Why? The federal government didn’t cancel the convention which, in any case, never happened.
Mayor Barrett said the city expected to be reimbursed by the federal government for the more than $20 million it had spent on convention-related security costs.
The city’s Police Department remains on high alert, Mr. Barrett said, for possible protesters outside the convention center, though it remains unclear why they would come without the national media spotlight in town.
If you have protesters showing up outside an empty Dem convention with nobody but moths inside, that’s really your problem. It’s not a federal issue.
The New York Times article delves into all the people who lost money on the planned DNC convention. And that’s unfortunate. For them. But a whole lot of people have lost money during the pandemic.
And considering that Barrett was throwing a fit over President Trump sending federal agents to protect federal institutions, doing his shtick about needing federal money for security costs is blatant chutzpah.
“Given the events that have taken place in Portland over the last few nights, I am extremely concerned that President Trump is looking for opportunities to create more political division in cities across the nation. Federal agents are not welcome here for that purpose.”
“If the federal presence is to truly cooperate with local law enforcement, then it is imperative the limits of their activities are clearly delineated and monitored.”
Maybe they can police the imaginary convention instead.
Jim Roosevelt, a convention attendee since 1960, said he had been asked by delegates over the summer how best to experience the convention.
“The first thing I recommend is that people watching at home act as if they are there,” said Mr. Roosevelt, a D.N.C. member from Massachusetts. “Set aside the week as if you were there in Milwaukee and immerse yourself in the electronic participation.”
Delusional sounds like a good way to go.