thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Grocery Chains Fined For Allegedly Endangering Workers During Pandemic

Workplace safety officials in California on Wednesday announced fines against five grocery stores that allegedly put workers in danger of contracting the coronavirus .
Workers from two of those stores died of COVID-19 .
The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health said four Ralphs locations and a Food 4 Less store all violated the law by not updating their safety plans for the pandemic .
Certain stores also failed to report coronavirus infections , properly train employees on pandemic protocols or maintain social distancing .
Officials said two Ralphs stores failed to inform the state after a worker died @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and another in Sherman Oaks .
Regulators learned about the two deaths roughly a week after they happened .
California law requires that a death likely to be job-related be reported to Cal/OSHA within eight hours of the employer learning about it .
“ Grocery retail workers are on the front lines and face a higher risk of exposure to COVID-19 , ” Parker said .
“ Employers in this industry must investigate possible causes of employee illness and put in place the necessary measures to protect their staff.
” Ralphs and Food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state ’ s announcement on the fines was a “ misrepresentation of the facts , ” and that some of the COVID-19 cases date back to before the state issued workplace guidelines on dealing with the disease .
The chains said they plan to appeal the citations and air their side of the story during hearings .
“ To be clear , the safety of our associates and customers is our top priority , ” the statement said .
“ We have learned and continue to learn while keeping our stores and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the pandemic.
” Grocery store employees have worked through every coronavirus surge as “ essential ” personnel critical to maintaining the food supply .
Their service has come at a steep cost : The United Food and Commercial Workers union says more than 100 grocery store workers have died of COVID-19 nationwide and at least 14,000 have been infected or exposed to the virus .
In addition to facing possible infection , workers have also had to play the role of social-distance enforcers .
Asking customers to wear masks for everyone ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even assaults at grocery stores .
Most workers were given modest pay bumps to compensate for the unusual hazards posed by the virus ― usually on the order of an extra $ 2 per hour ― but those premiums have long since disappeared at most chains even though the pandemic is ongoing .
Employees at Ralphs and Food 4 Less are represented by UFCW Local 170 .
The union filed complaints against the stores with state regulators after workers began contracting the virus in the spring .
Jackie Mayoral , who works at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among those who got sick .
She said in a statement through the union that she was glad her store got a citation .
“ I contracted COVID-19 at work and it wrecked me .
I am still recovering , ” Mayoral said .
“ People are still getting sick and safety measures are still implemented inconsistently.
” Another Ralphs worker , Maria Hernandez , recently penned an op-ed for The Los Angeles Times , saying the company needs to listen more to workers to keep stores safe : ” I believe Kroger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I know my store inside and out .
With support from the top , workers like me could help ensure safety protocols are being followed .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Workplace safety officials in California on Wednesday announced fines against five grocery stores that allegedly put workers in danger of contracting the coronavirus. Workers from two of those stores died of COVID-19.
The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health said four Ralphs locations and a Food 4 Less store all violated the law by not updating their safety plans for the pandemic. Certain stores also failed to report coronavirus infections, properly train employees on pandemic protocols or maintain social distancing.
Advertisement
All of the stores are owned by Cincinnati-based Kroger, the largest grocery conglomerate in the U.S.
Officials said two Ralphs stores failed to inform the state after a worker died at each ― one in Culver City and another in Sherman Oaks. Regulators learned about the two deaths roughly a week after they happened. California law requires that a death likely to be job-related be reported to Cal/OSHA within eight hours of the employer learning about it.
Cal/OSHA Chief Doug Parker said in a statement that employers are responsible for determining whether an employee’s illness may have resulted from work.
“Grocery retail workers are on the front lines and face a higher risk of exposure to COVID-19,” Parker said. “Employers in this industry must investigate possible causes of employee illness and put in place the necessary measures to protect their staff.”
The fines against the five stores total more $104,000, with individual fines ranging from $13,500 to $25,560.
Advertisement
Social distancing decals are seen on the floor of a Ralphs grocery store in Los Angeles. Lucy Nicholson / Reuters
Ralphs and Food 4 Less said in a statement that the state’s announcement on the fines was a “misrepresentation of the facts,” and that some of the COVID-19 cases date back to before the state issued workplace guidelines on dealing with the disease. The chains said they plan to appeal the citations and air their side of the story during hearings.
“To be clear, the safety of our associates and customers is our top priority,” the statement said. “We have learned and continue to learn while keeping our stores and supply chain open and serving Southern California during the pandemic.”
Grocery store employees have worked through every coronavirus surge as “essential” personnel critical to maintaining the food supply. Their service has come at a steep cost: The United Food and Commercial Workers union says more than 100 grocery store workers have died of COVID-19 nationwide and at least 14,000 have been infected or exposed to the virus.
In addition to facing possible infection, workers have also had to play the role of social-distance enforcers. Asking customers to wear masks for everyone’s protection has led to arguments and even assaults at grocery stores.
Advertisement
Most workers were given modest pay bumps to compensate for the unusual hazards posed by the virus ― usually on the order of an extra $2 per hour ― but those premiums have long since disappeared at most chains even though the pandemic is ongoing.
“I contracted COVID-19 at work and it wrecked me. I am still recovering.” - Jackie Mayoral, Ralphs employee
Employees at Ralphs and Food 4 Less are represented by UFCW Local 170. The union filed complaints against the stores with state regulators after workers began contracting the virus in the spring.
Jackie Mayoral, who works at a Ralphs store in Hollywood, was among those who got sick. She said in a statement through the union that she was glad her store got a citation.
“I contracted COVID-19 at work and it wrecked me. I am still recovering,” Mayoral said. “People are still getting sick and safety measures are still implemented inconsistently.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--When Trump Went After Hunter Biden For His Addiction, He Went After Me Too

ASSOCIATED PRESS President Donald Trump gestures while speaking during the first presidential debate on Tuesday , Sept. 29 , at Case Western University and the Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland , Ohio .
I was among the 73 million people who watched Tuesday night ’ s debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden .
It was a debate , I might add , that had all the decorum of a “ Real Housewives ” reunion show ( no shade to all you Real Housewives out there ) .
As a Black woman , I was stunned and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ denounce white supremacists .
But when Biden brought up his late son Beau ’ s military record and Trump countered by attacking Biden ’ s other son , Hunter , saying he was thrown out of the military for cocaine use , I had to get up and walk away from the television .
Ouch .
Even the Real Housewives know that kids are always off-limits .
Around 20 million Americans ages 12 and older have a substance abuse disorder , according to a 2019 report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shot at Biden ’ s son on this prime-time stage , he was also firing off at them and at the tens of thousands of family members who have an addict in their lives .
On April 22 , 1978 , then-first lady of the United States Betty Ford bravely announced to the world that she was addicted to prescription medication and alcohol .
Later on , she famously created the gold standard in treatment centers , the Betty Ford Center .
And up until her death at age 93 , she worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people associate with alcoholism and addiction .
Last week when actor Dax Shepard opened up on his podcast Armchair Expert about his drug use after claiming 16 years of sobriety , he spoke about being scared — not just of having “ lost his time , ” but of being stigmatized .
Shepard spoke candidly about how his ego was his own worst enemy , saying he had been afraid of what people would think of him if he confessed .
In 2006 , I was fighting a monster of an alcohol and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Like Shepard described on his podcast , my tolerance was also off the charts , meaning I had to take larger and larger quantities to feel even just kind of normal .
I was hiding my addiction from everyone I knew , keeping up with a wild schedule and suffering through daily bouts of withdrawal and shame .
Even though I knew that the quantities of pills and booze I was downing on a nightly basis could kill me , I was determined to keep up appearances .
I ’ d just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my kid ’ s school .
Later that year , I was asked to join the Board of Trustees .
And I had been at countless meetings and lunches with other committee moms and heard the way they trash-talked other parents who fell from grace .
“ Did you hear that Parker ’ s mom is having an affair with Mr. Todalski ?
” Or , “ I heard , Bryce ’ s dad lost his job .
He may have to switch schools.
” But the most scandalous subject of all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discuss in excited , hushed tones ?
Rehab .
Checking into rehab on July 14 , 2008 , was frightening .
I was scared to leave my kids , I was scared of what was sure to be a gnarly , painful detox , and I was terrified by the possibility of facing life without a cocktail ( or seven ) .
But it was boarding that airplane to return home 28 days later that was really the most terrifying thing I ’ d ever done .
To me , it was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s den .
I returned to an ex-husband who had no doubt discovered all of the bottles I had hidden around the house .
I returned to a group of women who had probably been coached on what they could and couldn ’ t say to their fragile , alcoholic friend .
But the most petrifying thing was driving to campus that first day back to drop off my kids .
I briefly thought about switching them to a different school but decided instead to don the required uniform of any disgraced addict @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Parking on the ramp to wait in that line was agonizing .
It ’ s taken me years to learn to hold my head high after rehab .
When appropriate , I identify as an alcoholic , but more often , I identify as a woman in recovery .
I write openly about my journey in sobriety , and for the most part , the responses I get are lovely , filled with inspiration and gratitude .
Until Tuesday night , I had started to become hopeful that the nation was indeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of addiction was becoming less and less significant .
That could possibly spare the lives of countless folks like me who might be reluctant to admit to having a condition that some people believe is a matter of choice or a weakness of character .
In a strange way , I ’ m glad that Trump attacked Hunter Biden ’ s addiction and recovery onstage that night .
Now there can be no doubt about where he stands .
And I ’ m glad that Joe Biden was allowed that moment — not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come to the defense of addicts all over the world .

President Donald Trump gestures while speaking during the first presidential debate on Tuesday, Sept. 29, at Case Western University and the Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, Ohio. ASSOCIATED PRESS
I was among the 73 million people who watched Tuesday night’s debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden. It was a debate, I might add, that had all the decorum of a “Real Housewives” reunion show (no shade to all you Real Housewives out there).
As a Black woman, I was stunned and demoralized by Trump’s refusal to denounce white supremacists. But when Biden brought up his late son Beau’s military record and Trump countered by attacking Biden’s other son, Hunter, saying he was thrown out of the military for cocaine use, I had to get up and walk away from the television. Ouch.
Advertisement
I circled back, though, when I heard the tone of Biden’s swift, loving response.
“My son, my son, my son ― like a lot of people you know at home ― had a drug problem. He’s overtaken it, he’s fixed it, he’s worked on it, and I’m proud of him. I’m proud of my son.”
Thank you, Joe.
Even the Real Housewives know that kids are always off-limits. Around 20 million Americans ages 12 and older have a substance abuse disorder, according to a 2019 report from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. When Trump took a shot at Biden’s son on this prime-time stage, he was also firing off at them and at the tens of thousands of family members who have an addict in their lives.
With roughly 70,000 people dying per year from accidental overdoses and with alcohol use skyrocketing during the pandemic, it feels wildly callous and irresponsible for our president to “go in” on people who are struggling with a disease formally recognized by the American Medical Association.
On April 22, 1978, then-first lady of the United States Betty Ford bravely announced to the world that she was addicted to prescription medication and alcohol. Later on, she famously created the gold standard in treatment centers, the Betty Ford Center. And up until her death at age 93, she worked tirelessly to remove the stigma that many people associate with alcoholism and addiction.
Advertisement
Last week when actor Dax Shepard opened up on his podcast Armchair Expert about his drug use after claiming 16 years of sobriety, he spoke about being scared — not just of having “lost his time,” but of being stigmatized. Shepard spoke candidly about how his ego was his own worst enemy, saying he had been afraid of what people would think of him if he confessed.
In 2019, U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams said, “The biggest killer around drug and alcohol abuse isn’t the overdoses. It’s the stigma. Stigma keeps people from asking for help.”
I know a little bit about that.
In 2006, I was fighting a monster of an alcohol and pill addiction, and I was losing. Like Shepard described on his podcast, my tolerance was also off the charts, meaning I had to take larger and larger quantities to feel even just kind of normal.
I was hiding my addiction from everyone I knew, keeping up with a wild schedule and suffering through daily bouts of withdrawal and shame. Even though I knew that the quantities of pills and booze I was downing on a nightly basis could kill me, I was determined to keep up appearances. I’d just been named president of the PTA at my kid’s school. Later that year, I was asked to join the Board of Trustees. And I had been at countless meetings and lunches with other committee moms and heard the way they trash-talked other parents who fell from grace.
“Did you hear that Parker’s mom is having an affair with Mr. Todalski?” Or, “I heard, Bryce’s dad lost his job. He may have to switch schools.” But the most scandalous subject of all, the one that they huddled around to discuss in excited, hushed tones? Rehab.
Advertisement
“Did you hear that so-and-so went to [the addiction treatment center] Hazelden? Her poor children. Her poor husband. I heard he had to hide her keys so she wouldn’t try and drive the kids to school drunk.”
Gulp. How could I tell anyone that I had this horribly destructive disease if admitting it meant that I would become the drunk mom de jour on the next PTA gossip menu?
Checking into rehab on July 14, 2008, was frightening. I was scared to leave my kids, I was scared of what was sure to be a gnarly, painful detox, and I was terrified by the possibility of facing life without a cocktail (or seven). But it was boarding that airplane to return home 28 days later that was really the most terrifying thing I’d ever done.
To me, it was the equivalent of walking into the lion’s den. I returned to an ex-husband who had no doubt discovered all of the bottles I had hidden around the house. I returned to a group of women who had probably been coached on what they could and couldn’t say to their fragile, alcoholic friend.
But the most petrifying thing was driving to campus that first day back to drop off my kids. I briefly thought about switching them to a different school but decided instead to don the required uniform of any disgraced addict — dark sunglasses and a baseball cap. Parking on the ramp to wait in that line was agonizing.
Advertisement
It’s taken me years to learn to hold my head high after rehab. When appropriate, I identify as an alcoholic, but more often, I identify as a woman in recovery. I write openly about my journey in sobriety, and for the most part, the responses I get are lovely, filled with inspiration and gratitude.
Until Tuesday night, I had started to become hopeful that the nation was indeed coming to a point where the stigma of addiction was becoming less and less significant. That could possibly spare the lives of countless folks like me who might be reluctant to admit to having a condition that some people believe is a matter of choice or a weakness of character.
In a strange way, I’m glad that Trump attacked Hunter Biden’s addiction and recovery onstage that night. Now there can be no doubt about where he stands. And I’m glad that Joe Biden was allowed that moment — not just to defend his son, but to come to the defense of addicts all over the world.
People in recovery have labored under this stigma long enough. We’re not bad people trying to be good. We’re sick people trying to get better. And as singer-songwriter Jason Isbell tweeted the day after the debate, “Recovery lessons really come in handy when you’re trying to rebuild something that’s in extreme disrepair.”
Need help with substance use disorder or mental health issues? In the U.S., call 800-662-HELP (4357) for the SAMHSA National Helpline.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Weight Isn't The Problem With COVID-19. How We Talk About It Is.

Here ’ s another thing to take into account : Evidence shows that the vast majority of people can ’ t lose weight and keep it off for more than a year , and it ’ s not for lack of willpower .
Intentional weight loss has been shown to cause adaptations like lowered energy expenditure and leptin production ( a hormone that signals fullness ) , and an increase in appetite and ghrelin production ( a hormone that signals hunger ) .
Thus , repeated weight loss attempts often lead to weight gain , as well as lowered self-esteem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with food .
That ’ s a lot to take in , and many people ’ s instinct might be to roll their eyes at the suggestion that it ’ s possible to be fat and healthy .
Evidence aside , let ’ s dive into how it might feel to be a fat person during the COVID-19 pandemic .
Because messaging ― especially incomplete messaging that doesn ’ t take in all the facts ― can affect people ’ s mental health .
And that can have damaging consequences on overall health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health messaging has been around forever , and COVID-19 is only making it worse .
“ I got ta be honest , the thing that gets me is how unremarkable this is , ” Thoune told HuffPost .
Too often , when “ people in positions of power — in health departments , in medical spaces — have the opportunity to make a fat person feel crappy about themselves , they take it.
” Consistently , she said , the message is , “ If you are fat , you ’ re at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And , it ’ s your fault.
” In other words , when the CDC or other organizations suggest lifestyle changes to promote weight loss , people of higher weights often hear , “ Your body is bad and it ’ s your responsibility to change it.
” But as mentioned above , long-term weight loss isn ’ t easy or even possible for most people .
Cooper Stoll explained that one of the biggest issues with this kind of messaging is that “ most public health professionals or physicians aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The problem is , they believe that being fat is inherently bad and that these messages are necessary and helpful .
Because people in these fields often don ’ t acknowledge that these messages have negative consequences , she said , it makes it that much harder to solve the problem of weight stigma .
And many people are very resistant to the idea that fat bodies aren ’ t inherently bad .
“ I ’ ve been giving talks about my research on systems of oppression for years , ” Cooper Stoll @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that fat people should have some degree of respect and be treated like human beings , and I tell you , critics just come out of the woodwork .
I ’ ve never gotten this kind of backlash before with any of my other work.
” Fatphobia and weight gain comments during COVID-19 can also be isolating .
Ivy Felicia is The Body Relationship Coach .
She helps “ women of all sizes , shapes , and body types feel at peace in their body through any stage of life , ” drawing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struggles .
She is also the founder of Fat Women of Color , and explains that intersectionality — the interconnectedness of various marginalized identities , like being a person of color and being fat — shapes people ’ s experiences with stigma and discrimination .
“ Any time someone talks about the fact that they don ’ t want to be fat or they don ’ t want to gain weight , it ’ s inherently fatphobic , ” Felicia said .
“ It sends the message to a person of size that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to look like you , ’ or , ‘ I don ’ t want to be what you already are.
’ ” It may be unintentional , she added , but that doesn ’ t make it any less harmful .
Many people at higher weights are more afraid of getting COVID-19 than their lower-weight peers .
“ A lot of [ my higher-weight clients ] are even more scared than the average person of even leaving their house , ” Rosenbluth said .
“ There ’ s this fear of , ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ am I going to be last on the list because they ’ re looking at me as someone who brought this on themself.
’ That does happen.
” Think twice before making comments about weight and COVID-19 , or weight in general .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Messages about the perceived association between weight and COVID-19 risk are everywhere.
On the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s website, there’s a page dedicated to “Obesity, Race/Ethnicity, and COVID-19,” in which the agency blatantly states that “obesity worsens outcomes from COVID-19.”
The page goes on to say that while obesity is complex and is associated with systemic factors like poverty, education, housing and racial inequality, people should prioritize “eating a healthy diet,” “being active,” “getting enough sleep,” and “reducing stress.” These things, the CDC says, can help promote weight loss and prevent weight gain, which can then reduce “the risk of severe illness from COVID-19.”
Advertisement
This type of messaging is covertly stigmatizing. While the CDC talks very matter-of-factly about obesity and COVID-19, the underlying message is that fat is bad, and that fat people should prioritize ridding themselves of their fatness above all else.
But that thinking may be partially flawed: The research on weight and COVID-19 has some limitations. In an April 2020 story for Wired, dietitian Christy Harrison explained that none of the studies backing this link “control for race, socioeconomic status, or quality of care — social determinants of health that we know explain the lion’s share of health disparities between groups of people.”
They also don’t take into account comorbidities (other health conditions an individual might have) or the fact that health care professionals typically have a strong bias against fat people, which affects the quality of care they provide.
Here’s another thing to take into account: Evidence shows that the vast majority of people can’t lose weight and keep it off for more than a year, and it’s not for lack of willpower. Intentional weight loss has been shown to cause adaptations like lowered energy expenditure and leptin production (a hormone that signals fullness), and an increase in appetite and ghrelin production (a hormone that signals hunger). Thus, repeated weight loss attempts often lead to weight gain, as well as lowered self-esteem, disordered eating habits and a preoccupation with food.
Advertisement
That’s a lot to take in, and many people’s instinct might be to roll their eyes at the suggestion that it’s possible to be fat and healthy. Evidence aside, let’s dive into how it might feel to be a fat person during the COVID-19 pandemic. Because messaging ― especially incomplete messaging that doesn’t take in all the facts ― can affect people’s mental health. And that can have damaging consequences on overall health, too.
(Full disclosure: The individuals interviewed below reiterated during our conversations that their opinions do not represent the opinions of every person who’s at a higher weight, since each person’s experience and background is different. Still, their thoughts offer insight into how the current public health messaging around weight and COVID-19 can be harmful.)
Here’s what you need to know:
Weight stigma in public health messaging has been around forever, and COVID-19 is only making it worse.
Laurie Cooper Stoll and Darci Thoune are professors at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, in the fields of sociology and English, respectively. Both are involved with fat studies, an interdisciplinary field of scholarship marked by an aggressive, consistent, rigorous critique of the negative assumptions, stereotypes and stigma placed on fat and the fat body.
Thoune wrote a post on their shared Two Fat Professors blog at the beginning of April about how diet culture and fatphobia was showing up as memes about quarantine weight gain, and how that perpetuates weight stigma against people at higher weights.
Advertisement
“I gotta be honest, the thing that gets me is how unremarkable this is,” Thoune told HuffPost. Too often, when “people in positions of power — in health departments, in medical spaces — have the opportunity to make a fat person feel crappy about themselves, they take it.” Consistently, she said, the message is, “If you are fat, you’re at a greater risk for negative health outcomes. And, it’s your fault.” In other words, when the CDC or other organizations suggest lifestyle changes to promote weight loss, people of higher weights often hear, “Your body is bad and it’s your responsibility to change it.” But as mentioned above, long-term weight loss isn’t easy or even possible for most people.
Cooper Stoll explained that one of the biggest issues with this kind of messaging is that “most public health professionals or physicians aren’t doing this out of maliciousness.” The problem is, they believe that being fat is inherently bad and that these messages are necessary and helpful. Because people in these fields often don’t acknowledge that these messages have negative consequences, she said, it makes it that much harder to solve the problem of weight stigma.
“Because most people feel like it’s common knowledge that fat is bad, and that’s backed up by health care and public health professionals, it actually opens the door to make it OK to beat up on fat people kind of all over the place,” Thoune added.
And many people are very resistant to the idea that fat bodies aren’t inherently bad. “I’ve been giving talks about my research on systems of oppression for years,” Cooper Stoll said. “But you start writing that fat people should have some degree of respect and be treated like human beings, and I tell you, critics just come out of the woodwork. I’ve never gotten this kind of backlash before with any of my other work.”
kali9 via Getty Images Health doesn't always correlate with size. Blanket statements about weight and jokes about weight gain during the pandemic can be damaging.
Advertisement
Fatphobia and weight gain comments during COVID-19 can also be isolating.
Ivy Felicia is The Body Relationship Coach. She helps “women of all sizes, shapes, and body types feel at peace in their body through any stage of life,” drawing from her own experience with body image struggles. She is also the founder of Fat Women of Color, and explains that intersectionality — the interconnectedness of various marginalized identities, like being a person of color and being fat — shapes people’s experiences with stigma and discrimination.
She pointed out that the messaging around weight and COVID-19 might negatively affect those at higher weights in other ways that can influence their overall health.
“Any time someone talks about the fact that they don’t want to be fat or they don’t want to gain weight, it’s inherently fatphobic,” Felicia said. “It sends the message to a person of size that, ‘I don’t want to look like you,’ or, ‘I don’t want to be what you already are.’” It may be unintentional, she added, but that doesn’t make it any less harmful.
Many people at higher weights are more afraid of getting COVID-19 than their lower-weight peers.
Shira Rosenbluth is a body-positive fashion blogger and eating disorder therapist who has been open about her own struggles recovering from an eating disorder at a higher weight. No surprise, she takes issue with all of the anti-obesity and weight loss campaigns that public health officials are promoting right now.
“What’s interesting to me is that all of these messages claim to care about people’s health,” Rosenbluth said. “But as we know, extreme dieting or dieting of any kind is physically harmful.”
Advertisement
Not to mention the stress this might cause people in larger bodies. “Telling [higher-weight] people they’re more likely to die, for them to be under that kind of stress, is obviously also very unhealthy,” Rosenbluth said.
And although the evidence linking higher weights to greater risk of complications from COVID-19 is shaky, the fear and stress felt by those in larger bodies is warranted.
“A lot of [my higher-weight clients] are even more scared than the average person of even leaving their house,” Rosenbluth said. “There’s this fear of, ‘If they run out of ventilators, am I going to be last on the list because they’re looking at me as someone who brought this on themself.’ That does happen.”
A 2016 meta analysis on the link between weight and H1N1 found that higher-weight people were less likely to be prescribed early antiviral treatment, which itself increases their risk of poor outcomes.
DisobeyArt via Getty Images Data on weight and COVID-19 isn't exactly as straightforward as it's being presented.
Advertisement
Think twice before making comments about weight and COVID-19, or weight in general.
As Thoune and Cooper Stoll explained, the issues of weight stigma and fatphobia, particularly during COVID-19, are so hard to address because most people don’t realize that they exist. We hear respected individuals and organizations talk about the risks of being at a higher weight, or the benefits of weight loss, and we don’t think twice about how these messages might be harmful.
The fact is, the public health and medical communities may never change their messaging on weight as a risk factor for COVID-19 and other diseases. There are, of course, cases where weight can matter for health risk. But a blanket assumption, without taking into account other factors of a person’s life, isn’t doing any favors, which is why doctors need to look at a person’s full health profile rather than just focus on someone’s body mass index (which is a deeply flawed tool also, by the way).
No matter your stance on the topic — maybe you believe that it’s possible to be healthy at a higher weight, maybe you don’t — at least make space for the idea that obesity and weight loss messaging is inherently stigmatizing to people at higher weights. Keep in mind also that weight loss isn’t possible for many people, despite what we’re led to believe.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Trump Is 'The Largest Driver' Of COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories, Study Finds

From using racist rhetoric to promoting dangerous “ miracle cures , ” President Donald Trump is by far the biggest spreader of COVID-19 false claims , according to a new analysis by researchers at Cornell University ’ s Alliance for Science , which identifies and combats misinformation and conspiracy theories about science .
The study , published by the university on Thursday , examined over 38 million English-language news articles about the coronavirus from Jan. 1 to May 26 .
Of those , just over a million contained misinformation or disinformation .
Misinformation is any false information , regardless of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mislead , and disinformation is shared with the specific intent of misleading or deceiving .
Trump , the researchers concluded , is “ likely the largest driver of the COVID-19 misinformation.
” Nearly 38 % of the articles mentioned the president , the study found , making him “ by far the largest single component of the infodemic.
” In addition to direct mentions of Trump , there was significant overlap between news coverage of the president and news coverage of “ miracle cures ” because the president was often spreading the false @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his millions of Twitter followers .
Trump , for example , persistently touted the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as an effective coronavirus treatment , despite scientific research showing otherwise .
He also ludicrously suggested that injecting disinfectant could wipe out the virus .
Other common categories of misinformation identified in the researchers ’ analysis include racist conspiracy theories , such as those placing an outsized focus on the virus originating China and promoting racist tropes about people of Chinese descent .
Trump frequently refers to the pandemic using racist slurs and blames China in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leadership .
His rages have coincided with a wave of racism against Asian Americans this year .
Conspiracy theories often begin on social media and extremist websites .
But the biggest danger arises when they ’ re repeated on influential platforms and blasted by those holding the biggest megaphones , the researchers said .
“ It is especially notable that while misinformation and conspiracy theories promulgated by ostensibly grassroots sources , such as anti-vaccination groups , 5G opponents , and political extremists , do appear in our analysis in several of the topics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overall volume of misinformation than more powerful actors , in particular the U.S. President , ” they wrote .
The researchers found that only 16.4 % of the articles in the study specifically called out or corrected false information about the pandemic .
The study was being peer-reviewed for an academic journal , but the authors withdrew it because of the lengthy delay so they could share the findings immediately , according to The New York Times .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
From using racist rhetoric to promoting dangerous “miracle cures,” President Donald Trump is by far the biggest spreader of COVID-19 false claims, according to a new analysis by researchers at Cornell University’s Alliance for Science, which identifies and combats misinformation and conspiracy theories about science.
The study, published by the university on Thursday, examined over 38 million English-language news articles about the coronavirus from Jan. 1 to May 26. Of those, just over a million contained misinformation or disinformation. Misinformation is any false information, regardless of whether the person sharing it intended to mislead, and disinformation is shared with the specific intent of misleading or deceiving.
Advertisement
Trump, the researchers concluded, is “likely the largest driver of the COVID-19 misinformation.” Nearly 38% of the articles mentioned the president, the study found, making him “by far the largest single component of the infodemic.”
In addition to direct mentions of Trump, there was significant overlap between news coverage of the president and news coverage of “miracle cures” because the president was often spreading the false information during White House briefings or to his millions of Twitter followers. Trump, for example, persistently touted the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as an effective coronavirus treatment, despite scientific research showing otherwise. He also ludicrously suggested that injecting disinfectant could wipe out the virus.
Other common categories of misinformation identified in the researchers’ analysis include racist conspiracy theories, such as those placing an outsized focus on the virus originating China and promoting racist tropes about people of Chinese descent.
Trump frequently refers to the pandemic using racist slurs and blames China in order to deflect from his own failed leadership. His rages have coincided with a wave of racism against Asian Americans this year.
Advertisement
Conspiracy theories often begin on social media and extremist websites. But the biggest danger arises when they’re repeated on influential platforms and blasted by those holding the biggest megaphones, the researchers said.
“It is especially notable that while misinformation and conspiracy theories promulgated by ostensibly grassroots sources, such as anti-vaccination groups, 5G opponents, and political extremists, do appear in our analysis in several of the topics, they contributed far less to the overall volume of misinformation than more powerful actors, in particular the U.S. President,” they wrote.
The researchers found that only 16.4% of the articles in the study specifically called out or corrected false information about the pandemic.
The study was being peer-reviewed for an academic journal, but the authors withdrew it because of the lengthy delay so they could share the findings immediately, according to The New York Times.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Rep. Katie Porter Makes Pharma Exec Squirm Over Cancer Drug Price Hikes

Rep. Katie Porter ( D-Calif. ) and her trusty whiteboard are at it again .
The lawmaker delivered one of her textbook takedowns during a House Committee on Oversight and Reform hearing Wednesday with current and former executives of three major drug companies .
The committee is investigating the high cost of prescription drugs in the U.S. Porter began her grilling of Mark Alles , the CEO of Celgene until 2019 , by asking about the company ’ s repeated price hikes of the cancer drug Revlimid .
It now costs $ 763 per pill ― up from $ 215 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drug was approved for new indications , but Porter stopped him to ask if that had changed the pill in any way .
“ Did the drug start to work faster ?
” she asked .
“ Were there fewer side effects ?
How did you change the formula or production of Revlimid to justify this price increase ?
” Alles said the manufacturing of the pill remained the same .
Porter then outlined how the average senior citizen in her district could not even afford one pill : Half a million dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pharma CEO got for hiking the price of ONE cancer treatment drug .
How many patients lost their lives because they could n't afford this medicine ?
Here 's our conversation : pic.twitter.com/mkke6y9tnw — Rep. Katie Porter ( @ RepKatiePorter ) September 30 , 2020 Next , she drew a new figure : $ 13 million ― referring to Alles ’ salary as Celgene CEO in 2017 .
“ It ’ s 200 times the average American ’ s income and 360 times what the average senior gets on Social Security , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calculations about Alles ’ bonus , which she reminded him was linked to the company ’ s yearly earnings .
“ You personally received half a million dollars just by tripling the price of Revlimid , ” she said .
“ So , to recap here , the drug didn ’ t get any better , the cancer patients didn ’ t get any better , you just got better at making money .
You just refined your skills at price gouging .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) and her trusty whiteboard are at it again.
The lawmaker delivered one of her textbook takedowns during a House Committee on Oversight and Reform hearing Wednesday with current and former executives of three major drug companies. The committee is investigating the high cost of prescription drugs in the U.S.
Porter began her grilling of Mark Alles, the CEO of Celgene until 2019, by asking about the company’s repeated price hikes of the cancer drug Revlimid. It now costs $763 per pill ― up from $215 in 2005.
Advertisement
Alles explained that the drug was approved for new indications, but Porter stopped him to ask if that had changed the pill in any way.
“Did the drug start to work faster?” she asked. “Were there fewer side effects? How did you change the formula or production of Revlimid to justify this price increase?”
Alles said the manufacturing of the pill remained the same.
Porter then outlined how the average senior citizen in her district could not even afford one pill:
Half a million dollars.
That's the bonus a Big Pharma CEO got for hiking the price of ONE cancer treatment drug.
How many patients lost their lives because they couldn't afford this medicine? Here's our conversation: pic.twitter.com/mkke6y9tnw — Rep. Katie Porter (@RepKatiePorter) September 30, 2020
Next, she drew a new figure: $13 million ― referring to Alles’ salary as Celgene CEO in 2017.
“It’s 200 times the average American’s income and 360 times what the average senior gets on Social Security,” Porter said.
Advertisement
She then made some calculations about Alles’ bonus, which she reminded him was linked to the company’s yearly earnings.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--White House Refuses Direct Answer On Whether Trump Condemns White Supremacy

Several reporters pressed McEnany about whether she could say outright that Trump denounces white supremacists and far-right extremists ― groups of people who comprise some of the president ’ s base .
The questions were first sparked by Fox News correspondent John Roberts .
“ I would like to ask you for a definitive and declarative statement without ambiguity or deflection , ” Roberts asked the press secretary .
“ As the person who speaks for the president , does the president denounce white supremacism , and groups that espouse it , in all its forms ?
” “ This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself , the day before by the president himself on the debate stage , ” McEnany said , even though that claim is false .
The press secretary then read a series of quotes from Trump saying “ sure ” when asked if he would condemn white supremacy .
But despite continued questioning from Roberts , she never gave a declarative statement on whether the president denounces the ideology and its followers .
Instead , she accused the reporter of “ contriving a storyline and a narrative.
” “ For all of you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asking that question , I don ’ t care .
It ’ s a question that needs to be asked , and clearly the president ’ s Republican colleagues a mile away from here are looking for an answer for it too , ” he said .
“ So stop deflecting , stop blaming the media .
I ’ m tired of it.
” In response to Reid ’ s question on what the White House is doing to combat white supremacy , McEnany said that Trump wants to prosecute the Ku Klux @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a national hate crime , and has pushed for the execution of a white supremacist .
Reid pressed further , saying , “ Saying you want to do it is different than actually doing it.
” The press secretary continued repeating that Trump has condemned white supremacy , even though he hasn ’ t .
CNN ’ s Collins pointed out that the far-right extremist group the Proud Boys celebrated when Trump refused to condemn white supremacy during Tuesday ’ s debate and instead told the violent gang to “ stand back and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s statement could be considered “ denouncing ” white supremacy if the Proud Boys celebrated it , McEnany called her question a “ partisan attack.
” “ I just don ’ t understand why you knew you were going to get these questions and you don ’ t have a statement ready to just say , ‘ We do unambiguously denounce these groups , ’ ” Collins said , adding that even Republicans have called on the president to be more forceful in disavowing hate groups .
During the first presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News asked Trump if he was willing to condemn “ white supremacists and militia groups ” and tell them to “ stand down ” in cities like Kenosha , Wisconsin , and Portland , Oregon ― areas where heavily armed far-right extremists like the Proud Boys have shown up to counterprotest anti-racism demonstrations .
“ Sure , I ’ m willing to do that , ” Trump said , without actually doing it .
“ What do you want to call them ?
Give me a name , go ahead , who would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When Wallace and Democratic nominee Joe Biden then repeated that they were asking to Trump to condemn white supremacists and right-wing hate groups like the Proud Boys , the president said : “ Proud Boys ?
Stand back and stand by.
” Members of the violent fascist gang then celebrated Trump ’ s comments , sharing the group ’ s logo with the president ’ s words .
“ But I tell you what , somebody has got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump added on the debate stage , referring to anti-fascist activists .
The FBI itself has said that “ antifa ” is an ideology and not an organization , dealing a blow to Trump ’ s repeated accusations against the left .
Director Christopher Wray testified to Congress last month that antifa is not a group but “ a movement , ” and that racially motivated extremists like white supremacists have been “ primary source of ideologically motivated ” lethal attacks in recent years in the U.S .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany spent Thursday’s briefing refusing to definitively say that President Donald Trump condemns white supremacy, a frustrating response just days after Trump dodged the same question at the first presidential debate.
Several reporters pressed McEnany about whether she could say outright that Trump denounces white supremacists and far-right extremists ― groups of people who comprise some of the president’s base. The questions were first sparked by Fox News correspondent John Roberts.
Advertisement
“I would like to ask you for a definitive and declarative statement without ambiguity or deflection,” Roberts asked the press secretary. “As the person who speaks for the president, does the president denounce white supremacism, and groups that espouse it, in all its forms?”
“This has been answered yesterday by the president himself, the day before by the president himself on the debate stage,” McEnany said, even though that claim is false. The press secretary then read a series of quotes from Trump saying “sure” when asked if he would condemn white supremacy.
But despite continued questioning from Roberts, she never gave a declarative statement on whether the president denounces the ideology and its followers. Instead, she accused the reporter of “contriving a storyline and a narrative.”
Kayleigh McEnany dances around a question from Fox News asking her to categorically condemn white supremacists. Very bizarre. pic.twitter.com/7xoyMHPTxa — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 1, 2020
Advertisement
Roberts spoke on Fox News after the briefing, visibly angry at McEnany’s refusal to give a clear denunciation of white supremacy.
“For all of you on Twitter who are hammering me for asking that question, I don’t care. It’s a question that needs to be asked, and clearly the president’s Republican colleagues a mile away from here are looking for an answer for it too,” he said. “So stop deflecting, stop blaming the media. I’m tired of it.”
Some pretty striking comments from John Roberts on Fox pic.twitter.com/zqftfKoluF — Dave Brown (@dave_brown24) October 1, 2020
Two other reporters followed Roberts in pushing for the press secretary to make a statement condemning white supremacy ― CBS News correspondent Paula Reid and CNN correspondent Kaitlan Collins.
In response to Reid’s question on what the White House is doing to combat white supremacy, McEnany said that Trump wants to prosecute the Ku Klux Klan as domestic terrorists, make lynching a national hate crime, and has pushed for the execution of a white supremacist. Reid pressed further, saying, “Saying you want to do it is different than actually doing it.” The press secretary continued repeating that Trump has condemned white supremacy, even though he hasn’t.
Advertisement
.@paulareidcbs presses Kayleigh McEnany on President Trump's inconsistent statements denouncing racism and hate groups: "You're saying that he condemns it. I have his record right here. It's mixed. His record is mixed." https://t.co/Nj065CIsxp pic.twitter.com/IlfX1GRLaf — CBS News (@CBSNews) October 1, 2020
CNN’s Collins pointed out that the far-right extremist group the Proud Boys celebrated when Trump refused to condemn white supremacy during Tuesday’s debate and instead told the violent gang to “stand back and stand by.” When Collins asked how Trump’s statement could be considered “denouncing” white supremacy if the Proud Boys celebrated it, McEnany called her question a “partisan attack.”
“I just don’t understand why you knew you were going to get these questions and you don’t have a statement ready to just say, ‘We do unambiguously denounce these groups,’” Collins said, adding that even Republicans have called on the president to be more forceful in disavowing hate groups.
Reporter to Kayleigh McEnany: "You knew you were going to get these questions and you don't have a statement ready to just say, 'We do unambiguously denounce these groups.'" pic.twitter.com/SKIZWaWzWR — The Hill (@thehill) October 1, 2020
During the first presidential debate, moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News asked Trump if he was willing to condemn “white supremacists and militia groups” and tell them to “stand down” in cities like Kenosha, Wisconsin, and Portland, Oregon ― areas where heavily armed far-right extremists like the Proud Boys have shown up to counterprotest anti-racism demonstrations.
Advertisement
“Sure, I’m willing to do that,” Trump said, without actually doing it. “What do you want to call them? Give me a name, go ahead, who would you like me to condemn?”
When Wallace and Democratic nominee Joe Biden then repeated that they were asking to Trump to condemn white supremacists and right-wing hate groups like the Proud Boys, the president said: “Proud Boys? Stand back and stand by.” Members of the violent fascist gang then celebrated Trump’s comments, sharing the group’s logo with the president’s words.
“But I tell you what, somebody has got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem, this is a left-wing problem,” Trump added on the debate stage, referring to anti-fascist activists.
McEnany also brought up antifa when pressed by reporters about denouncing white supremacy, accusing the media of not covering what she and the administration claims is a violent far-left group.
The FBI itself has said that “antifa” is an ideology and not an organization, dealing a blow to Trump’s repeated accusations against the left. Director Christopher Wray testified to Congress last month that antifa is not a group but “a movement,” and that racially motivated extremists like white supremacists have been “primary source of ideologically motivated” lethal attacks in recent years in the U.S.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Republican Texas Governor Shuts Down Absentee Ballot Drop-Off Sites

Texas Gov .
Greg Abbott ( R ) announced on Thursday that multiple absentee ballot drop-off sites would close the next day , narrowing drop-off to one site per county even in areas home to millions of people .
The biggest reductions in drop-off locations will occur in the fast-growing counties with large cities and suburban areas that are increasingly leaning toward the Democratic Party in a state dominated by Republicans for decades .
Harris County , with a population of 4.7 million , will see its drop-off sites fall from 12 to one .
The 1.3 million people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ four sites whittled to just one .
All over the state , the order could lead to longer commutes and lines to drop off ballots .
This supersedes a previous order Abbott issued that allowed counties to operate multiple drop-off .
The order also states that poll watchers must be allowed to observe this single drop-off location .
“ Republicans are on the verge of losing , so Governor Abbott is trying to change the rules last minute , ” Gilberto Hinojosa , chair of the Texas Democratic Party , said in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very few states that has not allowed all voters to request an absentee ballot based on fear of the coronavirus pandemic .
Texans must either be 65 years or older , have a significant disability or be in another location on election day to qualify for an absentee ballot even during the pandemic .
That means the reduction in drop-off sites will specifically make it more difficult for senior citizens to return their ballots in person .
Thursday ’ s order reducing ballot drop-off locations comes as Texas Republicans sue Abbott in court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expanded early voting and absentee ballot drop-offs .
The original July 27 order moved the beginning of early voting to Oct. 13 in order to ease crowding at in-person vote sites on Election Day and allowed counties to operate absentee ballot drop-off sites .
This was a measure meant to respond to the pandemic that has killed more than 16,000 Texans .
Abbott may soon find himself facing a lawsuit from the other side .
Marc Elias , the top election lawyer for the Democratic Party and its allied groups , threatened to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order with a lawsuit to keep more than one drop-off site per county open .
This is an outrageous act of voter suppression by the Republicans who know they are losing at the ballot box .
We will explore ALL legal options to ensure voting rights for all Texans !
https : //t.co/TYuhHvh2b1 — Marc E. Elias ( @ marceelias ) October 1 , 2020 While the presidential election between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden is closer in Texas than any since the 1990s , the major focus is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Representatives .
Democrats need to win nine seats in the Texas House to win control .
Such a victory would deprive Republicans of total control over the state ’ s redistricting process .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) announced on Thursday that multiple absentee ballot drop-off sites would close the next day, narrowing drop-off to one site per county even in areas home to millions of people.
The biggest reductions in drop-off locations will occur in the fast-growing counties with large cities and suburban areas that are increasingly leaning toward the Democratic Party in a state dominated by Republicans for decades.
Advertisement
Harris County, with a population of 4.7 million, will see its drop-off sites fall from 12 to one. The 1.3 million people who live in Travis County will see their four sites whittled to just one. All over the state, the order could lead to longer commutes and lines to drop off ballots.
This supersedes a previous order Abbott issued that allowed counties to operate multiple drop-off. The order also states that poll watchers must be allowed to observe this single drop-off location.
“Republicans are on the verge of losing, so Governor Abbott is trying to change the rules last minute,” Gilberto Hinojosa, chair of the Texas Democratic Party, said in a statement.
Texas is one of the very few states that has not allowed all voters to request an absentee ballot based on fear of the coronavirus pandemic. Texans must either be 65 years or older, have a significant disability or be in another location on election day to qualify for an absentee ballot even during the pandemic. That means the reduction in drop-off sites will specifically make it more difficult for senior citizens to return their ballots in person.
Advertisement
Thursday’s order reducing ballot drop-off locations comes as Texas Republicans sue Abbott in court to block his initial order, which expanded early voting and absentee ballot drop-offs. The original July 27 order moved the beginning of early voting to Oct. 13 in order to ease crowding at in-person vote sites on Election Day and allowed counties to operate absentee ballot drop-off sites. This was a measure meant to respond to the pandemic that has killed more than 16,000 Texans.
Abbott may soon find himself facing a lawsuit from the other side. Marc Elias, the top election lawyer for the Democratic Party and its allied groups, threatened to respond to the governor’s Thursday order with a lawsuit to keep more than one drop-off site per county open.
This is an outrageous act of voter suppression by the Republicans who know they are losing at the ballot box.
We will explore ALL legal options to ensure voting rights for all Texans! https://t.co/TYuhHvh2b1 — Marc E. Elias (@marceelias) October 1, 2020
While the presidential election between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden is closer in Texas than any since the 1990s, the major focus is on control of the Texas House of Representatives. Democrats need to win nine seats in the Texas House to win control. Such a victory would deprive Republicans of total control over the state’s redistricting process.
Democrats are also targeting 10 national House seats currently held by Republicans and looking to defeat Sen. John Cornyn (R).


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--White House Called Out For False Claim That Amy Coney Barrett Was A 'Rhodes Scholar'

The White House press secretary said during a press briefing Thursday that Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett “ is a Rhodes scholar , ” according to a tweet by a Bloomberg News reporter who covered the briefing .
The terms refers to the prestigious scholarship to study at Oxford University .
Kayleigh McEnany says in briefing that Amy Coney Barrett is a `` Rhodes scholar . ''
Barrett did not receive a Rhodes Scholarship , but rather received a bachelor 's degree from Rhodes College in Memphis .
When reporter points that out , McEnany says , `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — CBS News ( @ CBSNews ) October 1 , 2020 Barrett , however , did not receive a Rhodes Scholarship , but rather earned a B.A .
in English literature from Rhodes College in Memphis , Tennessee , where she graduated magna cum laude , according to her bio at the University of Notre Dame Law School , where she is also an alumna and a member of school ’ s faculty .
When a reporter pointed out this fact to McEnany , the press secretary responded by saying , “ That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” referencing her notes .
Heather Long , a reporter for The Washington Post who actually was a Rhodes scholar , took things a step further by checking the scholarship ’ s alumni database and tweeted her findings Thursday .
“ I am pasting below all Rhodes Scholars ever selected with the first name ‘ Amy , ’ ” Long tweeted .
“ Amy Coney Barrett is not a ‘ Rhodes Scholar.
’ ” I am an actual Rhodes Scholar ( from 2004 ) .
You can view all Rhodes Scholars in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am pasting below all Rhodes Scholars ever selected with the first name `` Amy . ''
Amy Coney Barrett is not a `` Rhodes Scholar . ''
https : //t.co/pJS3AUlXBp pic.twitter.com/cfmb4nanSY — Heather Long ( @ byHeatherLong ) October 1 , 2020 McEnany ’ s gaffe seems consistent with the Trump administration ’ s record of lying to the American public .
In fact , President Donald Trump ’ s penchant for making false claims is so prevalent that CNN fact-checker and reporter Daniel Dale has been meticulously chronicling his lies for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett to fill the seat of the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who died on Sept. 18 and fought tirelessly for gender equality , has also raised concerns among social liberals .
Barrett , a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit , was mentored by Antonin Scalia , a Supreme Court justice who consistently ruled against gender equality .
Barrett , a strict Catholic , is socially conservative and has called Roe v. Wade , the landmark Supreme Court decision ensuring the right to abortion , an “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a public “ statement of protest ” against the Affordable Care Act ’ s birth control benefit , referring to it as an “ assault on religious liberty.
” If confirmed , Barrett , 48 , would be the youngest justice on the Supreme Court and her tenure could last for decades .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Kayleigh McEnany got fact-checked for making a false claim.
The White House press secretary said during a press briefing Thursday that Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett “is a Rhodes scholar,” according to a tweet by a Bloomberg News reporter who covered the briefing. The terms refers to the prestigious scholarship to study at Oxford University.
Kayleigh McEnany says in briefing that Amy Coney Barrett is a "Rhodes scholar."
Barrett did not receive a Rhodes Scholarship, but rather received a bachelor's degree from Rhodes College in Memphis.
When reporter points that out, McEnany says, "My bad" https://t.co/Nj065CIsxp pic.twitter.com/YpIFz4W1PA — CBS News (@CBSNews) October 1, 2020
Advertisement
Barrett, however, did not receive a Rhodes Scholarship, but rather earned a B.A. in English literature from Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee, where she graduated magna cum laude, according to her bio at the University of Notre Dame Law School, where she is also an alumna and a member of school’s faculty.
When a reporter pointed out this fact to McEnany, the press secretary responded by saying, “That’s what I have written here,” referencing her notes.
When the reporter continued to push, McEnany responded: “She attended Rhodes College, so, my bad.”
Heather Long, a reporter for The Washington Post who actually was a Rhodes scholar, took things a step further by checking the scholarship’s alumni database and tweeted her findings Thursday.
“I am pasting below all Rhodes Scholars ever selected with the first name ‘Amy,’” Long tweeted. “Amy Coney Barrett is not a ‘Rhodes Scholar.’”
Advertisement
I am an actual Rhodes Scholar (from 2004).
You can view all Rhodes Scholars in this database here:https://t.co/RF0MbYBPux
I am pasting below all Rhodes Scholars ever selected with the first name "Amy." Amy Coney Barrett is not a "Rhodes Scholar." https://t.co/pJS3AUlXBp pic.twitter.com/cfmb4nanSY — Heather Long (@byHeatherLong) October 1, 2020
McEnany’s gaffe seems consistent with the Trump administration’s record of lying to the American public.
In fact, President Donald Trump’s penchant for making false claims is so prevalent that CNN fact-checker and reporter Daniel Dale has been meticulously chronicling his lies for years.
Trump’s nomination of Barrett to fill the seat of the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died on Sept. 18 and fought tirelessly for gender equality, has also raised concerns among social liberals.
Barrett, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, was mentored by Antonin Scalia, a Supreme Court justice who consistently ruled against gender equality.
Advertisement
Barrett, a strict Catholic, is socially conservative and has called Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision ensuring the right to abortion, an “erroneous decision.” She has also signed a public “statement of protest” against the Affordable Care Act’s birth control benefit, referring to it as an “assault on religious liberty.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Trump Supporter Attacks Journalist Outside Minnesota Rally: 'You Want To Be Violent?'

The attacker , who has not been publicly identified , appeared to punch a phone out of the hands of Dymanh Chhoun , a photojournalist who was on assignment for local CBS affiliate WCCO-TV at the time .
Chhoun captured the assault on his phone , which he was using to gather video of demonstrators who had assembled ahead of the rally .
“ You guys want to be peaceful ?
Be peaceful !
You want to be violent ?
Come to me !
” the assailant can be heard saying in the video , moments before turning to confront @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violent attack on my @ wcco colleague , friend & photojournalist  @ Dymanh in Duluth- I am so thankful he was not hurt .
The venom must stop , our photojournalists are our truest storytellers & this video tells an important , sad & terrifying one .
Thx Dymanh pic.twitter.com/9caREau3HS — esme murphy ( @ esmemurphy ) October 1 , 2020 Chhoun was not injured during the incident , WCCO reported .
Chhoun had identified himself as a member of the media prior to being assailed , according to the news station @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recording footage on his phone for a news report , another male hit the phone out of the reporting party ’ s hand , ” the police said in a statement .
“ The male who hit the phone left without incident several minutes before this event was reported to officers .
There were no injuries or property damage reported in connection with this incident and no citations issued at this time .
The Duluth Police Department is investigating this case.
” This isn ’ t the first time a Trump supporter has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a Trump rally attendee swore at a BBC cameraman and shoved him .
Trump has repeatedly stoked anger against members of the press , calling them the “ enemy of the people.
” He ’ s also praised violence against journalists as a “ beautiful sight.
” “ Any guy that can do a body slam , he ’ s my guy , ” Trump said of the congressman .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A supporter of President Donald Trump attacked a journalist outside Trump’s rally in Duluth, Minnesota, on Wednesday.
The attacker, who has not been publicly identified, appeared to punch a phone out of the hands of Dymanh Chhoun, a photojournalist who was on assignment for local CBS affiliate WCCO-TV at the time.
Advertisement
Chhoun captured the assault on his phone, which he was using to gather video of demonstrators who had assembled ahead of the rally.
“You guys want to be peaceful? Be peaceful! You want to be violent? Come to me!” the assailant can be heard saying in the video, moments before turning to confront Chhoun.
I am outraged by this violent attack on my @wcco colleague,friend &photojournalist @Dymanh in Duluth- I am so thankful he was not hurt. The venom must stop, our photojournalists are our truest storytellers &this video tells an important,sad & terrifying one. Thx Dymanh pic.twitter.com/9caREau3HS — esme murphy (@esmemurphy) October 1, 2020
Chhoun was not injured during the incident, WCCO reported. Chhoun had identified himself as a member of the media prior to being assailed, according to the news station.
Advertisement
Duluth police said they’re investigating the reported “disturbance.”
“A male reported that while recording footage on his phone for a news report, another male hit the phone out of the reporting party’s hand,” the police said in a statement. “The male who hit the phone left without incident several minutes before this event was reported to officers. There were no injuries or property damage reported in connection with this incident and no citations issued at this time. The Duluth Police Department is investigating this case.”
This isn’t the first time a Trump supporter has attacked a journalist. In February 2019, a Trump rally attendee swore at a BBC cameraman and shoved him.
Trump has repeatedly stoked anger against members of the press, calling them the “enemy of the people.” He’s also praised violence against journalists as a “beautiful sight.”
In 2018, Trump praised a Republican congressman who physically assaulted a reporter the year before.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Federal Judge Halts Trump's Cop-Filled Law Enforcement Task Force

A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration not to release a report by the Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice , finding that the group ― comprised entirely of current and former members of law enforcement ― had been “ far from transparent.
” Senior U.S. District Judge John Bates , a George W. Bush appointee , issued a 45-page ruling finding that commission ― which President Donald Trump announced with fanfare at a police conference last year ― had violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act ( FACA ) , which requires that committees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ viewpoints represented .
Attorney General William Barr said there was a need to hear from a “ diversity of backgrounds and perspectives , ” but the commission was full of law enforcement officials .
Bates ’ order requires Barr “ to ensure the Commission has a fairly balanced membership.
” Last month , as HuffPost previously reported , an elected prosecutor quit one of the commission ’ s working groups because he worried that it was “ providing cover ” for a predetermined law-and-order agenda that “ will only widen the divisions in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commission ’ s membership “ consists entirely of current and former law enforcement officials ” and that no commissioner “ has a criminal defense , civil rights , or community organization background.
” “ Especially in 2020 , when racial justice and civil rights issues involving law enforcement have erupted across the nation , one may legitimately question whether it is sound policy to have a group with little diversity of experience examine , behind closed doors , the sensitive issues facing law enforcement and the criminal justice system in America today , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defense Fund had challenged the commission .
Bates found that it had standing to do so , and that it had “ also suffered an injury in fact because the government has denied LDF access to a representative voice on the Commission.
” “ LDF has an interest in and is directly impacted by the Commission ’ s function of studying policing , ” he wrote .
“ Because Attorney General Barr appointed the Commissioners at the same time as establishing the Commission , and only selected from those with law enforcement backgrounds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and its representatives had an opportunity to formally apply for Commission membership.
” Noting that “ all eighteen Commissioners are current or former law enforcement ” and that the group included no members of civil rights organizations , nor “ any criminal defense attorney , academic , civic leader , or representative of a community organization or social service organization , ” Bates said that FACA “ aimed to ensure there would not be all law enforcement officials on a DOJ commission studying the broad subject of policing in America.
” Bates wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what precisely a commission with a “ fair balance ” would look like , but said Barr ’ s commission didn ’ t come even close to complying with the law .
“ The Commission ’ s function is to improve policing , including relations between law enforcement and the communities they protect .
Yet the Commission does not include a single member who represents elements of those communities , rather than law enforcement , ” Bates wrote .
“ Indeed , the Court is hard pressed to think of a starker example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balance requirement than a commission charged with examining broad issues of policing in today ’ s America that is composed entirely of past and present law enforcement officials.
” Trump , who has proclaimed himself the candidate of “ law and order ” and who has been running a largely fear-based reelection campaign , was set to release the commission ’ s report later this month .
But Bates ordered that commission proceedings “ be halted and that defendants may not submit , publish , or rely on any report or recommendations produced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FACA are satisfied .
”

Attorney General William Barr Alexander Drago / Reuters
A federal judge on Thursday ordered the Trump administration not to release a report by the Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, finding that the group ― comprised entirely of current and former members of law enforcement ― had been “far from transparent.”
Senior U.S. District Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, issued a 45-page ruling finding that commission ― which President Donald Trump announced with fanfare at a police conference last year ― had violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which requires that committees be “fairly balanced” in the viewpoints represented.
Advertisement
Attorney General William Barr said there was a need to hear from a “diversity of backgrounds and perspectives,” but the commission was full of law enforcement officials. Bates’ order requires Barr “to ensure the Commission has a fairly balanced membership.”
Last month, as HuffPost previously reported, an elected prosecutor quit one of the commission’s working groups because he worried that it was “providing cover” for a predetermined law-and-order agenda that “will only widen the divisions in our nation.”
Bates wrote that the commission’s membership “consists entirely of current and former law enforcement officials” and that no commissioner “has a criminal defense, civil rights, or community organization background.”
“Especially in 2020, when racial justice and civil rights issues involving law enforcement have erupted across the nation, one may legitimately question whether it is sound policy to have a group with little diversity of experience examine, behind closed doors, the sensitive issues facing law enforcement and the criminal justice system in America today,” he wrote.
Advertisement
The NAACP Legal Defense Fund had challenged the commission. Bates found that it had standing to do so, and that it had “also suffered an injury in fact because the government has denied LDF access to a representative voice on the Commission.”
“LDF has an interest in and is directly impacted by the Commission’s function of studying policing,” he wrote. “Because Attorney General Barr appointed the Commissioners at the same time as establishing the Commission, and only selected from those with law enforcement backgrounds, it does not appear that LDF and its representatives had an opportunity to formally apply for Commission membership.”
Noting that “all eighteen Commissioners are current or former law enforcement” and that the group included no members of civil rights organizations, nor “any criminal defense attorney, academic, civic leader, or representative of a community organization or social service organization,” Bates said that FACA “aimed to ensure there would not be all law enforcement officials on a DOJ commission studying the broad subject of policing in America.”
Bates wrote that it would be difficult to determine what precisely a commission with a “fair balance” would look like, but said Barr’s commission didn’t come even close to complying with the law.
“The Commission’s function is to improve policing, including relations between law enforcement and the communities they protect. Yet the Commission does not include a single member who represents elements of those communities, rather than law enforcement,” Bates wrote. “Indeed, the Court is hard pressed to think of a starker example of non-compliance with FACA’s fair balance requirement than a commission charged with examining broad issues of policing in today’s America that is composed entirely of past and present law enforcement officials.”
Advertisement
Trump, who has proclaimed himself the candidate of “law and order” and who has been running a largely fear-based reelection campaign, was set to release the commission’s report later this month. But Bates ordered that commission proceedings “be halted and that defendants may not submit, publish, or rely on any report or recommendations produced by the Commission until the requirements of FACA are satisfied.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Fox News’ John Roberts Rips Trump Defenders: ‘Stop Deflecting’ On White Supremacy Remarks

“ Sure , I ’ m willing to do that , ” Trump responded , “ but I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing , not from the right wing.
” Moments later , Trump instructed Proud Boys , a violent neo-fascist street gang , to “ stand back and stand by ” before pivoting back to the dangers posed by “ antifa and the left.
” Proud Boys leadership reportedly viewed the statement as both an endorsement and a call to violence .
On Wednesday , Trump attempted to walk back his comments by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Proud Boys .
“ I don ’ t know who Proud Boys are , ” Trump told reporters .
“ But whoever they are , they have to stand down and let law enforcement do their work.
” “ If he didn ’ t know who they were , why did he denounce them ?
” Roberts said .
“ Why didn ’ t he say , ‘ Well , I don ’ t know who they are .
Can you give me a little bit more information about them ?
’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So this all remains very puzzling.
” During the briefing Thursday , Roberts had asked McEnanay for a “ definitive and declarative statement ” about whether Trump denounces white supremacy and all groups that espouse it .
McEnanay appeared to shrug off the controversy surrounding Trump ’ s remarks during the debate earlier in the week , listing a few past statements the president has made condemning bigotry .
“ The president was asked this .
He said ‘ sure ’ three times , ” McEnany said .
She later stated that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than any president in modern history.
” But Roberts continued to press her : “ Can you right now denounce white supremacy and the group that espouses it ?
” “ I just did , ” McEnany said .
“ The president has denounced white supremacy , the KKK and hate groups in all forms .
... His record on this is unmistakable .
”

“Sure, I’m willing to do that,” Trump responded, “but I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing.”
Moments later, Trump instructed Proud Boys, a violent neo-fascist street gang, to “stand back and stand by” before pivoting back to the dangers posed by “antifa and the left.” Proud Boys leadership reportedly viewed the statement as both an endorsement and a call to violence.
On Wednesday, Trump attempted to walk back his comments by claiming he isn’t familiar with the Proud Boys.
“I don’t know who Proud Boys are,” Trump told reporters. “But whoever they are, they have to stand down and let law enforcement do their work.”
Roberts on Thursday called Trump’s claim of ignorance “puzzling.”
“If he didn’t know who they were, why did he denounce them?” Roberts said. “Why didn’t he say, ‘Well, I don’t know who they are. Can you give me a little bit more information about them?’ And then make a decision about it. So this all remains very puzzling.”
During the briefing Thursday, Roberts had asked McEnanay for a “definitive and declarative statement” about whether Trump denounces white supremacy and all groups that espouse it.
McEnanay appeared to shrug off the controversy surrounding Trump’s remarks during the debate earlier in the week, listing a few past statements the president has made condemning bigotry.
“The president was asked this. He said ‘sure’ three times,” McEnany said. She later stated that Trump “has condemned white supremacy more than any president in modern history.”
But Roberts continued to press her: “Can you right now denounce white supremacy and the group that espouses it?”
“I just did,” McEnany said. “The president has denounced white supremacy, the KKK and hate groups in all forms. ... His record on this is unmistakable.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Wisconsin GOP Deeply Worried About Racing Sausages At Polling Places

Charlie Riedel/Associated Press These are the sausage mascots that the Wisconsin GOP wants to keep away from polling sites .
The Wisconsin GOP is very concerned that giant racing sausages might get people excited about voting in this election , and the party is seeking to ban them from early voting locations .
Andrew Hitt , chairman of the Wisconsin Republican Party , wrote a letter to the Milwaukee Election Commission on Tuesday stating his opposition to having mascots and players at early voting locations at Fiserv Forum ( where the Milwaukee Bucks play ) or Miller Park ( where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his letter , first reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel , Hitt said that the appearance of these characters would constitute “ electioneering ” and be illegal .
“ All of the Bucks ’ and Brewers ’ athletes and mascots are , of course , beloved of their fans , so their presence at a venue is undoubtedly something of significant value , ” he wrote .
“ Consequently , it would be inappropriate for them to be at Miller Park or Fiserv Forum while those venues are in use as alternate absentee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mascots are so famous and beloved that having them there constitutes giving people something of value in exchange for their vote .
The Racing Sausages were at a Sept. 22 drive-through voter registration event .
Nowhere in Hitt ’ s letter is there any allegation that the mascots were campaigning for any candidate or political party , or that they were intimidating voters .
“ My initial reaction is , I don ’ t know what value a mascot would have in a parking lot as far as enticing voters somewhere , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city Election Commission , told the Journal Sentinel .
“ It ’ s certainly nonpartisan and not telling anyone how to vote.
” Hitt stood by his remarks to the Journal Sentinel , saying he knows his concerns may sound “ a little silly , ” but you “ can ’ t give anything of value to people to come in to vote.
” Republicans have been very concerned about making it easier for people to turn out to vote in November .
President Donald Trump has railed against mail-in voting , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefit when barriers to voting are lowered .
On Sept. 26 , the city of Madison , which is liberal , hosted “ Democracy in the Park ” events at more than 200 locations , intended to help people register to vote , request absentee ballots , serve as witnesses for people who already had their ballots and accept completed forms .
Yet Republicans objected to these events , saying they were too much like in-person voting , which had not yet started , and risked threatening the security and integrity of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican Gov .
Greg Abbott told counties that they can designate only one location as a drop-off site for completed absentee ballots , adding another voting barrier during the coronavirus pandemic .
His announcement would hit Harris County , which includes Houston , is the state ’ s most populous county and leans Democratic , particularly hard , forcing officials to reduce their 11 drop-off sites to one .
We want to know what you ’ re hearing on the ground from the candidates .
If you get any interesting ― or suspicious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hear anything else you think we should know about , email us at scoops @ huffpost.com .

These are the sausage mascots that the Wisconsin GOP wants to keep away from polling sites. Charlie Riedel/Associated Press
The Wisconsin GOP is very concerned that giant racing sausages might get people excited about voting in this election, and the party is seeking to ban them from early voting locations.
Andrew Hitt, chairman of the Wisconsin Republican Party, wrote a letter to the Milwaukee Election Commission on Tuesday stating his opposition to having mascots and players at early voting locations at Fiserv Forum (where the Milwaukee Bucks play) or Miller Park (where the Milwaukee Brewers play).
Advertisement
In his letter, first reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Hitt said that the appearance of these characters would constitute “electioneering” and be illegal.
“All of the Bucks’ and Brewers’ athletes and mascots are, of course, beloved of their fans, so their presence at a venue is undoubtedly something of significant value,” he wrote. “Consequently, it would be inappropriate for them to be at Miller Park or Fiserv Forum while those venues are in use as alternate absentee ballot sites.”
In other words, the mascots are so famous and beloved that having them there constitutes giving people something of value in exchange for their vote.
The Racing Sausages and Bernie Brewer appear at Brewers games, while Bango is the Bucks’ mascot.
Be careful, or Bango might get you to vote. Morry Gash/Associated Press
Advertisement
The Racing Sausages were at a Sept. 22 drive-through voter registration event. Nowhere in Hitt’s letter is there any allegation that the mascots were campaigning for any candidate or political party, or that they were intimidating voters.
“My initial reaction is, I don’t know what value a mascot would have in a parking lot as far as enticing voters somewhere,” Claire Woodall-Vogg, executive director of the city Election Commission, told the Journal Sentinel. “It’s certainly nonpartisan and not telling anyone how to vote.”
Hitt stood by his remarks to the Journal Sentinel, saying he knows his concerns may sound “a little silly,” but you “can’t give anything of value to people to come in to vote.”
Republicans have been very concerned about making it easier for people to turn out to vote in November. President Donald Trump has railed against mail-in voting, essentially openly admitting that he thinks Democrats benefit when barriers to voting are lowered.
On Sept. 26, the city of Madison, which is liberal, hosted “Democracy in the Park” events at more than 200 locations, intended to help people register to vote, request absentee ballots, serve as witnesses for people who already had their ballots and accept completed forms. Yet Republicans objected to these events, saying they were too much like in-person voting, which had not yet started, and risked threatening the security and integrity of the ballots.
Advertisement
In Texas on Thursday, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott told counties that they can designate only one location as a drop-off site for completed absentee ballots, adding another voting barrier during the coronavirus pandemic.
His announcement would hit Harris County, which includes Houston, is the state’s most populous county and leans Democratic, particularly hard, forcing officials to reduce their 11 drop-off sites to one.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Stanley McChrystal, U.S. Army General Fired After Mocking Biden, Endorses Biden

The endorsement came roughly 10 years after then-President Barack Obama fired McChrystal following a Rolling Stone profile of the general in which he mocked Biden and other administration officials .
Biden , if elected in November , “ would surround himself with an effective team of good people , ” McChrystal said during an appearance on MSNBC ’ s “ Morning Joe.
” “ I think he would set a tone in which he brings out the best of people , ” McChrystal continued .
“ Again , not everybody will agree with every policy ― nobody ever will ― @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy .
But we have to believe in our values .
You have to believe that your commander-in-chief , at the end of the day , is someone you can trust .
And I can trust Joe Biden.
” McChrystal led the Joint Special Operations Command in the mid-2000s under President George W. Bush .
He served as commander of the International Security Assistance force for just over a year under Obama before being forced to resign in June 2010 , a day after Rolling Stone published an article online in which McChrystal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden and criticized Obama ’ s leadership .
“ I extend my sincerest apology for this profile , ” he said in a statement at the time .
“ It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened .
Throughout my career , I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity .
What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard.
” Obama denied firing McChrystal for the remarks , instead saying the general was dismissed because of differences in Afghan war strategy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can sustain that unity of effort and achieve our objectives in Afghanistan without making this change , ” Obama told reporters at the time .
McChrystal has made clear that he ’ s no fan of President Donald Trump .
He called Trump dishonest and immoral during a 2018 interview with ABC News .
“ If we want to be governed by someone we wouldn ’ t do a business deal with because their background is so shady ― if we ’ re willing to do that ― then that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are , ” McChrystal said .
“ And so I think it ’ s necessary at those times to take a stand .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal on Thursday endorsed Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.
The endorsement came roughly 10 years after then-President Barack Obama fired McChrystal following a Rolling Stone profile of the general in which he mocked Biden and other administration officials.
Biden, if elected in November, “would surround himself with an effective team of good people,” McChrystal said during an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
Advertisement
“I think he would set a tone in which he brings out the best of people,” McChrystal continued. “Again, not everybody will agree with every policy ― nobody ever will ― and that’s healthy in a democracy. But we have to believe in our values. You have to believe that your commander-in-chief, at the end of the day, is someone you can trust. And I can trust Joe Biden.”
McChrystal led the Joint Special Operations Command in the mid-2000s under President George W. Bush. He served as commander of the International Security Assistance force for just over a year under Obama before being forced to resign in June 2010, a day after Rolling Stone published an article online in which McChrystal and his staff made disparaging comments about Biden and criticized Obama’s leadership.
In the Rolling Stone story, McChrystal and his staff expressed frustration with reporter Michael Hastings’ questions about Biden.
“Are you asking about Vice President Biden?” McChrystal said with a laugh. “Who’s that?”
“Biden?” a top adviser chimed in. “Did you say: Bite Me?”
McChrystal apologized soon after the story was published.
“I extend my sincerest apology for this profile,” he said in a statement at the time. “It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened. Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far short of that standard.”
Advertisement
Obama denied firing McChrystal for the remarks, instead saying the general was dismissed because of differences in Afghan war strategy.
“I don’t think we can sustain that unity of effort and achieve our objectives in Afghanistan without making this change,” Obama told reporters at the time.
McChrystal has made clear that he’s no fan of President Donald Trump. He called Trump dishonest and immoral during a 2018 interview with ABC News.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-01--Amy Coney Barrett Signed Ad Supporting End Of ‘Barbaric’ Roe v. Wade

Carlos Barria / Reuters This is not the first public letter on reproductive rights signed by Amy Coney Barrett to come under scrutiny .
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett signed her name on a newspaper advertisement in 2006 calling for the “ end of abortion on demand.
” The two-page spread in the South Bend Tribune was sponsored by St. Joseph County Right to Life , an anti-abortion group that also goes by the name Right to Life Michiana .
“ We , the following citizens of Michiana , oppose abortion on demand and defend the right to life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a statement on the ad ’ s first page reads .
“ Please continue to pray to end abortion.
” Barrett ’ s name is listed on the page , among hundreds of others including her husband ’ s .
The second full page of the Tribune ad , opposite the page of signatures , urges “ an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade.
” Barrett , a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit and a law professor at the University of Notre Dame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump to fill the seat vacated by Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
Barrett is a devout Catholic who is known to personally oppose abortion .
She is expected to face intense questioning about her ability to remain impartial on abortion rights , considering her apparent hostility to Roe v. Wade , the landmark court decision that legalized the procedure nationwide .
The ad that Barrett signed her name to was actually a two-page spread in the South Bend Tribune , and the full ad specifically calls for `` an end to the barbaric @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is as clear a position as you 'll ever see from a judicial nominee .
Here is the full ad : pic.twitter.com/PcZCcu89MS — Brian Fallon ( @ brianefallon ) October 1 , 2020 The resurfacing of the letter , first reported by The Guardian , has ratcheted up reproductive rights supporters ’ concerns that Barrett will work to overturn Roe v. Wade if seated .
Her nomination is supported by many anti-abortion activists who hope that she will represent their interests on the court .
Jackie Appleman , the executive director of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organization had no comment on Barrett nor her nomination .
A White House spokesperson said that during Barrett ’ s 2017 confirmation hearing , the judge made clear she was committed to the rule of law , not her own personal beliefs .
This is not the first public letter on reproductive rights signed by Barrett to come under scrutiny .
In 2012 , she signed a letter of protest to the Obama administration about the birth control mandate in the Affordable Care Act .
The statement criticized the workaround offered to religious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of moral substance and fails to remove the assault on individual liberty and the rights of conscience which gave rise to the controversy .
”

This is not the first public letter on reproductive rights signed by Amy Coney Barrett to come under scrutiny. Carlos Barria / Reuters
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett signed her name on a newspaper advertisement in 2006 calling for the end of “abortion on demand.”
The two-page spread in the South Bend Tribune was sponsored by St. Joseph County Right to Life, an anti-abortion group that also goes by the name Right to Life Michiana.
Advertisement
“We, the following citizens of Michiana, oppose abortion on demand and defend the right to life from fertilization to natural death,” a statement on the ad’s first page reads. “Please continue to pray to end abortion.” Barrett’s name is listed on the page, among hundreds of others including her husband’s.
The second full page of the Tribune ad, opposite the page of signatures, urges “an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade.”
Barrett, a federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit and a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, was nominated last week by President Donald Trump to fill the seat vacated by Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Barrett is a devout Catholic who is known to personally oppose abortion.
She is expected to face intense questioning about her ability to remain impartial on abortion rights, considering her apparent hostility to Roe v. Wade, the landmark court decision that legalized the procedure nationwide.
Advertisement
The ad that Barrett signed her name to was actually a two-page spread in the South Bend Tribune, and the full ad specifically calls for "an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade".
This is as clear a position as you'll ever see from a judicial nominee.
Here is the full ad: pic.twitter.com/PcZCcu89MS — Brian Fallon (@brianefallon) October 1, 2020
The resurfacing of the letter, first reported by The Guardian, has ratcheted up reproductive rights supporters’ concerns that Barrett will work to overturn Roe v. Wade if seated. Her nomination is supported by many anti-abortion activists who hope that she will represent their interests on the court.
Jackie Appleman, the executive director of Right to Life Michiana, said the organization had no comment on Barrett nor her nomination.
A White House spokesperson said that during Barrett’s 2017 confirmation hearing, the judge made clear she was committed to the rule of law, not her own personal beliefs.
This is not the first public letter on reproductive rights signed by Barrett to come under scrutiny.
Advertisement
In 2012, she signed a letter of protest to the Obama administration about the birth control mandate in the Affordable Care Act. The statement criticized the workaround offered to religious employers, saying it “changes nothing of moral substance and fails to remove the assault on individual liberty and the rights of conscience which gave rise to the controversy.”
She also signed a letter to Catholic bishops in 2015 affirming the “value of human life from conception to natural death.”
Barrett declined to respond to questions about the ad during a meeting with Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) on Capitol Hill on Thursday.
CORRECTION: This article previously misquoted the language of the advertisement as calling for the “end of abortion on demand.” The text of the ad says the signers “oppose abortion on demand.”