thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--YouTube Is A Pedophile’s Paradise

YouTube Is A Pedophile’s Paradise

Eleven-year-old Allie sways back and forth in purple pajamas, mumbling softly.
“I feel so dizzy,” says the girl, who runs a tiny YouTube channel from her bedroom in Florida. She rolls her eyes into her head and collapses onto the bed behind her, next to a pile of teddy bears. After lying there motionless for a moment, she pops back up.
“Um, I wasn’t really sure what else to add, ’cause all that was requested was to faint while putting my eyes backwards,” she says to the camera, thanking a user who goes by “Martin” for the suggestion.
Advertisement
Allie’s channel is full of skits that she has eagerly filmed at the request of strangers on YouTube. She’s learned that her audience particularly enjoys watching her pretend to pass out and hypnotize herself; those kinds of requests come in all the time. In January, a user known online as “Damien” even scripted a scene for her, in which she dons a leotard with little pink flowers and gets abducted, tied up and knocked unconscious.
By contrast, Martin’s channel is empty — save for a few posts in which he talks about masturbating and his desire to ejaculate on a woman’s face. Damien’s channel features a series of movie clips showing young women being beaten and attacked with chloroform.
For Allie, whose real name is being withheld, the attention is exciting. (HuffPost was able to reach her parents and inform them of the situation; they did not agree to an interview.) To the girl’s great delight, her dizzy-themed videos randomly blow up sometimes, pulling in thousands of views despite her small following. She refers to her viewers as “fans” and promises to film whatever they’d like to see. That often means unwittingly acting out sexual fetishes for predators, who flock to her content like flies.
This didn’t happen by accident. YouTube’s automated recommendation engine propels sexually implicit videos of children like Allie from obscurity into virality and onto the screens of pedophiles. Executives at the Google-owned company are well aware of this: For years, media outlets and vloggers have been sounding the alarm over YouTube’s aggressive promotion of videos featuring vulnerable and partially clothed kids. The New York Times reported last spring on a mother who was horrified to find that a video of her young daughter playing in a pool had been watched hundreds of thousands of times.
Advertisement
“YouTube is a company made up of parents and families,” YouTube assured users and stakeholders in the wake of that story, which laid out in detail how the platform would serve pedophiles “a catalog of videos” sexualizing children. “We’ll always do everything we can to prevent any use of our platform that attempts to exploit or endanger minors.”
But despite its statements to the contrary, YouTube continues to actively put children in danger, a HuffPost investigation has found.
The tech behemoth’s safety measures — such as its pledge to disable comments on videos prominently featuring minors — are inconsistently enforced and insufficient. Undeterred, pedophiles are openly grooming kids and compiling their videos into sexualized playlists, making girls like Allie easy prey.
What’s worse, YouTube’s algorithm is still plucking videos of children in potentially sexually suggestive scenarios — bathing, doing gymnastics, spreading their legs — and lining them up en masse for users with predatory viewing habits. It’s even pushing viewers of erotica on the site toward a repository of videos starring scantily clad minors.
YouTube could easily rein in its amplification of such problematic content — as it has promised to do time and again in the face of bad press, sweeping advertiser boycotts and threats of legislation. Instead, it has rolled out half-measures to quell the public furor while continuing to facilitate, incentivize and profit off the sexual exploitation of children.
Advertisement
YouTube’s automated recommendation engine propels sexually implicit videos of children from obscurity into virality and onto the screens of pedophiles. Getty/YouTube
Catering To Extreme Tastes
Footage of kids in swimsuits, and similar videos that are innocuous but could be tempting to pedophiles, account for a small fraction of content on YouTube, and often are not in violation of its Community Guidelines. There’s nothing wrong with parents uploading clips from their family trip to the beach. The issue is not the volume or even the content itself per se, but how the platform herds users directly to it.
YouTube’s recommendation algorithm, which automatically generates video suggestions and brings users from one clip to the next, drives more than 70% of traffic on the site. It was designed with the goal of keeping people watching for as long as possible by feeding them increasingly “extreme” content to binge, according to one of its architects.
“Increasing users’ watch time is good for YouTube’s business model,” said former Google engineer Guillaume Chaslot, who helped create the recommendation algorithm but is now among its most outspoken critics. The longer people stay on YouTube to watch videos, he explained, the more ads they’ll see, which ultimately results in greater advertising revenue. (YouTube disputes that it steers users toward “extreme” videos; it contends that in general, its recommendations more often lead to mainstream content.)
Algorithmic promotion would explain why a random channel’s video filming up a toddler’s skirt has 473,000 views. And why a video of two men drowning in a river has 539,000, despite one of the victims’ mothers publicly pleading for it to be removed. It would also explain why a video of a woman engaging in an uncensored sexual act with a pet has more than 113 million views.
Advertisement
Each unique view represents around 10 recommendations from the algorithm, Chaslot said, indicating that YouTube has promoted the video of explicit bestiality more than a billion times. The company’s executives don’t specifically aim to push people toward such lurid material, he noted, and it’s certainly not their objective to guide users from sexy, adult-themed videos to kids, yet they continue to employ a profit-maximizing algorithm that they’re unable — or unwilling — to control.
Chaslot suspects the latter. YouTube vowed last year to reduce the distribution of videos “featuring minors in risky situations” — which would take little effort, he said — but it has continued to do the opposite, often blasting such content to hundreds of thousands of viewers or more. (YouTube declined to explain how it defines “risky” in this context.)
“Until they change the algorithm, the problem won’t go away,” said Chaslot, who stressed that YouTube could also train its artificial intelligence systems to detect predatory behavior by users.
As things stand, he added, it is effectively the case that if the algorithm determines “pedophiles spend more time online than other people, then it’s going to find ways to convert more people into pedophiles.”
Searching YouTube for clips featuring adult nudity quickly led down a rabbit hole of algorithmically recommended videos showing partially clothed children. YouTube
Advertisement
Breeding Predators
In spite of YouTube’s ban on “gratuitous” nudity, finding erotic content on the site is as easy as typing “sexy” into the search bar. Users who go looking for it, however, may quickly and unintentionally wind up watching videos of children that could be sexually arousing to pedophiles. Clicking on just one or two clips showing partially clothed children can plunge users into an echo chamber comprising little else, HuffPost found.
For the purpose of this investigation, HuffPost reporters created a new Google account, logged into YouTube and played a video with more than 3.7 million views featuring a fully nude man and woman. From there, YouTube’s autoplay tool assembled a lineup of videos with naked adults. Several seemed to be in clear violation of YouTube’s nudity policy: One with 1.9 million views showed a woman rolling around in a thong with her legs spread, briefly exposing her genitals.
It didn’t take long for the algorithm to insert a video with children into the queue. The second suggestion from the top alongside a YouTube-recommended clip featuring dozens of naked, partying adults was a family camping video with a thumbnail showing two shirtless kids in a pool.
On its own, that video does not seem predatory. Yet the same cannot be said of its enormous audience: It has 423,000 views and bears a weeks-old, time-coded comment left by the user “ХХХ AМATЕUR SЕХ VIDЕО - CLICK HERE” that takes viewers straight to the moment the children are first shown in their bathing suits.
Recommended alongside the pool clip was a video thumbnail showing a girl who looks to be no older than six lying on her back with her stomach exposed. In replies to a top-rated comment with a timecode leading to that moment in the video, which was preceded by two ads, viewers have written, “mmmmmmmm sexy!” and “She needs a tummy rub.” Yet another video recommended alongside the pool clip showed a young girl being touched by a man who looks to be a doctor. “she looks amazing and then some 😍,” reads one comment. Next up was a segment with two ads and the words “EXTREMELY FLEXIBLE GIRL” in the title, which showed a young girl in her underwear and an open-back top. It has 11.5 million views.
Advertisement
“Parents need to know they can’t trust YouTube to protect their kids.” - Haley McNamara, National Center on Sexual Exploitation
Within a few clicks, YouTube’s algorithm had taken HuffPost through a progression of recommendations from videos showing adult nudity to those featuring children in potentially sexual contexts. (YouTube claimed this does not represent an average user’s experience and that it could not replicate HuffPost’s results; however, the same process repeated multiple times from new accounts yielded the same pattern of results.)
Many of the recommended clips with kids had ads and time-coded comments leading to compromising moments, such as a video of a small girl being baptized in the nude. One timecode skipped to her getting undressed; others jumped to scenes where her bottom was exposed. “Why did they strip her naked?” asked a commenter. “I’m not complaining.”
And although YouTube now restricts minors from live-streaming, it still directed HuffPost to live-streamed videos featuring minors, including one with a young girl doing the splits in revealing shorts. Comments had been disabled on that video, but YouTube still allowed a live chat bar, enabling viewers to leave posts in real-time such as, “She is turning into a beautifuuuuuuuuul little woman” and “omg I love your long sexy legs 😍.”
After guiding HuffPost to a clip that showed two little girls getting changed, YouTube’s algorithm even suggested a playlist containing similar content. Before long, HuffPost’s recommendation bar was chock-full of videos of kids splashing in bathing suits, stretching in spandex, tumbling around in their underwear and getting undressed. If you fall down a rabbit hole on YouTube — intentionally or otherwise — it’s hard to get out.
Advertisement
YouTube told HuffPost that it has “disabled comments and limited recommendations on hundreds of millions of videos containing minors in risky situations” and that it uses machine learning classifiers to identify violative content. It did not explain how or why so many other videos showing vulnerable and partially clothed children are still able to slip through the cracks, drawing in extraordinary viewership and predatory comments.
Once HuffPost reporters had clicked through two dozen YouTube-recommended videos, which started out with content featuring adults and then shifted to children, the YouTube homepage looked like this:
Playlists For Pedophiles
Algorithmic promotion isn’t the only YouTube function that’s helping to put masses of potentially exploitative videos in front of predators who wouldn’t otherwise see them.
YouTube’s playlist tool allows users to assemble public content from other people’s channels without obtaining their permission — or even alerting them. It’s a useful feature for people who might want to watch a bunch of sports highlights grouped together, instead of searching the platform for each individual video. But pedophiles are freely exploiting it by hunting for independently innocuous clips of little kids (often posted to parents’ channels), compiling them into fetish-themed playlists, then dispersing the lists.
Aggregating “innocent content of minors for the purposes of sexual gratification” is prohibited on YouTube, though the platform does not proactively search for violations; instead, it relies on users to report them. As a result, many predatory playlists exist without penalty.
Advertisement
Through simple searches, HuffPost easily found sexually exploitative playlists with titles such as “Little girls,” “wet clothed girls” and “Girls passed out.” A video featured in a playlist called “Sleeping girls” showed a toddler nodding off in her car seat. It was pulled from a channel that appears to belong to the girl’s father, who has just 19 subscribers. The clip has close to 30,000 views. (YouTube removed these playlists after HuffPost flagged them in an email to the company.)
It’s unlikely that a parent would even know if a video of their child has been pulled into another user’s playlist, because YouTube wouldn’t notify them. But if they do somehow become aware, there’s no easy way for them to get the video removed from that person’s playlist — aside from deleting the video altogether or setting it to private mode.
“Regardless of what they keep saying, they’re not optimizing for child safety — they’re optimizing for engagement and profit.” - Hany Farid, digital forensics expert
The French vlogger behind the popular YouTube channel “Le Roi des Rats” called attention to this issue back in January 2017. In a viral video, he showed a stream of examples of playlists with titles “like on a pornographic website” containing videos featuring prepubescent girls, and revealed how YouTube would recommend such lists.
His exposé made headlines and elicited a tepid response from YouTube: It’s up to users to flag problematic content, the company told Le Parisien. The vlogger later warned of people trading links to sexually exploitative videos and playlists in dedicated off-site forums. But to date, the issue remains largely unaddressed.
Advertisement
YouTube told HuffPost that it has continuously been looking into ways it can better enforce its playlist aggregation policy at scale, but declined to answer what improvements it has made thus far, if any.
It’s likely that Allie’s content has also received a boost in traffic from playlist viewers who wouldn’t have found her videos otherwise. “Marco,” a person who sends the girl video requests, pulled one of her hypnosis skits into a playlist that consists of dozens of other clips featuring little girls and young women being “hypnotized.” In another one of Marco’s playlists, titled “Petite,” small children can be seen giggling and pretending to lull each other into trances.
“The aggregation of those videos into a playlist — having 100 of those videos in a row — shows a predatory, potentially pedophiliac intent,” said Haley McNamara, the vice president of advocacy and outreach for the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. “[YouTube] has failed to engage with the nuances of grooming and sexual exploitation.”
YouTube has made some progress in combating the sexual exploitation of children on its platform, McNamara said — such as its removal of nearly 1 million videos that violated its child safety policy in the final quarter of 2019 — but its approach has been too limited.
“They will talk about how they do take down many videos, which is great — and they report things to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children when it’s explicit child sexual abuse materials — but there’s much more sexual abuse than just explicit pornographic images,” she added. “They need to recognize that aggregation can be used in a predatory way as well.”
Advertisement
Until then, she said, “Parents need to know they can’t trust YouTube to protect their kids.”
YouTube vowed last spring to ban comments on videos of minors. But its enforcement has been inconsistent — allowing predators to groom children and to write comments sexualizing their prepubescent bodies. Illustration: HuffPost; Photos: YouTube
Grooming Minors
YouTube’s algorithm has fostered an environment that caters to — and potentially breeds — child predators. It propels them toward videos that star children and are sometimes even uploaded by the children themselves. This is especially problematic because the site is teeming with unsupervised kids, despite its policy requiring any user under the age of 13 to be accompanied by an adult. In some cases, predators can still have a direct line of communication with minors on YouTube without ever leaving the platform.
For Allie, her situation is cyclical: By driving people to her unwittingly fetish-themed content, where they often leave comments requesting more, YouTube has incentivized her to continue producing it.
“I noticed everyone really likes the hypnosis videos. I actually checked [my] first hypnosis video, and it has like 1.3K views! I was so happy to see that,” she said in a post last year. Her most popular video, in which she “hypnotizes” another little girl, has 6,200 views. Before she started filming fetishes on demand, her videos rarely amassed 60 views.
Last year, when Disney, Nestlé, AT&T and other major brands pulled ads from YouTube over concerns about predatory comments on videos of kids, YouTube suddenly jumped into action: It announced that it would disable comment sections on videos featuring minors. This measure is undoubtedly effective in reducing the risk of child grooming — when it’s actually enforced.
Advertisement
Allie is far from the only child starring in YouTube videos that still have comments enabled. In fact, YouTube algorithmically recommended to HuffPost an abundance of videos — old and new — that feature children and that still have comments turned on. In some cases, pedophiles have left comments that objectify and sexualize those children.
“No form of content that endangers minors is acceptable to us.” - YouTube spokesperson
A video of very young girls walking a runway in bathing suits was littered with lewd comments discussing their prepubescent bodies — including some written as recently as last week. Users left timecodes to guide each other to specific girls, talked about getting a “boner,” masturbating, wanting the “sexy kids” to sit in their laps, and openly wondered how the children’s vaginas might smell. In one comment thread, pedophiles could be seen trading contact information for the purposes of sharing images of a girl’s body. In another, they traded links to other videos of underage girls in revealing attire.
That video has close to 210,000 views and was uploaded in October 2019 — months after the comments ban was announced. YouTube disabled the comments section only after HuffPost brought the video to its attention.
It’s remarkable that YouTube relies on journalists and other outside groups to alert it to such issues, said leading digital forensics expert Hany Farid, who teaches computer science at the University of California, Berkeley.
Advertisement
“YouTube is not doing what they promised they’d be doing,” he said. “Somehow, magically, [reporters] can find these problems, but YouTube can’t, despite the fact that it’s their service, and they have all the money and resources.”
Although YouTube no longer has a private messaging feature, there’s nothing stopping predators from writing comments on kids’ videos asking them to share their off-site contact information. Allie typically replies to such requests by providing a link to her public Instagram page and inviting people to message her there.
Her latest videos with comments are flooded with requests from Damien and others asking her to act out “fainting several times” and similar fetishes. In a comment left in January, someone told her to hypnotize another person. “Find someone, anyone: your friends, cousin, sister but it has to be a girl,” the person instructed, to which Allie replied: “I hope to make your videos soon!”
“No form of content that endangers minors is acceptable to us," YouTube says. HuffPost/Getty
A History of Broken Promises
Over the years, YouTube has claimed repeatedly that keeping children safe on its platform is a top priority — one it will strive for by any means necessary. But since vowing last spring to reduce the spread of videos of minors in “risky situations,” the company has actually continued to amplify such videos into virality and to specifically steer them toward users seeking sexual content and footage of partially clothed kids.
Advertisement
“This is a feature, it’s not a bug,” said Farid. “Regardless of what they keep saying, they’re not optimizing for child safety — they’re optimizing for engagement and profit.”
YouTube only takes action in response to critical press coverage, fleeing advertisers and threats of regulation, he said, adding that even then, the company’s executives “only ever make changes that are just enough to get everybody off their backs, but not so much to really address the problem.”
Like other tech platforms, YouTube is shielded from liability for users’ content thanks to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a law passed in 1996. This essentially means it cannot be held legally accountable for the videos it hosts and promotes.
Congress has threatened to change that.
“We are dismayed at YouTube’s slow and inadequate response to repeated stories about child exploitation on its platform,” Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) wrote in a letter to YouTube’s chief executive officer, Susan Wojcicki, after the Times published its article on the issue. “With YouTube asleep at the wheel, predators have taken the reins.”
The senators urged YouTube to temporarily halt all recommendations of videos primarily featuring minors until it could work out a lasting solution — which it declined to do. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) took a more aggressive approach: He introduced a bill that would require YouTube to cut off such recommendations indefinitely or face criminal penalties.
Advertisement
And just this month, a coalition of senators introduced the EARN IT Act, a bipartisan bill that would force tech platforms to “earn” their immunity from liability by adhering to a set of “best practices” for preventing, reducing and responding to child exploitation.
YouTube has lobbied against such legislation, insisting that it’s capable of self-regulation.
“No form of content that endangers minors is acceptable to us. We have explicit policies that prohibit this and while the majority of videos featuring minors on YouTube are not violative and posted innocently, we take an extra cautious approach towards enforcement,” a spokesperson told HuffPost. “We’ve invested heavily in this area, and will continue to work with experts inside and outside of YouTube to provide minors and families the best protections possible.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Mike Bloomberg Lays Off Entire Campaign Staff And Scales Back Election Spending Plans

In a staggering reversal , Mike Bloomberg announced on Friday that he will not launch a super PAC or other new independent political group to help defeat President Donald Trump as he promised .
Instead , he transferred $ 18 million from his presidential campaign committee to the Democratic National Committee and announced some state offices would be moved to state Democratic parties .
“ Either it is going to be the best primary campaign in American history , or the greatest IE that has ever been created , ” Bloomberg ’ s campaign manager , Kevin Sheekey , told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg campaign boasted its staffers would be paid through November , with the campaign ’ s massive field operation generating enthusiasm and turning out voters for the Democratic nominee .
Friday ’ s announcement appears to be a massive backtrack .
Although $ 18 million is a huge sum , it is just 4 % of the more than $ 500 million Bloomberg spent on his own unsuccessful bid for the nomination .
That bid involved setting up unprecedented numbers of field offices and blanketing the airwaves with television ads attacking Trump and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very specific about what we can and can ’ t say and when , and the job guarantee was one of the things we were encouraged to emphasize to everyone but especially to any wavering candidates : ‘ As long as you ’ re willing to move , you have a guaranteed job through November , ’ ” he said , speaking on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardize future employment .
The former staffer shared a copy of an interview template sent out by the Bloomberg 2020 headquarters .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ reads : “ Employment through November 2020 with Team Bloomberg ( not guaranteed location you are at now ) .
” The job guarantee was again listed as a benefit in the hiring paperwork , right alongside things like health care and dental insurance .
“ It is bewildering that one of the richest men in the world , whose net worth is well above $ 50 billion , at least before this crisis ― greater than many countries ’ GDPs put together ― is unwilling to provide for and live up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who uprooted their lives , ” the former staffer said .
“ They committed to him , and he won ’ t commit to them at a time of global pandemic.
” Ex-Bloomberg campaign staffers are now encouraged to fill out a Google form if they are interested in a DNC campaign job .
The list of names compiled from these forms will be passed on to the DNC as it makes hiring decisions in swing states ahead of the general election .
These new jobs will not pay the cushy salaries Bloomberg @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even if Bloomberg ’ s efforts do scale back , he ’ ll remain one of the most important Democratic Party donors .
In recent weeks , he has given $ 500,000 to Voto Latino , which works to register and turn out Latino voters in key states ; $ 2 million to progressive group Swing Left ; and $ 2 million to Collective Future , which will use it to turn out Black voters in the south and Midwest .
It ’ s very troubling that Bloomberg appears to be evading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a party committee .
Beth Rotman , campaign finance expert at Common Cause “ The Democratic Party stands united and fully committed to defeating the most dangerous president in modern history , and we welcome the announcement of Mayor Bloomberg ’ s extraordinary investment to ensure that happens , ” said Kate Bedingfield , Biden ’ s deputy campaign manager .
“ We need to compete with the war chest that Donald Trump , the RNC , and their right-wing allies have amassed , and this will go a long way in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ efforts in key battleground states that will be necessary to win this November.
” As an individual donor , Bloomberg can only donate $ 355,000 to the DNC per year .
That includes one $ 35,500 donation to the party ’ s main campaign account and three donations of $ 106,500 to separate accounts for legal , building and convention accounts .
But candidate committees , like Bloomberg ’ s presidential campaign , are technically allowed to make unlimited transfers to the political party committees they are affiliated with .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In a staggering reversal, Mike Bloomberg announced on Friday that he will not launch a super PAC or other new independent political group to help defeat President Donald Trump as he promised. Instead, he transferred $18 million from his presidential campaign committee to the Democratic National Committee and announced some state offices would be moved to state Democratic parties.
The billionaire ex-New York City mayor had previously promised to spend “whatever it takes” to defeat Trump in November, and his top staffers regularly promised to mount a massive, unprecedentedly well-funded effort to defeat Trump even if Bloomberg’s presidential bid failed. Staffers were encouraged to join the campaign with a promise they would remain employed through the general election.
Advertisement
“Either it is going to be the best primary campaign in American history, or the greatest IE that has ever been created,” Bloomberg’s campaign manager, Kevin Sheekey, told The Washington Post in January. The Bloomberg campaign boasted its staffers would be paid through November, with the campaign’s massive field operation generating enthusiasm and turning out voters for the Democratic nominee.
Friday’s announcement appears to be a massive backtrack. Although $18 million is a huge sum, it is just 4% of the more than $500 million Bloomberg spent on his own unsuccessful bid for the nomination. That bid involved setting up unprecedented numbers of field offices and blanketing the airwaves with television ads attacking Trump and boosting his campaign.
“People were really bamboozled into taking these jobs, when they would have been far better off taking another one.” - former Bloomberg campaign staffer
Staffers who remained employed with the campaign in the swing states of Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin received word on Friday that their jobs were ending. Some of these staff will be transferred to state Democratic parties for the month of April.
Advertisement
A former Bloomberg 2020 staffer, whose roles included hiring manager, said the campaign told him to stress the job guarantee to potential candidates.
“They were very specific about what we can and can’t say and when, and the job guarantee was one of the things we were encouraged to emphasize to everyone but especially to any wavering candidates: ‘As long as you’re willing to move, you have a guaranteed job through November,’” he said, speaking on the condition of anonymity so as not to jeopardize future employment.
The former staffer shared a copy of an interview template sent out by the Bloomberg 2020 headquarters. Under a list of benefits, it reads: “Employment through November 2020 with Team Bloomberg (not guaranteed location you are at now).” The job guarantee was again listed as a benefit in the hiring paperwork, right alongside things like health care and dental insurance.
This staffer’s office, in a northeastern state, hired staff from as far away as Ohio, North Carolina and Texas. One staffer who came from far away lived in his car so he could put his paycheck toward paying his considerable student debt.
“It is bewildering that one of the richest men in the world, whose net worth is well above $50 billion, at least before this crisis ― greater than many countries’ GDPs put together ― is unwilling to provide for and live up to a promise he made to the people who uprooted their lives,” the former staffer said. “They committed to him, and he won’t commit to them at a time of global pandemic.”
Advertisement
“People were really bamboozled into taking these jobs, when they would have been far better off taking another one,” he added.
Ex-Bloomberg campaign staffers are now encouraged to fill out a Google form if they are interested in a DNC campaign job. The list of names compiled from these forms will be passed on to the DNC as it makes hiring decisions in swing states ahead of the general election. These new jobs will not pay the cushy salaries Bloomberg had promised would last through the election.
There was little indication Bloomberg had immediate plans for substantial donations to other major Democratic super PACs ― including Priorities USA, the party’s largest super PAC, or Unite The Country, which has backed former Vice President Joe Biden throughout the primaries ― or organizations, though the billionaire didn’t cut major checks to Democratic groups until late summer during the 2018 election cycle.
Former Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg in March as he announces the suspension of his campaign and his endorsement of former Vice President Joe Biden. AP Photo/Eduardo Munoz Alvarez
Even if Bloomberg’s efforts do scale back, he’ll remain one of the most important Democratic Party donors. In recent weeks, he has given $500,000 to Voto Latino, which works to register and turn out Latino voters in key states; $2 million to progressive group Swing Left; and $2 million to Collective Future, which will use it to turn out Black voters in the south and Midwest.
Advertisement
In a memo released Friday, Bloomberg’s campaign committee said the plans to donate to the DNC and not form a new group were a way to minimize redundant efforts and centralize the anti-Trump campaign effort.
“While we considered creating our own independent entity to support the nominee and hold the President accountable, this race is too important to have many competing groups with good intentions but that are not coordinated and united in strategy and execution,” the memo states.
Bloomberg’s campaign will also transfer “several of its former field offices to state parties and help accelerate the hiring pace for important positions in organizing, data, and operations across key battleground states,” in addition to the $18 million donation, to the DNC.
“It’s very troubling that Bloomberg appears to be evading the federal contribution limits of an individual to a party committee.” - Beth Rotman, campaign finance expert at Common Cause
Bloomberg’s run ended after a disappointing showing on Super Tuesday. He won just a single jurisdiction ― American Samoa ― and finished fourth in delegates, behind Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.).
Advertisement
The campaign of Biden, whose leads in public polling and the delegate count all but ensure he will be the party’s nominee, praised Bloomberg’s donation in a statement.
“The Democratic Party stands united and fully committed to defeating the most dangerous president in modern history, and we welcome the announcement of Mayor Bloomberg’s extraordinary investment to ensure that happens,” said Kate Bedingfield, Biden’s deputy campaign manager. “We need to compete with the war chest that Donald Trump, the RNC, and their right-wing allies have amassed, and this will go a long way in ensuring that we can fund the grassroots efforts in key battleground states that will be necessary to win this November.”
But this massive donation, plus the stated transfer of resources, raises significant concerns about whether Bloomberg is violating federal laws limiting campaign contributions from individuals to political parties.
As an individual donor, Bloomberg can only donate $355,000 to the DNC per year. That includes one $35,500 donation to the party’s main campaign account and three donations of $106,500 to separate accounts for legal, building and convention accounts. But candidate committees, like Bloomberg’s presidential campaign, are technically allowed to make unlimited transfers to the political party committees they are affiliated with.
Bloomberg’s campaign presents “novel challenges” because it was funded entirely with his own money, according to Beth Rotman, campaign finance expert at Common Cause, a nonpartisan good government nonprofit. This makes the $18 million donation through his campaign look like a new way to evade the contribution limits put in place to deter corruption and ensure equality in political campaigns.
Advertisement
“It’s very troubling that Bloomberg appears to be evading the federal contribution limits of an individual to a party committee,” Rotman said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--The Hucksters Pushing A Coronavirus ‘Cure’ With The Help Of Fox News And Elon Musk

Gregory Rigano has been everywhere lately .
The night before President Donald Trump promoted a potential treatment for the coronavirus , the anti-malarial drug chloroquine , Rigano was on Tucker Carlson ’ s prime-time Fox News show heralding the supposed breakthrough involving the drug : “ What we ’ re here to announce is the second cure to a virus of all time.
” He was identified as an adviser to Stanford University School of Medicine .
Rigano also appeared on Glenn Beck ’ s radio program this week , and Tesla founder Elon Musk tweeted out Rigano ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Stanford University School of Medicine and the University of Alabama , Birmingham , School of Medicine told HuffPost that no one from their institutions was directly involved in Rigano and Todaro ’ s paper .
The National Academy of Sciences was also not aware of any connection between Rigano or Todaro and the organization , according to a spokesperson .
One UAB researcher requested that his name be removed from the paper after he was initially listed as an author and denied he had any knowledge of it or any part in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a Thursday profile of Rigano and Todaro .
Rigano ’ s description of chloroquine ’ s effects is largely based on a single study from France that tested its use on a group of only 20 people .
Six additional patients were also given the treatment but dropped out of the study before its completion : Three were transferred to intensive care , one died , one left the hospital and another stopped treatment because of nausea .
The study has been peer-reviewed and accepted to the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next day or so .
The study ’ s corresponding author , Dr. Didier Raoult , did not return HuffPost ’ s requests for an interview and comment on whether he has been in communication with Rigano and Todaro .
Any drug requires extensive testing and clinical trials before it can be said to be effective , let alone that it is a “ cure.
” Initially promising drugs can also fail upon further testing .
Although chloroquine could indeed be beneficial against COVID-19 , the disease caused by the virus and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into its potential , medical experts also say there is no decisive proof yet that it can effectively treat the coronavirus .
One of the first people to note that Rigano and Todaro ’ s paper didn ’ t add up was Joan Donovan , director of the Technology and Social Change project at Harvard ’ s Shorenstein Center .
She wrote on Twitter that there was a lack of original research and that the authors appeared to have more experience with blockchain and cryptocurrency than running clinical medical trials .
Even the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it trying to distance the authors from any liability and damages it may cause , and stating “ the authors and or its affiliates does not guarantee the accuracy of or the conclusions reached in this white paper , and this white paper is provided ‘ as is ’ .
” Despite their questionable paper and lack of credentials , Rigano and Todaro have quickly become right-wing media darlings and had their claims amplified to millions .
Their paper has been touted in Breitbart , the Washington Examiner and The Daily Wire , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s and Beck ’ s shows .
Their promise of a breakthrough flatters the agreed-upon storyline in conservative media that Trump has the outbreak under control .
“ It ’ s our job to be skeptical of all and any claims .
However , I very much want to believe this and I think we need obviously immediately to run it down .
The federal government needs to find out if this is true , because if it is , that ’ s the biggest news of this moment , ” Carlson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role in the coronavirus crisis , and was one of the only Fox News hosts not to downplay the severity of the disease .
He instead embraced a nativist , anti-China message that has become the narrative of the White House and other right-wing media pundits forced to acknowledge the global pandemic .
Carlson effectively has a direct audience with Trump through his program , and according to Vanity Fair even privately talked with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort in recent weeks to emphasize the seriousness of the outbreak .
Carlson ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was reportedly a turning point for Trump to finally address the crisis .
Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk also picked up on Rigano and Todaro ’ s paper , on Tuesday tweeting it out to his over 32 million followers and then engaging in a back-and-forth with Rigano .
Major venture capitalists including Bill Gurley and David Sacks also shared the document , with Sacks tweeting “ if true , all other conversations are moot .
Flattening curve irrelevant.
” Musk ’ s apparent endorsement drew the attention of Beck , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ show Thursday .
Rigano told Beck that he and Todaro were in “ active discussions with Elon Musk on Twitter.
” He also claimed to have a “ direct line ” to the White House and said “ we know that President Trump received our white paper within 24 hours after it being published.
” Rigano asked for the government ’ s support “ both financially and scientifically.
” The White House did not respond to a request for comment on Rigano ’ s claims .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Gregory Rigano has been everywhere lately. The night before President Donald Trump promoted a potential treatment for the coronavirus, the anti-malarial drug chloroquine, Rigano was on Tucker Carlson’s prime-time Fox News show heralding the supposed breakthrough involving the drug: “What we’re here to announce is the second cure to a virus of all time.” He was identified as an adviser to Stanford University School of Medicine. Rigano also appeared on Glenn Beck’s radio program this week, and Tesla founder Elon Musk tweeted out Rigano’s self-published paper about the effects of chloroquine.
But Rigano is not a doctor. Nor is he affiliated with Stanford’s medical school — it is actively trying to get him to stop saying he is an adviser. And his claims about chloroquine are unproven, often overstated and potentially harmful.
Advertisement
Rigano and his associate James Todaro have rapidly gained attention for their paper on chloroquine, self-published on Google Docs, which they claim to have written “in consultation with Stanford University School of Medicine, UAB School of Medicine and National Academy of Sciences researchers.”
Stanford University School of Medicine and the University of Alabama, Birmingham, School of Medicine told HuffPost that no one from their institutions was directly involved in Rigano and Todaro’s paper. The National Academy of Sciences was also not aware of any connection between Rigano or Todaro and the organization, according to a spokesperson. One UAB researcher requested that his name be removed from the paper after he was initially listed as an author and denied he had any knowledge of it or any part in its creation, he told Wired magazine in a Thursday profile of Rigano and Todaro.
Both Stanford Medicine and its SPARK Program in Translational Research, a drug development partnership with industry, also explicitly told HuffPost that Rigano is making a false claim about his affiliation with the university and have contacted LinkedIn to demand the company remove the university from his profile.
“Mr Rigano is not an advisor to the SPARK program and Stanford was not involved in his paper. We previously asked him to remove any reference to Stanford in his publication,” Daria Mochly-Rosen, the founder and co-director of SPARK at Stanford, told HuffPost.
Advertisement
Rigano and Todaro did not respond to multiple requests for interviews and comment for this article.
Rigano was interviewed on Glenn Beck's radio program. He claimed to have a "direct line" to the White House. Youtube Tumblr
Rigano’s description of chloroquine’s effects is largely based on a single study from France that tested its use on a group of only 20 people. Six additional patients were also given the treatment but dropped out of the study before its completion: Three were transferred to intensive care, one died, one left the hospital and another stopped treatment because of nausea.
The study has been peer-reviewed and accepted to the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, which plans to publish it in the next day or so. The study’s corresponding author, Dr. Didier Raoult, did not return HuffPost’s requests for an interview and comment on whether he has been in communication with Rigano and Todaro.
Any drug requires extensive testing and clinical trials before it can be said to be effective, let alone that it is a “cure.” Initially promising drugs can also fail upon further testing. Although chloroquine could indeed be beneficial against COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus and prominent scientists have advocated for more research into its potential, medical experts also say there is no decisive proof yet that it can effectively treat the coronavirus.
“We certainly hope that chloroquine or hydroxy-chloroquine will be proven effective against COVID-19, but definitive evidence showing clinical benefit is lacking thus far and clinical trials are in progress,” Mochly-Rosen said.
Advertisement
One of the first people to note that Rigano and Todaro’s paper didn’t add up was Joan Donovan, director of the Technology and Social Change project at Harvard’s Shorenstein Center. She wrote on Twitter that there was a lack of original research and that the authors appeared to have more experience with blockchain and cryptocurrency than running clinical medical trials.
Even the paper itself has a massive disclaimer in it trying to distance the authors from any liability and damages it may cause, and stating “the authors and or its affiliates does not guarantee the accuracy of or the conclusions reached in this white paper, and this white paper is provided ‘as is’.”
Rigano’s LinkedIn profile lists him as “currently on leave” from a master’s program in bioinformatics at Johns Hopkins, while Todaro’s profile says he has a medical degree from Columbia University and is a “cryptocurrency investor and entrepreneur.”
Right-Wing Media And Elon Musk Spread The Claim
Despite their questionable paper and lack of credentials, Rigano and Todaro have quickly become right-wing media darlings and had their claims amplified to millions. Their paper has been touted in Breitbart, the Washington Examiner and The Daily Wire, in addition to their appearances on Carlson’s and Beck’s shows. Their promise of a breakthrough flatters the agreed-upon storyline in conservative media that Trump has the outbreak under control.
Fox News gave Rigano and Todaro’s paper its most powerful platform when host Tucker Carlson aired a bizarre segment with Rigano on Wednesday night. Rigano praised Trump for cutting “red tape” and said the president could authorize chloroquine’s use for the coronavirus immediately. Carlson, who looked somewhat uncomfortable with Rigano’s robotic cadence, couched his praise but didn’t question Rigano on his explosive claims.
Advertisement
“It’s our job to be skeptical of all and any claims. However, I very much want to believe this and I think we need obviously immediately to run it down. The federal government needs to find out if this is true, because if it is, that’s the biggest news of this moment,” Carlson said.
“I’m so grateful that you announced that on this show, and I hope we’re hearing more about it very soon,” Carlson continued. “Thank you so much for coming on.”
Rigano on Tucker Carlon's prime-time Fox News show. He claimed he could announce a "cure" for the virus. Youtube Tumblr
Carlson has played a unique role in the coronavirus crisis, and was one of the only Fox News hosts not to downplay the severity of the disease. He instead embraced a nativist, anti-China message that has become the narrative of the White House and other right-wing media pundits forced to acknowledge the global pandemic. Carlson effectively has a direct audience with Trump through his program, and according to Vanity Fair even privately talked with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort in recent weeks to emphasize the seriousness of the outbreak. Carlson’s March 9 on-air monologue about the outbreak was reportedly a turning point for Trump to finally address the crisis.
A day after Rigano appeared on Carlson’s show, Trump repeatedly touted chloroquine as a potential wonder treatment for coronavirus. Trump falsely suggested that the Food and Drug Administration had approved it to treat the virus, and FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn said the president had directed him to take a closer look at its uses.
Advertisement
Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk also picked up on Rigano and Todaro’s paper, on Tuesday tweeting it out to his over 32 million followers and then engaging in a back-and-forth with Rigano. Major venture capitalists including Bill Gurley and David Sacks also shared the document, with Sacks tweeting “if true, all other conversations are moot. Flattening curve irrelevant.” Musk’s apparent endorsement drew the attention of Beck, who interviewed Rigano on his popular right-wing radio show Thursday.
“One of the things that caught my eye is that Elon Musk is all over this, and it’s gonna be guys like that that really change things,” Beck said on the show.
Rigano told Beck that he and Todaro were in “active discussions with Elon Musk on Twitter.” He also claimed to have a “direct line” to the White House and said “we know that President Trump received our white paper within 24 hours after it being published.” Rigano asked for the government’s support “both financially and scientifically.” The White House did not respond to a request for comment on Rigano’s claims.
Mainstream media outlets, many of them tech-related publications that cover Musk’s activities, have also run stories on Rigano and Todaro’s paper ― although some have been more critical and noted that it lacks clinical trials.
At a White House press conference on Friday, the use of chloroquine came up once again when a reporter asked Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, whether there was any evidence to suggest it could be used as a prophylaxis against COVID-19.
Advertisement
“The answer is no, and the evidence you’re talking about is anecdotal evidence,” Fauci said.
But Trump was more optimistic, again suggesting chloroquine could have impressive effects.
“I’m probably more of a fan of that than, maybe than anybody, but I’m a big fan,” Trump said of the drug.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Hope You Didn't Take The Trump Administration's Stock-Buying Advice

On Feb. 25 , while public health experts were warning of the possibility of a global , life-altering pandemic , National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow told Americans to go out and buy stocks .
“ The virus story is not going to last forever , ” Kudlow said on CNBC .
“ To me , if you are an investor out there and you have a long-term point of view , I would suggest very seriously taking a look at the market , the stock market , that is a lot cheaper than it was a week or two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rocky market in late February wasn ’ t a blip but the early stages of a full-on crash .
Most of the stock market gains made under Trump ’ s presidency have been wiped out by the coronavirus sell-off .
So how would you have made out so far if you followed Kudlow ’ s advice ?
As of end of day Thursday , the Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen 26 % since market close on Feb. 25 .
So if you had pumped $ 1,000 into an index fund tracking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attractive , that same investment would now be worth around $ 742 .
Kudlow prefaced his advice for those with a long-term point of view .
Fair enough .
You haven ’ t lost that money yet if you haven ’ t sold the stock .
If history is any indication , the market will come back up near those record highs ― maybe in six months , maybe in six years .
Nobody knows .
Not even former CNBC hosts .
But with the market cratering , the Dow has been lower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day since but one , meaning stocks in general have only gotten cheaper .
( To be clear : We are not telling you to buy stocks right now . )
You would have done marginally worse if you ’ d jumped into the market a day earlier , when the president himself suggested doing so .
On Feb. 24 , Trump tweeted that the “ Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA ” and that “ the Stock Market [ is ] starting to look very good to me !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ control in the USA .
We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries .
CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart .
Stock Market starting to look very good to me !
— Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) February 24 , 2020 Even the smartest investors can ’ t say with certainty that a dip is just a dip and not something more foreboding ― not even the president ’ s second son , Eric Trump .
As investors continued to sell in late February @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to give the stock market a thumbs up to his roughly 3 million followers , calling it a “ great time to buy stocks or into your 401K.
” He said he would be “ all in .
”

Buy those dips, folks. SAUL LOEB via Getty Images
On Feb. 25, while public health experts were warning of the possibility of a global, life-altering pandemic, National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow told Americans to go out and buy stocks.
“The virus story is not going to last forever,” Kudlow said on CNBC. “To me, if you are an investor out there and you have a long-term point of view, I would suggest very seriously taking a look at the market, the stock market, that is a lot cheaper than it was a week or two ago.”
Advertisement
“This thing will run its course,” he added.
As we now know, the rocky market in late February wasn’t a blip but the early stages of a full-on crash. Most of the stock market gains made under Trump’s presidency have been wiped out by the coronavirus sell-off.
So how would you have made out so far if you followed Kudlow’s advice?
As of end of day Thursday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen 26% since market close on Feb. 25. So if you had pumped $1,000 into an index fund tracking the Dow when Kudlow said prices looked attractive, that same investment would now be worth around $742.
Kudlow prefaced his advice for those with a long-term point of view. Fair enough. You haven’t lost that money yet if you haven’t sold the stock. If history is any indication, the market will come back up near those record highs ― maybe in six months, maybe in six years. Nobody knows. Not even former CNBC hosts.
Advertisement
But with the market cratering, the Dow has been lower than it was on Feb. 25 every day since but one, meaning stocks in general have only gotten cheaper. (To be clear: We are not telling you to buy stocks right now.)
You would have done marginally worse if you’d jumped into the market a day earlier, when the president himself suggested doing so. On Feb. 24, Trump tweeted that the “Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA” and that “the Stock Market [is] starting to look very good to me!”
The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA. We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 24, 2020
Even the smartest investors can’t say with certainty that a dip is just a dip and not something more foreboding ― not even the president’s second son, Eric Trump.
As investors continued to sell in late February, the younger Trump took to Twitter to give the stock market a thumbs up to his roughly 3 million followers, calling it a “great time to buy stocks or into your 401K.” He said he would be “all in.”
Advertisement
Eric Trump added, “let’s see if I’m right.” (He later deleted the tweet.)


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Trump Administration Asks States To Bury Unemployment Claim Figures

The Trump administration ’ s Labor Department sent an email to state officials this week asking them to report new unemployment claims only in “ generalities ” to avoid spooking financial markets , The New York Times reported .
The email on Wednesday asked state labor authorities to only “ provide information using generalities to describe claims levels ( very high , large increase ) ” until the Labor Department releases the total number of national claims next Thursday .
“ States should not provide numeric values to the public , ” Gay Gilbert , the administrator of the department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote in the email shared with the Times .
The message noted that the figures are closely tracked by financial markets judging the strength of the economy .
Unemployment claims have been skyrocketing as thousands are laid off from jobs amid the spread of coronavirus .
Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin reportedly warned senators that unemployment during the pandemic could hit 20 % without a financial rescue package .
Georgia did not release exact figures .
State Labor Department spokeswoman Kersha Cartwright told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution the state was not yet ready to reveal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mention the memo .
New claims were so numerous that the state ’ s unemployment website was clogged , said Cartwright , adding : “ We are seeing as many claims filed in a day as we usually see in a week .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Trump administration’s Labor Department sent an email to state officials this week asking them to report new unemployment claims only in “generalities” to avoid spooking financial markets, The New York Times reported.
The email on Wednesday asked state labor authorities to only “provide information using generalities to describe claims levels (very high, large increase)” until the Labor Department releases the total number of national claims next Thursday.
Advertisement
“States should not provide numeric values to the public,” Gay Gilbert, the administrator of the department’s Office of Employment Insurance, wrote in the email shared with the Times. The message noted that the figures are closely tracked by financial markets judging the strength of the economy.
Unemployment claims have been skyrocketing as thousands are laid off from jobs amid the spread of coronavirus. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin reportedly warned senators that unemployment during the pandemic could hit 20% without a financial rescue package.
Georgia did not release exact figures. State Labor Department spokeswoman Kersha Cartwright told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution the state was not yet ready to reveal specific numbers — though she did not mention the memo.
New claims were so numerous that the state’s unemployment website was clogged, said Cartwright, adding: “We are seeing as many claims filed in a day as we usually see in a week.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--In 2008, Richard Burr Also Told The Public Not To Panic While He Cashed Out

Sen. Richard Burr ( R-N.C. ) is facing fierce criticism for selling off a significant portion of his stocks , even as he was reassuring the public that the government was ready to handle the battle against the coronavirus .
On Feb. 13 , he unloaded between $ 628,000 and $ 1.72 million of his holdings .
But just three days earlier , he had co-authored an op-ed with a more optimistic message , saying “ the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats , like the coronavirus.
” As a member @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was receiving daily updates on the coronavirus .
His sell-off came before the markets began tanking ― meaning , before much of the public began to realize what was going on .
Burr ’ s message behind closed doors was less optimistic than what he had written in that Feb. 3 op-ed .
On Feb. 27 , he gave a speech to business leaders in North Carolina ― a group whose membership costs up to $ 100,000 ― where he warned attendees about what was coming .
He said they might have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start closing schools and mobilizing the military .
“ Today ’ s news of Citigroup ’ s acquisition of Wachovia might be unsettling to many in North Carolina .
While these are difficult times in our economy , it is important to remember that this move provides for the protection of accounts and the soundness of savings for Wachovia ’ s customers .
FDIC has said that all services for customers should continue uninterrupted , ” he said .
Around the same time , Burr told his wife to go to the bank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money as possible .
He revealed his actions in another speech to business leaders in 2009 .
“ On Friday night , I called my wife and I said , ‘ Brooke , I am not coming home this weekend .
I will call you on Monday .
Tonight , I want you to go to the ATM machine , and I want you to draw out everything it will let you take .
And I want you to go tomorrow , and I want you to go Sunday , ’ ” Burr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the time , referring to the 2008 incident .
That statement doesn ’ t really help the senator much .
If he made the transactions while the financial markets were showing volatility ― in other words , while they were dropping dramatically ― there wouldn ’ t be an issue .
But Burr conveniently dumped his stocks right before there were historic losses .
On Friday , Burr said he relied on public information ― “ CNBC ’ s daily health and science reporting out of its Asia bureaus ” in particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Feb. 13 but was asking the Senate Ethics Committee to review the transactions .
“ Understanding the assumption many could make in hindsight however , I spoke this morning with the Chairman of the Senate Ethics Committee and asked him to open a complete review of the matter with full transparency , ” he said in a statement .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) is facing fierce criticism for selling off a significant portion of his stocks, even as he was reassuring the public that the government was ready to handle the battle against the coronavirus.
But in 2008, during the financial crisis, he did something similar.
On Feb. 13, he unloaded between $628,000 and $1.72 million of his holdings. But just three days earlier, he had co-authored an op-ed with a more optimistic message, saying “the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus.”
Advertisement
As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Burr was receiving daily updates on the coronavirus. His sell-off came before the markets began tanking ― meaning, before much of the public began to realize what was going on.
Burr’s message behind closed doors was less optimistic than what he had written in that Feb. 3 op-ed. On Feb. 27, he gave a speech to business leaders in North Carolina ― a group whose membership costs up to $100,000 ― where he warned attendees about what was coming. He said they might have to curtail travel and that the government may start closing schools and mobilizing the military.
His remarks came almost two weeks before President Donald Trump’s administration began warning people about traveling to Europe.
In 2008, Burr put out a press release warning the public not to panic that Citigroup was taking over Wachovia, a bank based in North Carolina.
Advertisement
“Today’s news of Citigroup’s acquisition of Wachovia might be unsettling to many in North Carolina. While these are difficult times in our economy, it is important to remember that this move provides for the protection of accounts and the soundness of savings for Wachovia’s customers. FDIC has said that all services for customers should continue uninterrupted,” he said.
In other words, don’t freak out, and don’t make a run on the banks.
But that’s exactly what Burr did.
Around the same time, Burr told his wife to go to the bank and take out as much of their money as possible. He revealed his actions in another speech to business leaders in 2009.
“On Friday night, I called my wife and I said, ‘Brooke, I am not coming home this weekend. I will call you on Monday. Tonight, I want you to go to the ATM machine, and I want you to draw out everything it will let you take. And I want you to go tomorrow, and I want you to go Sunday,’” Burr told the Henderson County Chamber of Commerce at the time, referring to the 2008 incident.
He said he didn’t use any information obtained through private briefings as a senator to help his family weather the financial crisis.
Burr’s spokeswoman Caitlin Carroll initially defended the senator’s Feb. 13 stock transactions, saying he made them “several weeks before the U.S. and financial markets showed signs of volatility due to the growing coronavirus outbreak.”
Advertisement
That statement doesn’t really help the senator much. If he made the transactions while the financial markets were showing volatility ― in other words, while they were dropping dramatically ― there wouldn’t be an issue. But Burr conveniently dumped his stocks right before there were historic losses.
On Friday, Burr said he relied on public information ― “CNBC’s daily health and science reporting out of its Asia bureaus” in particular ― for the sale of his stocks on Feb. 13 but was asking the Senate Ethics Committee to review the transactions.
“Understanding the assumption many could make in hindsight however, I spoke this morning with the Chairman of the Senate Ethics Committee and asked him to open a complete review of the matter with full transparency,” he said in a statement.
In 2012, Burr was one of three senators who opposed the STOCK Act, legislation that bars members of Congress and their staff from using nonpublic information to make financial trades.
Keep up with the latest updates on the coronavirus at our live blog.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Trump Taps Former Attorney Of Trophy Hunting Group For Key Wildlife Job

The Trump administration has hired Anna Seidman , formerly a longtime lawyer at the trophy hunting advocacy group Safari Club International , to lead the U.S .
Fish and Wildlife Service ’ s international affairs program .
A Fish and Wildlife Service spokesperson confirmed Seidman ’ s appointment in a statement to HuffPost on Friday , calling her “ an effective , innovative leader with 20 years of legal and policy experience , including expertise in international environment and natural resource management.
” The Safari Club has close ties to the administration ― its political action committee donated $ 11,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign ― and is one of several groups that successfully lobbied Trump ’ s Interior Department to roll back prohibitions on importing the trophies of lions and elephants killed for sport in certain African countries .
Seidman was Safari Club ’ s top litigator for two decades and most recently served as director of its legal advocacy and international affairs arm , according to the organization ’ s website .
In that role , she led several lawsuits against the U.S .
Fish and Wildlife Service and other federal agencies , including challenging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predator control tactics in national preserves and refuges in Alaska .
Founded in 1972 and based in Washington , SCI is an advocacy group with more than 50,000 members that focuses on “ protecting hunters ’ rights and promoting wildlife conservation.
” It has been criticized for giving out awards — with names like “ Grand Slam African 29 , ” “ African Big Five ” and “ Bears of the World ” — to hunters who kill exotic and sometimes threatened species , including elephants , rhinos and polar bears .
SCI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ International Foundation , is a former client of Interior Secretary David Bernhardt ’ s .
Bernhardt worked as a lobbyist for oil , gas and other special interests before joining the Trump administration .
As assistant director of FWS ’ s international affairs program , Seidman will lead a team responsible for implementing international conservation treaties and protecting at-risk wildlife populations and their habitats around the globe .
She replaces Eric Alvarez , who has served as acting chief for two years .
SCI has been a major supporter of the Trump administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke , the department made quick work of fulfilling trophy hunting groups ’ wish list , as HuffPost previously reported .
In late 2017 , the Interior Department came under fire when it lifted Obama-era bans on importing elephant and lion trophies from Zimbabwe and Zambia ― a decision first made public by Safari Club .
Facing public backlash , Trump suspended the department ’ s decision and condemned big-game trophy hunting as a “ horror show.
” A day later , SCI sent out a “ call to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encouraged hunters to complain to Trump and Zinke and blasted “ hysterical anti-hunters and news media outlets.
” FWS subsequently issued a memo in March 2018 indicating it would consider permits to import trophies taken from elephants , lions and bontebok , a species of antelope , hunted in several African countries on a “ case-by-case ” basis .
Later that year , Steven Chancellor , an Indiana coal executive who raised more than $ 1 million for Trump ’ s 2016 campaign and was then a member of the Department of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obtained permits to import the heads and hides of at least three male lions from Africa .
Safari Club has been part of the revolving door at Trump ’ s Interior .
Last July , Ben Cassidy , a former lobbyist for the National Rifle Association , left a high-ranking Interior post to to become Safari Club ’ s new director of government affairs .
His departure from the Trump administration came less than three months he got wrapped up in a formal Interior Department ethics investigation .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Trump administration has hired Anna Seidman, formerly a longtime lawyer at the trophy hunting advocacy group Safari Club International, to lead the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s international affairs program.
A Fish and Wildlife Service spokesperson confirmed Seidman’s appointment in a statement to HuffPost on Friday, calling her “an effective, innovative leader with 20 years of legal and policy experience, including expertise in international environment and natural resource management.”
Advertisement
The Safari Club has close ties to the administration ― its political action committee donated $11,000 to President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign ― and is one of several groups that successfully lobbied Trump’s Interior Department to roll back prohibitions on importing the trophies of lions and elephants killed for sport in certain African countries.
Seidman was Safari Club’s top litigator for two decades and most recently served as director of its legal advocacy and international affairs arm, according to the organization’s website. In that role, she led several lawsuits against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other federal agencies, including challenging a 2015 Obama-era regulation that prohibited aggressive predator control tactics in national preserves and refuges in Alaska.
Seidman left Safari Club last year, according to her LinkedIn profile.
That's SCI's Director of Hunter Advocacy, Anna Seidman, in the photo with @SecretaryZinke ! https://t.co/aflXtWRbme — SCI Hunter Advocacy (@SCI_Advocacy) August 3, 2017
Founded in 1972 and based in Washington, SCI is an advocacy group with more than 50,000 members that focuses on “protecting hunters’ rights and promoting wildlife conservation.” It has been criticized for giving out awards — with names like “Grand Slam African 29,” “African Big Five” and “Bears of the World” — to hunters who kill exotic and sometimes threatened species, including elephants, rhinos and polar bears.
Advertisement
SCI’s sister organization, Safari Club International Foundation, is a former client of Interior Secretary David Bernhardt’s. Bernhardt worked as a lobbyist for oil, gas and other special interests before joining the Trump administration.
As assistant director of FWS’s international affairs program, Seidman will lead a team responsible for implementing international conservation treaties and protecting at-risk wildlife populations and their habitats around the globe. She replaces Eric Alvarez, who has served as acting chief for two years.
SCI did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment Thursday.
SCI has been a major supporter of the Trump administration and its pro-hunting agenda. And under former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, the department made quick work of fulfilling trophy hunting groups’ wish list, as HuffPost previously reported.
In late 2017, the Interior Department came under fire when it lifted Obama-era bans on importing elephant and lion trophies from Zimbabwe and Zambia ― a decision first made public by Safari Club. Facing public backlash, Trump suspended the department’s decision and condemned big-game trophy hunting as a “horror show.” A day later, SCI sent out a “call to arms,” in which the group encouraged hunters to complain to Trump and Zinke and blasted “hysterical anti-hunters and news media outlets.”
FWS subsequently issued a memo in March 2018 indicating it would consider permits to import trophies taken from elephants, lions and bontebok, a species of antelope, hunted in several African countries on a “case-by-case” basis. Later that year, Steven Chancellor, an Indiana coal executive who raised more than $1 million for Trump’s 2016 campaign and was then a member of the Department of the Interior’s advisory hunting council, obtained permits to import the heads and hides of at least three male lions from Africa.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Ex-Trump Adviser Asks What Could Be Most Heartless Question About Lockdowns Yet

If this goes on , where we have people locked down , they can ’ t go to work for @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re talking about economic damage that would be in the trillions of dollars @ @ @ @ @ this question : Is it worth trillions of dollars of losses ?
Think of the @ @ @ @ @ , in terms of the lost income , the lost life savings .
Is that @ @ @ @ @ with this ?
It ’ s a question worth asking , because I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ should get people to work as fast as we can .

If this goes on, where we have people locked down, they can’t go to work for more than three weeks, you’re talking about economic damage that would be in the trillions of dollars and we have to ask this question: Is it worth trillions of dollars of losses? Think of the human suffering, from the, in terms of the lost income, the lost life savings. Is that worth it, to deal with this? It’s a question worth asking, because I’m starting to think maybe we should get people to work as fast as we can.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Trump Closes U.S.-Mexico Border To Nonessential Traffic

President Donald Trump closed the U.S.-Mexico border to all nonessential traffic , a move he said will help slow the spread of the coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic .
Friday ’ s announcement followed a similar move on the U.S.-Canada border , where a temporary closure is expected to go into effect Friday at midnight .
“ As we did with Canada , we ’ re also working with Mexico to implement new rules to suspend nonessential travel , ” Trump said at a press conference Friday morning .
He added that the new rules “ will not impede @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the decision around his long-time desire to close down the border with Mexico , which he ’ s attempted to do through a wall , restrictions on access to asylum , family separations , policies that send asylum-seekers back to Mexico and other initiatives .
He said unauthorized immigration has long been an issue .
“ We ’ ve had this problem for decades ... but now ― with the national emergencies and all of the other things that we ’ ve declared ― we can actually do something about it .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that .
We have before , but this is now at a level that nobody has ever approached.
” Similar to the Canadian agreement , trade and commercial routes are expected to remain open .
Essential workers would still be allowed to cross , but travelers whose main purpose was recreation and tourism would not .
Trump has repeatedly suggested that border closures and travel restrictions will keep COVID-19 from spreading in the U.S. At this point in the nation ’ s slow coronavirus response , however , it ’ s likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infection to other countries .
On Monday , Canadian health officials noted that half of Ontario ’ s newest COVID-19 cases could be traced back to travel in the U.S. Keep up with the latest updates on the coronavirus at our live blog .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump closed the U.S.-Mexico border to all nonessential traffic, a move he said will help slow the spread of the coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic.
Friday’s announcement followed a similar move on the U.S.-Canada border, where a temporary closure is expected to go into effect Friday at midnight.
Advertisement
“As we did with Canada, we’re also working with Mexico to implement new rules to suspend nonessential travel,” Trump said at a press conference Friday morning. He added that the new rules “will not impede lawful trade and commerce.”
Trump framed the decision around his long-time desire to close down the border with Mexico, which he’s attempted to do through a wall, restrictions on access to asylum, family separations, policies that send asylum-seekers back to Mexico and other initiatives.
He said unauthorized immigration has long been an issue. “We’ve had this problem for decades ... but now ― with the national emergencies and all of the other things that we’ve declared ― we can actually do something about it. We’re taking a very strong hold of that. We have before, but this is now at a level that nobody has ever approached.”
Similar to the Canadian agreement, trade and commercial routes are expected to remain open. Essential workers would still be allowed to cross, but travelers whose main purpose was recreation and tourism would not.
Advertisement
Trump has repeatedly suggested that border closures and travel restrictions will keep COVID-19 from spreading in the U.S. At this point in the nation’s slow coronavirus response, however, it’s likely that U.S. citizens are actually spreading the infection to other countries.
On Monday, Canadian health officials noted that half of Ontario’s newest COVID-19 cases could be traced back to travel in the U.S.
Elise Foley contributed reporting.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--The Trump Administration To Cancel Standardized Tests For Closed Schools

The action will likely provide relief to school leaders around the country .
Schools are held accountable for their standardized test scores based on state systems designed through the federal education law , the Every Student Succeeds Act .
However , in recent days , leaders have sounded the alarm on whether or not they would be able to accurately assess students after weeks , or even months , of school closures .
Indeed , some schools have closed for the rest of the year , raising questions about how these tests would even be delivered .
“ Students need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continuing to learn .
Teachers need to be able to focus on remote learning and other adaptations .
Neither students nor teachers need to be focused on high-stakes tests during this difficult time , ” said a statement from U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos .
“ Students are simply too unlikely to be able to perform their best in this environment.
” The action represents a step forward , after last week , the Department released guidance indicating that it would consider granting states waivers from standardized tests , while noting that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the latest statement , the Department said states still had to apply for such a one-year waiver , but it had “ dramatically streamlined ” the application process .
Education leaders have applauded the move .
Many states had already applied for the waivers , and some states had already announced that they would not be testing regardless .
“ In these unprecedented times , states need flexibility as they prioritize the health and safety of all students , teachers , staff and families , ” said a statement from Carissa @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Chief State School Officers .
“ State chiefs strongly believe in the importance of assessments and accountability but now is the time to focus first on the safety and well-being of all students as educators assist them in weathering and recovering from this national emergency.
” “ With more than three-quarters of our states issuing statewide school closures — closures that are increasingly likely to last the remainder of the school year — it is clear there will be an impact on our ability to comply with assessment and accountability requirements , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawmakers from the organization .
“ I think probably a lot of the students will be extremely happy , ” President Trump said .
“ Some probably not .
The ones who work hard , probably not.
” The move comes after education leaders have expressed confusion over federal guidance on school closures .
The Center for Disease Control advised against gatherings of more than 50 people , but said such guidance did not apply to schools .
Trump has warned against groups of more than 10 .
“ School system leaders are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers different , why do the numbers not apply to schools , and what does this really mean for schools ?
’ ” read a statement from executive director of The School Superintendents Association , Daniel A. Domenech , released earlier this week .
Meanwhile , without clear guidance , a vast majority of schools have shut down .
As of Friday , at least 114,000 U.S. public and private schools had shuttered in an effort to combat coronavirus , impacting over 52 million students , according to EdWeek .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Trump administration announced Friday that it would provide waivers excusing states from performing standardized testing if they’re unable to assess students amid widespread school closures.
The action will likely provide relief to school leaders around the country. Schools are held accountable for their standardized test scores based on state systems designed through the federal education law, the Every Student Succeeds Act. However, in recent days, leaders have sounded the alarm on whether or not they would be able to accurately assess students after weeks, or even months, of school closures. Indeed, some schools have closed for the rest of the year, raising questions about how these tests would even be delivered.
Advertisement
“Students need to be focused on staying healthy and continuing to learn. Teachers need to be able to focus on remote learning and other adaptations. Neither students nor teachers need to be focused on high-stakes tests during this difficult time,” said a statement from U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. “Students are simply too unlikely to be able to perform their best in this environment.”
The action represents a step forward, after last week, the Department released guidance indicating that it would consider granting states waivers from standardized tests, while noting that standardized tests could still provide useful information. In the latest statement, the Department said states still had to apply for such a one-year waiver, but it had “dramatically streamlined” the application process.
Education leaders have applauded the move. Many states had already applied for the waivers, and some states had already announced that they would not be testing regardless.
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos in February 2020. Caroline Brehman via Getty Images
Advertisement
“In these unprecedented times, states need flexibility as they prioritize the health and safety of all students, teachers, staff and families,” said a statement from Carissa Moffat Miller, executive director The Council of Chief State School Officers. “State chiefs strongly believe in the importance of assessments and accountability but now is the time to focus first on the safety and well-being of all students as educators assist them in weathering and recovering from this national emergency.”
Yesterday, The School Superintendents Association called on Congress to support such waivers.
“With more than three-quarters of our states issuing statewide school closures — closures that are increasingly likely to last the remainder of the school year — it is clear there will be an impact on our ability to comply with assessment and accountability requirements,” said a letter sent to key lawmakers from the organization.
Trump addressed the issue at a press conference on Friday.
“I think probably a lot of the students will be extremely happy,” President Trump said. “Some probably not. The ones who work hard, probably not.”
The move comes after education leaders have expressed confusion over federal guidance on school closures. The Center for Disease Control advised against gatherings of more than 50 people, but said such guidance did not apply to schools. Trump has warned against groups of more than 10.
“School system leaders are rightfully asking, ‘Why are the numbers different, why do the numbers not apply to schools, and what does this really mean for schools?’” read a statement from executive director of The School Superintendents Association, Daniel A. Domenech, released earlier this week.
Advertisement
Meanwhile, without clear guidance, a vast majority of schools have shut down. As of Friday, at least 114,000 U.S. public and private schools had shuttered in an effort to combat coronavirus, impacting over 52 million students, according to EdWeek.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Most Renters Not Safe From Eviction Under Trump Proposal

“ That ’ s the problem with ( HUD ’ s proposal ) .
It only impacts a very small amount of people .
We need big-scale solutions , ” said Andrea Shapiro of the Metropolitan Council on Housing , a New York-based housing advocacy organization .
Furthermore , HUD has no power to protect renters in public housing authorities located across the country .
HUD Secretary Ben Carson said this week on Twitter that the agency is working with Congress to get that authority to protect renters in public housing authorities .
“ HUD has been in contact with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ensure the millions of low-income Americans we serve continue to have a roof over their head , ” Carson said .
The rules are in contrast to comments made by Trump this week , who said renters would get “ immediate relief ” as part of his administration ’ s plan .
Housing advocates called the White House ’ s proposal an “ important first step ” but said there are limitations to the policy that need to be addressed .
“ America ’ s lowest-income renters were already struggling to pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ latest disaster , and people were experiencing homelessness .
Congress must implement a national moratorium on all evictions and foreclosures , ” said Diane Yentel , president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition .
Renters tend to be more economically vulnerable than their homeowner counterparts .
They have generally lower incomes and can not tap into the equity in their homes as a line of credit in case of an emergency .
A disproportionate number of renters are black , Hispanic and other minorities .
Some cities and states , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York state and Kentucky , have imposed their own eviction and foreclosure moratoriums in response to the coronavirus .
But the majority of states and localities have yet to step in to stop people from losing their homes .

“That’s the problem with (HUD’s proposal). It only impacts a very small amount of people. We need big-scale solutions,” said Andrea Shapiro of the Metropolitan Council on Housing, a New York-based housing advocacy organization.
Furthermore, HUD has no power to protect renters in public housing authorities located across the country. HUD Secretary Ben Carson said this week on Twitter that the agency is working with Congress to get that authority to protect renters in public housing authorities.
“HUD has been in contact with every Public Housing Agency in the country to ensure the millions of low-income Americans we serve continue to have a roof over their head,” Carson said.
The rules are in contrast to comments made by Trump this week, who said renters would get “immediate relief” as part of his administration’s plan.
Housing advocates called the White House’s proposal an “important first step” but said there are limitations to the policy that need to be addressed.
“America’s lowest-income renters were already struggling to pay rent and make ends meet before this latest disaster, and people were experiencing homelessness. Congress must implement a national moratorium on all evictions and foreclosures,” said Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.
Renters tend to be more economically vulnerable than their homeowner counterparts. They have generally lower incomes and cannot tap into the equity in their homes as a line of credit in case of an emergency. A disproportionate number of renters are black, Hispanic and other minorities.
Some cities and states, including San Francisco and Los Angeles, New York state and Kentucky, have imposed their own eviction and foreclosure moratoriums in response to the coronavirus. But the majority of states and localities have yet to step in to stop people from losing their homes.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Some Republicans Say Mitch McConnell's Stimulus Bill Doesn't Go Far Enough

In addition to proposing hundreds of billions in loans for small businesses , many of which have been forced to close as COVID-19 illnesses mount , McConnell ’ s legislation would provide individuals making up to $ 75,000 in gross adjusted income a one-time check of $ 1,200 ( couples earning less than $ 150,000 would get $ 2,400 ) .
The payments would increase $ 500 for each child .
But the “ recovery rebates , ” as the bill calls them , would provide much less ― $ 600 ― for many low-income Americans who pay little or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be reduced for taxpayers earning above $ 75,000 to a maximum of $ 99,000 in gross adjusted income , with those above that figure ineligible for the government checks .
Several Republicans took issue with the proposal ’ s means-testing that would exclude some Americans from the benefits , urging the Senate to expand the payments .
“ Americans urgently need cash to meet immediate needs , that ’ s been my goal from the start , ” Sen. Mitt Romney ( R-Utah ) tweeted on Thursday .
“ The current bill has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lower earners smaller checks —that ’ s directly contrary to my proposal .
We need to fix this to ensure lower earners get equal payments.
” Romney was one of the first GOP lawmakers to propose sending a $ 1,000 check to every American adult to help deal with the increasingly painful economic fallout of the coronavirus .
Kyle Pomerleau , an economist and a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute , a conservative think tank in Washington , estimated that over 60 million low-income Americans wouldn ’ t receive the full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ultimately will look like hinges on high-stakes negotiations due to begin Friday between McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) , who have a hardly stellar record on cooperation .
Democrats have leverage over the final shape of the bill because it will require 60 votes for passage and Republicans hold 53 of the Senate ’ s 100 seats .
Democrats have their own wish list for the fiscal package , calling for at least $ 750 billion to boost hospital capacity , unemployment insurance , small business assistance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delivery .
In addition , they want forbearance of all federal loans and cancellation of some student loan debt .
“ We are beginning to review Senator McConnell ’ s proposal and on first reading , it is not at all pro-worker and instead puts corporations way ahead of workers , ” Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) said in a statement on Thursday .
Economic forecasts that grow direr by the day add pressure for quick action .
Unemployment claims are poised to surge to a record 2.25 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week , according to an analysis from Goldman Sachs .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― The $1 trillion emergency fiscal stimulus bill Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) unveiled on Thursday won’t do enough to address people’s suffering amid the growing coronavirus pandemic, several Republican lawmakers warned.
In addition to proposing hundreds of billions in loans for small businesses, many of which have been forced to close as COVID-19 illnesses mount, McConnell’s legislation would provide individuals making up to $75,000 in gross adjusted income a one-time check of $1,200 (couples earning less than $150,000 would get $2,400). The payments would increase $500 for each child.
Advertisement
But the “recovery rebates,” as the bill calls them, would provide much less ― $600 ― for many low-income Americans who pay little or no taxes. Moreover, they would be reduced for taxpayers earning above $75,000 to a maximum of $99,000 in gross adjusted income, with those above that figure ineligible for the government checks.
Several Republicans took issue with the proposal’s means-testing that would exclude some Americans from the benefits, urging the Senate to expand the payments.
“Americans urgently need cash to meet immediate needs, that’s been my goal from the start,” Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) tweeted on Thursday. “The current bill has promise but it shouldn’t give lower earners smaller checks —that’s directly contrary to my proposal. We need to fix this to ensure lower earners get equal payments.”
Romney was one of the first GOP lawmakers to propose sending a $1,000 check to every American adult to help deal with the increasingly painful economic fallout of the coronavirus.
Advertisement
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) agreed McConnell’s bill “needs to be fixed.”
“Relief to families in this emergency shouldn’t be regressive. Lower-income families shouldn’t be penalized,” Hawley added.
Kyle Pomerleau, an economist and a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, estimated that over 60 million low-income Americans wouldn’t receive the full rebate amount:
Rough estimate using IRS data:
The Structure of the Senate GOP Plan's Rebate would mean that roughly 64 million filers earning less than $50k would not receive the full rebate amount of $1,200/$2,400. — Kyle Pomerleau (@kpomerleau) March 20, 2020
What the new legislation ultimately will look like hinges on high-stakes negotiations due to begin Friday between McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who have a hardly stellar record on cooperation. Democrats have leverage over the final shape of the bill because it will require 60 votes for passage and Republicans hold 53 of the Senate’s 100 seats.
Democrats have their own wish list for the fiscal package, calling for at least $750 billion to boost hospital capacity, unemployment insurance, small business assistance, child care, remote learning and food delivery. In addition, they want forbearance of all federal loans and cancellation of some student loan debt.
Advertisement
“We are beginning to review Senator McConnell’s proposal and on first reading, it is not at all pro-worker and instead puts corporations way ahead of workers,” Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a statement on Thursday.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-20--Trump Administration Failed Dry Run 'Crimson Contagion' Pandemic Exercise

Officials wouldn ’ t explain why the administration ’ s coronavirus response was so slow to roll out testing , or to move on promoting social distancing and school closings — all steps highlighted in the exercise , according to the Times .
While President Donald Trump has claimed that “ nobody knew there would be a pandemic ... of this proportion , ” that ’ s exactly the kind of possibility the exercise addressed .
The Trump administration also had the benefit of lessons learned by the Obama administration in dealing with the Ebola crisis .
Obama aides in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preparedness for incoming officials of the Trump administration as part of the transition , but almost all of the previous administration ’ s experts had left the government by last year .
Former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats , who was fired by Trump in 2019 , warned of the danger of a pandemic to an unprepared nation last year in his Worldwide Threat Assessment .
The U.S. will “ remain vulnerable to the next flu pandemic or large-scale outbreak of a contagious disease that could lead to massive rates of death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy , strain international resources , and increase calls on the United States for support , ” the threat report warned .
The presentation of this year ’ s threat assessment to members of Congress has been held up by the Trump administration , Time magazine reported , citing unnamed sources .
The report warns the U.S. is unprepared for a pandemic .

Officials wouldn’t explain why the administration’s coronavirus response was so slow to roll out testing, or to move on promoting social distancing and school closings — all steps highlighted in the exercise, according to the Times.
While President Donald Trump has claimed that “nobody knew there would be a pandemic ... of this proportion,” that’s exactly the kind of possibility the exercise addressed.
The Trump administration also had the benefit of lessons learned by the Obama administration in dealing with the Ebola crisis. Obama aides in early 2017 ran an exercise for pandemic preparedness for incoming officials of the Trump administration as part of the transition, but almost all of the previous administration’s experts had left the government by last year.
Former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, who was fired by Trump in 2019, warned of the danger of a pandemic to an unprepared nation last year in his Worldwide Threat Assessment.
The U.S. will “remain vulnerable to the next flu pandemic or large-scale outbreak of a contagious disease that could lead to massive rates of death and disability, severely affect the world economy, strain international resources, and increase calls on the United States for support,” the threat report warned.
The presentation of this year’s threat assessment to members of Congress has been held up by the Trump administration, Time magazine reported, citing unnamed sources. The report warns the U.S. is unprepared for a pandemic.