you claimed the nih never funded gain of function in wuhan? >> i have never lied before the congress, and i do not retract that statement. >> you take an animal virus and you increase the transmissbility to humans, you are saying that's not gain of function? >> that's correct. senator paul, you do not know what you are talking about. >> paul: the war of words between senator rand paul and dr. fauci coming to a head last week with the kentucky republican accusing the administration's top infectious disease expert of lying to congress and requesting that the attorney general garland criminally investigate fauci
over senate testimony, in which he said that the national institutes of health never funded gain of function research at the wuhan institute of virology. the controversy central to the question of the origins of covid-19 and whether the virus could have leaked from that chinese lab. we're back with homan jenkins and "wall street journal" editorial page writer adam o'neil. adam, you have followed all of this. who got the better of that exchange between rand paul and fauci, on the merits? >> on the merits, i think rand paul. he may not be -- he may be exaggerating for some effect when he talks about the millions of people who have died or things like that, and the connection between u.s. funding and the wuhan institute of virology in china, but the facts are with him, and dr. fauci may be technically right about some points about whether under a particular definition funding went to a particular type of science, but the general thrust of his argument is entirely
legitimate and needs to be investigated more closely. there's no question. >> paul: the thrust of that argument is that in fact the u.s. did fund through a nonprofit the wuhan institute and in fact that wuhan institute did do gain of function research. difference of opinion is just how you define gain of function research? is that what it comes down to? >> essentially, yes. dr. fauci was using a 2014 definition that a lot of critics have pointed out is extremely narrow, but the basic concept of adding a function to an organism, gain of function, was clearly present in a lot of the research done at the wuhan institute of virology and frankly there's a lot that could have happened that we didn't know about because of the secrecy involving in the institution. >> paul: homan, where do you come out on this and the credibility of not just dr. fauci but a lot of the other doctors, the doctor, for example, who was one of those who was part of the who team that investigated wuhan?
yet he has also denied that there was any support for gain of function research. >> exactly. they are just playing a definition game. dr. fauci should have said, you know, we funded that research 10 years ago, and we would never do that today because we have learned a lot more about what's going on in china and its research on bat viruses, our relationship with china has changed, and the relationship cannot one of trust as it was in the past. instead he went into this ridiculous thing where he claimed that rand paul was accusing him of killing 4 million people, which is not exactly what rand paul said at all. >> paul: okay. so where does the investigation, homan, stand now in terms of what we're trying to find out about what happened at wuhan and the u.s. role in financing that? >> yeah, the world health organization now has taken up the chance that we must get to the bottom of the wuhan lab. i think that's because the world health organization knew it was on the verge of becoming the
china health organization. it still wants to have the world as its constituency. there is no chance the chinese are going to cooperate. they are still pushing the idea that we have to start looking for the origin of covid in other countries. i think, you know, the real subtext of the rand paul dispute with dr. fauci is are we going to accept that the relationship with china has changed? we've known that they have playing us for zucker -- for suckers for a long time. are we going to stick with that or try to revive the old relationship and get back to business as usual? >> paul: do you think we should revive it, homan? >> absolutely not. i know we are in a very complex competitive relationship with china, and you know, wuhan lab thing is going to hang over us for a long time. i hope we can get to the bottom of it and clear the air one way or the other, but it is going to be a real stumbling block to getting back to a relationship of trust. >> paul: adam, where is this investigation stand now, if we can't get china to open up, and
homan's right, we can't, then what about the u.s. congress, u.s. intelligence sources, the administration is investigating, is that going anywhere or not? >> sure. the biden administration's 90-day intelligence review of the covid-19 origins, that should wrap up next month. and the big question is what the white house does after that, because you're seeing some movement in congress. this was a bipartisan letter with four senators calling for pressuring china and reviewing how the u.s. funds different scientific endeavors with china. there was a letter from more moderate democrats. you have republicans in minority making moves to try to get about what information fauci and the nih were up to. we need a unifying action from the white house saying it is okay to look into this. this isn't just a partisan exercise. this is something we should all agree on, and that will have to -- next month is going to be very critical for the u.s. and
of this investigation. >> paul: briefly, adam, some of the republican leadership criticizing speaker pelosi and the democrats in the house for not doing more to investigate this. is the democratic house doing anything? >> there's a little bit of movement, but leadership needs to do a lot better, and they are going to need president biden to step in here. they can do a lot more. >> paul: all right. thank you both. when we come back, a bipartisan infrastructure bill moves forward, leading the way for the democrats' 3.5 trillion dollars tax and spending bill. what if anything are republicans getting from the deal? our politics panel is next. stock slices. for as little as $5, now anyone can own companies in the s&p 500, even if their shares cost more. at $5 a slice, you could own ten companies for $50 instead of paying thousands. all commission free online. schwab stock slices: an easy way to start investing or to give the gift of stock ownership.
♪ put a little love in your heart - david ruffin ♪ my bad, my bad... good race! -you too! you were tough out there... thank you, i'm getting you next time though. oh i got you, i got you. hamblin goes down. d'agostino helps hamblin back up. are you okay? -yeah. >> paul: the senate this week voting to move ahead on a 1 trillion dollars bipartisan infrastructure deal, setting the stage not only for its passage
but for the passage of the bernie sanders backed 3.5 trillion dollars budget resolution, a democratic only plan packed with new entitlement programs, climate spending, and tax increases. so just what are republicans getting from the deal? let's ask our politics panel, dan henninger, columnist, editorial board member alicia finley. alicia, let's talk about the merits first, the substance first. is this a good piece of legislation worth doing? >> well, i don't see really much noteworthy in the bill, or it still hasn't been finalized, but for one, there's a few concessions. there's no 40 billion dollars for the irs to expand its powers to harass small businesses. they didn't have an infrastructure -- [inaudible]. they were able to eliminate some prevailing wage mandates for certain projects, like broad band and cybersecurity. most of the bill is actually
just green pork and more handouts to states and local governments that don't need the money. >> paul: all right. why did these republicans sign on into it, alicia? >> well, i think one, they wanted to seem like they were making, you know, acting in good faith and doing something that's bipartisan and some other senators will argue that well, this may mean that the democrats are less likely to pass the next 3.5 or 6 trillion dollars bill because now they don't have these infrastructure projects to go along with it. and i think that's a little bit of a dubious argument. >> paul: dan, on the merits of this thing, do you like this bill? i mean, rob portman and others would argue, you know what, infrastructure is bipartisan. we all love roads, bridges, airports, more money for airports, better ports and so on, so shouldn't both parties be behind this? is that a good argument in your
view? >> well, if it were a free-standing bill, yeah, you could make that argument, that's bipartisanship and that's the way it works, be tu truth is, paul -- but the truth is, paul, it is not a free standing bill. this infrastructure bill and a 3.5 trillion dollars so called budget bill really is much bigger than that, are joined at the hip. the progressives in congress such as nancy pelosi know that, this bill is that it creates a kind of gateway to passing that larger bill, and senator cinema of arizona one of the swing democratic votes has said she won't vote for a 3.5 trillion dollars reconciliation bill, but she says she likes some of the elements in it, raising the question of whether she would vote for the new entitlements and some taxes if the price tag were reduced to say 2.5 trillion dollars. that's the state of play.
that's the game that's being played by the democrats now, connecting the infrastructure bill to the larger entitlement bill. >> paul: bill, the portman camp, that observation of sinema saying 3.5 trillion dollars i'm not for that, is proof that the senator's political calculation that this will make such a bill less likely to pass. that was the evidence for his point. is in fact that evidence for his point? >> no, i don't think it is. i think dan interprets that the way it was. she didn't actually say she wouldn't vote for the bill. she said she wouldn't vote for the 3.5 trillion. is it a republican victory if we get that down to 2.5 trillion plus the infrastructure? i'm not sure i would favor the infrastructure bill even if it were stand alone. i question some of the assumptions. is one assumption that they are going to get 56 billion from
economic growth, you know, that's going to help pay for this thing? 33% on returns? i mean, anyone remember the history of shovel ready? the myth all along as dan was saying is that these -- the republican myth is that these are really separate pieces of legislation. nancy pelosi clearly doesn't believe that. chuck schumer doesn't believe that. and even joe biden doesn't believe that, so i don't know why republicans are putting this on something that could be a good campaign issue next year. >> paul: alicia, nancy pelosi, the speaker saying that she doesn't even want to bring up and won't bring up the bipartisan infrastructure bill, even if it passes the senate until -- bring it up to a vote in the house until the -- it is very clear to her that the reconciliation bill which is really the bernie sanders budget could pass. that suggests she's holding
moderate democrats hostage here and demanding their support for her bill or they don't get a vote on their bipartisan bill. >> well, i think the two are tied at the hip at this point. you're going to get the tax increases. you're going to get all these entitlements. maybe republicans can say they are not voting for them in the infrastructure deal, but they are making it easier for democrats to pass it nonetheless. >> paul: how are they doing that? why is it easier? >> well, in some ways, they are breaking down the cost. this is 600 billion dollars that's not added on to the 3.5 trillion. and so democrats can say -- manchin can say oh, well, we voted for a bipartisan bill, and now we can vote, you know, for the blowout, but they have some bipartisan cover now. >> paul: we will see how it goes. still ahead, make way for the new national climate army.
progressives are pushing a civilian climate corps as part of the democratic coming budget. what you can expect from the so-called clean energy educators, when we come back. someone once told me, that i should get used to people staring. so i did. it's okay, you can stare. when you're a two-time gold medalist, it comes with the territory.
take the mystery out of your glucose levels, and lower your a1c. now you know. freestyle libre 14 day. now covered by medicare for those who qualify. i am robert strickler. i've been involved in communications in the media freestyle libre 14 day. for 45 years. i've been taking prevagen on a regular basis for at least eight years. for me, the greatest benefit over the years has been that prevagen seems to help me recall things and also think more clearly. and i enthusiastically recommend prevagen. it has helped me an awful lot. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. i'm searching for info on options trading, and look, it feels like i'm just wasting time. that's why td ameritrade designed
a first-of-its-kind, personalized education center. oh. their award-winning content is tailored to fit your investing goals and interests. and it learns with you, so as you become smarter, so do its recommendations. so it's like my streaming service. well except now you're binge learning. see how you can become a smarter investor with a personalized education from td ameritrade. visit tdameritrade.com/learn ♪ >> the creation of a civilian climate corps is not something that should be done. it is something that must be done. so it is not just about doing it. it is about doing it big. the way we will combat the climate crisis is not just with
the science, but it is also with our economic structure. we can combat this with a fair economy. 1.5 million people on a track to good union jobs. >> paul: make way for the civilian climate corps. that was congresswoman alexandria o kass owe yeah -- ocasio cortez last week with a preview if the democrats are able to push their reconciliation bill through congress. the president has requested these climate troops with progressives pushing to hire 1.5 million americans over five years to repair national park trails, install rooftop solar panels and become so called clean energy educators. climate corps enrolees would earn at least 15 bucks an hour, get health coverage, counselling and child care and education grants of $25,000 a year. we're back with dan henninger, editorial page writer jilian
meltor. you have been digging into this. a lot of phone calls this last week. where does this idea come from? what would this climate corps do? >> well, originally the idea dates back to the 1930s. the civilian conservational corps, but green activists, the progressives are saying that that was racist in some ways, that it focused too much on hiring men, and that we need a whole new program here that's really focused not just on climate change, but on environmental justice. we're talking about addressing racism, sexism in society, taking kind of a total view of this, and then coming up with a civilian conservation corps that will employ american youth and put them out to either go out and install solar panels or else talk to you about your sustainable behavior. >> paul: look, the civilian conservation corps was a depression-era program that pushed people to work doing a variety of things when the
unemployment rate was over 20%. now we have a worker shortage, okay. we have 9 million jobs that aren't able -- employers aren't able to find workers for. what are they going to do on the climate? >> so they want to do all kinds of things. the details of this are kind of vague, but if you look into some of the proposals, by green groups, they are going out and fixing national park trails, going out and dealing with the effects of climate change, that there's a climate catastrophe, you would have the climate corps on the site ready to help, but i think -- >> paul: sorry, jilian, don't we have fema for that? what would they actually be doing, a lot of people who don't have any particular expertise going to help a disaster site of floods? i mean, if you get wildfires, they don't know how to fight wildfires. i mean, i guess what i'm puzzled
by is why do you need 1 1/2 million people to -- what are they going to do? it sounds to me it is kind of make work program to create lobbyists for progressive policy goals? >> i think you are right about that. you know, when we're talking about some of it is boots on the ground climate change work, but a lot of it does seem to have a political activism component to it. some of this is going into communities that are now building community structures, talk to people about recycling about [inaudible]. but they are also envisioning things like a member could design posters using graphic design, pushing local governments to enact more sustainable policies. this really does have a pretty significant political organizational component to it. >> paul: dan, is this an appropriate role for government? >> no. i think we probably have enough government as you said, there is a fema out there, paul, doing some of these jobs, but they
just want to throw more people at it, and i think, you know, it reminds me of the chinese cultural revolution and the red guards which was kind of a paramilitary social movement which went around the country intimidating people into getting in line with the communist ideology. this group is going to get us in line with the climate ideology, which is totally expansive, paul. for instance, i mean, listening to jilian, some people may say really racism, the rest of it is in there? yes, it is. some of them have said there isn't for instance enough diversity among the people fighting wild fires. they say fighting wildfires is done with too many white males. you think well i'm sure they would like some help, but they don't want amateur 20-year-olds walking in off the street to help them. this is a job. it's the other worldliness of aoc. basically she wants the money. she wants these people unionized.
it is really a path to power for them as it always is. >> paul: i guess jilian if you really want to have this kind of employment for people, doing these jobs, why can't george soros or some progressive billionaire set up this kind of climate corps or make a proposal to the gates foundation or the hewlett foundation or something? they can fund it. they have money. why should taxpayers be funding something like this, with $25,000 grants for education? >> yeah, that's going to apply retroactively if you pay off your student debt. i think you raised a good point, one o the things that was striking to me watching the cop with congressional hearings, better use of private money than taxpayer money. >> paul: still ahead. as the u.s. exits afghanistan, will china step in to fill the
void? ♪ [band plays] ♪ a place where everyone lives life well-protected. ♪♪ and even when things go a bit wrong, we've got your back. here, things work the way you wish they would. and better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands with allstate. click or call for a lower auto rate today. (struggling vehicle sounds) you're in good hands with allstate. think premium can't be capable? think again. ♪ (energetic music) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ introducing the first ever at4 lineup. premium and capable. that's professional grade from gmc.
♪♪ (vo) the rule in business used to be, "location, location, location." now it's, "network, network, network." so you need a network that's built right. verizon business unlimited starts with america's most reliable network. then we add the speed of verizon 5g. we provide security that's made for business and offer plans as low as $30 per line. more businesses choose verizon than any other network. we are open and ready for you. you need an ecolab scientific clean here. and here. which is why the scientific expertise that helps operating rooms stay clean now helps the places you go too. look for the ecolab science certified seal.
when you earn a degree with university of phoenix, we support you with career coaching for life, including personal branding, resume building and more. that's our promise to you. that's career services for life. learn more at phoenix.edu. that's career services for life. i don't just play someone brainy on tv - i'm an actual neuroscientist. and i love the science behind neuriva plus. unlike ordinary memory supplements, neuriva plus fuels six key indicators of brain performance. more brain performance? yes, please! neuriva. think bigger.
>> paul: let's bring in cliff may, founder and president of the foundation for defense of democracies. cliff, good to see you. first, how fast are events deteriorating in afghanistan? >> very rapidly. one could say that a bloodbath is coming, except that a bloodbath is really already here. about 100 civilians were taken by taliban in kandahar. they were taken out and shot or beheaded. that's really bad. there's not a lot of reporting going on. one of the reasons is one of the best reporters in afghanistan, dana sadiki, he was captured by the taliban and executed. we're seeing a very rapid deterioration. we're seeing america surrender, and i just want to remind you, that khalid sheikh mohammed, al qaeda mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, when he was at gitmo, he told his interrogator, we will win, he told his interrogator. we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting. that's what's going on right
now. so i don't know that he drinks champagne or he has access to it at guantanamo but if he does on the 20th anniversary of 9/11, he would be justified in breaking open a bottle. >> paul: the symbolism of that departure date for biden could end up being tragic symbolism because i think he wanted to say pull out our troops by that day, 20 years is enough, and if that happens, and the taliban is on the verge of taking control of the country, their conclusion will be see, this is the anniversary of our -- again of our triumph. i mean, is it so bad there that you could see the government in kabul fall relatively soon? i don't want to be apocalyptic here, but the reports are bad. >> well, i think a lot depends on the taliban and what their pace is. we don't know exactly. but that's why in your paper we had a very -- i think a very good op-ed by hr mcmaster and brad bowman, both of whom affiliated with my think tank,
also editorial by you guys saying look there's a way we can prevent that from happening. we're not talking about engaging again in a full scare war, which i would -- full scale war, which i will argue we have not been since 2014, about something simple, train, assist, advise mission which you can all do -- don't forget in then. by 2014, no. in february of this year, 2500 troops. 2500 troops is very few. we had ten times that number. 25,000. at the capitol after january 6th because of fear of insurrection or something like that, train, assist, advise mission with close air support, intelligence assistance, as well, that could really help. the taliban has no air power. the taliban all this time, and this has been a success of the mission there, has been kept in the boondocks, in the countryside. they have held no major urban areas, not kabul, no provincial capitals. that's been a good thing.
the other thing we have had since 9/11, we haven't had a repetition of the 9/11 attacks. we can say well who knows why and we're about to test that, but keep in mind, al qaeda not only still exists. it is morphed in different ways. it is more closely aligned we know this from recent intelligence reports, more closely aligned with the taliban than ever before, so whatever the al qaeda asks of the taliban, they are likely to be granted. strategically this is a very very bad thing, and the humanitarian catastrophe that is very likely to unfold also will shame america. >> paul: now, the u.s. gave up its air assets inside afghanistan, including bagram airbase that we had invested so much in, but recently, in the last week, the u.s. resumed some bombing on behalf of afghan forces, to be able to stop taliban advances, particularly in helmand and kandahar, but that's been over the horizon bombing which means they are coming probably from assets in the mideast, in the gulf.
a long way to go, very hard to maintain. but would you recommend that in fact the u.s. does maintain some kind of bombing assistance like that on a regular basis in order to stop the taliban advance? >> well, yes of course, and i don't say this because i'm a military expert but i speak to enough of them, the bagram airbase was the perfect place to do that from, you need to be in theater to have the intelligence you need, you can't do this on a sustained basis from as you say over the horizon from far away. you have to refuel, very short time in the air over the target. can't be done. bagram airbase was a wonderful asset for afghanistan for the indo pacific where there are more than a dozen other jihadi organizations that we should be monitoring and perhaps hitting and because of our difficulties with china, we need forward
deployments. china is in the indo pacific after all, and having the airbase of bagram is a great asset, and we just threw it away. >> paul: any sign briefly, cliff, that the administration is reconsidering the total withdrawal and may introduce some assets like that? >> well, i hope that's the case as they see what's happening in terms of the humanitarian situation. they have agreed like to 19,000 visas for people who are very close with us, but there are many more than that, risk being beheaded in stadium. women in places like kabul who have gotten an education and achieved things over the last 20 years they are in danger now. the fact they are doing air power, that's useful. i hope they will re-evaluate the situation quickly. >> paul: cliff may, thank you very much for coming in. when we come back, a new poll in california showing the effort to recall governor gavin newsom gaining support, while progressives on the san
>> paul: a new poll showing the effort to recall california governor gavin newsom may be gaining support with those who say they expect to vote in the september recall election almost evenly divided over whether to remove the first term democrat from office. the uc berkeley poll released tuesday found 47% of likely voters say they would back the recall and 50% saying they were opposed. we're back with bill mcgurn and alicia -- [inaudible]. alicia, how do you explain the deterioration in gavin newsom's standing? >> well, i think in part he's just becoming the fall guy for a lot of progressive democratic
policies that had been brewing for actually probably decades and are now really wreaking havoc across the state. you can see it in the rising homelessness. you know, crime rates -- homicides were up 31% last year. you also see it in the lockdowns. small businesses destroyed. california has the third highest unemployment rate in the country. also, you know, deteriorating as they mentioned deteriorating schools. a lot of young parents are really upset about that. you see that in that he's actually under water among the 18 to 39 demographic, which should be his core base of support. >> paul: so when you say that he's the fall guy for progressive policies, you mean, that the dominant party in california for years, and i mean, in sacramento, in particular, has been the democratic party. republicans are outnumbered something like 2 to 1 in voters
in the states. these policies are now having an effect that the voters are looking at it and saying hmmm i don't really like the effect. >> right. >> paul: is that what we're seeing? >> yes, to some extent newsom isn't responsible for all the problems, you can blame the economic destruction from the lockdowns on him, but he's not responsible for the wildfires which are a result of lousy forest management and democrats prioritizing their climate policies over forest management. he's not necessarily responsible for the -- directly responsible for the blackouts or power outages that we have been experiencing in recent years, which are really the result of democratic policies, the renewable mandates and others that have, you know, are starting to wreak havoc in the state. these are policies that really date back more than a decade that we're now just starting to see have effect.
>> paul: bill, the way that recall works is first of all, the people take a vote on whether to recall the governor. if the governor loses that recall, with less than 50% of the vote, then you go to the second question which is all right who do you want the governor to be? so far we're seeing larry elder, who is a radio talk show host gaining support, and he's now ahead in that polling. tell us what you know about elder. >> yeah, look, i think he's a conservative voice. he's known on radio and tv for kind of conservative principles. so this is a good moment for him. i think, though, what it comes down to is as alicia mentioned, the polls i think are pretty evenly split on the recall, just under 50%, you know, who want to recall gavin newsom and roughly the same amount who don't. so i think a lot of it is going to come down to enthusiasm for
gavin newsom. in other words, a lot of democrats who may not want to vote for a recall, they might just not go out to the polls. there's not much else on the ballot that would bring them out, just newsom, so a lot of this is going to be an enthusiasm contest. can larry elder get his people out, and will gavin newsom's people come out for him? >> paul: bill, tell us a little bit about this san francisco school board recall. three members of the school board targeted for recall. what's going on there? >> yeah, so alicia just mentioned, you know, the polls sort of evenly divided on the gavin newsom recall. on the school board, that's not the case. recent polls found 69% of san francisco's parents support recalling three school board members, the president, the vice president, and the former vice president. now, there's a whole host of issues. the dominant one is san francisco was so slow to reopen its schools. it was so bad at one point the
city of san francisco sued the school district of san francisco to get them to open. and then on top of that, you have votes to rename schools that weren't considered woke enough and to change the merit exams at their top school in a move to, you know, reduce the number of asian americans. it is all piling up. >> paul: it is going to be fascinating to watch on both counts. we have to take one more break. when we come back, hits and misses of the week. :: yes, you are. i'm gonna get this place all clean. i'll give you a hand. and i'm gonna put lisa on crutches! wait, what? said she's gonna need crutches. she fell pretty hard. you might want to clean that up, girl. excuse us. when owning a small business gets real, progressive helps protect what you built with customizable coverage. -and i'm gonna -- -eh, eh, eh. -donny, no. -oh.
men, you need to get off the couch and get with the program. -eh, eh, eh. with golo, i lost 50 pounds. it feels really good to be able to button your jacket and not worry about it blowing up. -(laughs) -go to golo.com to lose weight and get healthier. time now for missus of the week. >> my miss those two extraordinary exercises privilege. they've been talking about institutional racism, critical theory but our new report shows prolonged school shutdowns that unions have been pushing all
along to her black and poor children. black kids have missed out on six months reading and mathematics. the poorest schools missed out on even more it's a tragedy for kids for a long time. paul: bill. >> paul, hit for saeed who one a metal and judo at the tokyo limbic's. he was competing for mongolia and thanked israel and hebrew for his victory because israel took him in two years ago when he went from iran. he defected because of the iranian coach for international judo match prevent possibility rent would have to face israel so what we have is a great olympic moment. paul: adam spira a hit for japanese prime minister, he
takes a lot of pressure to cancel the games. i find the objects unwatchable but many people seem to enjoy them and taking a step toward normal. paul: dan. >> here's one of the unlikeliest hits ever, celebrity progressives who led a protest and picket this week outside the new york office of alexandria ocasio-cortez. you heard that right. her beef is that she doesn't think she put it, represents us anymore in her complaint is cortez and the squad have not produced nationalized healthcare yet. you know, i never thought i would see someone get the left of aoc but this week that made my day. paul: could we get a primary run against aoc?
>> you never know. paul: if you have your own hit or miss, tweet us at j er.fnc. that's it for this week's show. thanks to my panel and thanks to all of you for watching. i am paul gigot, hope to see you here next week. ♪♪ legal battle laying out the court, justice department suing over order by governor right out of it, he wants to limit ground transportation of migrants what he says may be carrying the coronavirus virus during that in the name of protecting the health of texans and americans across the country, he said.