thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--SHOCKER: Donald Trump Didn’t Wear A Face Mask At A Mask Factory

President Donald Trump and his aides on Tuesday failed to wear face masks during a tour of a Honeywell factory in Arizona that makes masks , drawing scorn on Twitter .
Honeywell employees , meanwhile , were pictured wearing masks and socially distancing by sitting apart while waiting for Trump to speak : CNN ’ s Jim Acosta noted a sign in the facility stated that face masks were required to be worn in the area that Trump visited : Trump not wearing mask but goggles at Honeywell facility .
Other aides not wearing masks at all .
Sign in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this area.
” pic.twitter.com/Uq7Fr2ioeS — Jim Acosta ( @ Acosta ) May 5 , 2020 Trump earlier told reporters that he would wear a mask during the tour if it was required .
Inevitably , Trump and his aides were mocked and scorned on social media .
The music that was played over the plant ’ s sound system during the president ’ s visit also raised eyebrows .
On its website , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends “ wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slow the spread of the coronavirus .
First lady Melania Trump has also repeatedly urged people to wear masks in public .
The president himself , however , has previously said he can ’ t see himself wearing a mask .
I can think of no better metaphor for this presidency than Donald Trump not wearing a face mask to a face mask factory while the song “ Live and Let Die ” blares in the background .
pic.twitter.com/mJzU1HW7HA — Jimmy Kimmel ( @ jimmykimmel ) May 5 , 2020 A suitable title @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : No Masks in the Mask Factory .
https : //t.co/pjUXJQXSvt — Norm Eisen ( @ NormEisen ) May 5 , 2020 Let 's just say that Donald Trump touring a mask factory today without wearing a mask is all we need to know about what a stable genius and role model this guy is for our country ... — Andy Kleinman ( @ andykleinman ) May 6 , 2020 Trump & co touring a mask factory without masks to do nothing but place their bare hands and spittle on a freshly manufactured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entire era .
pic.twitter.com/PpLk4SooBH — Bree Newsome Bass ( @ BreeNewsome ) May 6 , 2020 President Trump flew to Phoenix to tour a mask facility .
He exited Air Force One wearing no mask and shaking hands — Not modeling the behavior health experts are all telling us to follow .
https : //t.co/d5z88YWggM — Derick Waller ( @ wallerABC7 ) May 5 , 2020 Donald Trump visited a mask factory in Arizona and DID N'T WEAR A MASK , which is the equivalent of ... wait , no , fuck this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more comedy when the man himself is the biggest joke in history .
— Harrison Greenbaum ( @ harrisoncomedy ) May 6 , 2020 Trump did n't wear a mask at the mask factory because he was afraid it would make him look stupid .
Whew .
Sure dodged a bullet there , Mr. President .
pic.twitter.com/hB1IzVXV3F — Holly Figueroa O'Reilly ( @ AynRandPaulRyan ) May 6 , 2020 Seriously asking - is visiting a mask factory and purposely not wearing a mask some type of shrewd political move ?
A symbolic act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ base ?
I ’ m just not seeing the play .
Seems like the dumbest PR move ever .
Am I missing something incredibly clever ?
— Jed Katz ( @ JedKatz ) May 6 , 2020 Masking the truth , but never his mouth .
@ guardian photo of Trump at a mask factory today : pic.twitter.com/w2rL9quo5n — Lloyd Doggett ( @ RepLloydDoggett ) May 6 , 2020 live & let die blaring as trump puts his dirty paws all over masks & while he himself is not wearing said mask amazing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) May 6 , 2020 Vice President Mike Pence last week bucked Mayo Clinic rules when he decided not to wear a mask during a visit to its campus in Minnesota .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump and his aides on Tuesday failed to wear face masks during a tour of a Honeywell factory in Arizona that makes masks, drawing scorn on Twitter.
Trump instead opted to wear protective eyeglasses:
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI via Getty Images
Advertisement
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI via Getty Images
Honeywell employees, meanwhile, were pictured wearing masks and socially distancing by sitting apart while waiting for Trump to speak:
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI via Getty Images
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Advertisement
CNN’s Jim Acosta noted a sign in the facility stated that face masks were required to be worn in the area that Trump visited:
Trump not wearing mask but goggles at Honeywell facility. Other aides not wearing masks at all. Sign in facility says “face mask required in this area.” pic.twitter.com/Uq7Fr2ioeS — Jim Acosta (@Acosta) May 5, 2020
Trump earlier told reporters that he would wear a mask during the tour if it was required.
Inevitably, Trump and his aides were mocked and scorned on social media.
The music that was played over the plant’s sound system during the president’s visit also raised eyebrows.
On its website, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends “wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain” to slow the spread of the coronavirus.
First lady Melania Trump has also repeatedly urged people to wear masks in public.
The president himself, however, has previously said he can’t see himself wearing a mask.
I can think of no better metaphor for this presidency than Donald Trump not wearing a face mask to a face mask factory while the song “Live and Let Die” blares in the background. pic.twitter.com/mJzU1HW7HA — Jimmy Kimmel (@jimmykimmel) May 5, 2020
Advertisement
A suitable title for a history of the Trump administration: No Masks in the Mask Factory. https://t.co/pjUXJQXSvt — Norm Eisen (@NormEisen) May 5, 2020
Let's just say that Donald Trump touring a mask factory today without wearing a mask is all we need to know about what a stable genius and role model this guy is for our country... — Andy Kleinman (@andykleinman) May 6, 2020
We’re never going to see Trump wearing a face mask — Chris Espinosa (@cdespinosa) May 6, 2020
Trump & co touring a mask factory without masks to do nothing but place their bare hands and spittle on a freshly manufactured batch sums up the idiocy of this entire era. pic.twitter.com/PpLk4SooBH — Bree Newsome Bass (@BreeNewsome) May 6, 2020
Donald Trump didn’t wear a mask to the mask factory.
And...scene! — Bryan Behar (@bryanbehar) May 6, 2020
Advertisement
President Trump flew to Phoenix to tour a mask facility. He exited Air Force One wearing no mask and shaking hands — Not modeling the behavior health experts are all telling us to follow. https://t.co/d5z88YWggM — Derick Waller (@wallerABC7) May 5, 2020
Donald Trump visited a mask factory in Arizona and DIDN'T WEAR A MASK, which is the equivalent of... wait, no, fuck this. I don't need to add more comedy when the man himself is the biggest joke in history. — Harrison Greenbaum (@harrisoncomedy) May 6, 2020
Trump didn't wear a mask at the mask factory because he was afraid it would make him look stupid.
Whew. Sure dodged a bullet there, Mr. President. pic.twitter.com/hB1IzVXV3F — Holly Figueroa O'Reilly (@AynRandPaulRyan) May 6, 2020
Seriously asking - is visiting a mask factory and purposely not wearing a mask some type of shrewd political move? A symbolic act of toughness? A nod to his base? I’m just not seeing the play. Seems like the dumbest PR move ever. Am I missing something incredibly clever? — Jed Katz (@JedKatz) May 6, 2020
Masking the truth, but never his mouth.@guardian photo of Trump at a mask factory today: pic.twitter.com/w2rL9quo5n — Lloyd Doggett (@RepLloydDoggett) May 6, 2020
Advertisement
live & let die blaring as trump puts his dirty paws all over masks & while he himself is not wearing said mask
amazing stuff — Danny Cage (@TheDannyCage) May 6, 2020
Dude, WTF was with the goggles and no mask?? pic.twitter.com/2Jhg7xAp5F — Andy Ostroy (@AndyOstroy) May 6, 2020
Vice President Mike Pence last week bucked Mayo Clinic rules when he decided not to wear a mask during a visit to its campus in Minnesota.
He admitted his mistake on Sunday. “I didn’t think it was necessary, but I should have worn a mask,” Pence said during a Fox News virtual town hall.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-05--Judge Restores New York Democratic Primary For June 23

NEW YORK ( AP ) — The New York Democratic presidential primary must take place June 23 because canceling it would be unconstitutional , a judge ruled Tuesday .
U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres in Manhattan ruled after hearing arguments a day earlier as lawyers for withdrawn presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Andrew Yang argued that it was wrong to cancel the primary .
The judge said there was enough time before the primary occurs to figure out how to carry it out safely .
“ If all but one of the presidential candidates are removed from the ballot and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Plaintiffs will be deprived of the opportunity to compete for delegate slots and shape the course of events at the Convention , and voters will lose the chance to express their support for delegates who share their views , the judge wrote .
“ The loss of these First Amendment rights is a heavy hardship.
” She added : “ There is also a strong public interest in permitting the presidential primary to proceed with the full roster of qualified candidates.
” Democratic presidential hopefuls former US vice president Joe Biden ( L @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R ) take part in the 11th Democratic Party 2020 presidential debate in a CNN Washington Bureau studio in Washington , DC on March 15 , 2020 .
( Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP ) ( Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images ) The Democratic members of the State ’ s Board of Elections voted to cancel the primary even though New York was still planning to hold its congressional and state-level primaries June 23 .
They cited the danger to voters from the coronavirus as a reason to cancel the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been endorsed by the major candidates he had faced .
Jacobs had called holding the primary “ unnecessary ” with the suspension of Sanders ’ campaign and said reduced turnout could reduce the need for as many poll workers .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NEW YORK (AP) — The New York Democratic presidential primary must take place June 23 because canceling it would be unconstitutional, a judge ruled Tuesday.
U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres in Manhattan ruled after hearing arguments a day earlier as lawyers for withdrawn presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Andrew Yang argued that it was wrong to cancel the primary.
Advertisement
The judge said there was enough time before the primary occurs to figure out how to carry it out safely.
“If all but one of the presidential candidates are removed from the ballot and the primary is not held, Delegate Plaintiffs will be deprived of the opportunity to compete for delegate slots and shape the course of events at the Convention, and voters will lose the chance to express their support for delegates who share their views, the judge wrote. “The loss of these First Amendment rights is a heavy hardship.”
She added: “There is also a strong public interest in permitting the presidential primary to proceed with the full roster of qualified candidates.”
Democratic presidential hopefuls former US vice president Joe Biden (L) and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders (R) take part in the 11th Democratic Party 2020 presidential debate in a CNN Washington Bureau studio in Washington, DC on March 15, 2020. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images) MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images
Advertisement
The Democratic members of the State’s Board of Elections voted to cancel the primary even though New York was still planning to hold its congressional and state-level primaries June 23.
They cited the danger to voters from the coronavirus as a reason to cancel the election since former Vice President Joe Biden has been endorsed by the major candidates he had faced.
New York state Democratic party chair Jay Jacobs said: “We are reviewing it.”
Jacobs had called holding the primary “unnecessary” with the suspension of Sanders’ campaign and said reduced turnout could reduce the need for as many poll workers.
Lawyers who argued before Torres on Monday did not immediately return calls seeking comment.
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Meyers Issues Blunt Reminder To Democrats Praising Bush's Coronavirus Message

“ Let us remember how small our differences are in the face of this shared threat , ” Bush said @ @ @ @ @ at the weekend that was praised because of its stark contrast to the vitriolic tone @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
Meyers acknowledged it was “ a lovely video from what appears to be @ @ @ @ @ “ But George W. Bush is not your friend , ” he warned .
“ @ @ @ @ @ guy who used fabricated evidence to drag us into an intractable war.
” “ Yes @ @ @ @ @ , ” Meyers added .
“ But let ’ s not forget , Bush gave @ @ @ @ @ torture , the financial collapse , the Katrina disaster , and , of course , @ @ @ @ @ Bush of having “ paved the way ” for Trump to become president .
“ @ @ @ @ @ remember when presidents do bad things , then more presidents are going to come along @ @ @ @ @ , ” Meyers added .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
“Let us remember how small our differences are in the face of this shared threat,” Bush said in a video message released over the weekend, which received praise because of its stark contrast to the vitriolic tone regularly struck by President Donald Trump.
Advertisement
Watch Bush’s video message here:
A Message from President George W. Bush@TheCalltoUnite pic.twitter.com/FIn9wuOPTF — George W. Bush Presidential Center (@TheBushCenter) May 2, 2020
Meyers acknowledged it was “a lovely video from what appears to be a very nice man.”
“But George W. Bush is not your friend,” he warned. “He’s still the guy who used fabricated evidence to drag us into an intractable war.”
“Yes, things are bad now,” Meyers added. “But let’s not forget: Bush gave us the Iraq War, torture, the financial collapse, the Katrina disaster and, of course, Ponchogate.”
He also accused Bush of having “paved the way” for Trump to become president.
“If we can’t remember when presidents do bad things, then more presidents are going to come along and do more bad things,” he said.
Advertisement
Check out the clip below:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--The Coronavirus Pandemic Approaches Its 'Lord Business' Moment

KelvinYue via Getty Images Does Lord Business remind you of anyone ?
The Wisconsin Republican called the film “ an especially grievous slam on business ” because its main villain is Lord Business , an authoritarian industrialist who wants to control all the little Lego people by gluing them into fixed positions .
At the time , Johnson ’ s complaint seemed odd .
Corporations themselves have long promoted the idea that business can be oppressive , with the key caveat that this or that product will liberate consumers .
( Think of Apple ’ s iconic “ 1984 ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . )
Johnson was upset that “ The Lego Movie ” ― in the course of marketing Legos and other products directly to kids for 100 minutes ― had also regurgitated decades of banal consumer culture .
But now here we are , with Republicans like Johnson insisting , on Lord Business ’ behalf , that people should worry less about a virus that ’ s killing nearly 2,000 Americans per day , and worry more about going to work and purchasing goods and services .
So what if a bunch of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t spent a lot of time thinking about this , but what ’ s happening right now in the real world is similar to something that happens in “ The Lego Movie.
” Governors in several states , with encouragement from President Donald Trump , are lifting stay-at-home orders so that businesses like restaurants and barbershops can reopen ― even though states have not met the benchmarks that epidemiologists say we should to control the contagion .
Trump has also egged on far-right protesters brandishing guns at state capitols , demanding they be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ haircuts .
Some workers now have to choose whether to risk exposure to the virus in order to earn a living or to risk destitution if they follow the guidance of public health experts .
In “ The Lego Movie , ” Lord Business sets his evil plan in motion by making an announcement through a giant black Lego brick floating out over all the little Lego people in Bricksburg .
“ Attention , everyone , this is President Business , ” he says .
“ Don ’ t worry about this big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out the sun .
What you need to worry about is this question that I ’ m about to ask you : Who wants a taco ?
” “ The Lego Movie , ” it turns out , accurately portrayed a ruling class that treats people like economic units that must remain in their prescribed positions at all times .
Johnson was right to be offended .
The real-life twist is that despite Trump ’ s best efforts to turn reopening the economy into just another polarized partisan issue ― and even despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority of Americans actually aren ’ t interested in dying for tacos .
“ I think we can do that certainly from a standpoint of social distancing , personal hygiene , ” he said .
“ People are taking this very seriously.
” But when Johnson arrived at the U.S. Capitol on Monday , he was one of only a few senators who refused to wear a mask , something public health experts have recommended to slow transmission of the coronavirus that has nevertheless become controversial .
Johnson told a reporter that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ store , but didn ’ t think he needed a mask in the Capitol .

Does Lord Business remind you of anyone? KelvinYue via Getty Images
“The Lego Movie” was a hit with critics and audiences in 2014, but not with Sen. Ron Johnson.
The Wisconsin Republican called the film “an especially grievous slam on business” because its main villain is Lord Business, an authoritarian industrialist who wants to control all the little Lego people by gluing them into fixed positions.
At the time, Johnson’s complaint seemed odd. Corporations themselves have long promoted the idea that business can be oppressive, with the key caveat that this or that product will liberate consumers. (Think of Apple’s iconic “1984” TV ad for its Macintosh personal computer.) Johnson was upset that “The Lego Movie” ― in the course of marketing Legos and other products directly to kids for 100 minutes ― had also regurgitated decades of banal consumer culture.
Advertisement
But now here we are, with Republicans like Johnson insisting, on Lord Business’ behalf, that people should worry less about a virus that’s killing nearly 2,000 Americans per day, and worry more about going to work and purchasing goods and services. So what if a bunch of people die?
“Every premature death is a tragedy, but death is an unavoidable part of life,” Johnson wrote in USA Today in March.
The senator probably hasn’t spent a lot of time thinking about this, but what’s happening right now in the real world is similar to something that happens in “The Lego Movie.”
Governors in several states, with encouragement from President Donald Trump, are lifting stay-at-home orders so that businesses like restaurants and barbershops can reopen ― even though states have not met the benchmarks that epidemiologists say we should to control the contagion. Trump has also egged on far-right protesters brandishing guns at state capitols, demanding they be allowed to eat at restaurants and get haircuts.
Advertisement
Some workers now have to choose whether to risk exposure to the virus in order to earn a living or to risk destitution if they follow the guidance of public health experts.
In “The Lego Movie,” Lord Business sets his evil plan in motion by making an announcement through a giant black Lego brick floating out over all the little Lego people in Bricksburg.
“Attention, everyone, this is President Business,” he says. “Don’t worry about this big black monolith thing that’s blocking out the sun. What you need to worry about is this question that I’m about to ask you: Who wants a taco?”
Everyone cheers for the tacos. Then Lord Business dispatches evil flying robots to spray them with Krazy Glue so they’ll be permanently stuck.
“The Lego Movie,” it turns out, accurately portrayed a ruling class that treats people like economic units that must remain in their prescribed positions at all times. Johnson was right to be offended.
Advertisement
The real-life twist is that despite Trump’s best efforts to turn reopening the economy into just another polarized partisan issue ― and even despite his Tuesday taco tweet ― the vast majority of Americans actually aren’t interested in dying for tacos.
“Death is an unavoidable part of life.” - Sen. Ron Johnson
Johnson told a local TV station this week that Wisconsin businesses should reopen sooner than the state’s Democratic governor has suggested.
“I think we can do that certainly from a standpoint of social distancing, personal hygiene,” he said. “People are taking this very seriously.”
But when Johnson arrived at the U.S. Capitol on Monday, he was one of only a few senators who refused to wear a mask, something public health experts have recommended to slow transmission of the coronavirus that has nevertheless become controversial. Johnson told a reporter that he wears one when he goes to a store, but didn’t think he needed a mask in the Capitol.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--It’s Time To End Election Night In America

But the 2020 election will be different .
Nearly every state in the country anticipates a radical increase in voters casting their ballots by mail to stay safe amid the uncertainty of the coronavirus pandemic .
This will fundamentally alter the speed at which votes are tabulated .
If this year ’ s presidential election is as close as five of the last six elections ― 2008 being the exception ― it is unlikely a victor will be declared on Nov. 3 .
There are still delays in reporting the results of mailed-in ballots even when states do allow them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day .
Arizona , which Trump won by about 91,000 votes , has a very high rate of votes cast by mail and allows mailed ballots to be opened and counted when they are received .
Still , the state ’ s election results are regularly delayed because mail-in ballots are allowed to be received on Election Day .
Those must be verified as legitimate and checked with in-person votes to ensure no one voted twice before they can be counted .
Sen. Krysten Sinema ( D-Ariz. ) was not declared the winner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the election .
California was one of the states Trump singled out for his false accusation of voter fraud .
In 2014 , the nation ’ s most populous state passed an election reform law allowing election clerks to count absentee ballots postmarked on Election Day and received up to three days later .
This means that the state ’ s vote total is not finalized for many days after Election Day .
In 2016 , Hillary Clinton ’ s popular vote total continued to rise after Election Day , largely due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California .
This fed Trump ’ s narcissistic ire .
McCarthy , the current House Republican Leader , has also attacked his home state ’ s election laws by positing false conspiracy theories that California changed the law so that voters casting mail ballots no longer need to match their signature to the one the state has on file and that voters can hand in empty ballots that can be filled out later .
He linked these unfounded claims to the seven Republican losses in California in 2018 .
A team of election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by University of California , Irvine , professor Rick Hasen , the author of “ Election Meltdown , ” released a list of recommendations related to this very problem last week .
Barring a complete delay in reporting vote totals until all ballots are prepared to be counted , as in the case of Wisconsin , the experts recommended that the media prepare viewers and readers for the reality that a winner will not be declared on election night and avoid amplifying any false accusations of fraud from the president or any other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote counts continuing beyond Election Day are normal and that errors and delays are not necessarily indicators of nefarious intent , ” the report states .
“ Opportunistic elites will seek to take advantage of this confusion , particularly if it can harm the standing of the side that is likely to win .
Irresponsible coverage that amplifies such claims runs the risk of encouraging more fundamental challenges to accepting the outcome of the election itself , a compact that is at the heart of democracy.
” The 2004 election between Bush and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close , but the press did not call the election that night .
Bush was not declared the winner until Nevada announced its results and Kerry conceded at 11 a.m. the next day .
It was the first time networks did not declare a president before the sun rose on Wednesday morning since election night was introduced to television .

Every four years, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, the political press hosts its biggest planned news event: election night. It’s the blockbuster season finale political reporters and television hosts, not to mention the candidates, have been building up to for at least two years.
Election night is supposed to be a night of hyper cable news hosts, color-coded Magic Walls, flickering needles and overwrought homilies to U.S. democracy that ends, maybe in the wee hours, with the American People making a Decision. One person will win and be named the next president of the United States. There will be speeches ― one, a concession, the other, claiming victory. Ratings will be high.
Advertisement
But the 2020 election will be different. Nearly every state in the country anticipates a radical increase in voters casting their ballots by mail to stay safe amid the uncertainty of the coronavirus pandemic. This will fundamentally alter the speed at which votes are tabulated. If this year’s presidential election is as close as five of the last six elections ― 2008 being the exception ― it is unlikely a victor will be declared on Nov. 3.
As a trickle of results come in over the ensuing days or weeks, President Donald Trump and Republican leaders will almost certainly attack the credibility of the elections with false and unfounded allegations of voter fraud. Trump did this in 2016 even after he won the election. And Republican leaders like former House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) both did so after the 2018 midterm elections.
Democratic elections require voters to believe in the legitimacy of the process. False accusations of fraud from one party are designed to undermine the legitimacy of the election of their opponents. But these accusations also strike at the heart of our democratic elections and republican government.
We need to take action to deprive these accusations of oxygen. It’s time to turn down the hype and end election night in America as we know it.
Advertisement
Absentee Ballot Flood
Voting by mail is expected to surge in every state in 2020 due to fears of the coronavirus. ASSOCIATED PRESS
An unprecedented number of mail ballots cast means an unprecedented number of mail ballots to count, a more time-consuming process than counting in-person votes. State and county election officials in key swing states were already asking for more money to speed the processing of an anticipated uptick in absentee ballots before the pandemic made in-person voting less safe. Now, they will need even more money as pandemic-induced business shutdowns deplete state budgets and tax revenue.
Michigan, which Trump won by just 11,000 votes in 2016, was the first state to experience such a crunch during its March 10 presidential preference primary election. County election clerks sought funds from the Republican-controlled legislature to help hire staff to handle the anticipated increase in absentee ballots after voters approved a referendum allowing no-excuse absentee voting in 2018. The legislature’s refusal caused election results to be delayed by a day.
Another issue that will cause delays in the reporting of mail-in ballots is when they can be opened and counted. Michigan law requires election officials to only open and count them on Election Day. Other states, including swing states like Arizona, Florida and North Carolina, allow absentee ballots to be opened and counted before Election Day.
There are still delays in reporting the results of mailed-in ballots even when states do allow them to be opened and counted before Election Day. Arizona, which Trump won by about 91,000 votes, has a very high rate of votes cast by mail and allows mailed ballots to be opened and counted when they are received. Still, the state’s election results are regularly delayed because mail-in ballots are allowed to be received on Election Day. Those must be verified as legitimate and checked with in-person votes to ensure no one voted twice before they can be counted. Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) was not declared the winner of her 2018 election until six days after the election.
Advertisement
Pennsylvania, which only allowed no-excuse absentee voting in 2019, is on the other end of the spectrum. This crucial swing state that Trump won by a little more than 44,000 votes mandates that ballots only be opened after the close of Election Day polls at 8 p.m. A full count of Pennsylvania votes is expected to take up to three days, according to a report by Mother Jones.
Absent a landslide victory for either Trump or presumptive Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden, the rise in absentee voting makes it unlikely that election night in America will be a decision night for broadcast networks, cable news or digital outlets. Wolf Blitzer will, at least, be prepared this time.
Fraudulent Fraud Accusations
President Donald Trump routinely states, falsely, that voter fraud is widespread and that it only harms Republicans like him. AP Photo/Evan Vucci
The biggest problem with slow-rolling results after Election Day as mail-in ballots are counted is that Trump and the Republican Party can use this delay to cast doubt on the election’s outcome with accusations of fraud.
After winning the 2016 election but losing the popular vote, Trump claimed, falsely and without evidence, that he would have won the popular vote “if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally.”
Advertisement
California was one of the states Trump singled out for his false accusation of voter fraud. In 2014, the nation’s most populous state passed an election reform law allowing election clerks to count absentee ballots postmarked on Election Day and received up to three days later. This means that the state’s vote total is not finalized for many days after Election Day. In 2016, Hillary Clinton’s popular vote total continued to rise after Election Day, largely due to the ongoing count of votes in California. This fed Trump’s narcissistic ire.
But Trump isn’t the only one to make false and evidence-free claims of voter fraud due to the time it takes California to report its mailed-in ballots.
After Democrats won seven House seats previously held by Republicans in California during the 2018 midterm elections, then-Speaker Ryan said the state’s election “just defies logic to me.” In a number of these seats, Republican candidates led on election night but ended up losing days later, after all late mail ballots were counted.
“We were only down 26 seats the night of the election and three weeks later, we lost basically every California race,” he said.
Ryan’s spokesperson later released a statement claiming his boss “does not dispute the results.”
McCarthy, the current House Republican leader, has also attacked his home state’s election laws by positing false conspiracy theories that California changed the law so that voters casting mail ballots no longer need to match their signature to the one the state has on file and that voters can hand in empty ballots that can be filled out later. He linked these unfounded claims to the seven Republican losses in California in 2018.
Advertisement
More recently, McCarthy attacked House Democrats for getting $400 million in the CARES Act to help states prepare for more mail-in voting by falsely claiming the process is plagued by “a lot of fraud.” More than 70% of voters in the largest county in McCarthy’s congressional district voted by mail in 2018.
The greatest danger in all of this is that limited results reported on election night will show one candidate winning — perhaps Trump — but later, mail-in ballots counted after Election Day could reverse that trend and bring the other candidate into the lead and the White House.
As Trump and Republicans have demonstrated, they will attack and undermine faith in the election process whether this occurs or not.
Prepare The Audience
CBS News covers the results of the 2016 presidential election on Nov. 8, 2016. Michele Crowe/CBS via Getty Images
When Wisconsin held its April 7 elections, politicians in the state were roundly criticized for either acting too late to delay the elections or forcing the state to go ahead with in-person voting during a pandemic.
Advertisement
A federal district court judge initially extended the deadline for receiving votes cast by mail to April 13 while also mandating that the state not begin reporting results until that date. The Supreme Court overruled this extension of absentee voting, but not the result reporting delay. And so, Wisconsin reported results from its April 7 election on April 13.
This delay eliminated the possibility that any changing results after Election Day would cause confusion and paranoia. There could be no claims of fraud as an Election Day lead for one candidate gave way to a loss as more votes were counted.
This might be an extreme solution to the problem posed by Trump’s surefire effort to whip his supporters into a frenzy with fraud claims as vote totals change after the November election. But it would completely eliminate the psychological impact that counting votes after Election Day appears to have on partisans.
A team of election law, media and technology experts led by University of California, Irvine, professor Rick Hasen, the author of “Election Meltdown,” released a list of recommendations related to this very problem last week. Barring a complete delay in reporting vote totals until all ballots are prepared to be counted, as in the case of Wisconsin, the experts recommended that the media prepare viewers and readers for the reality that a winner will not be declared on election night and avoid amplifying any false accusations of fraud from the president or any other politician.
“Journalists should report that vote counts continuing beyond Election Day are normal and that errors and delays are not necessarily indicators of nefarious intent,” the report states. “Opportunistic elites will seek to take advantage of this confusion, particularly if it can harm the standing of the side that is likely to win. Irresponsible coverage that amplifies such claims runs the risk of encouraging more fundamental challenges to accepting the outcome of the election itself, a compact that is at the heart of democracy.”
Advertisement
“Absent a landslide victory for either Trump or presumptive Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden, the rise in absentee voting makes it unlikely that election night in America will be a decision night for broadcast networks, cable news or digital outlets.”
The press has changed its election night behavior in the past. In the infamous 2000 election, news networks first called the pivotal swing state of Florida for Vice President Al Gore, a Democrat, based on survey data produced by the media consortium Voter News Service. They then reversed that call and made the state too close to call. At 2:15 a.m. the next morning, Republican candidate George W. Bush took the lead. Within a matter of minutes, the networks and cable channels all declared Bush the winner of the Electoral College and the election.
Gore called Bush to concede, which led The New York Times to declare Bush the victor. As Gore headed to a rally of supporters to announce the bad news, the votes began to narrow Bush’s lead. Gore was told not to take the stage and he called Bush to retract his concession at 3:30 a.m.
The whiplash caused by preemptively calling Florida for Gore and the election for Bush led cable channels and newspapers to launch investigations into their election night coverage. A report commissioned by CNN labeled that coverage a “news disaster” that “created a premature impression” that Bush had won.
“Gore was perceived as the challenger and labeled a ‘sore loser’ for trying to steal the election,” the report continued.
Advertisement
The report called for an end to the use of exit polls and surveys to call states before their votes had been tabulated. CNN announced it would not use exit polls to call “close” races. The Voter News Service, blamed for the faulty exit poll data, was eventually scrapped after the data it collected for the 2002 midterm elections were also inaccurate.
The 2004 election between Bush and Democratic candidate John Kerry was also incredibly close, but the press did not call the election that night. Bush was not declared the winner until Nevada announced its results and Kerry conceded at 11 a.m. the next day. It was the first time networks did not declare a president before the sun rose on Wednesday morning since election night was introduced to television.
That is more than likely to happen again in 2020. It’s time for both the press and state election officials to start planning how to maintain the integrity of American democracy.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story described incorrectly how the date of Election Day is determined. It is set for the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Trump Says Coronavirus Task Force Will Stay But Shift Focus

WASHINGTON ( Reuters ) - President Donald Trump said on Wednesday his coronavirus task force would shift its focus to reviving U.S. business and social life , prompting the top Democrat in Congress to warn that ignoring science and the need for more testing would put Americans at risk .
In a series of tweets on Wednesday , Trump said that because of its success , “ the Task Force will continue on indefinitely with its focus on SAFETY & OPENING UP OUR COUNTRY AGAIN .
We may add or subtract people to it , as appropriate.
” The task @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focused on battling the pandemic , some of whom have at times offered guidance at odds with Trump ’ s , including on when to ease stay-at-home orders and lockdowns on the economy .
White House guidelines say that the number of new cases must be trending downward for 14 days and that vastly expanded coronavirus testing and other safeguards must be put in place before the shutdowns can be phased out .
House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she did not believe the Republican Trump should pivot to reopening at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing .
“ If you undermine science , if you underfund testing , if you exaggerate the opportunity that is out there for the economy at the risk of people dying , that ’ s not a plan , ” Pelosi told MSNBC .
“ There are counties and cities in which you can do that safely now , but there are others that if you do that , it ’ s really dangerous , ” he said on Tuesday night .
A number of U.S. states saw a record increase in cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Wisconsin .
Minnesota has set a new record for cases nine out of the last 14 days , including 728 new cases on Wednesday .
More than 71,000 people in the United States have died from COVID-19 , the disease caused by the virus , and more than 1.2 million people have been infected , according to a Reuters tally .
But the mayor of Atlanta , Keisha Lance Bottoms , who has clashed with Georgia Republican Governor Brian Kemp over his moves to reopen , said she saw people partying and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ holiday on Tuesday .
“ It was disappointing .
And what was very clear was that people didn ’ t get anything past the message that we were open up for business , ” she told CNN on Wednesday .
“ They didn ’ t get to the part that said that this was still a deadly virus and that you needed to continue to socially distance and wear masks , and I think that ’ s the shortcoming of this order.
” New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio , whose city @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country , said that he was hopeful the city had turned the corner but did not expect to reopen until September after shutting down with the rest of the state on March 20 .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump said on Wednesday his coronavirus task force would shift its focus to reviving U.S. business and social life, prompting the top Democrat in Congress to warn that ignoring science and the need for more testing would put Americans at risk.
U.S. President Donald Trump listens to Honeywell's Vice President of Integrated Supply Chain Tony Stallings as Stallings shows him a protective mask during a tour of Honeywell's facility manufacturing face masks for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Phoenix, Arizona, U.S., May 5, 2020 Tom Brenner / Reuters
Advertisement
In a series of tweets on Wednesday, Trump said that because of its success, “the Task Force will continue on indefinitely with its focus on SAFETY & OPENING UP OUR COUNTRY AGAIN. We may add or subtract people to it, as appropriate.”
He added: “The Task Force will also be very focused on Vaccines & Therapeutics.”
The task force to date has included medical professionals focused on battling the pandemic, some of whom have at times offered guidance at odds with Trump’s, including on when to ease stay-at-home orders and lockdowns on the economy.
White House guidelines say that the number of new cases must be trending downward for 14 days and that vastly expanded coronavirus testing and other safeguards must be put in place before the shutdowns can be phased out.
House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she did not believe the Republican Trump should pivot to reopening at the expense of emphasizing the need for more testing.
Advertisement
“If you undermine science, if you underfund testing, if you exaggerate the opportunity that is out there for the economy at the risk of people dying, that’s not a plan,” Pelosi told MSNBC.
“Death is not an economic motivator, stimulus. So why are we going down that path?”
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert and most high-profile member of the task force, acknowledged in a CNN interview that he was losing the argument against reopening the country too quickly.
“There are counties and cities in which you can do that safely now, but there are others that if you do that, it’s really dangerous,” he said on Tuesday night.
Trump told reporters he would announce new members of his task force by Monday.
A number of U.S. states saw a record increase in cases on Tuesday, including Kentucky, Oregon and Wisconsin. Minnesota has set a new record for cases nine out of the last 14 days, including 728 new cases on Wednesday.
More than 71,000 people in the United States have died from COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus, and more than 1.2 million people have been infected, according to a Reuters tally.
Advertisement
The Republican Trump administration and many state governors have emphasized the political and social pressures they face getting the U.S. economy going again.
ADP National Employment Report data on Wednesday showed that U.S. private employers laid off a record 20.236 million workers in April, suggesting the lockdowns could leave lasting scars on the economy.
SOCIAL DISTANCING
State governors who have started lifting restrictions have said business reopenings will be gradual and that people should continue to observe social distancing and other guidelines.
But the mayor of Atlanta, Keisha Lance Bottoms, who has clashed with Georgia Republican Governor Brian Kemp over his moves to reopen, said she saw people partying and celebrating on the annual Cinco de Mayo holiday on Tuesday.
“It was disappointing. And what was very clear was that people didn’t get anything past the message that we were open up for business,” she told CNN on Wednesday.
Advertisement
“They didn’t get to the part that said that this was still a deadly virus and that you needed to continue to socially distance and wear masks, and I think that’s the shortcoming of this order.”
Democratic governors of states hardest hit by the outbreak have at times been at odds with the Republican Trump over easing restrictions.
But even California’s Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom on Monday announced plans to relax some restrictions if the data continues to see improvement.
Los Angeles’ downtown flower market opened on Wednesday for the first time since the shutdown after the city’s mayor gave some businesses the green light.
“It’s good that the stores are reopening. I have two kids. It has been hard,” said florist Gregorio Garcia, 35, as he pruned pink roses inside his small open-front store.
Advertisement
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, whose city has been the hardest hit in the country, said that he was hopeful the city had turned the corner but did not expect to reopen until September after shutting down with the rest of the state on March 20.
“My message to the rest of the country is: learn from how much effort, how much discipline it took to finally bring these numbers down and follow the same path until you’re sure that it’s being beaten back,” de Blasio told CNN.
“Or else, if this thing boomerangs, you’re putting off any kind of restart or recovery a hell of a lot longer.”
Reporting by Susan Heavey, Doina Chiacu, Lucia Mutikani and Jeff Mason in Washington, Maria Caspani in New York, Lucy Nicholson in Los Angeles, Lisa Shumaker in Chicago; Writing by Sonya Hepinstall; Editing by Howard Goller


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Justin Amash Truly Doesn't Care If He's A Spoiler In The Presidential Election

If you try asking the same question a few different ways ― “ Is it not clear that you have @ @ @ @ @ ?
” “ Are you really that divided ?
” “ But are you more @ @ @ @ @ ?
” ― you ’ ll get expositions about how Trump and Biden are probably @ @ @ @ @ than Amash is with either Trump or Biden , or about how a Biden presidency @ @ @ @ @ as a Trump presidency , or about how Washington is broken .
He ’ s @ @ @ @ @ him credit .
When he speaks from the heart about his beliefs , voters can @ @ @ @ @ a voting record that shows ideology over partisanship .
And his campaign experience has taught @ @ @ @ @ voters appreciate that , even when they disagree with him , they know where he @ @ @ @ @ Amash posts explanations of his votes on major bills on Facebook . )

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― Rep. Justin Amash isn’t trying to run a spoiler campaign for president ― but he may end up doing so anyway.
Amash told HuffPost in a phone interview that he’s running to win, not to help or hurt another candidate, or to deny President Donald Trump or presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden a majority of electoral votes and throw the election to the House of Representatives, where Amash has served for five terms.
Advertisement
Having covered Amash closely for his entire time in Congress, I can tell you he almost always believes what he says ― a rare characteristic in members of Congress.
But that may be one of the most alarming aspects of Amash’s long-shot Libertarian campaign for the White House; he’s truly unconcerned about the effects of his candidacy on the presidential election.
“There’s no way to know how a campaign goes until you run it, and there’s no way to know where votes come from,” Amash said, seeming to ignore early polling that suggests he would draw more votes from Biden in Michigan than from Trump, as well as his firsthand knowledge of the fealty that most Republicans show to the president.
But as Amash usually is, he’s technically correct ― his favorite kind of being correct.
A poll from June 2019 can’t determine how his candidacy will affect the 2020 race, and the way Amash campaigns will shape which voters he appeals to. Millions of Republicans would vote for Trump if he’s the only alternative to Biden, Amash pointed out, but they might consider someone else if there’s a better option. Some Democrats feel the same way about Biden, allowing him to steal votes from those reluctant supporters.
Advertisement
“I anticipate running a campaign that harms both candidates’ chances,” Amash said. “I mean, that’s the point.”
When you press Amash on his own preference between Trump and Biden, he tries to avoid the question.
“It depends on how you define ‘preference,’” Amash said. “I think Trump is a train wreck. And in the short run, we can all see the kind of devastation wrought by Trump.”
“But,” Amash continued, “beneath the surface, what created Trump is still there, whether Trump’s in office or not at all. And Joe Biden is not going to address that problem.”
Rep. Justin Amash, then a Republican, hosting a news conference with a bipartisan group of House and Senate lawmakers in January 2018. ASSOCIATED PRESS
If you try asking the same question a few different ways ― “Is it not clear that you have a preference between these two?” “Are you really that divided?” “But are you more concerned about Biden than Trump?” ― you’ll get expositions about how Trump and Biden are probably more closely aligned on policy than Amash is with either Trump or Biden, or about how a Biden presidency produces the same partisan tension as a Trump presidency, or about how Washington is broken.
Advertisement
The best answer I got was when I brought up a quote from former Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho), one of Amash’s old close allies. Labrador recently told Politico he thought Amash didn’t see much of a difference between Trump and Biden. “People must be surprised to realize that Justin would rather see a Trump presidency than a Biden presidency, even it’s a 51/49 proposition,” Labrador said.
That’s just “Raul’s opinion,” Amash said. “I don’t think that’s right. I don’t have a preference for either one of them.”
If you believe Amash is this equally torn between Trump and Biden, you may be able to understand the concern he’s brought to Democrats.
Former Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) summed it up this way: “Every single anti-Trump vote needs to be on the viable candidate for president” ― meaning Biden ― and Democrats clearly worry that Republicans will fall more in line with Trump than Democrats will with the former vice president.
“They dropped balloons from the sky in the West Wing when Justin Amash announced that he was running for president,” McCaskill said.
Advertisement
Trump’s actual reaction was to tweet that Amash would make a “wonderful candidate,” further heightening the Democratic concern.
But Amash interpreted that as “reverse psychology.” Basically, he said, it was an attempt to rile up Democrats and try to sink his Libertarian nomination.
“I’ll put it this way,” Amash said. “As much as I dislike the president’s tone, demeanor, and many of his policies, I think he understands how to campaign. And he’s one of the best trolls on Twitter that you’re going to find.”
Amash has argued that no candidate is entitled to the presidency or the presumption of victory, and that the partisan attacks he’s faced since announcing his candidacy are precisely the reason he wants to run ― to challenge that mindset.
“It’s pretty strange to me to argue that a candidate who might get a lot of traction shouldn’t be on the ballot because the American people might prefer that candidate,” Amash said during our interview.
Advertisement
That backlash may end up as a key argument in favor of Amash, as he seeks the Libertarian nomination in two weeks.
Amash left the Republican Party in July to become an independent and is now changing his affiliation again to become Congress’ first capital-L Libertarian. Much of his argument for the party’s presidential nomination, which he’s expected to get, is that he’s the candidate best positioned to blow up the two-party system.
And if you have any doubt about that, just check his Twitter mentions.
Rep. Justin Amash (I-Mich.) during the House impeachment debate on Dec. 18, 2019. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Amash, who tweets for himself and closely monitors his Twitter interactions, has been treated to a constant online thrashing since announcing his candidacy. While he said he said he expected the backlash, he blamed certain “Never Trump” Republicans for stoking it.
“There are a few prominent former Republicans who prefer Joe Biden, and I guess have a plan in mind about how they want this election to go,” Amash said. “It creates a lot of problems for them and their approach.”
Advertisement
Part of the concern from Democrats and Never Trump Republicans is that Amash may, indeed, be relevant.
He’s savvier than most politicians give him credit. When he speaks from the heart about his beliefs, voters can actually tell. He has a voting record that shows ideology over partisanship. And his campaign experience has taught him that many of his voters appreciate that, even when they disagree with him, they know where he stands and why. (Amash posts explanations of his votes on major bills on Facebook.)
Of course, some of his votes are more difficult to explain.
Amash has perhaps the most fiscally conservative record in Congress over the last decade. He hasn’t voted for a single budget during his time in Congress ― an act of defiance that led former Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to kick him off the Budget Committee in 2012 ― and he rarely votes in favor of spending bills.
He’s also voted for controversial Republican priorities. He was the last member to vote for the GOP health care bill in 2017, and he has developed a reputation as a lone dissenter. If there’s ever a vote with only one member voting no, there’s a good chance it’s Amash.
Those positions may make it difficult for Democrats to embrace Amash. But his position on Trump’s impeachment may make it impossible for many Republicans to back him.
Advertisement
Amash gained considerable notoriety in May 2019 as the first congressional Republican to support impeaching Trump. Shortly after that, Amash left the Republican Party to become an independent. And for the conservative Republicans who loved Amash even through his Trump criticism, his embrace of impeachment was the last straw.
That seemed to be okay with Amash. For all the supporters he lost on the right, he seemed to gain even more on the left. But that honeymoon may have ended in February, when Amash was one of four House members to vote against an anti-lynching bill that now awaits Trump’s signature.
He vehemently defends that vote, arguing that explanations of the bill claiming it makes lynching a federal crime are plain wrong. (What the bill actually did was criminalize conspiracies to violate certain existing laws. Amash argued that, at best, it codifies existing lynching provisions, and at worst, equates unrelated crimes with lynching and gives police and prosecutors more power to charge people with hate crimes.)
Still, the vote gave Amash a considerable amount of heartburn. And it’s a classic example of him rejecting an obvious political truth ― don’t vote against a bill called the “Emmett Till Anti-lynching Act” ― in favor of being legally, technically, sort of right.
Rep. Justin Amash speaks with constituents at Rising Grinds Café in Grand Rapids on Aug. 21, 2019. The Washington Post via Getty Images
Advertisement
If you’re the type of voter attracted to a candidate who’s able to argue legal minutia and recite the Constitution from memory, Amash may be your guy. (Another contrast with Trump, and a potential overlap with Biden, who, like Amash, went to law school and has written legislation in Congress.)
But Democrats may be more concerned that Amash will highlight Biden’s similarities with Trump.
Amash is a baby-faced 40-year-old whose parents were born in Syria and the Palestinian territories. Biden is 77-year-old white guy who sometimes fumbles his words. Trump is a 73-year-old white guy who sometimes speaks in complete sentences.
If you accept the idea that Trump supporters are going to vote for Trump no matter what ― because, after everything, they’re still standing with the president ― then Amash constantly going on cable news and saying that both major candidates are roughly the same could be a problem.
And make no mistake: Amash plans to be on cable news.
He has toyed with the idea of running for president for years, and has thought seriously about it for several months. He planned to come to a final decision at the end of February, but the coronavirus outbreak delayed his decision. Ultimately, he concluded the shutdown of public campaign events could be an advantage for him, as the action shifts to cable news and Twitter.
“It’s mostly a digital or technological race,” Amash said of campaigning during stay-at-home orders. “You know, it’s who can be on the media and on social media, and who can get the message out there electronically while people are at home?”
Advertisement
While Amash was clear that he’s aiming to actually win the presidency as the Libertarian candidate, a more realistic result could be immensely consequential to the outcome. The 2016 Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson drew 3.27% of the national vote (4.4 million votes), and election analysts theorized that Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein may have cost Hillary Clinton the presidency.
In 2020, Amash may not even have to steal votes from Biden to tip the election; he may only need to convince a few thousand voters ― perhaps only in his home state of Michigan ― that there isn’t enough of a difference between the GOP and Democratic nominees to warrant standing in line for hours to vote, particularly if the coronavirus is still a threat in November.
It’s certainly a looming possibility ― one made even more profound by the fact that Amash genuinely seems to think there is no lesser of two evils.
This, however, may be a rare situation in which Amash is engaging in political gamesmanship.
Ironically, if Amash were to state a preference for Biden over Trump ― who he voted to impeach, left the Republican Party over, and called “amoral and self-serving” ― it may actually hurt Biden more than his “no preference” stance. And if he goes harder on Trump than on Biden, it would be a direct appeal to voters leaning toward Biden.
Rep. Justin Amash arrives at the Rayburn House Office Building on June 26, 2019. Tom Williams via Getty Images
Advertisement
If you were looking for an indication of how Amash might affect the race, you can look at how he’s been campaigning.
To this point, Amash has tried to run on his record of limited government, Constitutional conservatism, a better criminal justice system, and a less interventionist foreign policy ― arguments that may naturally appeal to Libertarian-minded Republicans. But he’s also targeted partisanship as an enemy of his campaign, and he says he’s running because hyperpartisanship has made government dysfunctional. Score one for the “no preference” approach.
Perhaps the biggest tell has been what Amash hasn’t talked about.
He’s largely sidestepped what may be the most damaging shot at Biden: that Amash is the one candidate not accused of sexual assault.
Trump’s supporters don’t seem to care that 25 women have accused their candidate of sexual misconduct. Some of Biden’s supporters might care that their candidate now faces a serious allegation. At the very least, leaning into Tara Reade’s claims against Biden might help insulate Amash from some of the online criticism he’s faced since announcing his candidacy.
When HuffPost raised the topic, Amash dismissed it.
“Who wants to run a campaign like that?” he said. “I mean, maybe some people do. You know me, like, it’s not my thing. It’s, like, it’s not the thing I decided to run for president to talk about.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Epidemiologist Slams U.S. Coronavirus Response: 'Close To Genocide By Default'

A Yale epidemiologist pulled no punches with his searing assessment of the United States ’ botched handling of the coronavirus pandemic , suggesting it is now “ getting awfully close to genocide by default.
” “ How many people will die this summer , before Election Day ?
” tweeted Gregg Gonsalves , co-director of Yale ’ s Global Health Justice Partnership , on Wednesday morning , the day after President Donald Trump said the White House ’ s coronavirus task force would be wound down despite case numbers still rising .
( Trump , however , tweeted later Wednesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on indefinitely with its focus on SAFETY & OPENING UP OUR COUNTRY AGAIN.
” ) “ What proportion of the deaths will be among African-Americans , Latinos , other people of color ?
” asked Gonsalves .
“ This is getting awfully close to genocide by default .
What else do you call mass death by public policy ?
” How many people will die this summer , before Election Day ?
What proportion of the deaths will be among African-Americans , Latinos , other people of color ?
This is getting awfully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ else do you call mass death by public policy ?
# COVID19 # coronavirus — Gregg Gonsalves ( @ gregggonsalves ) May 6 , 2020 “ What is happening in the US is purposeful , considered negligence , omission , failure to act by our leaders , ” he wrote .
“ Can they be held responsible under international law ?
” And I am being serious here : what is happening in the US is purposeful , considered negligence , omission , failure to act by our leaders .
Can they be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gregg Gonsalves ( @ gregggonsalves ) May 6 , 2020 “ So , what does it mean to let thousands die by negligence , omission , failure to act , in a legal sense under international law ?
” Gonsalves added .
COVID-19 , the disease caused by the virus , has now killed upwards of 72,000 people in the U.S .
There are more than 1.2 million confirmed cases nationwide , more than any other country in the world .
On Sunday , Trump said up to 100,000 people could eventually die @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he said there would be up to 60,000 fatalities .
Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx , members of the White House ’ s task force , have also previously suggested that between 100,000 and 240,000 people could die from the virus in the U.S .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes on its website how “ current data suggest a disproportionate burden of illness and death among racial and ethnic minority groups.
” Almost one-third of those who have died from the disease in the U.S. are Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump for weeks downplayed the threat of the virus before dithering on what action to take , as case numbers worldwide soared .
He has used the daily task force briefings to attack journalists and tout unproven cures , such as his suggestion last month that injecting disinfectant could be a possible remedy , which he later claimed was sarcasm .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A Yale epidemiologist pulled no punches with his searing assessment of the United States’ botched handling of the coronavirus pandemic, suggesting it is now “getting awfully close to genocide by default.”
“How many people will die this summer, before Election Day?” tweeted Gregg Gonsalves, co-director of Yale’s Global Health Justice Partnership, on Wednesday morning, the day after President Donald Trump said the White House’s coronavirus task force would be wound down despite case numbers still rising. (Trump, however, tweeted later Wednesday morning that the group “will continue on indefinitely with its focus on SAFETY & OPENING UP OUR COUNTRY AGAIN.”)
Advertisement
“What proportion of the deaths will be among African-Americans, Latinos, other people of color?” asked Gonsalves. “This is getting awfully close to genocide by default. What else do you call mass death by public policy?”
How many people will die this summer, before Election Day? What proportion of the deaths will be among African-Americans, Latinos, other people of color? This is getting awfully close to genocide by default. What else do you call mass death by public policy? #COVID19 #coronavirus — Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) May 6, 2020
In later tweets, Gonsalves confirmed he was serious with his suggestion.
“What is happening in the US is purposeful, considered negligence, omission, failure to act by our leaders,” he wrote. “Can they be held responsible under international law?”
And I am being serious here: what is happening in the US is purposeful, considered negligence, omission, failure to act by our leaders. Can they be held responsible under international law? — Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) May 6, 2020
Advertisement
“So, what does it mean to let thousands die by negligence, omission, failure to act, in a legal sense under international law?” Gonsalves added.
So, what does it mean to let thousands die by negligence, omission, failure to act, in a legal sense under international law? #COVID19 #coronavirus — Gregg Gonsalves (@gregggonsalves) May 6, 2020
COVID-19, the disease caused by the virus, has now killed upwards of 72,000 people in the U.S. There are more than 1.2 million confirmed cases nationwide, more than any other country in the world.
On Sunday, Trump said up to 100,000 people could eventually die from the virus. A week earlier, he said there would be up to 60,000 fatalities.
A draft Federal Emergency Management Agency report over the weekend, however, showed there could be 3,000 deaths daily by June 1.
Advertisement
Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx, members of the White House’s task force, have also previously suggested that between 100,000 and 240,000 people could die from the virus in the U.S.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes on its website how “current data suggest a disproportionate burden of illness and death among racial and ethnic minority groups.” Almost one-third of those who have died from the disease in the U.S. are Black, according to an Associated Press analysis.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Trump Says He Didn't Know How 'Popular' Coronavirus Task Force Is

After reversing course on winding down the coronavirus task force , President Donald Trump said he didn ’ t realize Americans liked it so much .
Speaking from the Oval Office on Wednesday afternoon , Trump came close to admitting that his plans to dissolve the task force were a mistake .
“ I had no idea how popular the task force is until actually yesterday , ” Trump said .
“ When I started talking about winding it down , I got calls from very respected people saying , ‘ I think it ’ d be better to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such a good job .
It ’ s a respected task force.
’ I knew it myself , but I didn ’ t know whether or not it was appreciated by the public , but it is appreciated by the public.
” Trump ’ s plans to wind down the task force , a team of health and government officials overseeing the U.S. response to COVID-19 , were widely criticized as an attempt to shirk responsibility for the crisis by passing it onto state and local leaders , potentially shielding him from any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the lead-up to the November election .
Trump backed down from his plans Wednesday morning , tweeting that “ the Task Force will continue on indefinitely with its focus on SAFETY & OPENING UP OUR COUNTRY AGAIN.
” He also said that he may “ add or subtract people ” from the committee .
One of the additions is Iowa ’ s state epidemiologist , Dr. Caitlin Pedati , who accepted the offer from Trump on Wednesday .
Newly initiated White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany wouldn ’ t offer any details @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the task force .
When a reporter asked her about it , she referred him to Trump ’ s other remarks and said the president “ decided that the coronavirus task force is here to stay.
” Trump ’ s reversal comes after the task force had already reportedly started winding down .
NBC News reported Tuesday that the task force had already stopped meeting every day and that the meetings it has held have been shorter .
Trump has linked the task force with the continued national economic shutdown ― something he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporter asked him Tuesday why he thought this was a good time to scale back the task force , Trump replied , “ Well , because we can ’ t keep our country closed for the next five years .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
After reversing course on winding down the coronavirus task force, President Donald Trump said he didn’t realize Americans liked it so much.
Speaking from the Oval Office on Wednesday afternoon, Trump came close to admitting that his plans to dissolve the task force were a mistake.
Advertisement
“I had no idea how popular the task force is until actually yesterday,” Trump said. “When I started talking about winding it down, I got calls from very respected people saying, ‘I think it’d be better to keep it going. It’s done such a good job. It’s a respected task force.’ I knew it myself, but I didn’t know whether or not it was appreciated by the public, but it is appreciated by the public.”
Trump’s plans to wind down the task force, a team of health and government officials overseeing the U.S. response to COVID-19, were widely criticized as an attempt to shirk responsibility for the crisis by passing it onto state and local leaders, potentially shielding him from any blame over the country’s response in the lead-up to the November election.
Trump backed down from his plans Wednesday morning, tweeting that “the Task Force will continue on indefinitely with its focus on SAFETY & OPENING UP OUR COUNTRY AGAIN.”
He also said that he may “add or subtract people” from the committee. One of the additions is Iowa’s state epidemiologist, Dr. Caitlin Pedati, who accepted the offer from Trump on Wednesday.
Advertisement
Newly initiated White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany wouldn’t offer any details on whose idea it was to disband the task force. When a reporter asked her about it, she referred him to Trump’s other remarks and said the president “decided that the coronavirus task force is here to stay.”
Trump’s reversal comes after the task force had already reportedly started winding down. NBC News reported Tuesday that the task force had already stopped meeting every day and that the meetings it has held have been shorter.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Someone Just Flushed A Toilet During Supreme Court's Oral Arguments

The Supreme Court ’ s decision to hold oral arguments by phone had the internet flush with excitement on Wednesday .
Not because the arguments made by the lawyers were particularly enthralling , but because someone decided to flush a toilet during the proceedings .
The flush heard around the internet occurred while attorney Roman Martinez , appearing for the American Association of Political Consultants , was discussing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act , a law meant to restrict intrusive robocalls .
As you can hear for yourself , Martinez had to deal with something very “ intrusive ” as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people couldn ’ t believe their ears .
Some sensed they were witnessing a seminal moment in U.S. history .
Twitter appears to be blowing up over this .
And they thought Plessy v. Ferguson or Marbury v. Madison were seminal moments for # SCOTUS — Jeff Harrington ( @ JeffMHarrington ) May 6 , 2020 Here 's the question : What % of articles from serious # SCOTUS reporters later/tomorrow have at least a sentence or two about a toilet flushing during oral argument ?
# SCOTUSLive # appellatetwitter — Adam Shniderman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 Other people had theories , some more plausible than others .
Honestly , I would like to think that RBG got up from her hospital bed and took a shit during the # SCOTUS oral arguments , because the fact that we 're even debating birth control coverage AGAIN and in the year 2020 is just that : absolute shit .
Flush that toilet , RBG .
Let 'em know .
— Danielle Campoamor ( @ DCampoamor ) May 6 , 2020 My sources tell me that during SCOTUS telecommunications , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political party was 1 flush for agree , 2 flushes.. - SCOTUS continues to make history .
A participant in oral arguments flushed a toilet during the conference pic.twitter.com/pLXcCODx9a — Larry Gorkin ( @ LarryGorkin1 ) May 6 , 2020 The sound of the toilet flushing during Supreme Court arguments is so loud that I have to believe the culprit was IN the bathroom , though not necessarily on the toilet .
https : //t.co/WqyK7RpAtZ — Mark Joseph Stern ( @ mjs_DC ) May 6 , 2020 A Little humor , # toilet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone did n't know # technology very well about muting the AirPods or the speaker !
https : //t.co/stQax5GBw0 — Linda Kenney Baden ( @ KenneyBaden ) May 6 , 2020 One woman sympathized greatly with the culprit responsible for the flush .
You think your day is bad ?
At least you were n't the person who flushed a toilet during the SCOTUS oral arguments .
— Jena Sturgis ( @ jenasturgis ) May 6 , 2020 Another person hoped that the errant flush would become part of the official record .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ flushing when court is in session .
We could really increase attention from the public if Justices would use this as their signal for a bad argument .
— mdmurphyla ( @ mdmurphyla ) May 6 , 2020 HuffPost reached out to Martinez for his reaction , but he did not comment about the flush .
A source said that he was on a landline in his office when it happened .
Meanwhile , the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission , which was referenced in the case , jumped on Twitter to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flush as a criticism of the FCC by the Supreme Court .
To be clear , the @ FCC does not construe the flushing of a toilet immediately after counsel said `` what the FCC has said '' to reflect a substantive judgment of the Supreme Court , or of any Justice thereof , regarding an agency determination .
# SCOTUS https : //t.co/cghyBfn7rE — Ajit Pai ( @ AjitPaiFCC ) May 6 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Supreme Court’s decision to hold oral arguments by phone had the internet flush with excitement on Wednesday.
Not because the arguments made by the lawyers were particularly enthralling, but because someone decided to flush a toilet during the proceedings.
Advertisement
The flush heard around the internet occurred while attorney Roman Martinez, appearing for the American Association of Political Consultants, was discussing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a law meant to restrict intrusive robocalls.
As you can hear for yourself, Martinez had to deal with something very “intrusive” as well.
LISTEN: Toilet flush during U.S. Supreme Court oral argument (h/t @nicninh) pic.twitter.com/He3QGMzvJI — Jeremy Art (@cspanJeremy) May 6, 2020
As you might expect, people couldn’t believe their ears.
I had to do a double take because I thought SURELY NOT 😂 — quarantiff (@trthompson11) May 6, 2020
Some sensed they were witnessing a seminal moment in U.S. history.
Twitter appears to be blowing up over this. And they thought Plessy v. Ferguson or Marbury v. Madison were seminal moments for #SCOTUS — Jeff Harrington (@JeffMHarrington) May 6, 2020
Advertisement
Here's the question: What % of articles from serious #SCOTUS reporters later/tomorrow have at least a sentence or two about a toilet flushing during oral argument? #SCOTUSLive #appellatetwitter — Adam Shniderman (@adam_shniderman) May 6, 2020
Other people had theories, some more plausible than others.
Honestly, I would like to think that RBG got up from her hospital bed and took a shit during the #SCOTUS oral arguments, because the fact that we're even debating birth control coverage AGAIN and in the year 2020 is just that: absolute shit. Flush that toilet, RBG. Let 'em know. — Danielle Campoamor (@DCampoamor) May 6, 2020
My sources tell me that during SCOTUS telecommunications, the signal to the others in the same political party was 1 flush for agree, 2 flushes..
-
SCOTUS continues to make history.
A participant in oral arguments flushed a toilet during the conference pic.twitter.com/pLXcCODx9a — Larry Gorkin (@LarryGorkin1) May 6, 2020
The sound of the toilet flushing during Supreme Court arguments is so loud that I have to believe the culprit was IN the bathroom, though not necessarily on the toilet. https://t.co/WqyK7RpAtZ — Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 6, 2020
A Little humor, #toilet flush during #SCOTUS arg. Guess someone didn't know #technology very well about muting the AirPods or the speaker! https://t.co/stQax5GBw0 — Linda Kenney Baden (@KenneyBaden) May 6, 2020
Advertisement
One woman sympathized greatly with the culprit responsible for the flush.
You think your day is bad? At least you weren't the person who flushed a toilet during the SCOTUS oral arguments. — Jena Sturgis (@jenasturgis) May 6, 2020
Another person hoped that the errant flush would become part of the official record.
I hope this is written into the transcript. — AltHomelandSecurity🇺🇸 (@AltHomelandSec) May 6, 2020
One person saw positives in allowing more flushing when court is in session.
We could really increase attention from the public if Justices would use this as their signal for a bad argument. — mdmurphyla (@mdmurphyla) May 6, 2020
HuffPost reached out to Martinez for his reaction, but he did not comment about the flush. A source said that he was on a landline in his office when it happened.
Meanwhile, the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, which was referenced in the case, jumped on Twitter to make sure that no one read the flush as a criticism of the FCC by the Supreme Court.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Betsy DeVos’s Campaign To Roll Back Sexual Assault Survivor Rights Is Complete

The 2,000-page rule , which was released Wednesday , addresses how K-12 schools and colleges are required to implement Title IX , the federal civil rights law created to ensure gender equality in education .
DeVos preemptively dismissed critics ― she said on a call with reporters that “ many will , unfortunately , offer you scare quotes and half-truths in attempts to denigrate and undercut this rule ” ― and said it would make the process quicker and fairer .
But it follows in her past footsteps to apply legal standards to college disciplinary proceedings , something that makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to report harassment and assault by narrowing the definition of sexual misconduct and limiting whom a victim can report to .
That could be a boon for colleges : When there are fewer sexual misconduct cases , colleges actually save money ― anywhere from $ 286 million to $ 368 million over 10 years , according to estimates included in DeVos ’ s 2018 proposed guideline .
The new Title IX rule will go into effect on Aug. 14 , right before the new school year is set to begin , and applies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including nearly all colleges and universities , all public K-12 schools and a few private K-12 schools that receive federal dollars .
One alarming element of the new rule is that schools are not responsible for responding to sexual violence that occurs off-campus or while students are studying abroad .
Off-campus spaces include housing ― 87 % of college students live off-campus ― bars and fraternity houses , where sexual abuse can be prevalent .
Additionally , this would allow schools involved in sexual assault scandals ― such as Michigan State and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by staff at off-campus events .
“ There are two times we would have the most calls and the most reports , ” Carson said of her time as a hotline advocate for college campus sexual assault survivors .
“ One is during the red zone at the beginning of the school year , and the second is when folks would return from study abroad in the winter .
This means that a majority , or all of these students now , would not be able to move forward with a formal report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see their [ perpetrator ] every day in class.
” According to a 2017 analysis of sexual violence and study abroad , female college students who study abroad are five times more likely to be raped than their counterparts who stay on their college campuses .
Other provisions included in DeVos ’ s new guidelines make it harder for survivors to report and get justice through the Title IX system .
In a move proponents say improves fairness for the accused , the rule allows the accused to participate in a live cross-examination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party , which means a survivor could be questioned by an accused person ’ s parents , friends and even fraternity brothers .
( The guideline does prohibit the accused from cross-examining the accuser themselves , and the two parties are not allowed to see each other during the process ) .
Some advocates argue that cross-examination is triggering for many survivors and can be used as a tactic to silence students contemplating coming forward .
“ Betsy DeVos ’ new rules for how America ’ s colleges and universities address sexual misconduct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abusers in a system that is already overwhelmingly rigged in their favor , ” Shaunna Thomas , executive director of UltraViolet , said in a Wednesday statement .
“ Students throughout the nation are less safe because of this decision.
” The rule also limits whom a victim can report to , which often discourages students from filing complaints at all .
Under the new guideline , college students can report a sexual misconduct claim only to a Title IX coordinator .
Many students prefer to disclose to a trusted professor or adviser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who they might not even know exists , which often discourages some from filing a complaint and opening a misconduct case .
( K-12 students are allowed under the rule to report to anyone , such as a teacher , bus driver or cafeteria worker , rather than solely a Title IX coordinator . )
DeVos and Kenneth Marcus , assistant secretary of the Education Department ’ s Office for Civil Rights , touted that their department has closed 172 sexual misconduct cases in the last three years ― a 375 % increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said on Wednesday .
Advocates worry , however , that closing misconduct cases quickly doesn ’ t actually get justice for survivors or the accused but instead reduces costs for colleges .
I ask this Administration – where is the humanity in subjecting a survivor to live hearings and cross examinations , or in making it easier for a perpetrator to get away with gross misconduct knowing they can go on to violate again ?
There are some positive steps in the new rule , according to advocates for victims .
It allows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ digitally , which is a welcomed provision as college students in the U.S. are now remote learning from home due to the coronavirus pandemic .
However , advocates stressed that this is a step that the civil rights office should ’ ve taken earlier when the pandemic hit the country in March and many accusers were left in limbo .
A group of organizations , lawmakers and others have already vowed to fight the new rule .
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser opposed the new guidelines on Wednesday and promised to challenge the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court .
The National Women ’ s Law Center also tweeted that the rule “ guts Title IX protections ” and vowed to take DeVos to court .
“ I ask Betsy DeVos to look a survivor in the eyes and explain how these changes will keep her safe or ensure that she achieves justice , ” Speier said in the statement .
“ I ask this Administration – where is the humanity in subjecting a survivor to live hearings and cross examinations , or in making it easier for a perpetrator to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can go on to violate again ?
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A new rule by Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos will reshape how colleges handle sexual misconduct ― speeding up investigations, adding protections for the accused and even allowing schools to skirt responsibility for assaults entirely if they take place off-campus.
The 2,000-page rule, which was released Wednesday, addresses how K-12 schools and colleges are required to implement Title IX, the federal civil rights law created to ensure gender equality in education. DeVos preemptively dismissed critics ― she said on a call with reporters that “many will, unfortunately, offer you scare quotes and half-truths in attempts to denigrate and undercut this rule” ― and said it would make the process quicker and fairer.
Advertisement
But it follows in her past footsteps to apply legal standards to college disciplinary proceedings, something that makes it harder for survivors of sexual violence to report harassment and assault by narrowing the definition of sexual misconduct and limiting whom a victim can report to. That could be a boon for colleges: When there are fewer sexual misconduct cases, colleges actually save money ― anywhere from $286 million to $368 million over 10 years, according to estimates included in DeVos’s 2018 proposed guideline.
The new Title IX rule will go into effect on Aug. 14, right before the new school year is set to begin, and applies to all schools that receive federal funding, including nearly all colleges and universities, all public K-12 schools and a few private K-12 schools that receive federal dollars.
One alarming element of the new rule is that schools are not responsible for responding to sexual violence that occurs off-campus or while students are studying abroad. Off-campus spaces include housing ― 87% of college students live off-campus ― bars and fraternity houses, where sexual abuse can be prevalent. Additionally, this would allow schools involved in sexual assault scandals ― such as Michigan State and Ohio State ― to sidestep misconduct perpetrated by staff at off-campus events.
The provision about study abroad programs is “extremely concerning,” Sage Carson, manager at the anti-sexual violence organization KnowYourIX, told HuffPost.
Advertisement
“There are two times we would have the most calls and the most reports,” Carson said of her time as a hotline advocate for college campus sexual assault survivors. “One is during the red zone at the beginning of the school year, and the second is when folks would return from study abroad in the winter. This means that a majority, or all of these students now, would not be able to move forward with a formal report even if they are still forced to see their [perpetrator] every day in class.” According to a 2017 analysis of sexual violence and study abroad, female college students who study abroad are five times more likely to be raped than their counterparts who stay on their college campuses.
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos's new Title IX guidelines make it harder to report sexual assault and to get justice. Jonathan Ernst / Reuters
Study abroad was not discussed in Title IX guidance before DeVos’s new guideline, but it was widely understood as applicable no matter where the student experienced sexual misconduct. Schools were required to process complaints “regardless of where the conduct occurred,” according to the 2014 Obama-era Title IX guidelines.
“Whether you are raped in your on-campus dorm room or in another country, having to see your rapist in class equally interrupts your education,” said Sarah Nesbitt, a policy organizer at KnowYourIX.
When reached for comment, an Education Department spokesperson pointed HuffPost to the language of the Title IX statute that specifically states that no person in the U.S. be discriminated against because of their sex. Laws, including Title IX, cannot be enforced outside the U.S. unless Congress makes an exception, the spokesperson noted.
Advertisement
Other provisions included in DeVos’s new guidelines make it harder for survivors to report and get justice through the Title IX system. In a move proponents say improves fairness for the accused, the rule allows the accused to participate in a live cross-examination of the alleged victim through a third party, which means a survivor could be questioned by an accused person’s parents, friends and even fraternity brothers. (The guideline does prohibit the accused from cross-examining the accuser themselves, and the two parties are not allowed to see each other during the process). Some advocates argue that cross-examination is triggering for many survivors and can be used as a tactic to silence students contemplating coming forward.
“Betsy DeVos’ new rules for how America’s colleges and universities address sexual misconduct allegations are designed to expand protections for abusers in a system that is already overwhelmingly rigged in their favor,” Shaunna Thomas, executive director of UltraViolet, said in a Wednesday statement. “Students throughout the nation are less safe because of this decision.”
Another way the rule could reduce the case numbers is by narrowing the definition of sexual harassment. The new rule defines sexual harassment as “severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive,” which survivor advocacy organizations have argued forces a victim to be harassed multiple times before they’re able to file a complaint.
The rule also limits whom a victim can report to, which often discourages students from filing complaints at all. Under the new guideline, college students can report a sexual misconduct claim only to a Title IX coordinator. Many students prefer to disclose to a trusted professor or adviser instead of a Title IX coordinator, who they might not even know exists, which often discourages some from filing a complaint and opening a misconduct case. (K-12 students are allowed under the rule to report to anyone, such as a teacher, bus driver or cafeteria worker, rather than solely a Title IX coordinator.)
DeVos and Kenneth Marcus, assistant secretary of the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, touted that their department has closed 172 sexual misconduct cases in the last three years ― a 375% increase from the prior eight years, DeVos said on Wednesday. Advocates worry, however, that closing misconduct cases quickly doesn’t actually get justice for survivors or the accused but instead reduces costs for colleges.
Advertisement
“I ask this Administration – where is the humanity in subjecting a survivor to live hearings and cross examinations, or in making it easier for a perpetrator to get away with gross misconduct knowing they can go on to violate again?” - Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.)
There are some positive steps in the new rule, according to advocates for victims. It allows for sexual misconduct hearings to take place digitally, which is a welcomed provision as college students in the U.S. are now remote learning from home due to the coronavirus pandemic. However, advocates stressed that this is a step that the civil rights office should’ve taken earlier when the pandemic hit the country in March and many accusers were left in limbo.
A group of organizations, lawmakers and others have already vowed to fight the new rule. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser opposed the new guidelines on Wednesday and promised to challenge the Department of Education’s decision in court. The National Women’s Law Center also tweeted that the rule “guts Title IX protections” and vowed to take DeVos to court.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said Wednesday that the guidelines were “about silencing survivors” and would “make schools less safe.”
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) condemned DeVos’s new rule, calling it “a dark day for survivors of sexual violence across the country and a flagrant get out of jail pass to rapists” in a statement Wednesday.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-06--Duncan Hunter Asks To Delay Prison Term Because Of Coronavirus

SAN DIEGO ( AP ) — Former California Rep. Duncan Hunter wants to push back the start of his prison term for stealing campaign funds until next year because of concerns over the coronavirus pandemic .
Hunter ’ s lawyers and prosecutors filed a joint motion in federal court on Tuesday and were awaiting a ruling from a judge on their request to change the surrender date from May 29 to Jan. 4 .
If granted , Hunter promised to not ask for any other changes to his term or that his home confinement be counted toward the 11-month prison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unprecedented challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic , this is not a time to be adding to the prison population unnecessarily , ” attorney Devin Burstein said in an email to The Associated Press on Wednesday .
Hunter was sentenced in March to 11 months in prison after pleading guilty to stealing campaign funds and spending the money on everything from outings with friends to his daughter ’ s birthday party .
The ex-Marine resigned from Congress in January after representing one of Southern California ’ s last solidly Republican districts .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ November runoff for his seat .
Last month , another convicted former congressman from New York , Chris Collins , had his prison start date delayed until June after his lawyers told the court the 69-year-old is in a high risk category if he contracts the coronavirus .
Collins , a former Republican representative sentenced to 26 months for securities fraud , is now set to surrender June 23 .
At Hunter ’ s sentencing hearing , his lawyers had asked for most or part of his sentence yo be served in home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iraq and Afghanistan , and his nearly six terms in Congress .
But U.S. District Court Judge Thomas J. Whelan cited the amount of money Hunter misspent and the number of years he carried out the pilfering in rejecting the request .
Hunter and his wife Margaret , who was his campaign manager , were accused in a 60-count indictment of stealing more than $ 250,000 in campaign funds and trying to hide it on financial disclosure records , listing some personal expenses as contributions to Wounded Warriors .
Each pleaded guilty to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last year , and each had faced up to five years in prison .
His wife ’ s sentencing hearing is June 8 .
For most people , the coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms , such as fever and cough that clear up in two to three weeks .
For some , especially older adults and people with existing health problems , it can cause more severe illness , including pneumonia , and death .
The vast majority of people recover .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
SAN DIEGO (AP) — Former California Rep. Duncan Hunter wants to push back the start of his prison term for stealing campaign funds until next year because of concerns over the coronavirus pandemic.
Hunter’s lawyers and prosecutors filed a joint motion in federal court on Tuesday and were awaiting a ruling from a judge on their request to change the surrender date from May 29 to Jan. 4.
Advertisement
If granted, Hunter promised to not ask for any other changes to his term or that his home confinement be counted toward the 11-month prison stint.
”In light of the unprecedented challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, this is not a time to be adding to the prison population unnecessarily,” attorney Devin Burstein said in an email to The Associated Press on Wednesday.
Hunter was sentenced in March to 11 months in prison after pleading guilty to stealing campaign funds and spending the money on everything from outings with friends to his daughter’s birthday party. The ex-Marine resigned from Congress in January after representing one of Southern California’s last solidly Republican districts. A Democrat and Republican are headed to a November runoff for his seat.
Last month, another convicted former congressman from New York, Chris Collins, had his prison start date delayed until June after his lawyers told the court the 69-year-old is in a high risk category if he contracts the coronavirus. Collins, a former Republican representative sentenced to 26 months for securities fraud, is now set to surrender June 23.
Advertisement
At Hunter’s sentencing hearing, his lawyers had asked for most or part of his sentence yo be served in home confinement, citing his military service in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his nearly six terms in Congress. But U.S. District Court Judge Thomas J. Whelan cited the amount of money Hunter misspent and the number of years he carried out the pilfering in rejecting the request.
Hunter and his wife Margaret, who was his campaign manager, were accused in a 60-count indictment of stealing more than $250,000 in campaign funds and trying to hide it on financial disclosure records, listing some personal expenses as contributions to Wounded Warriors.
Each pleaded guilty to a single count in separate plea agreements last year, and each had faced up to five years in prison. His wife’s sentencing hearing is June 8.
For most people, the coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough that clear up in two to three weeks. For some, especially older adults and people with existing health problems, it can cause more severe illness, including pneumonia, and death. The vast majority of people recover.