thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--University of Michigan Students Ordered To Stay In Place Amid COVID-19 Rise

County health authorities issued an emergency stay-in-place order for University of Michigan undergraduate students after they were found to make up more than 60 % of local COVID-19 cases .
The order announced by the Washtenaw County Health Department on Tuesday will last until Nov. 3 .
It ’ s meant to slow the coronavirus infection rate and allow for better contact tracing , health officials said .
“ The situation locally has become critical , and this order is necessary to reverse the current increase in cases , ” county Health Officer Jimena Loveluck said .
Loveluck ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ near the Ann Arbor campus is driven by social gatherings ” that ignore state and local health guidelines .
A faculty member holds a sign as students and faculty protest in-person classes for the fall semester at the University of Michigan campus in Ann Arbor in August .
The university on Tuesday said that with the rise in infections , it will move more undergraduate classes to remote instruction for the remainder of the fall semester .
The stay-in-place order is different from a quarantine order in that students at the Ann Arbor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ official and essential activities , so long as they follow COVID-19 precautions , including wearing face coverings , social distancing , and frequent hand cleaning , the county said .
The order does not mention graduate students and does not affect the university ’ s sports teams .
The University of Michigan football stadium is pictured in August .
The stay-at-home order will not affect the university 's sports teams .
Michigan , like many other parts of the country , is experiencing an upward trend in COVID-19 cases as cooler weather pushes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The state on Monday set a new record for seven-day average daily cases , with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting an average of 1,818 new cases .
This tops the prior 1,622 seven-day average record from early April .
Last month , Michigan State University in East Lansing urged all of its localized students to self-quarantine for two weeks following a surge of COVID-19 cases as students returned for the fall semester .
During the first three weeks of September , the city of East Lansing saw a 315 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Ingham County Health Department said .
The county announced quarantine orders for 39 group houses , which included 25 fraternity and sorority houses .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
County health authorities issued an emergency stay-in-place order for University of Michigan undergraduate students after they were found to make up more than 60% of local COVID-19 cases.
The order announced by the Washtenaw County Health Department on Tuesday will last until Nov. 3. It’s meant to slow the coronavirus infection rate and allow for better contact tracing, health officials said.
Advertisement
“The situation locally has become critical, and this order is necessary to reverse the current increase in cases,” county Health Officer Jimena Loveluck said. Loveluck’s order said the surge “at or near the Ann Arbor campus is driven by social gatherings” that ignore state and local health guidelines.
A faculty member holds a sign as students and faculty protest in-person classes for the fall semester at the University of Michigan campus in Ann Arbor in August. Emily Elconin / Reuters
The university on Tuesday said that with the rise in infections, it will move more undergraduate classes to remote instruction for the remainder of the fall semester.
The stay-in-place order is different from a quarantine order in that students at the Ann Arbor school are permitted to physically participate in official and essential activities, so long as they follow COVID-19 precautions, including wearing face coverings, social distancing, and frequent hand cleaning, the county said.
Advertisement
The order does not mention graduate students and does not affect the university’s sports teams.
The University of Michigan football stadium is pictured in August. The stay-at-home order will not affect the university's sports teams. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Michigan, like many other parts of the country, is experiencing an upward trend in COVID-19 cases as cooler weather pushes people indoors and the flu season begins.
The state on Monday set a new record for seven-day average daily cases, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting an average of 1,818 new cases. This tops the prior 1,622 seven-day average record from early April.
Last month, Michigan State University in East Lansing urged all of its localized students to self-quarantine for two weeks following a surge of COVID-19 cases as students returned for the fall semester.
During the first three weeks of September, the city of East Lansing saw a 315% increase in total case count, the Ingham County Health Department said. The county announced quarantine orders for 39 group houses, which included 25 fraternity and sorority houses.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Child Regression Amid The COVID-19 Crisis: When To Worry And When Not To

And one common way for children to show they ’ re struggling is when they regress , which generally means they slip back into old behaviors or seemingly lose skills they once had .
For example : the previously solid sleeper who is now waking up whining for water every night .
The school-age kiddo who is having toddler-esque tantrums again .
Or the tween who ’ d gotten pretty adept at knocking out schoolwork , but is now unable to sit through a Zoom call .
Mental health experts who work with kids say that , anecdotally at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So if your child is regressing during the pandemic , they ’ re in good company .
Here ’ s what parents need to know .
Regressing is a defense mechanism—and in a lot of ways , it ’ s totally expected right now .
Children ( and adults ! )
go through regressive episodes because they ’ re feeling anxious , unsure , and because they ’ re looking for a bit of reassurance and comfort .
In some ways , these momentary behavioral regressions are a typical part of childhood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they maybe get a bit rattled , and they retreat for a bit .
One matter to keep in mind : Many parents have spent far more time with their children during the pandemic than before , so Hameed said it ’ s really typical that children may be clingier or struggling more with separation anxiety — particularly younger kids .
So , the kiddo who used to be pretty even-keeled about being dropped off at daycare might now be having meltdowns when you step out for an hour or two to run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often think of regressions as something that mainly affect younger kids who might slip back into night waking , thumb sucking , tantrums , potty training issues , etc.
, experts say older children might also revert to behaviors parents haven ’ t seen in some time .
“ It ’ s not limited to early developmental stages , ” said Julie Ross , executive director of Parenting Horizons and author of “ Practical Parenting for the 21st Century.
” “ You might have a kid who is 13 , 14 coming into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night .
They ’ re returning to an earlier time when they felt safe in the ‘ cocoon ’ of mom and dad.
” If regressing interferes with their functioning , that ’ s a red flag .
If there has been a change but it doesn ’ t necessarily impact a kid ’ s ability to get through the day as they typically would , that ’ s probably not something to be overly concerned with .
But if it ’ s something that ’ s been going on for weeks ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really getting in their way , it needs to be addressed .
For example , you might find it annoying that your toddler suddenly slips back into baby talk , but it ’ s not necessarily inhibiting your collective ability to get through the days , Hameed said .
But if you find that suddenly you ’ re having to , say , spoon-feed a young child who used to be able to feed themselves , and every meal is turning into a battle , that ’ s different .
( It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re specifically talking about behavioral regressions here , but kids may also be regressing academically and socially during the pandemic . )
“ Parents should ask themselves : ‘ Is this behavior , or this regression , getting in the way of my child functioning normally in life ?
’ ― knowing that ‘ normal ’ is kind of out the window right now , ” echoed Ross .
For parents of older children , it ’ s especially important to talk to them about the “ why , ” she added .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the regressive behavior is rooted in more serious underlying anxiety , loneliness , depression , etc .
If you have concerns about how your child is regressing , you should absolutely reach out to their pediatrician ASAP .
An expert can help rule out whether the behavior is actually being caused by an underlying medical concern , and can also help connect you with mental health resources .
Your child ’ s school can be another excellent touchpoint , both Hameed and Ross said .
Yes , regressions are common right now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents should simply accept behaviors they don ’ t like .
Both experts interviewed for this story urged parents to be patient with children , but also be clear with them about what you know they ’ re capable of .
Part of that is for them , and part of that is for you .
Pandemic parenting is relentless and challenging in so many ways .
Take care of yourself by maintaining expectations for your child ’ s behavior , which is really kind of a form of self-care .
“ Part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our own mental health is OK , ” Ross said .
“ So often I hear from parents who are concerned about something their child is experiencing , and it becomes clear that the parent is at the end of their rope as well .
”

Oksana_Alex via Getty Images Regressions may be more common during COVID-19. Here's what parents should know.
At this point in the coronavirus pandemic, there is plenty of evidence that it’s taken a toll on children’s mental health.
And one common way for children to show they’re struggling is when they regress, which generally means they slip back into old behaviors or seemingly lose skills they once had. For example: the previously solid sleeper who is now waking up whining for water every night. The school-age kiddo who is having toddler-esque tantrums again. Or the tween who’d gotten pretty adept at knocking out schoolwork, but is now unable to sit through a Zoom call.
Advertisement
Mental health experts who work with kids say that, anecdotally at least, all of this on the rise. So if your child is regressing during the pandemic, they’re in good company. Here’s what parents need to know.
Regressing is a defense mechanism—and in a lot of ways, it’s totally expected right now.
“It makes sense that parents are reporting these kinds of regressions right now,” said Kenya Hameed, a clinical neuropsychologist with the New York-based Child Mind Institute. “Regressions occur in response to stressors or big changes. And there’s so much uncertainty right now.”
Kids are generally extremely resilient, she added, but their routines have changed — and keep changing — which can be really challenging to cope with.
Children (and adults!) go through regressive episodes because they’re feeling anxious, unsure, and because they’re looking for a bit of reassurance and comfort. In some ways, these momentary behavioral regressions are a typical part of childhood development: Kids grow and change, they maybe get a bit rattled, and they retreat for a bit.
Advertisement
Other times, like during an ongoing global pandemic, regressions are a clear response to a particular stressor.
One matter to keep in mind: Many parents have spent far more time with their children during the pandemic than before, so Hameed said it’s really typical that children may be clingier or struggling more with separation anxiety — particularly younger kids. So, the kiddo who used to be pretty even-keeled about being dropped off at daycare might now be having meltdowns when you step out for an hour or two to run some errands.
“That’s normal,” she said, “and that’s to be expected.”
Regressions don’t just affect younger children.
Again, while we often think of regressions as something that mainly affect younger kids who might slip back into night waking, thumb sucking, tantrums, potty training issues, etc., experts say older children might also revert to behaviors parents haven’t seen in some time.
“Parents should ask themselves: ‘Is this behavior, or this regression, getting in the way of my child functioning normally in life?'” - Julie Ross, Parenting Horizons
“It’s not limited to early developmental stages,” said Julie Ross, executive director of Parenting Horizons and author of “Practical Parenting for the 21st Century.” “You might have a kid who is 13, 14 coming into mom and dad’s bed every night. They’re returning to an earlier time when they felt safe in the ‘cocoon’ of mom and dad.”
Advertisement
If regressing interferes with their functioning, that’s a red flag.
Hameed’s general rule of thumb for when regressions are cause for concern is: “Consider the impact it is having on your child’s functioning.”
If there has been a change but it doesn’t necessarily impact a kid’s ability to get through the day as they typically would, that’s probably not something to be overly concerned with. But if it’s something that’s been going on for weeks (or longer) and that’s really getting in their way, it needs to be addressed.
For example, you might find it annoying that your toddler suddenly slips back into baby talk, but it’s not necessarily inhibiting your collective ability to get through the days, Hameed said. But if you find that suddenly you’re having to, say, spoon-feed a young child who used to be able to feed themselves, and every meal is turning into a battle, that’s different. (It’s also worth noting: We’re specifically talking about behavioral regressions here, but kids may also be regressing academically and socially during the pandemic.)
“Parents should ask themselves: ‘Is this behavior, or this regression, getting in the way of my child functioning normally in life?’ ― knowing that ‘normal’ is kind of out the window right now,” echoed Ross.
For parents of older children, it’s especially important to talk to them about the “why,” she added. Because that can help you better understand if the regressive behavior is rooted in more serious underlying anxiety, loneliness, depression, etc.
Advertisement
If you have concerns about how your child is regressing, you should absolutely reach out to their pediatrician ASAP. An expert can help rule out whether the behavior is actually being caused by an underlying medical concern, and can also help connect you with mental health resources. Your child’s school can be another excellent touchpoint, both Hameed and Ross said.
Boundaries are absolutely essential.
Yes, regressions are common right now. But that doesn’t mean parents should simply accept behaviors they don’t like. Both experts interviewed for this story urged parents to be patient with children, but also be clear with them about what you know they’re capable of.
Part of that is for them, and part of that is for you. Pandemic parenting is relentless and challenging in so many ways. Take care of yourself by maintaining expectations for your child’s behavior, which is really kind of a form of self-care.
“Part of slogging through this is making sure our own mental health is OK,” Ross said. “So often I hear from parents who are concerned about something their child is experiencing, and it becomes clear that the parent is at the end of their rope as well.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Republican Mask Manufacturer Says He'll Vote Biden After Trump 'Politicized' COVID-19

The Republican executive of a company that manufactures medical masks said Tuesday that he will vote for Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden , due to President Donald Trump ’ s “ politicized ” response to the coronavirus crisis .
Mike Bowen ― executive vice president of Texas-based Prestige Ameritech , the largest producer of N95 masks and respirators in the U.S. ― said in a statement to HuffPost that Trump ’ s handling of the pandemic has “ greatly increased death and suffering in America.
” “ President Trump downplayed the virus , missed opportunities , and wasted precious time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ He has also politicized the wearing of masks .
...
The man has politicized a life-saving medical device and has teased people for wearing it !
” “ Mr .
Trump is a self-proclaimed ‘ genius ’ who prefers his own magical thinking to the advice of experts and scientists , ” Bowen continued , adding : “ The next time that there is a scientifically minded Republican presidential candidate , I will vote for her or him .
This time , however , there is only one scientifically minded person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe Biden.
” Bowen , who describes himself as a lifelong Republican , testified before Congress in May that the country ’ s dependence on foreign masks had been a national security risk for several years .
Executive Vice President of Prestige Ameritech Mike Bowen testifies before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health in May .
Prestige Ameritech is the largest producer of surgical masks in the United States .
During that same hearing , Dr. Rick Bright , the former director of the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had warned federal officials as early as January that the country faced a mask shortage .
Bright served as director of BARDA for nearly four years until , in his words , he was ousted in April for objecting to pressure from Trump administration officials who wanted the agency to invest in unproven COVID-19 drugs and vaccines .
“ I ’ ll never forget the emails I received from Mike Bowen indicating that our mask supply , our N95 respirator supply , was completely decimated , ” Bright testified .
“ And he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deep shit .
The world is .
And we need to act.
’ ... We were already behind the ball.
” “ Around 2005 , all of the major mask makers left the country , ” Bowen says in the film .
“ It put the U.S. mask supply in the hands of foreign control and could be subject to diversion during the pandemic .
And that ’ s what I ’ ve been warning about for years.
” He added : “ I voted for Donald Trump .
I thought , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the administration somebody ― one of these people ― is going to look at this and say , ‘ Hey , this is a problem .
Maybe we ought to call this guy.
’ And no , I couldn ’ t get any ― I didn ’ t get any response there.
” As of Wednesday , the U.S. continued to lead the world in confirmed coronavirus cases and deaths .
Nationwide , there have been more than 8.2 million cases and at least 221,000 deaths , according to data compiled by @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Republican executive of a company that manufactures medical masks said Tuesday that he will vote for Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, due to President Donald Trump’s “politicized” response to the coronavirus crisis.
Mike Bowen ― executive vice president of Texas-based Prestige Ameritech, the largest producer of N95 masks and respirators in the U.S. ― said in a statement to HuffPost that Trump’s handling of the pandemic has “greatly increased death and suffering in America.”
Advertisement
“President Trump downplayed the virus, missed opportunities, and wasted precious time,” Bowen said in his statement. “He has also politicized the wearing of masks. ... The man has politicized a life-saving medical device and has teased people for wearing it!”
“Mr. Trump is a self-proclaimed ‘genius’ who prefers his own magical thinking to the advice of experts and scientists,” Bowen continued, adding: “The next time that there is a scientifically minded Republican presidential candidate, I will vote for her or him. This time, however, there is only one scientifically minded person in the race. That person is Joe Biden.”
Bowen, who describes himself as a lifelong Republican, testified before Congress in May that the country’s dependence on foreign masks had been a national security risk for several years.
Executive Vice President of Prestige Ameritech Mike Bowen testifies before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health in May. Prestige Ameritech is the largest producer of surgical masks in the United States. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Advertisement
During that same hearing, Dr. Rick Bright, the former director of the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), testified that Bowen had warned federal officials as early as January that the country faced a mask shortage.
Bright served as director of BARDA for nearly four years until, in his words, he was ousted in April for objecting to pressure from Trump administration officials who wanted the agency to invest in unproven COVID-19 drugs and vaccines.
“I’ll never forget the emails I received from Mike Bowen indicating that our mask supply, our N95 respirator supply, was completely decimated,” Bright testified. “And he said, ‘We’re in deep shit. The world is. And we need to act.’ ... We were already behind the ball.”
Bowen appears in the newly released documentary “Totally Under Control,” which examines the Trump administration’s response to the pandemic.
“Around 2005, all of the major mask makers left the country,” Bowen says in the film. “It put the U.S. mask supply in the hands of foreign control and could be subject to diversion during the pandemic. And that’s what I’ve been warning about for years.”
Advertisement
He added: “I voted for Donald Trump. I thought, you know, if I contact enough people in the administration somebody ― one of these people ― is going to look at this and say, ‘Hey, this is a problem. Maybe we ought to call this guy.’ And no, I couldn’t get any ― I didn’t get any response there.”
As of Wednesday, the U.S. continued to lead the world in confirmed coronavirus cases and deaths. Nationwide, there have been more than 8.2 million cases and at least 221,000 deaths, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--U.S. Reports About 300,000 More Deaths During Pandemic Than In Typical Year

Nearly 300,000 more people have died in the United States in 2020 during the coronavirus pandemic than would be expected based on historical trends , with at least two-thirds due to COVID-19 , a government report released on Tuesday showed , adding that COVID deaths likely were undercounted .
The report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) estimated that 299,028 more people died between Jan. 26 and Oct. 3 than the average numbers from past years would have indicated .
CDC said that about 216,000 U.S. deaths from the coronavirus had been reported by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This might underestimate the total impact of the pandemic on mortality , ” it said .
A man walks past a mural by the artist who goes by the name `` Pure Genius '' depicting President Donald Trump as the Grim Reaper on a wall in New York City .
“ There are many factors that could contribute to an increase in deaths indirectly due to the pandemic , with disruptions to health care being one factor , ” study author Lauren Rossen , from CDC ’ s National Center for Health Statistics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ miss deaths indirectly related to the pandemic , caused by disruptions in healthcare access or utilization , and from conditions such as Alzheimer ’ s disease , dementia , and respiratory diseases , the report said .
But it also could reflect rises in non-COVID-19 related deaths .
The data show disproportionate increases among racial and ethnic groups that have been seen as particularly affected by COVID-19 .
A supporter of Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden holds up a sign indicating the number of coronavirus deaths in the United States over a freeway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The CDC found the largest average percentage increase in deaths compared with previous years occurring among Hispanic people ( 53.6 % ) , with deaths 32.9 % above average among Black people and 36.6 % above average for Asians .
The CDC found that excess deaths have occurred every week since March 2020 and reached their highest points in the weeks ended April 11 and Aug. 8 .
The largest percentage increase in excess deaths from all causes was among adults aged 25–44 years at 26.5 % .
Medical workers walk outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , New York City , where three members of the city ’ s Orthodox Jewish communities died from the coronavirus over the last four days .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Nearly 300,000 more people have died in the United States in 2020 during the coronavirus pandemic than would be expected based on historical trends, with at least two-thirds due to COVID-19, a government report released on Tuesday showed, adding that COVID deaths likely were undercounted.
The report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that 299,028 more people died between Jan. 26 and Oct. 3 than the average numbers from past years would have indicated.
Advertisement
CDC said that about 216,000 U.S. deaths from the coronavirus had been reported by the middle of this month. “This might underestimate the total impact of the pandemic on mortality,” it said.
A man walks past a mural by the artist who goes by the name "Pure Genius" depicting President Donald Trump as the Grim Reaper on a wall in New York City. TIMOTHY A. CLARY via Getty Images
“There are many factors that could contribute to an increase in deaths indirectly due to the pandemic, with disruptions to health care being one factor,” study author Lauren Rossen, from CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, told Reuters.
The count could miss deaths indirectly related to the pandemic, caused by disruptions in healthcare access or utilization, and from conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, and respiratory diseases, the report said. But it also could reflect rises in non-COVID-19 related deaths.
Advertisement
The data show disproportionate increases among racial and ethnic groups that have been seen as particularly affected by COVID-19.
A supporter of Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden holds up a sign indicating the number of coronavirus deaths in the United States over a freeway in Arlington, Virginia on October 2. ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS via Getty Images
The CDC found the largest average percentage increase in deaths compared with previous years occurring among Hispanic people (53.6%), with deaths 32.9% above average among Black people and 36.6% above average for Asians.
A Reuters tally finds about 220,000 coronavirus-related U.S. deaths have been reported.
The CDC found that excess deaths have occurred every week since March 2020 and reached their highest points in the weeks ended April 11 and Aug. 8.
The largest percentage increase in excess deaths from all causes was among adults aged 25–44 years at 26.5%.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--OxyContin Maker Purdue Pharma Pleads Guilty To 3 Counts In $8 Billion Settlement

The settlement comes less than two weeks before a presidential election where the opioid epidemic has taken a political back seat to the coronavirus pandemic and other issues .
But the deal does give President Donald Trump ’ s administration an example of action on the addiction crisis , which he promised early in his term .
Purdue will make a direct payment to the government of $ 225 million , which is part of a larger $ 2 billion criminal forfeiture .
In addition to that forfeiture , Purdue also faces a $ 3.54 billion criminal fine , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collected because it will be taken through a bankruptcy , which includes a large number of other creditors .
Purdue will also agree to $ 2.8 billion in damages to resolve its civil liability .
Purdue would transform into a public benefit company , meaning it would be governed by a trust that has to balance the trust ’ s interests against those of the American public and public health , the officials said .
The Sacklers would not be involved in the new company and part of the money from the settlement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment and other drug programs to combat the opioid epidemic , the officials said .
That arrangement mirrors a key element of the company ’ s proposal to settle about 3,000 lawsuits filed by state , local and Native American tribal governments .
As part of the plea deal , the company admits it violated federal law and “ knowingly and intentionally conspired and agreed with others to aid and abet ” the dispensing of medication from doctors “ without a legitimate medical purpose and outside the usual course of professional practice , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plea agreement obtained by the AP .
But even before the deal was announced , it was facing resistance from state attorneys general , Democratic members of Congress and advocates who wrote Attorney General William Barr asking him not to make the bargain with the company and the family .
They said it does not hold them properly accountable and they raised concerns about some of the details .
“ Millions of American families impacted by the opioid epidemic are looking to you and your Department for justice .
Justice for the sleepless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trapped in the grip of substance use disorder , justice for the jobs lost and the lives ruined , and justice for the lives of loved ones lost to overdoses , ” 38 Democratic members of Congress wrote .
“ If the only practical consequence of your Department ’ s investigation is that a handful of billionaires are made slightly less rich , we fear that the American people will lose faith in the ability of the Department to provide accountability and equal justice under the law.
” The Sackler family has already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plus at least $ 3 billion to resolve thousands of suits against the Stamford , Connecticut-based drugmaker .
The company — but not the family — declared bankruptcy as a way to work out that plan , which could be worth $ 10 billion over time .
About half the states oppose that settlement , and also wrote Barr to ask him not to make the federal deal that includes converting Purdue into a public benefit corporation .
They say it would be wrong for governments to rely on earnings from the sale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mitigate the toll of an opioid crisis wrought by prescription drugs as well as heroin and illicitly produced fentanyl .
With the terms of the Justice Department deal , the federal government gives a strong endorsement to the idea of a version of Purdue continuing as a “ public benefit corporation.
” If that plan does not end of being the heart of the reorganization through bankruptcy court , the U.S. could make Purdue pay it more , potentially unraveling any other settlement arrangement .
The Sackler family was once listed among the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
A 2019 court filing said they had made up to $ 13 billion over the years from the blockbuster drug , though a lawyer said they brought in far less after taxes and reinvestment in the company .
Until recently , the family ’ s name was on museum galleries and educational programs around the world because of gifts from family members .
But under pressure from activists , institutions from the Louvre in Paris to Tufts University in Massachusetts have dissociated themselves from the family in the last few years .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — Purdue Pharma, the company that makes OxyContin, the powerful prescription painkiller that experts say helped touch off an opioid epidemic, will plead guilty to three federal criminal charges as part of a settlement of more than $8 billion, Justice Department officials told The Associated Press.
The company will plead guilty to a criminal information being filed Wednesday in federal court in New Jersey to three counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and violating federal anti-kickback laws, the officials said.
Advertisement
The deal does not release any of the company’s executives or owners — members of the wealthy Sackler family — from criminal liability. A criminal investigation is ongoing.
The officials were not authorized to discuss the investigation publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
The settlement is the highest-profile display yet of the federal government seeking to hold a major drugmaker responsible for an opioid addiction and overdose crisis linked to more than 470,000 deaths in the country since 2000.
The settlement comes less than two weeks before a presidential election where the opioid epidemic has taken a political back seat to the coronavirus pandemic and other issues. But the deal does give President Donald Trump’s administration an example of action on the addiction crisis, which he promised early in his term.
Advertisement
As part of the resolution, Purdue will admit that it impeded the Drug Enforcement Administration by falsely representing that it had maintained an effective program to avoid drug diversion and by reporting misleading information to the agency to boost the company’s manufacturing quotas, the officials said.
A Justice Department official said Purdue had been representing to the DEA that it had “robust controls” to avoid opioid diversion but instead had been “disregarding red flags their own systems were sending up.”
Purdue will also admit to violating federal anti-kickback laws by paying doctors, through a speaking program, to induce them to write more prescriptions for the company’s opioids and for using electronic health records software to influence the prescription of pain medication, according to the officials.
Purdue will make a direct payment to the government of $225 million, which is part of a larger $2 billion criminal forfeiture. In addition to that forfeiture, Purdue also faces a $3.54 billion criminal fine, though that money probably will not be fully collected because it will be taken through a bankruptcy, which includes a large number of other creditors. Purdue will also agree to $2.8 billion in damages to resolve its civil liability.
Purdue would transform into a public benefit company, meaning it would be governed by a trust that has to balance the trust’s interests against those of the American public and public health, the officials said. The Sacklers would not be involved in the new company and part of the money from the settlement would go to aid in medically assisted treatment and other drug programs to combat the opioid epidemic, the officials said. That arrangement mirrors a key element of the company’s proposal to settle about 3,000 lawsuits filed by state, local and Native American tribal governments.
Advertisement
As part of the plea deal, the company admits it violated federal law and “knowingly and intentionally conspired and agreed with others to aid and abet” the dispensing of medication from doctors “without a legitimate medical purpose and outside the usual course of professional practice,” according to a copy of the plea agreement obtained by the AP.
The company is also required to cooperate with the ongoing federal investigation and potential other prosecutions.
But even before the deal was announced, it was facing resistance from state attorneys general, Democratic members of Congress and advocates who wrote Attorney General William Barr asking him not to make the bargain with the company and the family. They said it does not hold them properly accountable and they raised concerns about some of the details.
“Millions of American families impacted by the opioid epidemic are looking to you and your Department for justice. Justice for the sleepless nights spent worrying about sons and daughters trapped in the grip of substance use disorder, justice for the jobs lost and the lives ruined, and justice for the lives of loved ones lost to overdoses,” 38 Democratic members of Congress wrote. “If the only practical consequence of your Department’s investigation is that a handful of billionaires are made slightly less rich, we fear that the American people will lose faith in the ability of the Department to provide accountability and equal justice under the law.”
The Sackler family has already pledged to hand over the company itself plus at least $3 billion to resolve thousands of suits against the Stamford, Connecticut-based drugmaker. The company — but not the family — declared bankruptcy as a way to work out that plan, which could be worth $10 billion over time.
Advertisement
About half the states oppose that settlement, and also wrote Barr to ask him not to make the federal deal that includes converting Purdue into a public benefit corporation. They say it would be wrong for governments to rely on earnings from the sale of more OxyContin to fund programs to mitigate the toll of an opioid crisis wrought by prescription drugs as well as heroin and illicitly produced fentanyl.
With the terms of the Justice Department deal, the federal government gives a strong endorsement to the idea of a version of Purdue continuing as a “public benefit corporation.” If that plan does not end of being the heart of the reorganization through bankruptcy court, the U.S. could make Purdue pay it more, potentially unraveling any other settlement arrangement.
The state governments that oppose the settlements are pushing in bankruptcy court for documents that would spell out how much Sackler family members made from the sale of OxyContin over the years.
The Sackler family was once listed among the nation’s wealthiest by Forbes magazine. A 2019 court filing said they had made up to $13 billion over the years from the blockbuster drug, though a lawyer said they brought in far less after taxes and reinvestment in the company.
Until recently, the family’s name was on museum galleries and educational programs around the world because of gifts from family members. But under pressure from activists, institutions from the Louvre in Paris to Tufts University in Massachusetts have dissociated themselves from the family in the last few years.
Advertisement
It’s not the first time Purdue has admitted wrongdoing: The company and three executives pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges in 2007 and paid more than $630 million in a settlement. But after that, the nation’s addiction crisis only deepened.
As the maker of the best-known prescription opioid, Purdue is the highest-profile player in the opioid crisis, but it’s far from the other one. Trials against other drugmakers and distributors that were scheduled for this year have been pushed back due to the coronavirus.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--These Are The Risk Factors For Long COVID-19, According To New Data

If you ’ re a woman or you experienced multiple COVID-19 symptoms in the first week of infection , you ’ re more likely to experience long COVID , according to new research .
New analysis by researchers at King ’ s College London , using data from the COVID Symptom Study app , shows that 1 in 20 people with COVID-19 are likely to suffer symptoms for eight weeks or more – so-called long COVID .
This potentially adds up to millions worldwide .
Now , the researchers have identified the long COVID risk factors , providing some insight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affected .
Having more than five different symptoms in the first week of infection was one of the key risk factors .
Headache , fatigue , new loss of taste or smell , fever and a persistent cough are the five most common symptoms of COVID-19 people have reported to the app .
Other possible symptoms include a rash , diarrhea and vomiting .
Women under the age of 50 were 50 % more likely to suffer from long COVID than men ( 14.5 % compared with 9.5 % ) .
However , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the older age categories .
Overall , the chance of being impacted by long covid increased with age .
Long COVID was found to affect around 10 % of 18-49 year olds who become unwell with coronavirus , rising to 22 % of over 70s .
The study focused on data from 4,182 COVID Symptom Study app users who had been consistently logging their health and tested positive for COVID-19 through swab PCR testing .
The team found that while most people with COVID-19 reported being back to normal in 11 days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 13.3 % ) had COVID-19 symptoms lasting for at least four weeks , with around 1 in 20 ( 4.5 % ) staying ill for eight weeks and 1 in 50 ( 2.3 % ) suffering for longer than 12 weeks .
Claire Steves , clinical academic and senior author from King ’ s College London , thanked everyone who ’ s used the app so far and urged for more people to take part .
Tim Spector , COVID Symptom Study lead and a professor of genetic epidemiology from King ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 is a mild illness for many , but for 1 in 50 , symptoms can persist for longer than 12 weeks .
So it ’ s important that , as well as worrying about excess deaths , we also need to consider those who will be affected by long COVID if we don ’ t get the pandemic under control soon.
” Experts are still learning about COVID-19 .
The information in this story is what was known or available as of publication , but guidance can change as scientists discover more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the most updated recommendations .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
If you’re a woman or you experienced multiple COVID-19 symptoms in the first week of infection, you’re more likely to experience long COVID, according to new research.
New analysis by researchers at King’s College London, using data from the COVID Symptom Study app, shows that 1 in 20 people with COVID-19 are likely to suffer symptoms for eight weeks or more – so-called long COVID. This potentially adds up to millions worldwide.
Advertisement
Now, the researchers have identified the long COVID risk factors, providing some insight into who is most likely to be affected.
Having more than five different symptoms in the first week of infection was one of the key risk factors. Headache, fatigue, new loss of taste or smell, fever and a persistent cough are the five most common symptoms of COVID-19 people have reported to the app. Other possible symptoms include a rash, diarrhea and vomiting.
Women under the age of 50 were 50% more likely to suffer from long COVID than men (14.5% compared with 9.5%). However, this gender difference wasn’t seen in the older age categories.
Overall, the chance of being impacted by long covid increased with age. Long COVID was found to affect around 10% of 18-49 year olds who become unwell with coronavirus, rising to 22% of over 70s.
Advertisement
Weight also plays a role, with people developing long COVID having a slightly higher average body mass index than those with a shorter case of the illness.
The study focused on data from 4,182 COVID Symptom Study app users who had been consistently logging their health and tested positive for COVID-19 through swab PCR testing.
The team found that while most people with COVID-19 reported being back to normal in 11 days or less, around one in seven (13.3%) had COVID-19 symptoms lasting for at least four weeks, with around 1 in 20 (4.5%) staying ill for eight weeks and 1 in 50 (2.3%) suffering for longer than 12 weeks.
Tara Moore via Getty Images
Claire Steves, clinical academic and senior author from King’s College London, thanked everyone who’s used the app so far and urged for more people to take part.
Advertisement
Tim Spector, COVID Symptom Study lead and a professor of genetic epidemiology from King’s College London, added: “COVID-19 is a mild illness for many, but for 1 in 50, symptoms can persist for longer than 12 weeks. So it’s important that, as well as worrying about excess deaths, we also need to consider those who will be affected by long COVID if we don’t get the pandemic under control soon.”
This post originally appeared in HuffPost UK.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-20--Facebook Is Still Running New Anti-Vaccination Ads, Despite Ban [UPDATE]

Facebook/Earthley Alternative medicine company Earthley has continued to run anti-vaccine ads on Facebook without issue , despite the platform 's ban on such ads .
As of Tuesday morning , the alternative medicine company Earthley had more than a dozen active ads on Facebook criticizing vaccines , and in several cases , spreading misinformation .
Earthley makes money by selling supposed vaccine alternatives , such as the “ elderberry elixir ” it promotes on Facebook .
“ Ever wondered why your child needs 5+ [ Diphtheria , Tetanus and Pertussis ] shots ?
It ’ s because it isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ad , which contradicts data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
Another ad suggests vaccines cause autism or neurological injury , a myth that medical authorities have repeatedly debunked .
Other ads feature images of scared-looking children and their mothers — and question the effectiveness of not only vaccines but also the CDC-recommended practices of social distancing and wearing face masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19 .
“ THE PEOPLE THAT PROFIT WHEN YOU ’ RE SICK WILL NOT SELL YOU THE CURE , ” reads an Earthley Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We all know that this fall they are going to be pushing vaccines and masks like crazy !
” Vaccines are rigorously tested and have been deemed safe by an abundance of independent studies .
Public health experts stress that a coronavirus vaccine , once it ’ s available , will be vital for ending the pandemic and preventing more deaths .
Yet more than 1 in 3 Americans say they won ’ t take it , according to a Gallup poll — underscoring the harm caused by anti-vaccine propaganda advertised on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Facebook ’ s new policy applies only to ads ; other anti-vaccine content is still allowed and continues to flourish on the platform through posts and groups .
But even the minimal effort of restricting ads — which can be selectively targeted and can reach far bigger audiences than organic content — is , so far , failing .
After the ad policy announcement last Tuesday , HuffPost drew attention in a tweet to two of the many anti-vaccine ads from Earthley that remained active on the platform .
Facebook executive Rob @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be “ rolling ” over the remainder of last week , and Facebook removed those two ads .
Yet Earthley was still able to run other old and new anti-vax ads into this week without issue .
“ It is our understanding that Facebook is banning ads that actively tell people not to get a vaccine , ” said Tietje .
“ We do not tell our audience what choice to make ; we aim to provide links to peer-reviewed studies so that people can make informed decisions for themselves .
We do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy , nor should it.
” Facebook has long been aware of controversy surrounding health claims from Earthley , which recently received a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration for selling “ unapproved and misbranded ” products to prevent COVID-19 .
BuzzFeed News reported in January that the alternative medicine company was pushing falsehoods about the whooping cough vaccine in its Facebook ads — seemingly in violation of the platform ’ s already-existing policy prohibiting misinformation in ads .
Facebook declined at the time to take any action .
Along with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also announced a campaign to provide authoritative information about the flu vaccine and committed to “ help messages about the safety and efficacy of vaccines reach a broad group of people.
” Anti-vaccine conspiracy theories have burgeoned on Facebook , including the absurd claim that billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates will somehow microchip people through a forthcoming COVID-19 vaccine to exert mind control .
Facebook-owned Instagram is also rife with anti-vaccine misinformation , which the platform continues to algorithmically promote more than a year and a half after vowing to reduce the spread of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where people regularly exchange natural home remedies in lieu of doctor-recommended treatments for various ailments , are thriving on Facebook .
Earlier this year , a mother turned to a 178,000-member anti-vax Facebook group for advice on caring for her seriously ill 4-year-old son , as NBC News reported .
Users there suggested that she try thyme and elderberry , and urged her not to give her son the vaccine that her doctor had prescribed , so she didn ’ t .
The child died .
“ We have rejected several of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread vaccine misinformation , ” a Facebook spokesperson told HuffPost in an email .
“ We also remove misinformation about masks , including claims like masks can make you sick or that masks don ’ t prevent the spread of COVID-19 , but we do allow ads that disagree with masks requirements .
”

Alternative medicine company Earthley has continued to run anti-vaccine ads on Facebook without issue, despite the platform's ban on such ads. Facebook/Earthley
It’s been a week since Facebook announced a ban on ads “that discourage people from getting a vaccine,” a move that elicited widespread praise as the coronavirus death toll soars. “We don’t want these ads on our platform,” the social media giant declared.
But Facebook has quietly continued to run anti-vaccination ads — including new ones that launched days after its policy change.
Advertisement
As of Tuesday morning, the alternative medicine company Earthley had more than a dozen active ads on Facebook criticizing vaccines, and in several cases, spreading misinformation. Earthley makes money by selling supposed vaccine alternatives, such as the “elderberry elixir” it promotes on Facebook.
“Ever wondered why your child needs 5+ [Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis] shots? It’s because it isn’t working,” claims one Earthley ad, which contradicts data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Another ad suggests vaccines cause autism or neurological injury, a myth that medical authorities have repeatedly debunked. Other ads feature images of scared-looking children and their mothers — and question the effectiveness of not only vaccines but also the CDC-recommended practices of social distancing and wearing face masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
“THE PEOPLE THAT PROFIT WHEN YOU’RE SICK WILL NOT SELL YOU THE CURE,” reads an Earthley Facebook ad image beneath the caption, “We all know that this fall they are going to be pushing vaccines and masks like crazy!”
Vaccines are rigorously tested and have been deemed safe by an abundance of independent studies. Public health experts stress that a coronavirus vaccine, once it’s available, will be vital for ending the pandemic and preventing more deaths. Yet more than 1 in 3 Americans say they won’t take it, according to a Gallup poll — underscoring the harm caused by anti-vaccine propaganda advertised on the world’s biggest social media platform.
Advertisement
Facebook’s new policy applies only to ads; other anti-vaccine content is still allowed and continues to flourish on the platform through posts and groups. But even the minimal effort of restricting ads — which can be selectively targeted and can reach far bigger audiences than organic content — is, so far, failing.
Earthley’s anti-vaccine ads demonstrate Facebook’s jarring inability or unwillingness to enforce its own policies.
After the ad policy announcement last Tuesday, HuffPost drew attention in a tweet to two of the many anti-vaccine ads from Earthley that remained active on the platform. Facebook executive Rob Leathern tweeted in response that enforcement would be “rolling” over the remainder of last week, and Facebook removed those two ads. Yet Earthley was still able to run other old and new anti-vax ads into this week without issue.
A number of Earthley's Facebook ads suggest masks and social distancing are ineffective in keeping people safe from COVID-19. Public health experts say the opposite is true. HuffPost
Kate Tietje, Earthley’s lead herbalist, told HuffPost that she believes her company’s ads comply with Facebook rules.
Advertisement
“It is our understanding that Facebook is banning ads that actively tell people not to get a vaccine,” said Tietje. “We do not tell our audience what choice to make; we aim to provide links to peer-reviewed studies so that people can make informed decisions for themselves. We do not think this violates Facebook’s policy, nor should it.”
Facebook has long been aware of controversy surrounding health claims from Earthley, which recently received a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration for selling “unapproved and misbranded” products to prevent COVID-19. BuzzFeed News reported in January that the alternative medicine company was pushing falsehoods about the whooping cough vaccine in its Facebook ads — seemingly in violation of the platform’s already-existing policy prohibiting misinformation in ads. Facebook declined at the time to take any action.
Along with the new anti-vax ad ban, Facebook also announced a campaign to provide authoritative information about the flu vaccine and committed to “help messages about the safety and efficacy of vaccines reach a broad group of people.”
But despite its many claims that it is taking public health concerns seriously, Facebook is still a major driving force in rising anti-vaccine sentiment.
Anti-vaccine conspiracy theories have burgeoned on Facebook, including the absurd claim that billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates will somehow microchip people through a forthcoming COVID-19 vaccine to exert mind control. Facebook-owned Instagram is also rife with anti-vaccine misinformation, which the platform continues to algorithmically promote more than a year and a half after vowing to reduce the spread of such content. And massive anti-vax groups, where people regularly exchange natural home remedies in lieu of doctor-recommended treatments for various ailments, are thriving on Facebook.
Advertisement
Earlier this year, a mother turned to a 178,000-member anti-vax Facebook group for advice on caring for her seriously ill 4-year-old son, as NBC News reported. Users there suggested that she try thyme and elderberry, and urged her not to give her son the vaccine that her doctor had prescribed, so she didn’t. The child died.
That Facebook group is still active; it now has more than 200,000 members.
UPDATE: Oct. 21 — Facebook removed most, but not all, of Earthley’s anti-vaccine ads on Wednesday.
“We have rejected several of these ads because they discourage vaccines and spread vaccine misinformation,” a Facebook spokesperson told HuffPost in an email. “We also remove misinformation about masks, including claims like masks can make you sick or that masks don’t prevent the spread of COVID-19, but we do allow ads that disagree with masks requirements.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Rudy Giuliani Caught On Camera Appearing To Touch Genitals During ‘Borat’ Prank

Rudy Giuliani , New York City ’ s former mayor and President Donald Trump ’ s personal lawyer , was caught on camera appearing to touch his genitals in front of a woman he believed was a journalist , but was actually an actor involved in the sequel to Sacha Baron Cohen ’ s movie “ Borat.
” Baron Cohen ’ s follow-up to his 2006 hit comedy , to be released Friday , features a scene with Giuliani touching himself in the presence of a woman pretending to be a conservative reporter , as multiple publications have reported .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , actor Maria Bakalova , who plays Borat ’ s daughter in the new film , goes with the former mayor into a hotel suite rigged with hidden cameras .
Giuliani sits on the bed , Bakalova appears to remove his microphone , and Giuliani then lies back and reaches into his pants .
Soon afterward , Baron Cohen , playing Borat , bursts into the room and says , “ She ’ s 15 , she ’ s too old for you !
” ( Bakalova is 24 years old ) .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Giuliani said he was lying on the bed so he could tuck in his shirt .
“ I had to take off the electronic equipment , ” Giuliani told WABC .
“ And when the electronic equipment came off , some of it was in the back and my shirt came a little out , although my clothes were entirely on .
I leaned back , and I tucked my shirt in , and at that point , at that point , they have this picture they take which looks doctored , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tucking my shirt in .
I assure you that ’ s all I was doing.
” “ They ’ ll do anything , ” he added .
“ They ’ ve attacked me over everything possible , investigated every business dealing I ’ ve ever had .
And now the idiot Borat is going after me with a totally sensationalized false account of a ridiculous movie I guess that he ’ s done.
” Giuliani told the New York Post in early July that he thought he was participating in a real interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being fooled by Baron Cohen , who is notorious for pranking public figures in his films .
“ This guy comes running in , wearing a crazy , what I would say was a pink transgender outfit , ” Giuliani said at the time .
“ It was a pink bikini , with lace , underneath a translucent mesh top , it looked absurd .
He had the beard , bare legs , and wasn ’ t what I would call distractingly attractive.
” Thinking he was the victim of a “ scam @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called the police and Baron Cohen sprinted away .
Police did not pursue charges .
“ I only later realized it must have been Sacha Baron Cohen , ” he said .
“ I thought about all the people he previously fooled and I felt good about myself because he didn ’ t get me .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rudy Giuliani, New York City’s former mayor and President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, was caught on camera appearing to touch his genitals in front of a woman he believed was a journalist, but was actually an actor involved in the sequel to Sacha Baron Cohen’s movie “Borat.”
Baron Cohen’s follow-up to his 2006 hit comedy, to be released Friday, features a scene with Giuliani touching himself in the presence of a woman pretending to be a conservative reporter, as multiple publications have reported.
Advertisement
After holding a mock interview with Giuliani, actor Maria Bakalova, who plays Borat’s daughter in the new film, goes with the former mayor into a hotel suite rigged with hidden cameras. Giuliani sits on the bed, Bakalova appears to remove his microphone, and Giuliani then lies back and reaches into his pants.
Soon afterward, Baron Cohen, playing Borat, bursts into the room and says, “She’s 15, she’s too old for you!” (Bakalova is 24 years old).
In a radio interview Wednesday afternoon, Giuliani said he was lying on the bed so he could tuck in his shirt.
“I had to take off the electronic equipment,” Giuliani told WABC. “And when the electronic equipment came off, some of it was in the back and my shirt came a little out, although my clothes were entirely on. I leaned back, and I tucked my shirt in, and at that point, at that point, they have this picture they take which looks doctored, but in any event, I’m tucking my shirt in. I assure you that’s all I was doing.”
Advertisement
“They’ll do anything,” he added. “They’ve attacked me over everything possible, investigated every business dealing I’ve ever had. And now the idiot Borat is going after me with a totally sensationalized false account of a ridiculous movie I guess that he’s done.”
Giuliani told the New York Post in early July that he thought he was participating in a real interview, only to find out he was being fooled by Baron Cohen, who is notorious for pranking public figures in his films.
“This guy comes running in, wearing a crazy, what I would say was a pink transgender outfit,” Giuliani said at the time. “It was a pink bikini, with lace, underneath a translucent mesh top, it looked absurd. He had the beard, bare legs, and wasn’t what I would call distractingly attractive.”
Thinking he was the victim of a “scam or shakedown,” the former mayor called the police and Baron Cohen sprinted away. Police did not pursue charges.
In Giuliani’s estimation at the time, the actor failed to truly prank him.
“I only later realized it must have been Sacha Baron Cohen,” he said. “I thought about all the people he previously fooled and I felt good about myself because he didn’t get me.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Senate Democrats Plan To Boycott Amy Coney Barrett's Committee Vote

Sarah Silbiger — Pool/Getty Images Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Oct. 21 in Washington , D.C. President Donald Trump nominated Barrett to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg after her death .
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee plan to boycott Thursday ’ s committee vote on Amy Coney Barrett ’ s Supreme Court nomination as a protest against Republican efforts to rush her through before the election .
The plan hasn ’ t been finalized yet , according to a Democratic aide , but Democrats are preparing to fill their empty seats with poster-sized photos of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ casting a deciding vote against the Affordable Care Act .
These would be the same pictures of people Democrats had on display during Barrett ’ s confirmation hearing last week .
Democrats also intend to hold two press conferences to push back on Barrett ’ s confirmation ― one on the Capitol steps and one on the Supreme Court steps .
They will go to one or both of these pressers during the committee vote , according to the Democratic aide .
“ Throughout the hearings last week , committee Democrats demonstrated the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to health care , reproductive freedoms , the ability to vote , and other core rights that Americans cherish .
We will not grant this process any further legitimacy by participating in a committee markup of this nomination just twelve days before the culmination of an election that is already underway , ” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) and his caucus said in a statement Wednesday afternoon , after HuffPost ’ s story went up .
A boycott will delight progressives , who have been clamoring for a big fight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It won ’ t stop Republicans from advancing Barrett ’ s nomination , though .
Feinstein has come under particular criticism and scrutiny from her own party .
She undercut Democrats ’ message that the proceedings were a “ sham ” and “ illegitimate ” by praising both Barrett and committee chair Lindsey Graham ( R-S.C. ) .
“ This has been one of the best set of hearings that I ’ ve participated in , ” Feinstein said at the conclusion of the hearings last week .
“ It leaves one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot of questions and even some ideas perhaps of good bipartisan legislation we can put together.
” Both NARAL Pro-Choice America and Demand Justice , a progressive judicial advocacy group , called on the party to replace Feinstein as the top Democrat on the committee .
Schumer also said he had “ a long and serious talk ” with her but refused to give more details .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee plan to boycott Thursday’s committee vote on Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination as a protest against Republican efforts to rush her through before the election.
The plan hasn’t been finalized yet, according to a Democratic aide, but Democrats are preparing to fill their empty seats with poster-sized photos of people who would be hurt by Barrett potentially casting a deciding vote against the Affordable Care Act. These would be the same pictures of people Democrats had on display during Barrett’s confirmation hearing last week.
Advertisement
Democrats also intend to hold two press conferences to push back on Barrett’s confirmation ― one on the Capitol steps and one on the Supreme Court steps. They will go to one or both of these pressers during the committee vote, according to the Democratic aide.
“Throughout the hearings last week, committee Democrats demonstrated the damage a Justice Barrett would do – to health care, reproductive freedoms, the ability to vote, and other core rights that Americans cherish. We will not grant this process any further legitimacy by participating in a committee markup of this nomination just twelve days before the culmination of an election that is already underway,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and his caucus said in a statement Wednesday afternoon, after HuffPost’s story went up.
Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Oct. 21 in Washington, D.C. President Donald Trump nominated Barrett to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg after her death. Sarah Silbiger — Pool/Getty Images
A boycott will delight progressives, who have been clamoring for a big fight by Democrats over Barrett’s confirmation. It won’t stop Republicans from advancing Barrett’s nomination, though.
Advertisement
Feinstein has come under particular criticism and scrutiny from her own party. She undercut Democrats’ message that the proceedings were a “sham” and “illegitimate” by praising both Barrett and committee chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
“This has been one of the best set of hearings that I’ve participated in,” Feinstein said at the conclusion of the hearings last week. “It leaves one with a lot of hopes, a lot of questions and even some ideas perhaps of good bipartisan legislation we can put together.”
Both NARAL Pro-Choice America and Demand Justice, a progressive judicial advocacy group, called on the party to replace Feinstein as the top Democrat on the committee.
Schumer also said he had “a long and serious talk” with her but refused to give more details.
Asked Wednesday what would happen if Democrats don’t show up to Barrett’s hearing, Graham said, “We’ll vote the nominee out.”
This story has been updated with comment from Schumer.
Igor Bobic and Amanda Terkel contributed reporting to this story.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Mitt Romney Says He Didn't Vote For Donald Trump

Utah Sen. Mitt Romney , one of Donald Trump ’ s harshest Republican critics , revealed Wednesday that he didn ’ t vote for the president in the 2020 election .
CNN congressional correspondent Manu Raju tweeted Wednesday that the 2012 presidential nominee had informed him that he ’ d voted , but Romney wouldn ’ t say if he voted for Trump ’ s Democratic opponent , Joe Biden .
Mitt Rommey told me he already voted in the elections but he wouldn ’ t say if he voted for Joe Biden or wrote someone else in .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he said — Manu Raju ( @ mkraju ) October 21 , 2020 Romney ’ s decision not to vote for Trump doesn ’ t come as a surprise .
Last year , the senator vowed that he wouldn ’ t publicly endorse anyone in the 2020 presidential race .
He was also a vocal critic of Trump during the 2016 election , when he instead wrote in the name of his wife , Ann Romney , for president .
Romney is the only Republican senator who voted to convict the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .
He carries enormous influence in Utah and in the Mormon community , of which he is a member .
But the state is solidly red , and Biden still trails Trump there by several points .
But Romney ’ s influence also extends to Arizona , a swing state with another large Mormon population .
Pollsters say Trump should be worried about his chances in that state , citing Mormon opposition to Trump ’ s crude demeanor , his stance on immigration and his treatment of Muslims .
Several prominent Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against Trump in this election .
Among them include Arizona Sen. John McCain ’ s widow Cindy McCain , who endorsed Biden last month .
“ My husband John lived by a code : country first , ” she tweeted .
“ We are Republicans , yes , but Americans foremost .
There ’ s only one candidate in this race who stands up for our values as a nation , and that is @ JoeBiden .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Utah Sen. Mitt Romney, one of Donald Trump’s harshest Republican critics, revealed Wednesday that he didn’t vote for the president in the 2020 election.
CNN congressional correspondent Manu Raju tweeted Wednesday that the 2012 presidential nominee had informed him that he’d voted, but Romney wouldn’t say if he voted for Trump’s Democratic opponent, Joe Biden.
Advertisement
Mitt Rommey told me he already voted in the elections but he wouldn’t say if he voted for Joe Biden or wrote someone else in.
“I did not vote for President Trump,” he said — Manu Raju (@mkraju) October 21, 2020
Romney’s decision not to vote for Trump doesn’t come as a surprise. Last year, the senator vowed that he wouldn’t publicly endorse anyone in the 2020 presidential race. He was also a vocal critic of Trump during the 2016 election, when he instead wrote in the name of his wife, Ann Romney, for president.
Romney is the only Republican senator who voted to convict the president for abuse of power earlier this year. He carries enormous influence in Utah and in the Mormon community, of which he is a member. But the state is solidly red, and Biden still trails Trump there by several points.
But Romney’s influence also extends to Arizona, a swing state with another large Mormon population. Pollsters say Trump should be worried about his chances in that state, citing Mormon opposition to Trump’s crude demeanor, his stance on immigration and his treatment of Muslims.
Advertisement
Several prominent Republicans have broken with tradition and come out against Trump in this election. Among them include Arizona Sen. John McCain’s widow Cindy McCain, who endorsed Biden last month.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Trump's Fake Payroll Tax Cut Is A Big Mess

Most private employers appear to have opted out of the scheme , citing its administrative difficulty , and so did the U.S .
Postal Service .
But Trump decided to force it on his own workers — more than amillion employees of the federal government .
The tax deferral applies to the employee ’ s share of Social Security taxes , amounting to 6.2 % of wages , which for most workers is withheld by their employer .
The executive action increases their biweekly paychecks from September to the end of the year .
But unless Congress and the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers will have to return the money through payments or higher withholdings — and smaller-than-usual paychecks — in 2021 .
Personal Finance for Dummies would advise a worker to figure out how much extra money they ’ re receiving now and set it aside under the assumption that Uncle Sam will expect it back in a few months .
Not only does that discipline create some annoying administrative tasks , it defeats the shaky justification for the policy : to pump stimulus into the economy .
“ No one that I ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helps , ” said Knowles , speaking in his role as a union representative .
“ This is supposed to be the president ’ s way of helping us get through a rough spot due to COVID-19 .
This is not any kind of relief at all .
It ’ s just another , at best , distraction , but at worst it could put [ people ] in a financial bind.
” Knowles has been advising confused union members to go through their past paystubs to determine how much additional pay they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lean 2021 .
He said his agency put out a frequently-asked-questions document for employees that wasn ’ t all that helpful .
He doesn ’ t blame the agency — the Trump administration hasn ’ t made clear how it ’ s supposed to work .
An FAQ memo from the Department of the Interior shows how little information employees have to go on .
It says workers should plan on paying the money back through withholdings next year , but it ’ s sketchy on how much will be collected from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will apply : “ As more information becomes available ... it will be shared with the workforce.
” “ Even if federal workers spent all of the $ 5.5 billion loan , which is unlikely as they know it is simply a short-term loan , it would add less than 0.1 percentage points to fourth quarter growth , and subtract about the same from growth early next year as they paid the loan back , ” Zandi said .
“ This hardly registers , given the pandemic and everything else that is buffeting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ IRS employee and the president of National Treasury Employees Union Local 26 representing IRS employees in Atlanta , said the policy would be less problematic if employees had a choice in the matter .
The executive order applies to federal workers earning less than $ 4,000 per pay period , which amounts to a salary of around $ 100,000 .
“ Is it going to start incrementally ?
Are they going to get a notice stating they owe X number of dollars ?
Are they going to be required to report this as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We have no specific information on how they expect to get this money back.
” It would seem like the confusion might be worthwhile for federal employees on the off chance the loan is eventually forgiven .
But that ’ s a highly unlikely scenario .
For starters , no one knows who will occupy the White House and control Congress when the bill comes due .
Regardless of who ’ s in power , there would seem to be little desire in either party to turn the loan into a gift for @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In August, President Donald Trump took unilateral action to help the economy weather the coronavirus pandemic by putting more money in people’s pockets: The government would take less money out of every paycheck by deferring payroll taxes, essentially giving everyone a raise.
Trump has loved the idea of juicing the economy with a payroll tax cut, just like his predecessor Barack Obama did from 2011 through 2012. Congress wouldn’t go along with Trump’s proposal, however, so the president did it himself.
Advertisement
But there was a catch with Trump’s plan ― the money would have to be paid back next year, meaning it’s not a tax cut so much as a deferral.
Most private employers appear to have opted out of the scheme, citing its administrative difficulty, and so did the U.S. Postal Service. But Trump decided to force it on his own workers — more than amillion employees of the federal government.
Now, those civil servants must deal with the headaches of a loan they never asked for.
The tax deferral applies to the employee’s share of Social Security taxes, amounting to 6.2% of wages, which for most workers is withheld by their employer. The executive action increases their biweekly paychecks from September to the end of the year. But unless Congress and the White House forgive those loans through legislation, workers will have to return the money through payments or higher withholdings — and smaller-than-usual paychecks — in 2021.
“This hardly registers given the pandemic and everything else that is buffeting the economy.” - Economist Mark Zandi
Advertisement
Personal Finance for Dummies would advise a worker to figure out how much extra money they’re receiving now and set it aside under the assumption that Uncle Sam will expect it back in a few months. Not only does that discipline create some annoying administrative tasks, it defeats the shaky justification for the policy: to pump stimulus into the economy.
Michael Knowles, an employee in the U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services and the president of his union, the American Federation of Government Employees Local 1924, said the whole thing really is as pointless as it sounds.
“No one that I’ve talked to can figure out how this helps,” said Knowles, speaking in his role as a union representative. “This is supposed to be the president’s way of helping us get through a rough spot due to COVID-19. This is not any kind of relief at all. It’s just another, at best, distraction, but at worst it could put [people] in a financial bind.”
Knowles has been advising confused union members to go through their past paystubs to determine how much additional pay they’re getting and to plan for a lean 2021. He said his agency put out a frequently-asked-questions document for employees that wasn’t all that helpful. He doesn’t blame the agency — the Trump administration hasn’t made clear how it’s supposed to work.
An FAQ memo from the Department of the Interior shows how little information employees have to go on. It says workers should plan on paying the money back through withholdings next year, but it’s sketchy on how much will be collected from each paycheck, and how tax penalties will apply: “As more information becomes available ... it will be shared with the workforce.”
Advertisement
President Donald Trump gives a thumbs up as he walks to board Air Force One, Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020, at Andrews Air Force Base. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Trump intended for the tax deferral to boost the economy. Millions of people remain out of work due to the pandemic, and Congress and the White House have so far failed to reach agreement on more stimulus legislation.
But Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, said the payroll policy will have no meaningful impact. By his reckoning, it amounts to giving federal workers a three-month loan worth $5.5 billion.
Besides, most federal workers have been continuously employed throughout the crisis, and in less need of a loan than laid-off workers in the private sector.
“Even if federal workers spent all of the $5.5 billion loan, which is unlikely as they know it is simply a short-term loan, it would add less than 0.1 percentage points to fourth quarter growth, and subtract about the same from growth early next year as they paid the loan back,” Zandi said. “This hardly registers, given the pandemic and everything else that is buffeting the economy.”
Advertisement
Guidance from the Treasury Department warns that taxpayers affected by the deferral will have to pay the money back between January and April of next year “or interest, penalties, and additions to tax will begin to accrue on May 1, 2021.”
The guidance doesn’t explain how the money would be paid back. A spokesperson for the Treasury Department referred questions to the White House Office of Management and Budget, which did not respond to a request for comment.
“No one that I’ve talked to can figure out how this helps.” - Michael Knowles, president, AFGE Local 1924
Terry Scott, an IRS employee and the president of National Treasury Employees Union Local 26 representing IRS employees in Atlanta, said the policy would be less problematic if employees had a choice in the matter. The executive order applies to federal workers earning less than $4,000 per pay period, which amounts to a salary of around $100,000.
“The majority of employees I talked to would have liked to opt out,” Scott said.
He still doesn’t understand how the repayment will work.
“Is it going to start incrementally? Are they going to get a notice stating they owe X number of dollars? Are they going to be required to report this as additional income on their tax returns? We have no specific information on how they expect to get this money back.”
Advertisement
Other questions: What happens if someone switches jobs before the tax is fully repaid? How might this affect someone’s Social Security payments in the future if the deferrals are never paid back?
Trump has said he plans to forgive the taxes "if I’m victorious on Nov. 3.” In other words, he expects Congress will bail him out on a costly plan.
It would seem like the confusion might be worthwhile for federal employees on the off chance the loan is eventually forgiven. But that’s a highly unlikely scenario. For starters, no one knows who will occupy the White House and control Congress when the bill comes due. Regardless of who’s in power, there would seem to be little desire in either party to turn the loan into a gift for government workers.
Many Republican lawmakers push for cuts to the federal workforce and pay freezes. Democrats are friendlier to federal workers, but don’t want to jeopardize social insurance funds. That’s why they opposed Trump’s executive order in the first place: Cutting payroll taxes can weaken the financial position of Medicare and Social Security.
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), who represents a disproportionate share of federal workers in his suburban Washington district, called Trump’s gambit “openly corrupt”: “Vote for me and I will pay you, otherwise your paychecks will decrease in January.”
Advertisement
How the tax deferral is supposed to play out may not get any clearer in the immediate wake of the election. If Trump loses, he might not care enough to sort out his own executive order as a lame-duck president.
And the sloppy implementation suggests he might not care even if he wins.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Obama: Trump Can't Even Protect Himself From The Coronavirus

Barack Obama delivered a powerful speech on Tuesday that blasted President Donald Trump ’ s coronavirus response , saying he has given Americans plenty of evidence that he ’ ll never take the pandemic seriously .
“ Donald Trump isn ’ t suddenly going to protect all of us .
He can ’ t even take the basic steps to protect himself , ” the former president said , referencing Trump ’ s recent bout with COVID-19 that required a three-night hospital stay .
It was one of several scathing lines Obama delivered about his successor at a drive-in rally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Philadelphia .
Trump has called concerns about the coronavirus a “ hoax ” and said it would disappear on its own , dismissed the need for protective measures , refused to order federal safeguards and pushed unproven treatments while more than 220,000 Americans died from COVID-19 .
“ We literally left the White House a pandemic playbook , ” Obama said of a simulation exercise that his administration held for Trump ’ s team days before they took office .
“ They probably used it to , I don ’ t know , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Obama chided .
“ Joe ’ s not going to screw up testing , ” he said of his former vice president .
“ He ’ s not going to call scientists idiots .
He ’ s not going to hold a superspreader event at the White House.
” The outbreak that affected Trump and dozens of others in his orbit has been linked to a gathering the president held in the White House Rose Garden to celebrate his nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was at the other end of Pennsylvania pushing the state to open up more of its economy despite the rise in cases there over the past two months .
“ It ’ s a choice between our plan to kill the virus or Biden ’ s plan to kill the American dream , ” Trump said at a campaign rally in Erie .
“ That ’ s what he ’ d be doing .
Biden will delay therapies , postpone the vaccine , prolong the pandemic , close your schools , shut down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pennsylvania ’ s been shut down long enough .
Get your governor to open up Pennsylvania.
” “ I get that this president wants full credit for the economy he inherited and zero blame for the pandemic he ignored , ” Obama said .
“ But you know what , the job doesn ’ t work that way .
Tweeting at the television doesn ’ t fix things .
Making stuff up doesn ’ t make people ’ s lives better .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Barack Obama delivered a powerful speech on Tuesday that blasted President Donald Trump’s coronavirus response, saying he has given Americans plenty of evidence that he’ll never take the pandemic seriously.
“Donald Trump isn’t suddenly going to protect all of us. He can’t even take the basic steps to protect himself,” the former president said, referencing Trump’s recent bout with COVID-19 that required a three-night hospital stay.
Advertisement
It was one of several scathing lines Obama delivered about his successor at a drive-in rally for Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in Philadelphia. Trump has called concerns about the coronavirus a “hoax” and said it would disappear on its own, dismissed the need for protective measures, refused to order federal safeguards and pushed unproven treatments while more than 220,000 Americans died from COVID-19.
“We literally left the White House a pandemic playbook,” Obama said of a simulation exercise that his administration held for Trump’s team days before they took office. “They probably used it to, I don’t know, prop up a wobbly table somewhere,” Obama chided.
“Joe’s not going to screw up testing,” he said of his former vice president. “He’s not going to call scientists idiots. He’s not going to hold a superspreader event at the White House.”
The outbreak that affected Trump and dozens of others in his orbit has been linked to a gathering the president held in the White House Rose Garden to celebrate his nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Advertisement
A day before the Biden rally, Trump was at the other end of Pennsylvania pushing the state to open up more of its economy despite the rise in cases there over the past two months.
“It’s a choice between our plan to kill the virus or Biden’s plan to kill the American dream,” Trump said at a campaign rally in Erie. “That’s what he’d be doing. Biden will delay therapies, postpone the vaccine, prolong the pandemic, close your schools, shut down our country. By the way, Pennsylvania’s been shut down long enough. Get your governor to open up Pennsylvania.”
Obama balked at Trump’s version of events on Wednesday.
“I get that this president wants full credit for the economy he inherited and zero blame for the pandemic he ignored,” Obama said. “But you know what, the job doesn’t work that way. Tweeting at the television doesn’t fix things. Making stuff up doesn’t make people’s lives better.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-10-21--Rudy Giuliani's 'Borat 2' Appearance Arouses Interest Of Twitter Users

Rudy Giuliani ’ s appearance in “ Borat 2 ” is arousing a lot of interest on Twitter .
In one scene of the film , which officially premieres Friday on Amazon Prime , the former New York City mayor is seen touching himself in the presence of a woman who ’ s posing as a conservative reporter .
The woman is Bulgarian actress Maria Bakalova , 24 , who in the movie portrays Borat ’ s teenage daughter .
The scene ends when star Sacha Baron Cohen , playing Borat , bursts into the room and says , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s too old for you !
” Yes , we know : Pictures or it didn ’ t happen .
Here ’ s Rudy Giuliani , the personal attorney to the President of the United States .
A still picture of Rudy from the Borat movie coming out on Friday .
Cant wait ... pic.twitter.com/52kFgoOe4J — Rex Chapman🏇🏼 ( @ RexChapman ) October 21 , 2020 Sharing this from @ TeaPainUSA but not the tweet because folks do n't need to have the pic repeated : `` Sweet Mary , Joseph and Jesus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ RudyGiuliani , imagine what a seasoned Russian intelligence agent can do . ''
< THIS IS THE HEART OF IT — Brad Bauman ( @ bradbaumn ) October 21 , 2020 Really , Rudy Giuliani getting tricked by Borat is the *least* surprising development of 2020 , if you think about it .
— Craig Needles ( @ NeedlesOnNews ) October 21 , 2020 Did n't think the reason I 'd be excited about a new fall movie would be because of @ RudyGiuliani touching himself but well , here I am .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ October 21 , 2020 Some imagined the conversations going on right now in the Trump camp .
“ And now , here ’ s how we make this look like it ’ s Hunter ’ s laptop.
” — Bill Vidonic ( @ BillVidonic ) October 21 , 2020 Some drew comparisons between Giuliani and CNN legal affairs analyst and New Yorker staff writer Jeffrey Toobin , who was suspended on Monday for exposing himself during a Zoom meeting .
Jeffrey Toobin , Giuliani , who 's next ?
Does n't jerking off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see that always happen in three 's ?
— Lizz `` Good Genes '' Winstead ( @ lizzwinstead ) October 21 , 2020 Giuliani hasn ’ t commented on his onscreen touchiness , but he told the New York Post in early July that he ’ d been pranked by Baron Cohen .
“ This guy comes running in , wearing a crazy , what I would say was a pink transgender outfit , ” Giuliani said at the time .
“ It was a pink bikini , with lace , underneath @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absurd .
He had the beard , bare legs , and wasn ’ t what I would call distractingly attractive .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rudy Giuliani’s appearance in “Borat 2” is arousing a lot of interest on Twitter.
In one scene of the film, which officially premieres Friday on Amazon Prime, the former New York City mayor is seen touching himself in the presence of a woman who’s posing as a conservative reporter.
The woman is Bulgarian actress Maria Bakalova, 24, who in the movie portrays Borat’s teenage daughter.
Advertisement
The scene ends when star Sacha Baron Cohen, playing Borat, bursts into the room and says, “She’s 15, she’s too old for you!”
Yes, we know: Pictures or it didn’t happen.
Here’s Rudy Giuliani, the personal attorney to the President of the United States.
A still picture of Rudy from the Borat movie coming out on Friday.
Cant wait... pic.twitter.com/52kFgoOe4J — Rex Chapman🏇🏼 (@RexChapman) October 21, 2020
Naturally, Twitter users had strong opinions.
Which sank lower, @RudyGiuliani's reputation or his hand down his pants? #BoratSubsequentMoviefilm — JeremyNewberger (@jeremynewberger) October 21, 2020
Sharing this from @TeaPainUSA but not the tweet because folks don't need to have the pic repeated: "Sweet Mary, Joseph and Jesus! If a comedian can compromise @RudyGiuliani
, imagine what a seasoned Russian intelligence agent can do." < THIS IS THE HEART OF IT — Brad Bauman (@bradbaumn) October 21, 2020
Advertisement
BREAKING: Rudy Giuliani tested positive for being a jerk off#ByeRudy — Chip Franklin (@chipfranklin) October 21, 2020
Really, Rudy Giuliani getting tricked by Borat is the *least* surprising development of 2020, if you think about it. — Craig Needles (@NeedlesOnNews) October 21, 2020
Didn't think the reason I'd be excited about a new fall movie would be because of @RudyGiuliani touching himself but well, here I am. — Luke Barnett (@LukeBarnett) October 21, 2020
Some imagined the conversations going on right now in the Trump camp.
“And now, here’s how we make this look like it’s Hunter’s laptop.” — Bill Vidonic (@BillVidonic) October 21, 2020
Some drew comparisons between Giuliani and CNN legal affairs analyst and New Yorker staff writer Jeffrey Toobin, who was suspended on Monday for exposing himself during a Zoom meeting.
Advertisement
Jeffrey Toobin to Rudy Giuliani today: pic.twitter.com/gsFLTMhRHI — mattgallagher0 (@MattGallagher0) October 21, 2020
Jeffrey Toobin, Giuliani, who's next? Doesn't jerking off in front of people who never wanted to see that always happen in three's? — Lizz "Good Genes" Winstead (@lizzwinstead) October 21, 2020
Giuliani hasn’t commented on his onscreen touchiness, but he told the New York Post in early July that he’d been pranked by Baron Cohen.
“This guy comes running in, wearing a crazy, what I would say was a pink transgender outfit,” Giuliani said at the time. “It was a pink bikini, with lace, underneath a translucent mesh top, it looked absurd. He had the beard, bare legs, and wasn’t what I would call distractingly attractive.”