thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-24--Nancy Pelosi Denounced Trump’s ‘Back To Work’ Tweets On CNN

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) on Monday fiercely disagreed with President Donald Trump ’ s suggestion that he may soon lift pandemic restrictions to restart the economy , saying that the primary goal should be to stop the spread of coronavirus .
CNN anchor Dana Bash asked Pelosi about the president ’ s recent tweets suggesting he would consider easing up on isolation guidelines soon , even though health professionals have advised this could have disastrous consequences .
Our people want to return to work .
They will practice Social Distancing and all else , and Seniors will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We can do two things together .
THE CURE CAN NOT BE WORSE ( by far ) THAN THE PROBLEM !
Congress MUST ACT NOW .
We will come back strong !
— Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) March 24 , 2020 “ Well , there doesn ’ t have to be a contradiction there , ” Pelosi said .
“ Our economy will thrive when our people are well and able to go back to work in groups ... and our children can go back to school , ” Pelosi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that is stopping the spread of disease.
” As the exchange with Bash grew heated , Pelosi said she didn ’ t have time for the president ’ s Twitter antics and would prefer to follow the advice of experts , whom she praised for working around the clock to find a path forward through the crisis .
Speaker Pelosi on President Trump 's suggestion about lifting his self-isolation guidelines soon : “ What the President is suggesting is that light at the end of the tunnel could be a train coming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about in a way that spreads the disease further ” pic.twitter.com/SckGxXn3zz — CNN Politics ( @ CNNPolitics ) March 24 , 2020 “ Rather than waste any time on commenting on the president , I would rather spend our time focusing on the fact that any president or anybody with responsibility should be scientifically inclined .
Evidence-based data , what is going to make the difference .
I think the cure is the biggest message of hope that is out there.
” Pelosi said she ’ d prefer for now to avoid the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could have unfolded had Trump heeded scientists .
During a Monday night press briefing , Trump said he planned to start “ opening our country up for business because our country was meant to be open.
” The number of confirmed cases in the U.S. has now climbed above 44,000 with 544 deaths recorded , and Trump himself acknowledged that doctors advise that normal activities should not yet resume .
“ If it were up to the doctors , they may say , ’ Let ’ s keep it shut down ― let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the president said .
“ You can ’ t do that with a country ― especially the No .
1 economy anywhere in the world , by far … you can ’ t do that .
It causes bigger problems than the original.
” The administration is discussing several phases of lifting the 15-day isolation guidelines once the deadline passes Monday .
Scientists have reiterated that people congregating in groups pose inevitable risks of a spike in cases , given that many can carry the virus without exhibiting symptoms .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Monday fiercely disagreed with President Donald Trump’s suggestion that he may soon lift pandemic restrictions to restart the economy, saying that the primary goal should be to stop the spread of coronavirus.
CNN anchor Dana Bash asked Pelosi about the president’s recent tweets suggesting he would consider easing up on isolation guidelines soon, even though health professionals have advised this could have disastrous consequences.
Advertisement
Our people want to return to work. They will practice Social Distancing and all else, and Seniors will be watched over protectively & lovingly. We can do two things together. THE CURE CANNOT BE WORSE (by far) THAN THE PROBLEM! Congress MUST ACT NOW. We will come back strong! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 24, 2020
The leading House Democrat weighed in on what should take priority: health or the economy.
“Well, there doesn’t have to be a contradiction there,” Pelosi said. “Our economy will thrive when our people are well and able to go back to work in groups... and our children can go back to school,” Pelosi replied. “But central to all of that is stopping the spread of disease.”
As the exchange with Bash grew heated, Pelosi said she didn’t have time for the president’s Twitter antics and would prefer to follow the advice of experts, whom she praised for working around the clock to find a path forward through the crisis.
Speaker Pelosi on President Trump's suggestion about lifting his self-isolation guidelines soon: “What the President is suggesting is that light at the end of the tunnel could be a train coming at us if people are out and about in a way that spreads the disease further” pic.twitter.com/SckGxXn3zz — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) March 24, 2020
Advertisement
“Rather than waste any time on commenting on the president, I would rather spend our time focusing on the fact that any president or anybody with responsibility should be scientifically inclined. Evidence-based data, what is going to make the difference. I think the cure is the biggest message of hope that is out there.”
Pelosi said she’d prefer for now to avoid the “what ifs” of how this could have unfolded had Trump heeded scientists.
During a Monday night press briefing, Trump said he planned to start “opening our country up for business because our country was meant to be open.”
The number of confirmed cases in the U.S. has now climbed above 44,000 with 544 deaths recorded, and Trump himself acknowledged that doctors advise that normal activities should not yet resume.
“If it were up to the doctors, they may say, ’Let’s keep it shut down ― let’s shut down the entire world,” the president said. “You can’t do that with a country ― especially the No. 1 economy anywhere in the world, by far … you can’t do that. It causes bigger problems than the original.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-24--Prisoners Are Being Transferred Directly Into A Coronavirus Outbreak At Rikers Island Jail

But the city ’ s Correction Department is continuing to transfer more prisoners into the crowded jail .
On Monday , the man with asthma was moved from the Manhattan Detention Complex , which has no publicly reported coronavirus cases , to Rikers , where COVID-19 cases continue to rise .
The man requested anonymity out of fear of retaliation .
“ It ’ s senseless , INHUMANE , and goes against the health policies to prevent the spread of this virus , ” Karen Correa , who is close to the man sent to Rikers , said in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Correa that he was transferred with about two dozen other men from his “ house.
” The transfers into Rikers fly in the face of widespread calls from health experts and advocates for the incarcerated to reduce jail and prison populations as the coronavirus outbreak spreads .
And some city officials already agree .
New York City ’ s Board of Correction has called for decreasing the jail population by releasing prisoners who are over 50 years old , have underlying health conditions , are being detained for administrative reasons ( missing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ example ) , or are serving sentences of less than one year for low-level offenses .
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has authorized the release of some people from Rikers .
Jails and prisons are especially dangerous places to be during a public health crisis .
It is impossible for most inmates to follow recommended guidelines on social distancing , hand-washing and disinfecting surfaces .
Incarcerated people tend to live , shower , eat and exercise in crowds .
The types of cleaning products and hand sanitizers that are strong enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most detention facilities .
It is often hard for prisoners to get access to decent medical care , even under regular conditions .
And conditions at Rikers are notoriously bad .
Correa ’ s loved one heard from another prisoner last Friday that his entire house of inmates might get transferred to Rikers .
He had already been moved between jails several times over the past few months as he awaits his court appearances for an appeal .
He doesn ’ t usually complain , Correa said , but this time was different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conditions at Rikers and his asthma could put him at higher risk of getting very sick from the coronavirus , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
“ Transfers between facilities are made based on safety and security considerations and can occur for any number of reasons , ” Jason Kersten , a Corrections Department spokesman , said in an email .
“ For safety and security reasons , we do not comment on or confirm specific transfers.
” The department has confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses among 52 people in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has declined to provide a breakdown by facility .
Public defenders who have spoken to their clients inside Rikers expect the number of confirmed cases there to increase exponentially in the coming days .
On Monday afternoon around 3:15 , the man Correa is worried about and the rest of the prisoners in his house were told to pack up .
The facility had been on lockdown that morning so he hadn ’ t had a chance to leave his cell to shower or call Correa , who was anxiously awaiting an update @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boarded a bus to Rikers around 4 p.m .
They didn ’ t get to their new house until around 8 p.m. , he told Correa .
By then , they had missed dinner .
If they wanted anything to eat , they had to buy snacks with their commissary money .
The transfer of new prisoners into Rikers is “ perplexing , to say the least , ” said Michael Skelly , a spokesman for the Correction Officers ’ Benevolent Association .
Corrections officers still don ’ t have enough gloves or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ official said .
The Correction Department ’ s response to the coronavirus crisis is “ ad hoc and unsettling , ” said Skelly .
Randall Unger , the lawyer who represents Correa ’ s loved one , said in an interview that he doesn ’ t understand why his client was moved to Rikers .
The Correction Department “ just transfers people at random , it seems .
I ’ ve never known any rhyme or reason to the process , ” Unger said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A man with asthma was transferred on Monday to Rikers Island, the infamous New York jail currently battling a coronavirus outbreak, from a nearby jail with no publicly reported cases.
Advertisement
But the city’s Correction Department is continuing to transfer more prisoners into the crowded jail. On Monday, the man with asthma was moved from the Manhattan Detention Complex, which has no publicly reported coronavirus cases, to Rikers, where COVID-19 cases continue to rise. The man requested anonymity out of fear of retaliation.
“It’s senseless, INHUMANE, and goes against the health policies to prevent the spread of this virus,” Karen Correa, who is close to the man sent to Rikers, said in an email to HuffPost. The man told Correa that he was transferred with about two dozen other men from his “house.”
The transfers into Rikers fly in the face of widespread calls from health experts and advocates for the incarcerated to reduce jail and prison populations as the coronavirus outbreak spreads. And some city officials already agree. New York City’s Board of Correction has called for decreasing the jail population by releasing prisoners who are over 50 years old, have underlying health conditions, are being detained for administrative reasons (missing a meeting with a parole officer, for example), or are serving sentences of less than one year for low-level offenses. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has authorized the release of some people from Rikers.
Advertisement
Jails and prisons are especially dangerous places to be during a public health crisis. It is impossible for most inmates to follow recommended guidelines on social distancing, hand-washing and disinfecting surfaces. Incarcerated people tend to live, shower, eat and exercise in crowds. The types of cleaning products and hand sanitizers that are strong enough to kill the coronavirus are banned in most detention facilities. It is often hard for prisoners to get access to decent medical care, even under regular conditions. And conditions at Rikers are notoriously bad.
Correa’s loved one heard from another prisoner last Friday that his entire house of inmates might get transferred to Rikers. He had already been moved between jails several times over the past few months as he awaits his court appearances for an appeal. He doesn’t usually complain, Correa said, but this time was different. He had heard about the poor conditions at Rikers and his asthma could put him at higher risk of getting very sick from the coronavirus, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“The implications of sending vulnerable inmates like him to a clearly infested detention center is mind-boggling,” Correa wrote. “What is the end-game here?”
When the man asked a corrections officer on his floor at the Manhattan facility for a reason for the transfer, he was told not to “rile people up,” Correa said.
“Transfers between facilities are made based on safety and security considerations and can occur for any number of reasons,” Jason Kersten, a Corrections Department spokesman, said in an email. “For safety and security reasons, we do not comment on or confirm specific transfers.”
Advertisement
The department has confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses among 52 people in its custody and 30 employees — but it has declined to provide a breakdown by facility. Public defenders who have spoken to their clients inside Rikers expect the number of confirmed cases there to increase exponentially in the coming days.
On Monday afternoon around 3:15, the man Correa is worried about and the rest of the prisoners in his house were told to pack up. The facility had been on lockdown that morning so he hadn’t had a chance to leave his cell to shower or call Correa, who was anxiously awaiting an update. The group of men being transferred boarded a bus to Rikers around 4 p.m. They didn’t get to their new house until around 8 p.m., he told Correa. By then, they had missed dinner. If they wanted anything to eat, they had to buy snacks with their commissary money.
The transfer of new prisoners into Rikers is “perplexing, to say the least,” said Michael Skelly, a spokesman for the Correction Officers’ Benevolent Association. Corrections officers still don’t have enough gloves or masks to protect themselves, the union official said. The Correction Department’s response to the coronavirus crisis is “ad hoc and unsettling,” said Skelly.
Randall Unger, the lawyer who represents Correa’s loved one, said in an interview that he doesn’t understand why his client was moved to Rikers. The Correction Department “just transfers people at random, it seems. I’ve never known any rhyme or reason to the process,” Unger said.
Another client at Rikers, a man charged with a nonviolent offense, has been unable to get medical attention for a cough and a fever, the lawyer said.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Chris Hayes Delivers Blistering Critique Of Donald Trump's Coronavirus Claims

Chris Hayes on Tuesday warned that President Donald Trump has now become “ a genuine threat to public health ” with the misinformation he spreads on a daily basis about the coronavirus pandemic .
The host of MSNBC ’ s “ All In ” picked apart Trump ’ s stated goal to ease restrictions imposed to stop the spread of the virus by Easter , a move that would fly in the face of advice from health experts and a slew of the president ’ s former advisers .
“ Easter is two and half weeks away , ” Hayes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ battled this epidemic have had lockdowns for 60 days .
The place with the worst outbreak in the world , Wuhan , China , are still in lockdown .
Maybe they ’ ll be out in time for Easter ?
” Hayes then examined the falsehoods that Trump perpetuated in a Fox News virtual town hall earlier Tuesday , recalling how “ in the midst of this global pandemic , at this moment of crisis , the president , as he has been doing daily , as he has done since the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out today and said things that that are flat out wrong , that are lies , and more than that , that are dangerous.
” “ That ’ s why we did not play you any sound of what he said today because , frankly , the president has become a kind of , well , he ’ s a genuine threat to public health , his rhetoric at this point , the things he says , ” he added .
.
@ chrislhayes on why we are n't playing sound from Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a global pandemic , the President went out and said things that are flat out wrong , that are lies , and that are dangerous ...
Frankly , the President has become a genuine threat to public health.
” pic.twitter.com/AAgPxlv4ey — All In with Chris Hayes ( @ allinwithchris ) March 25 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Chris Hayes on Tuesday warned that President Donald Trump has become “a genuine threat to public health” with falsehoods he spreads daily about the coronavirus pandemic.
The host of MSNBC’s “All In” blasted Trump’s aim to ease restrictions to stop the spread of the virus by Easter ― a move that would contradict advice from health experts and a slew of the president’s former advisers.
Advertisement
“Easter is two and half weeks away,” Hayes noted. “Other countries that have battled this epidemic have had lockdowns for 60 days. The place with the worst outbreak in the world, Wuhan, China, are still in lockdown. Maybe they’ll be out in time for Easter?”
Hayes ripped into Trump for ladling out falsehoods in a Fox News virtual town hall earlier Tuesday.
“In the midst of this global pandemic, at this moment of crisis, the president, as he has been doing daily, as he has done since the first case arrived on our shores, went out today and said things that that are flat out wrong, that are lies, and more than that, that are dangerous,” Hayes said.
“That’s why we did not play you any sound of what he said today because, frankly, the president has become a kind of, well, he’s a genuine threat to public health, his rhetoric at this point, the things he says,” he added.
Check out the clip here:
.@chrislhayes on why we aren't playing sound from Trump today:
“In the midst of a global pandemic, the President went out and said things that are flat out wrong, that are lies, and that are dangerous...Frankly, the President has become a genuine threat to public health.” pic.twitter.com/AAgPxlv4ey — All In with Chris Hayes (@allinwithchris) March 25, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-24--Senate Reaches Deal On Massive Coronavirus Relief Bill

WASHINGTON ― After days of marathon negotiations and a tense shouting match on the Senate floor , lawmakers reached a deal with the Trump administration early Wednesday morning on massive trillion-dollar emergency legislation aimed at propping up the U.S. economy and giving relief to workers hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic .
“ The Senate has reached a bipartisan agreement on a historic relief package for this pandemic , ” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) said on the floor .
“ In effect , this is a wartime level of investment into our nation.
” The legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trillion , includes hundreds of billions in loans for small businesses , many of which have been forced to close to fight the spread of the virus .
It also provides direct cash payments to the majority of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet or who have lost jobs during the crisis .
Democrats twice delayed passage of the measure to secure key priorities .
The bill now includes more funding for hospitals and health care workers than Republicans proposed , as well as expanded unemployment benefits to cover individuals who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assistance for four months .
Republicans initially proposed three months .
“ This is a great plan .
What it says is if you lose your job in this crisis you can be furloughed by your employer , ” Schumer said Tuesday of the new provisions , calling it “ unemployment insurance on steroids.
” Democrats also succeeded in securing in some oversight over $ 400 billion in loans to distressed corporations , which some critics were calling a “ slush fund.
” The massive pot of money would be controlled by President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ include bailouts to affected industries like hotels , casinos , cruise lines , and the oil and gas industry .
Under the terms of the deal , however , an independent inspector general and a congressional oversight board would be in charge of scrutinizing the lending decisions .
“ This body can ’ t get its act together , and the only reason it can ’ t get its act together is right over here on the other side of the aisle , ” McConnell said on the floor Monday .
“ Are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heated exchange on the floor , Sen. Sherrod Brown ( D-Ohio ) responded to a question from Sen. Tom Cotton ( R-Ark . )
by saying , “ I know you always want to do ... the president ’ s bidding.
” The legislation is the third and largest of the government ’ s responses to the coronavirus crisis .
Last week , Trump signed House Democrats ’ bill that makes coronavirus testing free , expands unemployment insurance benefits and provides paid leave to some displaced workers .
Much of the negotiations occurred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Mnuchin was spotted walking back and forth between the offices of McConnell and Schumer .
He also sat down for two hours with Brown , the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) unveiled her own massive rescue bill on Monday that would cost at least $ 2.5 trillion .
The move seemed aimed at giving Schumer leverage in his talks with the administration ― in fact , some aspects of the legislation were included in the Senate bill .
Pelosi expressed hope Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to approve the Senate bill by voice vote rather than calling the entire lower chamber back to Washington , a process that could substantially delay getting the bill to the president ’ s desk .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― After days of marathon negotiations and a tense shouting match on the Senate floor, lawmakers reached a deal with the Trump administration early Wednesday morning on massive trillion-dollar emergency legislation aimed at propping up the U.S. economy and giving relief to workers hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic.
A vote on the bill, which has yet to be fully written, is expected later Wednesday. It would likely be the largest federal bailout package in U.S. history.
Advertisement
“The Senate has reached a bipartisan agreement on a historic relief package for this pandemic,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on the floor. “In effect, this is a wartime level of investment into our nation.”
The legislation, which would cost approximately $2 trillion, includes hundreds of billions in loans for small businesses, many of which have been forced to close to fight the spread of the virus. It also provides direct cash payments to the majority of Americans who are struggling to make ends meet or who have lost jobs during the crisis.
“This is a great plan. What it says is if you lose your job in this crisis you can be furloughed by your employer,” Schumer said Tuesday of the new provisions, calling it “unemployment insurance on steroids.”
Advertisement
Democrats also succeeded in securing in some oversight over $400 billion in loans to distressed corporations, which some critics were calling a “slush fund.” The massive pot of money would be controlled by President Donald Trump’s administration and could include bailouts to affected industries like hotels, casinos, cruise lines, and the oil and gas industry. Under the terms of the deal, however, an independent inspector general and a congressional oversight board would be in charge of scrutinizing the lending decisions.
The bill includes restrictions on companies that accept aid from U.S. taxpayers from rewarding shareholders and their executives through stock buybacks, another Democratic priority.
Republicans excoriated Democrats over the days-long delay of the bill, accusing them of putting Americans’ health and safety at risk while job losses and deaths mounted.
“This body can’t get its act together, and the only reason it can’t get its act together is right over here on the other side of the aisle,” McConnell said on the floor Monday. “Are you kidding me?”
Tensions flared as members of both parties traded shots over the bill.
“This is unbelievable,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) yelled at one point after Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) objected to her speaking on the floor.
Advertisement
During another heated exchange on the floor, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) responded to a question from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) by saying, “I know you always want to do ... the president’s bidding.”
But the mood in the chamber turned significantly more upbeat on Tuesday as both sides expressed optimism about passing the bill early this week.
The legislation is the third and largest of the government’s responses to the coronavirus crisis. Last week, Trump signed House Democrats’ bill that makes coronavirus testing free, expands unemployment insurance benefits and provides paid leave to some displaced workers.
Much of the negotiations occurred behind closed doors on Sunday and Monday. Mnuchin was spotted walking back and forth between the offices of McConnell and Schumer. He also sat down for two hours with Brown, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) unveiled her own massive rescue bill on Monday that would cost at least $2.5 trillion. The move seemed aimed at giving Schumer leverage in his talks with the administration ― in fact, some aspects of the legislation were included in the Senate bill.
Advertisement
Pelosi expressed hope Tuesday about getting unanimous agreement in the House to approve the Senate bill by voice vote rather than calling the entire lower chamber back to Washington, a process that could substantially delay getting the bill to the president’s desk.
Senate Democrats “have done a great job,” Pelosi said Tuesday in an interview on CNBC. “Overarchingly we’re getting to a good place.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Chris Cuomo Rips Into Trump's 'Fringe Righties' For Wanting To Sacrifice Seniors

CNN anchor Chris Cuomo called out President Donald Trump and “ fringe righties ” for the latest talking point in conservative media over the coronavirus pandemic : sacrificing seniors for the good of the economy .
Impatient with the shutdowns and social distancing rules that have stalled the economy , Trump said Tuesday that he wants everything to reopen by Easter .
“ Based on what ?
” Cuomo asked .
“ No expert backed him up on the Easter call ― not one piece of science , not one projection.
” Easter is about rebirth and renewal , Cuomo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the midst of a pandemic would be the opposite of that .
“ More than 100 Americans died from coronavirus today , ” Cuomo said .
“ More than 700 total .
The virus is accelerating.
” In recent days , a growing number of conservatives , including some Cuomo dismissed as “ fringe righties , ” have taken up Trump ’ s call and even said it would be OK to end the shutdowns if it meant the nation ’ s elderly would be at risk .
Earlier this week , Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) told Fox News he was “ all in ” on risking death himself in exchange for “ keeping the America that all America loves.
” “ Hmmm , ” Cuomo said .
” Kill my grandparents or my parents so that we get the economy going .
Sounds pretty good !
” “ We don ’ t put a price on people ’ s life , ” he said .
“ And as a people , we should face things together because that is the only damn thing that ’ s ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his monologue below :

LOADING ERROR LOADING
CNN anchor Chris Cuomo called out President Donald Trump and “fringe righties” for the latest talking point in conservative media over the coronavirus pandemic: sacrificing seniors for the good of the economy.
Impatient with the shutdowns and social distancing rules that have stalled the economy, Trump said Tuesday that he wants everything to reopen by Easter.
Advertisement
“Based on what?” Cuomo asked. “No expert backed him up on the Easter call ― not one piece of science, not one projection.”
Easter is about rebirth and renewal, Cuomo said, and reopening the country in the midst of a pandemic would be the opposite of that.
“More than 100 Americans died from coronavirus today,” Cuomo said. “More than 700 total. The virus is accelerating.”
In recent days, a growing number of conservatives, including some Cuomo dismissed as “fringe righties,” have taken up Trump’s call and even said it would be OK to end the shutdowns if it meant the nation’s elderly would be at risk. Earlier this week, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) told Fox News he was “all in” on risking death himself in exchange for “keeping the America that all America loves.”
Advertisement
“Hmmm,” Cuomo said. ”Kill my grandparents or my parents so that we get the economy going. Sounds pretty good!”
Cuomo dismissed the suggestion as absurd.
“We don’t put a price on people’s life,” he said. “And as a people, we should face things together because that is the only damn thing that’s ever gotten us anywhere.”
See more of his monologue below:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-24--Lawmakers Pushing Big Financial Break For Oil Got $4 Million In Industry Donations

They ’ re urging the reduction or elimination of royalties for offshore drilling operations ― payments that companies make to the federal government to extract oil and gas from public lands and waters .
Drillers pay a percentage of the resource ’ s value , with the money going to fund schools , roads , conservation projects and more .
Late Friday , 13 Republicans and one Democrat , most from Texas and Louisiana , sent a letter to Interior Secretary David Bernhardt urging him to “ examine the viability of a temporary reduction in royalties as domestic energy producers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Petroleum Exporting Countries ] -driven price war and an epidemic that is driving millions of people around the world into quarantines of one kind or another.
” Doing so , they added , “ will help mitigate a price war that is sinking prices and decreasing production.
” More than one-fifth of the total $ 4.14 million in campaign donations ― nearly $ 900,000 ― has come in the 2020 election cycle .
The data is from the Center for Responsive Politics , a nonprofit that compiles and tracks campaign donations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fossil fuel money that the 14 members of Congress who signed the letter received , plus Rep. Garret Graves ( R-La . )
, who last week told The Washington Examiner he also planned to ask the Interior Department to use its authorities to implement a short-term reduction in royalty rates for companies drilling on federal lands and waters .
More than half the total , nearly $ 2.4 million , came from fossil fuel industry political action committees , while the rest was from individuals , according to the Center for Responsive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice to stand with Big Oil rather than the people suffering most from the COVID-19 outbreak is despicable , ” Collin Rees , a senior campaigner at the environmental group Oil Change USA , said in an email Tuesday .
He noted that the U.S. gives more than $ 20 billion in subsidies to oil , gas , and coal companies each year and that fossil fuel interests spend millions to get ally politicians elected .
“ This is yet another damning example of the dirty energy money cycle at play , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejection of dirty money by our elected leaders , ” he said .
The largest chunk of the fossil fuel money went to Rep. Bill Flores ( R-Texas ) , the former CEO of oil and gas company Phoenix Exploration .
Over his five terms in Congress , Flores has raked in $ 1.17 million from the oil and gas sector , more than any other industry .
That includes approximately $ 66,000 from Chevron , $ 59,000 from Energy Future Holdings LLC and $ 56,000 from Koch Industries , his top-three all-time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national interest to sustain the oil and gas industry to fend off this economic warfare coming from nation-states and a decrease in demand globally because of coronavirus , ” Graves told the Washington Examiner last week .
“ There needs to be a national response .
We can ’ t just dump this all on the lap of industry.
” For the last three years , U.S. oil and gas producers have enjoyed an “ energy dominance ” -obsessed Trump administration that has propped up the industry at every turn by slashing environmental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change and working to expand drilling on federal lands and in offshore waters .
Now facing collapsing energy prices that risk bankrupting small producers , the industry has turned to the administration for financial relief to stay afloat .
The Trump administration has barreled forward with oil and gas lease sales on federal lands and vowed to purchase tens of millions of barrels of crude oil from U.S. producers , enough to fill the nation ’ s emergency reserve to capacity .
“ We ’ re going to fill it right up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billions and billions of dollars , helping our oil industry and making us even further toward that wonderful goal , which we ’ ve achieved , which nobody thought was possible , of energy independence , ” Trump said during a March 13 press conference .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
More than 70 members of Congress pushing for the Trump administration to throw oil a lifeline during the coronavirus pandemic have received a collective $35.7 million from the fossil fuel industry over their careers.
They’re urging the reduction or elimination of royalties for drilling operations ― payments that oil and gas companies make to the federal government to extract oil and gas from public lands and waters. Drillers pay a percentage of the resource’s value, with the money going to fund schools, roads, conservation projects and more.
Advertisement
“These members’ choice to stand with Big Oil rather than the people suffering most from the COVID-19 outbreak is despicable,” Collin Rees, a senior campaigner at the environmental group Oil Change USA, said in an email to HuffPost. He noted that the U.S. gives more than $20 billion in subsidies to oil, gas and coal companies each year and that fossil fuel interests spend millions to get ally politicians elected.
“This is yet another damning example of the dirty energy money cycle at play, and the solution has to be a clear rejection of dirty money by our elected leaders,” Rees said.
Offshore drillers pay a 12.5% royalty rate for leases in water depths of less than 200 meters. The rate for all other offshore oil and gas leases is 18.75%, and onshore drillers pay 12.5% to extract from federal lands.
Both an overseas price battle between Saudi Arabia and Russia and a steep decline in global demand due to the coronavirus outbreak have pummeled U.S. producers, sending prices to an 18-year low last month.
Advertisement
Sixty-one House lawmakers — 60 Republicans and 1 Democrat — have signed on to at least one of three letters to date calling for the Trump administration to cut royalties on fossil fuel extraction.
“If this market does not stabilize soon, we risk rolling back the success of the U.S. energy industry over the past decade, which will have a disastrous effect on America’s economy and jeopardize our energy security,” reads one letter, sent to Trump on Thursday and signed by 42 members of the House.
Below are the signatories of the House letters and the amount each has fundraised from the fossil fuel industry over their careers:
Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas) — $1,169,573
Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) — $615,835
Rep. Michael C. Burgess (R-Texas) ― $455,152
Rep. Randy K. Weber (R-Texas) ― $326,650
Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) ― $278,350
Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas) ― $218,592
Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) ― $210,755
Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) ― $194,900
Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) ― $171,700
Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Texas) ― $126,832
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) ― $109,784
Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) ― $95,850
Rep. Ralph Abraham (R-La.) ― $67,253
Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.) ― $64,125
Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) ― $36,750
Rep. John Curtis (R-Utah) — $54,900
Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) — $1,955,325
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) — $501,254
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) — $398,125
Rep. Michael Conaway (R-Texas) — $1,507,142
Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) — $296,100
Rep. Rick Crawford (R-Ariz.) — $115,572
Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) — $321,439
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) — $467,703
Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) — $1,217,801
Rep. Fred Keller (R-Penn.) — $18,550
Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) — $245,159
Rep. Paul Cook (R-Calif.) — $60,300
Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.) — $127,789
Rep. Rick W. Allen (R-Ga.) — $68,050
Rep. Jodey C. Arrington (R-Texas) — $246,578
Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) — $1,571,434
Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) — $723,450
Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) — $963,050
Rep. Scott Perry (R-Penn.) — $131,950
Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.) — $211,009
Rep. David Rouzer (R-N.C.) — $144,816
Rep. Roger Marshall (R-Kansas) — $73,007
Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.)— $58,000
Rep. W. Gregory Steube (R-Fla.) — $5,000
Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) — $63,000
Rep. David B. McKinley (R-W.Va.) — $399,325
Rep. Troy Balderson (R-Ohio) — $143,805
Rep. Ron Wright (R-Texas) — $27,859
Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) — $1,492,347
Rep. Robert E. Latta (R-Ohio) — $417,333
Rep. Alex X. Mooney (R-W.Va.) — $117,226
Rep. Ron Estes (R-Kan.) — $194,575
Rep. Larry Bucshon (R-Ind.) — $105,900
Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas) ― $949,302
Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-Penn.) ― $43,000
Rep. Paul A. Gosar (R-Ariz.) — $77,800
Rep. Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) — $47,900
Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) — $63,750
Rep. Greg Pence (R-Ind.) — $34,516
Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) — $0
Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) — $74,209
Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) — $618,723
Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) — $745,425
Rep. Carol D. Miller (R-W. Va.) — $14,500
Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) — $371,909
Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas), right, was one of 14 House lawmakers who signed a letter March 20 calling on the Trump administration to temporarily slash federal oil and gas royalties for offshore drilling operators. Tom Williams via Getty Images
A dozen Republican senators sent their own letter to Interior Secretary David Bernhardt on Monday calling for the secretary to “reduce, delay or suspend” royalty payments for oil, gas and coal companies operating on public lands. “Without these measures,” the group wrote, “it is likely that many of these companies will cease production, which could cost thousands of jobs and threaten American energy security.”
Together, those senators have raked in more than $14 million from the fossil fuel industry over their careers, according to the Center for Responsive Politics data. Here is a breakdown:
Sen. John Cornyn of (R-Texas) — $4,067,906
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) — $2,139,220
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) — $1,554,805
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) — $1,174,330
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) — $1,145,191
Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) — $893,247
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) — $857,079
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) — $683,078
Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) — $658,524
Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) — $530,583
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — $357,295
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) — $111,818
The oil and gas sector is among the top five contributing industries to 52 of the 73 lawmakers listed above.
Advertisement
For the last three years, U.S. oil and gas producers have enjoyed an “energy dominance”-obsessed Trump administration that has propped up the industry at every turn by slashing environmental regulations, downplaying the threat of climate change and working to expand drilling on federal lands and in offshore waters. Now facing collapsing energy prices that risk bankrupting small producers, the industry has turned to the administration for financial relief to stay afloat.
The administration has barreled forward with oil and gas lease sales on federal lands during the pandemic. And during a coronavirus briefing Tuesday at the White House, Trump said he had “great” conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman about the oil price situation.
“We’re going to see what we can do because you don’t want to lose an industry,” Trump said, adding that “the two countries are discussing it, and I am joining at the appropriate time if need be.”
It is unclear if the Interior Department is considering lawmakers’ request to cut royalties. The agency did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment.
Trump is slated to host executives of major oil and gas giants, including Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corporation, at the White House on Friday to discuss ways to protect their industry.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Washington Post Rebukes Donald Trump's 'Reckless' Coronavirus Plan

President Donald Trump ’ s expressed hope to reopen the U.S. economy amid the coronavirus pandemic by Easter drew scorn from The Washington Post editorial board on Tuesday .
“ Going back to work too soon is reckless , ” the board warned in its latest editorial .
“ More time is needed to break chains of transmission , ” it said of the spread of the virus that has so far sickened more than 425,000 people worldwide and killed almost 19,000 .
“ What if returning to normal reignites a virus explosion ?
” the editorial asked .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the water cooler is already recovered , or not infected ?
” The newspaper acknowledged “ at some point , return is inevitable , ” but insisted “ until a vaccine or drug therapy is found , tested and manufactured , getting back to normal will become a complex social , medical , economic and political problem.
” The next phase of combatting the virus “ can not possibly begin in just more than two weeks , as Mr. Trump wishfully maintains , ” it added , cautioning how “ even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China did , this stealthy virus could come roaring back if we do not make adequate preparations , beginning right now .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump’s expressed hope to reopen the U.S. economy amid the coronavirus pandemic by Easter drew scorn from The Washington Post editorial board on Tuesday.
“Going back to work too soon is reckless,” the board warned in its latest editorial. “More time is needed to break chains of transmission,” it said of the spread of the virus that has so far sickened more than 425,000 people worldwide and killed almost 19,000.
Advertisement
“What if returning to normal reignites a virus explosion?” the editorial asked. “How does anyone make sure that everyone by the water cooler is already recovered, or not infected?”
The newspaper acknowledged “at some point, return is inevitable,” but insisted “until a vaccine or drug therapy is found, tested and manufactured, getting back to normal will become a complex social, medical, economic and political problem.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Sanders Plans To Appear At Next Democratic Debate… If It Happens.

Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) is planning to take part in the next Democratic presidential debate against rival Joe Biden , his campaign confirmed to several media outlets on Tuesday .
“ Senator Sanders is still running for president , ” spokesman Mike Casca first told The New York Times on Tuesday .
“ If there is a debate in April , he plans to be there.
” The news is the latest signal that the Vermont lawmaker plans to stay in the race for the foreseeable future as the nation reels from the ongoing spread of COVID-19 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 55,000 Americans .
It ’ s unclear if the next debate , which the Democratic Nationa Committee previously said would be scheduled for April , will go ahead .
The last debate , the first direct match between Biden and Sanders , included a host of health considerations , including podiums that were spaced at least six feet apart and a ban on a live audience .
Just last week , Sanders ’ campaign said he would “ assess ” his bid for the White House after another round of primary losses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dominant performance during Super Tuesday , clinching Arizona , Florida and Illinois and securing a lead of around 300 delegates .
Many primaries have been moved to later dates and both Sanders and Biden have canceled in-person events amid recommendations or orders to ban large gatherings .
Sanders has continued to appeal to Americans throughout the pandemic .
He held one of his many online town halls on Tuesday to speak about the crisis as the Democratic primary battle has effectively ground to a halt .
Biden has also moved to address voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remarks from his home about the ongoing coronavirus pandemic , lambasting President Donald Trump ’ s response and saying the White House bears the “ responsibility for our response.
” “ The president says no one saw this coming .
Well , that ’ s just not accurate , ” Biden said .
“ The mindset that was slow to recognize the problem in the first place ... is still too much of how the president is addressing the problem .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is planning to take part in the next Democratic presidential debate against rival Joe Biden, his campaign confirmed to several media outlets on Tuesday.
“Senator Sanders is still running for president,” spokesman Mike Casca first told The New York Times on Tuesday. “If there is a debate in April, he plans to be there.”
Advertisement
The news is the latest signal that the Vermont lawmaker plans to stay in the race for the foreseeable future as the nation reels from the ongoing spread of COVID-19, the novel coronavirus that has infected more than 55,000 Americans.
It’s unclear if the next debate, which the Democratic Nationa Committee previously said would be scheduled for April, will go ahead. The last debate, the first direct match between Biden and Sanders, included a host of health considerations, including podiums that were spaced at least six feet apart and a ban on a live audience.
Just last week, Sanders’ campaign said he would “assess” his bid for the White House after another round of primary losses. Biden built once again on his dominant performance during Super Tuesday, clinching Arizona, Florida and Illinois and securing a lead of around 300 delegates. Many primaries have been moved to later dates and both Sanders and Biden have canceled in-person events amid recommendations or orders to ban large gatherings.
Sanders has continued to appeal to Americans throughout the pandemic. He held one of his many online town halls on Tuesday to speak about the crisis as the Democratic primary battle has effectively ground to a halt.
Advertisement
Biden has also moved to address voters online. On Monday, he delivered remarks from his home about the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, lambasting President Donald Trump’s response and saying the White House bears the “responsibility for our response.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Democrats Are Handing Donald Trump The Keys To The Country

Final text of the bill has not been released , but according to a legislative draft , the new law would establish a $ 4.5 trillion corporate bailout fund overseen by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin , with few substantive constraints .
Some outlets are reporting this as a $ 500 billion fund , but $ 425 billion of that can be leveraged 10 times over by the Federal Reserve , resulting in a multi-trillion-dollar program .
The bill permits bailed out companies to lay off up to 10 % of their workforce over the next six months , with no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to waive any upside for the public in its new investments , and the bill ’ s restrictions on stock buybacks at bailed-out firms are too temporary to be significant .
Bailed out companies could even pay dividends to their shareholders .
In exchange for this takeover , Democrats got four months of more generous unemployment benefits for the millions who will be laid off and a one-time check of $ 1,200 per adult , eliminating a Republican restriction that would have limited poor people to just $ 600 and phasing out payments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad provisions , but they pale in comparison to the handout offered to the rich .
There is , in fact , an economic emergency right now — just not for the super rich or massive conglomerates .
On Monday , the Federal Reserve announced essentially unlimited support for the banking sector and , for the first time , used its authority to directly finance corporate debt .
Large corporations can get money , as Boeing CEO David Calhoun made clear on Tuesday when he said his company would “ just look at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve got plenty of them , ” if Congress were to demand an equity stake in the companies it assists .
Bailouts will eventually be necessary , but Congress has plenty of time to craft serious programs designed to save industry , not merely people who own stock in industry .
Working people , by contrast , do not have time to wait .
The coronavirus layoffs have already begun , and when official numbers begin rolling in on Thursday , they will be shocking .
Democrats and Republicans have essentially decided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people hit hardest hostage to the most reckless and , at the moment , unnecessary corporate welfare program ever conceived .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) boasted that the package is “ a wartime level of investment into our nation.
” But nothing about the legislation resembles the way a nation prepares for an ambitious military operation .
The legislation provides nothing of substance to address the coronavirus pandemic itself .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo ( D ) has already said the package will do next to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his state .
It mobilizes no new resources , organizes no production , improves no medical supply delivery and trains no new nurses .
Instead , it moves an enormous amount of money around and puts the Trump administration in charge of its movement .
The dissonance between the actions of Senate Democrats today and those from just a few short months ago is mortifying .
In December , House Democrats voted to impeach President Donald Trump for withholding congressionally mandated aid to a national ally , arguing persuasively that Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rival for the presidency , Joe Biden .
Democrats literally tried to remove Trump from office for abusing the public purse for personal political gain .
On Wednesday , Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) and every Senate Democrat were preparing to authorize more than $ 4 trillion for Trump ’ s top lieutenants to pass around .
For too long , Democrats have ignored the suffering and dysfunction caused by structural problems with the American economy , trusting that social welfare payments will be sufficient to counter the power disparity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us .
They are wrong to accept such a bargain now .
We live in an era in which the wealthy and the well-connected dominate almost every aspect of our society .
The rich not only live different lives than the rest of us ― they live significantly longer lives , a trend that is likely to be exacerbated as the medical system cracks under the pressure of the incoming coronavirus caseloads and as working people lose access to basic care .
The financial crisis of 2008 and the bank bailouts it inspired @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fabric .
The financial sector essentially became a criminal syndicate , as fraud settlements became a simple cost of doing business for bailed-out banks like Wells Fargo .
The government ’ s unheard-of largesse for wealthy bankers made an infuriating contrast with the unemployment lines and foreclosure signs that became commonplace across the country , and our politics were transformed as a result .
We are about to replay this nightmare with a more frightening cast of demons .
The small business relief the Senate has agreed to authorize on Wednesday will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failures , and will arrive too late to help too many firms that will go under , while the biggest companies in America feast on the fruits of the bailout .
“ We will be lucky if most small businesses see any assistance in less than two months , ” law professors Adam Levitin and Satyam Khanna wrote in a New York Times op-ed on Tuesday .
“ That is time they — and their employees — do not have.
” As with the bank bailouts , big companies will grow larger and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way what we still call a democracy is organized .
But these horrors will only be realized if the House of Representatives approves this monstrosity .
The House voted down the first bank bailout bill in 2008 .
It could do so again , and demand instead a simple relief bill for people who really need it ― working families ― and emergency measures to actually fight the coronavirus pandemic .

The emergency coronavirus legislation that the Senate agreed to on Tuesday can only be described as an outrage. It is not an economic rescue package, but a sentence of unprecedented economic inequality and corporate control over our politics that will resonate for a generation.
It represents a transfer of wealth and power to the super rich from the rest of us, with the support of both political parties ― a damning statement about the condition of American democracy.
Advertisement
Final text of the bill has not been released, but according to a legislative draft, the new law would establish a $4.5 trillion corporate bailout fund overseen by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, with few substantive constraints. Some outlets are reporting this as a $500 billion fund, but $425 billion of that can be leveraged 10 times over by the Federal Reserve, resulting in a multi-trillion-dollar program.
The bill permits bailed out companies to lay off up to 10% of their workforce over the next six months, with no restrictions thereafter. Mnuchin would have authority to waive any upside for the public in its new investments, and the bill’s restrictions on stock buybacks at bailed-out firms are too temporary to be significant. Bailed out companies could even pay dividends to their shareholders.
Bailout money will flow to the shareholders of large corporations, otherwise known as rich people. The oversight terms that Democrats secured are purely cosmetic, replicating the toothless provisions of the 2008 bank bailout that enabled watchdogs to report abuse but not actually prevent or rectify it.
“If you give vast amounts of public money to a single person with no real accountability, you won’t like what happens next,” Damon Silvers, the deputy chair of the oversight panel for the bank bailout, wrote on Tuesday.
Advertisement
In exchange for this takeover, Democrats got four months of more generous unemployment benefits for the millions who will be laid off and a one-time check of $1,200 per adult, eliminating a Republican restriction that would have limited poor people to just $600 and phasing out payments for six-figure incomes. These are not bad provisions, but they pale in comparison to the handout offered to the rich.
“$1,200 isn’t enough,” the Economic Security Project, a liberal think tank, tweeted on Wednesday. By agreeing to the deal, Senate Democrats in effect accept a horrendous future in exchange for a somewhat less burdensome present.
“It is a panicked and reckless legislative response,” Sarah Miller, executive director of the American Economic Liberties Project, an anti-monopoly advocacy group, said in a statement on Wednesday. It’s one that “will repeat most of the mistakes made in the 2008-2010 bailouts” and “fundamentally transform the American economy,” she added.
There is, in fact, an economic emergency right now — just not for the super rich or massive conglomerates. On Monday, the Federal Reserve announced essentially unlimited support for the banking sector and, for the first time, used its authority to directly finance corporate debt. Large corporations can get money, as Boeing CEO David Calhoun made clear on Tuesday when he said his company would “just look at all the other options, and we’ve got plenty of them,” if Congress were to demand an equity stake in the companies it assists. Bailouts will eventually be necessary, but Congress has plenty of time to craft serious programs designed to save industry, not merely people who own stock in industry.
Unnecessary Corporate Welfare
Working people, by contrast, do not have time to wait. The coronavirus layoffs have already begun, and when official numbers begin rolling in on Thursday, they will be shocking. Democrats and Republicans have essentially decided to hold a pittance of relief for the people hit hardest hostage to the most reckless and, at the moment, unnecessary corporate welfare program ever conceived.
Advertisement
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) boasted that the package is “a wartime level of investment into our nation.” But nothing about the legislation resembles the way a nation prepares for an ambitious military operation. The legislation provides nothing of substance to address the coronavirus pandemic itself. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) has already said the package will do next to nothing to assuage the disaster unfolding in his state. It mobilizes no new resources, organizes no production, improves no medical supply delivery and trains no new nurses. Instead, it moves an enormous amount of money around and puts the Trump administration in charge of its movement.
The dissonance between the actions of Senate Democrats today and those from just a few short months ago is mortifying. In December, House Democrats voted to impeach President Donald Trump for withholding congressionally mandated aid to a national ally, arguing persuasively that Trump’s actions were designed to undermine his political rival for the presidency, Joe Biden. Democrats literally tried to remove Trump from office for abusing the public purse for personal political gain. On Wednesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and every Senate Democrat were preparing to authorize more than $4 trillion for Trump’s top lieutenants to pass around.
For too long, Democrats have ignored the suffering and dysfunction caused by structural problems with the American economy, trusting that social welfare payments will be sufficient to counter the power disparity between the rich and the rest of us. They are wrong to accept such a bargain now.
We live in an era in which the wealthy and the well-connected dominate almost every aspect of our society. The rich not only live different lives than the rest of us ― they live significantly longer lives, a trend that is likely to be exacerbated as the medical system cracks under the pressure of the incoming coronavirus caseloads and as working people lose access to basic care.
A Warning From 2008
The financial crisis of 2008 and the bank bailouts it inspired did long-term damage to the American social fabric. The financial sector essentially became a criminal syndicate, as fraud settlements became a simple cost of doing business for bailed-out banks like Wells Fargo. The government’s unheard-of largesse for wealthy bankers made an infuriating contrast with the unemployment lines and foreclosure signs that became commonplace across the country, and our politics were transformed as a result.
Advertisement
The campaigns of both Donald Trump and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) largely grew out of the anger and resentment that the bank bailouts and the outrageous inequality of both the crash and the recovery inspired.
We are about to replay this nightmare with a more frightening cast of demons. The small business relief the Senate has agreed to authorize on Wednesday will be too little to stem the tide of failures, and will arrive too late to help too many firms that will go under, while the biggest companies in America feast on the fruits of the bailout.
“We will be lucky if most small businesses see any assistance in less than two months,” law professors Adam Levitin and Satyam Khanna wrote in a New York Times op-ed on Tuesday. “That is time they — and their employees — do not have.” As with the bank bailouts, big companies will grow larger and more profitable and demand further control over the way what we still call a democracy is organized.
But these horrors will only be realized if the House of Representatives approves this monstrosity. The House voted down the first bank bailout bill in 2008. It could do so again, and demand instead a simple relief bill for people who really need it ― working families ― and emergency measures to actually fight the coronavirus pandemic.
Democrats control the House. They can pass any bill they like and dare Senate Republicans and the president to oppose a serious bill for a serious problem.
Advertisement
Or they can rubber-stamp the Senate bill and help Donald Trump foreclose on the next generation of American democracy.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--The Deadly Consequences Of Trump's Attacks On The Media In A Pandemic

He ’ s misrepresented and overpromised on tools to help people with the crisis .
He falsely claimed that the Food and Drug Administration had “ approved ” chloroquine , an anti-malaria drug , to treat coronavirus patients , and it would be available “ almost immediately.
” And he has exaggerated the availability of tests for people .
Trump has also regularly berated journalists and cast doubt on the credibility of their work .
As recently as Monday , he took a gratuitous swipe at the media .
He noted that many of the seats in the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dr. Deborah Birx , the White House ’ s coronavirus response coordinator , about the “ angry media ” who usually fill the seats .
“ We have a lot of very angry media all around this room and they want one of these seats , but because of social distancing , we are keeping them empty and they are keeping them empty .
Will there ever be a time when all of those really angry , angry people — who don ’ t like me much to start off with , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me — will there ever be a time when these seats are full , like full to the brim like it used to be ?
” he asked Birx .
Trump has long fostered distrust of journalists and mainstream outlets , attacking reporters at his rallies and playing up the idea that the media are out to get him ― all while putting out his own misinformation .
But during a crisis like the coronavirus pandemic , what he ’ s doing is even more dangerous , as millions of his followers will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life-saving scientific facts represented in the press .
“ It is horrifying now that we are facing a highly contagious disease that is frightening and confusing .
To watch Dr. [ Anthony ] Fauci and Dr. Birx have to come to podium to correct — again and again — the misinformation from the mouth of a president is awful .
It ’ s painful to watch because the consequences are huge , ” said Lori Dorfman , director of the Berkeley Media Studies Group , who studies media portrayals of public health issues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start with Trump .
People on both the left and the right have long questioned ― and often with good cause ― the biases , motivations and accuracy of the industry .
But Trump has made bashing the media and reports he doesn ’ t like a mainstay of his political and governing strategy , with the common refrain of calling it all “ fake news.
” A new poll from CBS/YouGov finds that 72 % of Democrats trust the national media to deliver accurate information about the coronavirus , whereas 87 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same percentage of Republicans do , however , trust social media and other online sources for accurate information , compared to just 28 % of Democrats .
It ’ s easy to go on social media and find posts that are skeptical about the threat of the coronavirus ― many reflecting the sentiments Trump himself has expressed .
Some think it ’ s a liberal hoax to take down Trump or falsely argue that it ’ s nothing more dangerous than the regular flu ― a claim that Trump himself has made .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ media hoax that shouldn ’ t be trusted ― a belief that Trump has done little to suppress .
When leaders communicate in a crisis , they need to present the information in a way that is clear , consistent , unemotional and credible , according to Frank Sesno , a former CNN journalist who is now director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at The George Washington University .
“ So to present information in a divisive way ... or to attack messengers so that people doubt what they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And while the president may feel that he is taking a shot at the media and the media deserve it ― and fair enough , some of them may ― what he ’ s really doing is he ’ s further reinforcing his own role as a divisive person who criticizes and attacks .
Now is not the time to criticize and attack , ” said Sesno .
The coronavirus is hitting everyone , regardless of political ideology .
The New York Times recently ran a story about Heaven and Mark Frilot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Louisiana town , whose Facebook feed was often filled with people making light of the coronavirus and social distancing , echoing language used by Trump and his allies ― the same sorts of jokes posted above .
That skepticism vanished , however , when Heaven revealed that Mark was critically ill from the disease .
“ We kept kind of joking about it , like , ‘ Oh , this is crazy !
This is not going to affect us , why is everyone so wigged out about it ?
’ And then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a close friend of Heaven ’ s who is a Trump supporter and believed that the media was overhyping the disease .
Since Trump made his inaccurate claims about chloroquine , there have been at least three instances worldwide of people self-medicating and getting sick .
In Nigeria , two people were sent to the hospital after overdosing on the medication .
In Arizona , a man died after he and his wife ― who needed critical care ― took chloroquine phosphate , which is used to clean aquariums .
Fauci , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Infectious Diseases , has tried to walk back Trump ’ s claims about the drug , saying it was “ anecdotal ” and still needed to be tested in a clinical trial to make sure it was “ truly safe and truly effective .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In the midst of a global crisis, President Donald Trump continues to engage in one of his favorite petty pastimes: attacking the media.
“Coming together is much harder when we have dishonest journalists.”
“I think it is a nasty question.”
Trump has started doing regular briefings on the coronavirus, after weeks of insisting that it was not a big deal and would go away by April.
Advertisement
He’s misrepresented and overpromised on tools to help people with the crisis. He falsely claimed that the Food and Drug Administration had “approved” chloroquine, an anti-malaria drug, to treat coronavirus patients, and it would be available “almost immediately.” And he has exaggerated the availability of tests for people.
Trump has also regularly berated journalists and cast doubt on the credibility of their work. As recently as Monday, he took a gratuitous swipe at the media. He noted that many of the seats in the White House press briefing room were empty and asked Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House’s coronavirus response coordinator, about the “angry media” who usually fill the seats.
“We have a lot of very angry media all around this room and they want one of these seats, but because of social distancing, we are keeping them empty and they are keeping them empty. Will there ever be a time when all of those really angry, angry people — who don’t like me much to start off with, but now they really don’t like me — will there ever be a time when these seats are full, like full to the brim like it used to be?” he asked Birx.
A few hours later, he referred to The New York Times as “Fake News!” in a tweet.
Trump has long fostered distrust of journalists and mainstream outlets, attacking reporters at his rallies and playing up the idea that the media are out to get him ― all while putting out his own misinformation. But during a crisis like the coronavirus pandemic, what he’s doing is even more dangerous, as millions of his followers will be encouraged to discount the basic and life-saving scientific facts represented in the press.
Advertisement
“It is horrifying now that we are facing a highly contagious disease that is frightening and confusing. To watch Dr. [Anthony] Fauci and Dr. Birx have to come to podium to correct — again and again — the misinformation from the mouth of a president is awful. It’s painful to watch because the consequences are huge,” said Lori Dorfman, director of the Berkeley Media Studies Group, who studies media portrayals of public health issues.
Media skepticism obviously didn’t start with Trump. People on both the left and the right have long questioned ― and often with good cause ― the biases, motivations and accuracy of the industry. But Trump has made bashing the media and reports he doesn’t like a mainstay of his political and governing strategy, with the common refrain of calling it all “fake news.”
And he has gone after the media for trying to “inflame” the threat of the coronavirus.
The Fake News Media and their partner, the Democrat Party, is doing everything within its semi-considerable power (it used to be greater!) to inflame the CoronaVirus situation, far beyond what the facts would warrant. Surgeon General, “The risk is low to the average American.” — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 9, 2020
That refusal to believe what’s in the media could, however, have deadly consequences for the coronavirus pandemic.
A new poll from CBS/YouGov finds that 72% of Democrats trust the national media to deliver accurate information about the coronavirus, whereas 87% of Republicans don’t. The same percentage of Republicans do, however, trust social media and other online sources for accurate information, compared to just 28% of Democrats.
Advertisement
It’s easy to go on social media and find posts that are skeptical about the threat of the coronavirus ― many reflecting the sentiments Trump himself has expressed. Some think it’s a liberal hoax to take down Trump or falsely argue that it’s nothing more dangerous than the regular flu ― a claim that Trump himself has made. Many think it’s simply a media hoax that shouldn’t be trusted ― a belief that Trump has done little to suppress.
When leaders communicate in a crisis, they need to present the information in a way that is clear, consistent, unemotional and credible, according to Frank Sesno, a former CNN journalist who is now director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at The George Washington University.
Advertisement
“So to present information in a divisive way ... or to attack messengers so that people doubt what they are seeing ― this is a damaging thing. And while the president may feel that he is taking a shot at the media and the media deserve it ― and fair enough, some of them may ― what he’s really doing is he’s further reinforcing his own role as a divisive person who criticizes and attacks. Now is not the time to criticize and attack,” said Sesno.
The coronavirus is hitting everyone, regardless of political ideology. The New York Times recently ran a story about Heaven and Mark Frilot, a conservative couple in a conservative Louisiana town, whose Facebook feed was often filled with people making light of the coronavirus and social distancing, echoing language used by Trump and his allies ― the same sorts of jokes posted above. That skepticism vanished, however, when Heaven revealed that Mark was critically ill from the disease.
“We kept kind of joking about it, like, ‘Oh, this is crazy! This is not going to affect us, why is everyone so wigged out about it?’ And then it did,” said Cheryl Pitfield, a close friend of Heaven’s who is a Trump supporter and believed that the media was overhyping the disease.
Since Trump made his inaccurate claims about chloroquine, there have been at least three instances worldwide of people self-medicating and getting sick. In Nigeria, two people were sent to the hospital after overdosing on the medication. In Arizona, a man died after he and his wife ― who needed critical care ― took chloroquine phosphate, which is used to clean aquariums.
“I saw it sitting on the back shelf and thought, ‘Hey, isn’t that the stuff they’re talking about on TV?’” the man’s wife said, adding, “We were afraid of getting sick.”
Advertisement
Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has tried to walk back Trump’s claims about the drug, saying it was “anecdotal” and still needed to be tested in a clinical trial to make sure it was “truly safe and truly effective.”
After long denying that the coronavirus was a big deal, some pundits thought Trump was finally beginning to take it seriously with his daily briefings, declaring a state of emergency and canceling campaign events.
But on Tuesday, Trump said he’d like to have the economy back “open” by Easter, even though public health experts warn such an end to social distancing could cost people their lives.
“I just think it would be a beautiful timeline,” Trump said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Pro-Trump Media’s New Chorus On Coronavirus: Let People Die

Trump has suggested that he may lift lockdown measures and social distancing guidelines by mid-April in an effort to quell economic downturn , even though health experts have advised against it .
Conservative media immediately moved in lockstep with the president ’ s new position .
Now they ’ re spreading Trump ’ s new stance to millions of their readers , listeners and viewers ― at a serious risk to public health .
For the last few days , a chorus of Fox News hosts and right-wing commentators have relentlessly been focusing on the latter , dismissing public health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loosened .
Fox News host Steve Hilton held a segment on “ flattening the curve , not the economy ” ; Laura Ingraham , another host on the network , tweeted that doctors shouldn ’ t shape policy .
Pro-Trump activist Charlie Kirk called for “ relieving some of the quarantine and allowing the American entrepreneur to be liberated.
” Trump , meanwhile , retweeted Ingraham and a series of fringe voices calling on people to go back to work after a 15-day lockdown period .
The idea is irresponsible , particularly at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warns the U.S. could become the epicenter of the pandemic .
Countries around the world have embraced drastic lockdown policies and social distancing measures because there are currently no proven treatments or vaccines to stop the virus .
Until those are found , health experts say limiting the transmission of the outbreak is the best means of combating it .
Loosening social distancing anytime soon would not only result in a surge in coronavirus infections , but also have knock-on effects that could overwhelm the medical system , further hurt the economy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If you lift the social distancing too soon , obviously you will expose a lot of people , ” said Georges Benjamin , the executive director of the American Public Health Association .
“ You also will clog up the health system and people will die of other diseases not related directly to coronavirus .
People with heart attacks will die , people with asthma will die , people with cancer will die.
” But the idea of a quick fix to boost ailing markets is appealing for Trump , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ net for his approval ratings and reelection hopes .
Trump and conservative pundits have repeated the mantra that “ the cure can not be worse than the disease , ” while using euphemisms about finding “ balance ” or making “ difficult tradeoffs ” ― downplaying the fact that they ’ re measuring how many people would need to die in order to see potential benefits to the market .
But experts say the dire lack of testing in the U.S. makes it is hard to know how widespread the outbreak is across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unrealistic to cut off all contact with vulnerable groups .
Many pro-Trump pundits have also fixated on a faulty comparison between the coronavirus outbreak and vehicle-related deaths .
They argue we don ’ t shut down roads or ban cars just because driving accidents kill around 40,000 people each year .
But this line of reasoning is based on a false equivalence and fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the outbreak .
Unlike traffic fatalities , the virus has the potential to grow exponentially and rapidly infect millions of Americans ― there is no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become sick and a worst-case scenario model projected over 1 million deaths in the U.S. alone .
Still , some Republicans and Trump-aligned media have proposed that the virus killing vulnerable groups is worth it to boost the economy .
Texas Lt. Gov .
Dan Patrick ( R ) suggested that older generations would be willing to risk their lives and that people should return to work .
Carlson , who has been a bellwether of Trump ’ s shifting reaction to the crisis , began floating the narrative last week that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jobs.
” Others within the partisan media ecosystem picked it up shortly thereafter , and it soon became Trump ’ s message as well .
There will need to be a real conversation about when to end social distancing and other measures needed to stem the outbreak , but it has been just two weeks since WHO declared a pandemic .
Restrictions are especially important now , experts say , as the U.S. is nowhere near the peak of the epidemic curve that projects how the outbreak will progress .
“ If we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or in the next couple weeks , we ’ re going to lose all this time as the epidemic flourishes around the country , ” said Gregg Gonsalves , an epidemiologist and assistant professor at Yale School of Public Health .
“ It ’ s going to be that much harder to get back to where we are even today .
”

After first downplaying the coronavirus crisis, right-wing media briefly began to take it seriously. But now that President Donald Trump has vowed to defy health officials and reopen businesses, his favorite pundits have settled on a new message: Let people die.
Trump has suggested that he may lift lockdown measures and social distancing guidelines by mid-April in an effort to quell economic downturn, even though health experts have advised against it. Conservative media immediately moved in lockstep with the president’s new position. Now they’re spreading Trump’s new stance to millions of their readers, listeners and viewers ― at a serious risk to public health.
Advertisement
At issue is what matters more: people’s lives or the economy.
For the last few days, a chorus of Fox News hosts and right-wing commentators have relentlessly been focusing on the latter, dismissing public health experts and suggesting social distancing measures be loosened. Fox News host Steve Hilton held a segment on “flattening the curve, not the economy”; Laura Ingraham, another host on the network, tweeted that doctors shouldn’t shape policy. Pro-Trump activist Charlie Kirk called for “relieving some of the quarantine and allowing the American entrepreneur to be liberated.” Trump, meanwhile, retweeted Ingraham and a series of fringe voices calling on people to go back to work after a 15-day lockdown period.
Many Fox News hosts have suggested revitalizing the economy should be a priority at this time. Drew Angerer via Getty Images
The idea is irresponsible, particularly at a time when the World Health Organization warns the U.S. could become the epicenter of the pandemic. Countries around the world have embraced drastic lockdown policies and social distancing measures because there are currently no proven treatments or vaccines to stop the virus. Until those are found, health experts say limiting the transmission of the outbreak is the best means of combating it. Loosening social distancing anytime soon would not only result in a surge in coronavirus infections, but also have knock-on effects that could overwhelm the medical system, further hurt the economy and make it harder to treat other illnesses.
“If you lift the social distancing too soon, obviously you will expose a lot of people,” said Georges Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association. “You also will clog up the health system and people will die of other diseases not related directly to coronavirus. People with heart attacks will die, people with asthma will die, people with cancer will die.”
Advertisement
The framing that there is a binary choice between lifting social distancing measures or causing an economic depression is simply inaccurate, many economists argue, and lifting social distancing measures could have its own disastrous effects on the economy.
But the idea of a quick fix to boost ailing markets is appealing for Trump, as the economy has acted as a safety net for his approval ratings and reelection hopes. Trump and conservative pundits have repeated the mantra that “the cure cannot be worse than the disease,” while using euphemisms about finding “balance” or making “difficult tradeoffs” ― downplaying the fact that they’re measuring how many people would need to die in order to see potential benefits to the market.
Some pundits have suggested measures such as restricting lockdowns only to areas with many cases of coronavirus, such as New York, or keeping seniors indoors.
The most vulnerable population must be socially distanced until we are over this. Churches should organize concerts outside senior living centers. We love you! We just can’t hug you right now! — Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) March 23, 2020
But experts say the dire lack of testing in the U.S. makes it is hard to know how widespread the outbreak is across the country and that it’s unrealistic to cut off all contact with vulnerable groups.
Advertisement
Many pro-Trump pundits have also fixated on a faulty comparison between the coronavirus outbreak and vehicle-related deaths. They argue we don’t shut down roads or ban cars just because driving accidents kill around 40,000 people each year. But this line of reasoning is based on a false equivalence and fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the outbreak. Unlike traffic fatalities, the virus has the potential to grow exponentially and rapidly infect millions of Americans ― there is no way of knowing how many people will become sick and a worst-case scenario model projected over 1 million deaths in the U.S. alone.
Allowing a surge in coronavirus cases would overwhelm hospitals that are already scrambling for supplies and short on resources, potentially collapsing health care systems.
“I know what happens in flu seasons and when you get overwhelmed with patients and having to put people in hallways,” Benjamin said. “People die when that happens.”
“People with heart attacks will die, people with asthma will die, people with cancer will die.” - Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association
Still, some Republicans and Trump-aligned media have proposed that the virus killing vulnerable groups is worth it to boost the economy. Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) suggested that older generations would be willing to risk their lives and that people should return to work.
Advertisement
“Let’s get back to living. Let’s be smart about it, and those of us who are 70-plus, we’ll take care of ourselves, but don’t sacrifice the country,” Patrick said on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show.
Carlson, who has been a bellwether of Trump’s shifting reaction to the crisis, began floating the narrative last week that “the real imperative right now is saving jobs.” Others within the partisan media ecosystem picked it up shortly thereafter, and it soon became Trump’s message as well.
There will need to be a real conversation about when to end social distancing and other measures needed to stem the outbreak, but it has been just two weeks since WHO declared a pandemic. Restrictions are especially important now, experts say, as the U.S. is nowhere near the peak of the epidemic curve that projects how the outbreak will progress.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Senate Coronavirus Bill Prohibits Trump's Hotels From Receiving Bailouts

“ I ’ ve learned , let ’ s just see what happens , ” the president told reporters at @ @ @ @ @ about the Trump Organization .
“ Because we have to save some of these great @ @ @ @ @ office , Trump announced he was leaving “ total control ” of his business to @ @ @ @ @ Eric and Don Jr. ― who would manage what he called a “ blind trust.
@ @ @ @ @ 11 hotel properties on its website .
The Senate bill also includes some oversight over @ @ @ @ @ aimed at propping up struggling industries .
Under the terms of the deal reached on @ @ @ @ @ general and a congressional oversight board will be in charge of scrutinizing the lending provided @ @ @ @ @ to what was done for the 2008 Wall Street bailout a decade ago .

“I’ve learned, let’s just see what happens,” the president told reporters at the White House when asked about the Trump Organization. “Because we have to save some of these great companies.”
Prior to assuming office, Trump announced he was leaving “total control” of his business to his children ― Ivanka, Eric and Don Jr. ― who would manage what he called a “blind trust.” The Trump Organization lists 11 hotel properties on its website.
The Senate bill also includes some oversight over the $450 billion fund aimed at propping up struggling industries. Under the terms of the deal reached on Wednesday, an independent inspector general and a congressional oversight board will be in charge of scrutinizing the lending provided to big businesses ― similar to what was done for the 2008 Wall Street bailout a decade ago.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-03-25--Donald Trump Ripped Over Response To Mitt Romney's Negative Coronavirus Test

Sen. Mitt Romney ( R-Utah ) tested negative for the coronavirus and President Donald Trump marked the news Wednesday morning with a celebratory tweet .
But many critics are questioning the sincerity of Trump ’ s post , given his past attacks on Romney ― the only Senate Republican to vote to convict the president in his impeachment trial ― and the seemingly sarcastic way Trump responded when he was initially told Romney was self-isolating as a precaution .
“ This is really great news !
” Trump wrote Wednesday .
“ I am so happy I can barely speak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential candidate and an even worse U.S .
Senator , but he is a RINO , and I like him a lot !
” This is really great news !
I am so happy I can barely speak .
He may have been a terrible presidential candidate and an even worse U.S .
Senator , but he is a RINO , and I like him a lot !
https : //t.co/42zpWW9vzy — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) March 25 , 2020 In a statement released Sunday , Romney announced he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of contact with Sen. Rand Paul ( R-Ky. ) , who earlier in the day became the first senator known to test positive for COVID-19 , the disease caused by the virus .
Following the negative test result , Romney revealed Tuesday he would “ remain in quarantine as the test does not rule out the onset of symptoms during the 14-day period.
” Thankfully I ’ ve tested negative for COVID-19 .
Nevertheless , guidance from my physician , consistent with the CDC guidelines , requires me to remain in quarantine as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ onset of symptoms during the 14-day period .
— Mitt Romney ( @ MittRomney ) March 24 , 2020 The tone of Trump ’ s tweet did not go unnoticed by his detractors : Shame on you .
Your sarcasm here during this # NationalEmergency , mocking the health of another human being , is unconscionable , and further demonstrates that you ’ re massively unfit for this job ... # TrumpPlague # coronavirus — Andy Ostroy ( @ AndyOstroy ) March 25 , 2020 I tried to give Trump the benefit of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he was not mocking Romney ’ s potential exposure to a pandemic .
Clearly , I was wrong .
Unhinged and classless .
https : //t.co/8Sumoxr7Fj — Brad Polumbo ( @ brad_polumbo ) March 25 , 2020 This tweet is a real test about how you see the man .
If you think it is n't sarcastic , bless your heart .
If you understand that it 's sarcastic but you think it 's super clever the way it 's done , you 're easily impressed and might be brainwashed .
https @ @ @ @ @ @ @ JonahDispatch ) March 25 , 2020 Mitt Romney 's wife has MS , and would be at high risk if she were to contract COVID-19 .
The president 's sarcasm and lack of empathy is disgusting .
https : //t.co/FH593r0iHj — James O'Leary ( @ jamesoleary87 ) March 25 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) tested negative for the coronavirus and President Donald Trump marked the news Wednesday morning with a celebratory tweet.
But many critics are questioning the sincerity of Trump’s post, given his past attacks on Romney ― the only Senate Republican to vote to convict the president in his impeachment trial ― and the seemingly sarcastic way Trump responded when he was initially told Romney was self-isolating as a precaution.
Advertisement
“This is really great news!” Trump wrote Wednesday. “I am so happy I can barely speak. He may have been a terrible presidential candidate and an even worse U.S. Senator, but he is a RINO, and I like him a lot!”
This is really great news! I am so happy I can barely speak. He may have been a terrible presidential candidate and an even worse U.S. Senator, but he is a RINO, and I like him a lot! https://t.co/42zpWW9vzy — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 25, 2020
In a statement released Sunday, Romney announced he was self-isolating after having “extended periods” of contact with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who earlier in the day became the first senator known to test positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus.
Following the negative test result, Romney revealed Tuesday he would “remain in quarantine as the test does not rule out the onset of symptoms during the 14-day period.”
Advertisement
Thankfully I’ve tested negative for COVID-19. Nevertheless, guidance from my physician, consistent with the CDC guidelines, requires me to remain in quarantine as the test does not rule out the onset of symptoms during the 14-day period. — Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) March 24, 2020
The tone of Trump’s tweet did not go unnoticed by his detractors:
Shame on you. Your sarcasm here during this #NationalEmergency, mocking the health of another human being, is unconscionable, and further demonstrates that you’re massively unfit for this job...#TrumpPlague #coronavirus — Andy Ostroy (@AndyOstroy) March 25, 2020
what is wrong with you??? — Michael Josem (@MichaelJosem) March 25, 2020
I tried to give Trump the benefit of the doubt based on an earlier video that he was not mocking Romney’s potential exposure to a pandemic.
Clearly, I was wrong.
Unhinged and classless. https://t.co/8Sumoxr7Fj — Brad Polumbo (@brad_polumbo) March 25, 2020
This tweet is a real test about how you see the man. If you think it isn't sarcastic, bless your heart. If you understand that it's sarcastic but you think it's super clever the way it's done, you're easily impressed and might be brainwashed. https://t.co/Gg3QwAewuG — Jonah Goldberg (@JonahDispatch) March 25, 2020
Advertisement
What is wrong with you? Have you no decency? — David Heyman (@dcborn61) March 25, 2020
Where the president's head is the morning of a $2 trillion deal to save the economy>>> https://t.co/TY3NujWbRv — Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) March 25, 2020
Trump is terrible person, example 7,523. https://t.co/rbhSs8iFFa — Josh Jordan (@NumbersMuncher) March 25, 2020
Remember that time @BarackObama wore a tan suit? https://t.co/nMzdVVA7ai — Matthew Smith (@MattSmithKIRO7) March 25, 2020
What an awful, evil, sick man our president is. https://t.co/yd4T5xnd9T — Jeff Jarvis (@jeffjarvis) March 25, 2020
Advertisement
Only a terrible person would feel the need to tweet this. https://t.co/myIUubYu04 — Susan J. Demas 🏔 (@sjdemas) March 25, 2020
Reminder: This is the President of the United States. https://t.co/QL19dqBJoV — Oren Kessler (@OrenKessler) March 25, 2020
This tweet shows how lightly the president holds life-and-death matters. https://t.co/klUigRnQWk — Windsor Mann (@WindsorMann) March 25, 2020
Mitt Romney's wife has MS, and would be at high risk if she were to contract COVID-19. The president's sarcasm and lack of empathy is disgusting. https://t.co/FH593r0iHj — James O'Leary (@jamesoleary87) March 25, 2020
Advertisement
You are a little, little man. https://t.co/ekZgH87CKh — Dr. Chris Pepin-Neff 🏳🌈 (@christopherneff) March 25, 2020
Wow. Amid the worst public-health crisis in a century, the president is spending his day settling scores with political enemies on Twitter. https://t.co/quYgLaDWWu — Dan Rosenheck (@DanRosenheck) March 25, 2020
If you support Trump, then you are on the wrong side of history. — Jeffrey Guterman (@JeffreyGuterman) March 25, 2020