thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Donald Trump Refuses To Wear Mask At Mask Supplier, Suggests Testing Is 'Overrated'

President Donald Trump on Thursday griped about the pressure he ’ s facing to increase the ability to test people for the coronavirus , saying that testing might be “ overrated ” anyway .
“ We have the best testing in the world .
Could be that testing is , frankly , overrated .
Maybe it is overrated , ” Trump said during a visit to Owens & Minor , a medical supply company in Allentown , Pennsylvania , that distributes masks and other products .
“ You know , they always say , ‘ We want more , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t want to give you credit .
Then we do more , and they say , ‘ We want more , ’ ” he added .
Trump did not wear a mask during his visit , and neither did his chief of staff , Mark Meadows .
Everyone else did , according to the pool report from S.V .
Date , HuffPost ’ s senior White House correspondent .
Hundreds of Trump supporters lined the road along the president ’ s route to the plant on Thursday , and thousands appeared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
Many were not wearing masks .
“ I don ’ t think that I ’ m going to be doing it , ” he said after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidelines to encourage mask usage .
Trump has also reportedly said he would look ridiculous wearing a mask and that he worried it would send the wrong message , contradicting his ( unscientific ) predictions that the end of the pandemic is just around the corner .
Thursday ’ s visit was one of Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ D.C. , since the coronavirus pandemic took hold of the country .
In early May , he went to a mask factory in Arizona and also refused to wear a mask ― despite a sign near the factory floor that read , “ Please wear your mask at all times.
” Vice President Mike Pence also faced significant criticism when he visited the Mayo Clinic and did not wear a mask ― even though it was the policy of the facility .
Trump has been playing down the significance of testing people to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even though medical experts and scientists said it ’ s key to overcoming the pandemic .
In addition to the volume of tests , experts said it also matters which populations are getting tested and whether there is adequate contact tracing to track who has been infected .
At the same time , he has boasted that the United States has “ the best testing in the world ” ― a claim that is absolutely not true .
But there is one place where testing is readily available : the White House .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ contact with the president and vice president tested positive for COVID-19 , tests are now readily available at the White House that take just minutes to get results ( although the reliability of those results has been questioned ) .
Staffers will also now have to wear masks most of the time , a policy that the president said he put into place himself .
Trump , however , will continue not to wear one .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump on Thursday griped about the pressure he’s facing to increase the ability to test people for the coronavirus, saying that testing might be “overrated” anyway.
“We have the best testing in the world. Could be that testing is, frankly, overrated. Maybe it is overrated,” Trump said during a visit to Owens & Minor, a medical supply company in Allentown, Pennsylvania, that distributes masks and other products.
Advertisement
“You know, they always say, ‘We want more, we want more,’ because they don’t want to give you credit. Then we do more, and they say, ‘We want more,’” he added.
Trump did not wear a mask during his visit, and neither did his chief of staff, Mark Meadows. Everyone else did, according to the pool report from S.V. Date, HuffPost’s senior White House correspondent.
President Donald Trump visits medical supply distributor Owens & Minor in Allentown, Pennsylvania, on May 14. Mandel Ngan/Getty Images
Hundreds of Trump supporters lined the road along the president’s route to the plant on Thursday, and thousands appeared to be at the plant itself to greet him. Many were not wearing masks.
Advertisement
Even though the federal government’s own health experts recommend wearing masks, Trump has refused to do so.
“I don’t think that I’m going to be doing it,” he said after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidelines to encourage mask usage.
Trump has also reportedly said he would look ridiculous wearing a mask and that he worried it would send the wrong message, contradicting his (unscientific) predictions that the end of the pandemic is just around the corner.
Thursday’s visit was one of Trump’s few trips out of Washington, D.C., since the coronavirus pandemic took hold of the country. In early May, he went to a mask factory in Arizona and also refused to wear a mask ― despite a sign near the factory floor that read, “Please wear your mask at all times.”
Vice President Mike Pence also faced significant criticism when he visited the Mayo Clinic and did not wear a mask ― even though it was the policy of the facility.
Advertisement
People watch as a motorcade with President Donald Trump drives past on Thursday, May 14, in Allentown, Pennsylvania. Evan Vucci/Associated Press
Trump has been playing down the significance of testing people to see whether they have the coronavirus, even though medical experts and scientists said it’s key to overcoming the pandemic. In addition to the volume of tests, experts said it also matters which populations are getting tested and whether there is adequate contact tracing to track who has been infected.
At the same time, he has boasted that the United States has “the best testing in the world” ― a claim that is absolutely not true.
But there is one place where testing is readily available: the White House. After several staffers who have had close contact with the president and vice president tested positive for COVID-19, tests are now readily available at the White House that take just minutes to get results (although the reliability of those results has been questioned).
Staffers will also now have to wear masks most of the time, a policy that the president said he put into place himself. Trump, however, will continue not to wear one.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Whistleblower Dr. Rick Bright Warns Coronavirus Resurgence Would 'Devastate' U.S.

Dr. Rick Bright , the whistleblower abruptly fired after pushing back against the Trump administration , described an urgent need to develop a national plan to combat the coronavirus to avoid disastrous overlap with the regular flu season .
Failure to do so will be “ devastating for our health care systems [ and ] for Americans , ” he said in congressional testimony on Thursday .
“ I believe we could have done better , ” Bright told the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health .
“ I believe there were critical steps we did not take in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funding at the outset of a pandemic is something that we ’ ve known about , ” Bright said .
President Donald Trump has faced relentless criticism for his administration ’ s delay in forming a coherent federal response to the crisis that has crippled the economy and killed more than 84,000 Americans so far .
“ We knew going into this pandemic that critical medical equipment would be in short supply .
I began getting alerts from industry colleagues in mid- and late January telling me that , from an outside view @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , telling me that other countries that we relied on to supply many of these masks were blocking exports and stopping transfer of these masks to the United States , ” Bright told the subcommittee .
When he alerted Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar to these alarming shortages , however , Bright said the responses he received ranged from officials claiming they were “ too busy , ” they didn ’ t know who was in charge , or they had a sick child at home and would deal with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never forget the emails I received from Mike Bowen indicating that our mask supply , our N95 respirator supply , was completely decimated , and he said , ‘ We ’ re in deep shit .
The world is .
And we need to act , ’ ” Bright recalled .
Bowen runs Prestige Ameritech , a Texas-based mask manufacturer .
His warning was previously reported by The Washington Post in a story outlining how the federal government turned down his offer to manufacture 1.7 million N95 masks per week back in January @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority , a division of the Department of Health and Human Services charged with developing drugs and vaccines .
It was created in 2006 as part of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act signed into law by President George W. Bush after passing easily in Congress .
Bright was reassigned to the National Institutes of Health .
A federal agency has said it found “ reasonable grounds to believe ” that the Trump White House fired him in retaliation for telling the administration how it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including testing on hydroxychloroquine , an unproven drug touted by Trump .
Several Republican members of the subcommittee argued that some doctors had been using hydroxychloroquine to treat their patients with COVID-19 , which is true .
But Bright is far from the only expert who feels there is too much risk in widely promoting it without having conducted large clinical studies to determine the potential downsides .
Bright said the U.S. lacks a plan to rein in the virus , warning that “ time is running out.
” In his prepared remarks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a supply chain for vital health care equipment needed by hospitals in addition to materials that will be required to mass-produce treatments and vaccines .
Failure to secure and increase supply of N95 masks , swabs and syringes , he said , “ put a lot of lives at risk in our frontline health care workers , ” and the federal government ’ s failure to work together on a plan to deal with the virus certainly “ lengthened our timeline to reopening .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Dr. Rick Bright, the whistleblower abruptly fired after pushing back against the Trump administration, described an urgent need to develop a national plan to combat the coronavirus to avoid disastrous overlap with the regular flu season. Failure to do so will be “devastating for our health care systems [and] for Americans,” he said in congressional testimony on Thursday.
“I believe we could have done better,” Bright told the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health. “I believe there were critical steps we did not take in time.”
Advertisement
“The urgent need for funding at the outset of a pandemic is something that we’ve known about,” Bright said. President Donald Trump has faced relentless criticism for his administration’s delay in forming a coherent federal response to the crisis that has crippled the economy and killed more than 84,000 Americans so far.
“We knew going into this pandemic that critical medical equipment would be in short supply. I began getting alerts from industry colleagues in mid- and late January telling me that, from an outside view, the supply chain was diminishing rapidly, telling me that other countries that we relied on to supply many of these masks were blocking exports and stopping transfer of these masks to the United States,” Bright told the subcommittee.
When he alerted Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar to these alarming shortages, however, Bright said the responses he received ranged from officials claiming they were “too busy,” they didn’t know who was in charge, or they had a sick child at home and would deal with the issue later.
“I’ll never forget the emails I received from Mike Bowen indicating that our mask supply, our N95 respirator supply, was completely decimated, and he said, ‘We’re in deep shit. The world is. And we need to act,’” Bright recalled.
Advertisement
Bowen runs Prestige Ameritech, a Texas-based mask manufacturer. His warning was previously reported by The Washington Post in a story outlining how the federal government turned down his offer to manufacture 1.7 million N95 masks per week back in January.
“I pushed that forward to the highest levels I could in HHS,” Bright said, “and got no response.”
Bright was removed last month as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services charged with developing drugs and vaccines. It was created in 2006 as part of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act signed into law by President George W. Bush after passing easily in Congress.
Bright was reassigned to the National Institutes of Health. A federal agency has said it found “reasonable grounds to believe” that the Trump White House fired him in retaliation for telling the administration how it needed to prepare to combat COVID-19, including testing on hydroxychloroquine, an unproven drug touted by Trump.
Several Republican members of the subcommittee argued that some doctors had been using hydroxychloroquine to treat their patients with COVID-19, which is true. But Bright is far from the only expert who feels there is too much risk in widely promoting it without having conducted large clinical studies to determine the potential downsides.
“I was told that my urgings were causing a commotion,” Bright told the committee, saying that he was then removed from planning meetings.
Advertisement
Bright said the U.S. lacks a plan to rein in the virus, warning that “time is running out.” In his prepared remarks, he stressed the importance of securing a supply chain for vital health care equipment needed by hospitals in addition to materials that will be required to mass-produce treatments and vaccines.
Failure to secure and increase supply of N95 masks, swabs and syringes, he said, “put a lot of lives at risk in our frontline health care workers,” and the federal government’s failure to work together on a plan to deal with the virus certainly “lengthened our timeline to reopening.”
Trump has dismissed Bright as a “disgruntled” employee ― a charge Bright rebuffed.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Wisconsin Judge Equates Stay-At-Home Order To Japanese American Concentration Camps

One of the Wisconsin state Supreme Court justices who blocked an extension of the governor ’ s stay-at-home order on Wednesday falsely compared the COVID-19 safety measure to the U.S. government ’ s incarceration of more than 100,000 Japanese Americans during World War II .
Justice Rebecca Bradley , appointed by former Wisconsin Gov .
Scott Walker ( R ) , cited the widely condemned 1944 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Korematsu v. U.S. , which at the time upheld forcing Japanese Americans into concentration camps and rejected that it was based on racial prejudice .
Bradley suggested the stay-at-home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( D ) was a similar example of government overreach that “ may lead to extraordinary abuses of its citizens.
” “ The point of citing them is not to draw comparisons between the circumstances of people horrifically interned by their government during a war and those of people subjected to isolation orders during a pandemic , ” she wrote .
“ We mention cases like Korematsu in order to test the limits of government authority , to remind the state that urging courts to approve the exercise of extraordinary power during times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of its citizens.
” Unlike COVID-19 restrictions designed to protect public health , the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II was based on racism , xenophobia and false assumptions .
After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941 , Japanese Americans were falsely accused of harboring loyalties for Japan or being spies .
President Franklin D. Roosevelt then ordered the mass removal and detention of more than 100,000 Japanese Americans , often separating families — part of a long , racist history of Asian Americans having their Americanness challenged .
Bradley ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision by the court ’ s Republican-appointed justices to strike down Evers ’ extension of the stay-at-home order , in a legal challenge brought by the state ’ s GOP-majority Legislature .
People hold signs during a protest against the coronavirus shutdown in front of the state Capitol in Madison , Wisconsin , on April 24 .
Public health officials have warned against lifting these restrictions too early , as COVID-19 cases continue to rise in many parts of the country and the virus is far from contained .
But conservative opponents of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led protests against the measures , with some comparing themselves to civil rights activists and claiming their rights have been infringed upon .
Densho , an organization that works to preserve the history of Japanese Americans ’ incarceration during World War II , rejected the false comparisons to those concentration camps in a statement on April 30 : We can ’ t believe this actually needs to be said , but … staying home during a global pandemic is not the same thing as being incarcerated and stripped of basic civil rights .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ camp , and exposing service providers to hazardous working conditions so you can get a haircut is not an inalienable right .
Your sense of entitlement and lack of any lived or historical knowledge of real systemic oppression makes you a whiny , privileged brat who can ’ t distinguish between inconvenience and state violence — not a freedom fighter .
Sit down , stay home , and stop calling yourself a modern day Fred Korematsu or Rosa Parks .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
One of the Wisconsin state Supreme Court justices who blocked an extension of the governor’s stay-at-home order on Wednesday falsely compared the COVID-19 safety measure to the U.S. government’s incarceration of more than 100,000 Japanese Americans during World War II.
Justice Rebecca Bradley, appointed by former Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), cited the widely condemned 1944 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Korematsu v. U.S., which at the time upheld forcing Japanese Americans into concentration camps and rejected that it was based on racial prejudice.
Advertisement
Bradley suggested the stay-at-home order enacted by Gov. Tony Evers (D) was a similar example of government overreach that “may lead to extraordinary abuses of its citizens.”
“The point of citing them is not to draw comparisons between the circumstances of people horrifically interned by their government during a war and those of people subjected to isolation orders during a pandemic,” she wrote. “We mention cases like Korematsu in order to test the limits of government authority, to remind the state that urging courts to approve the exercise of extraordinary power during times of emergency may lead to extraordinary abuses of its citizens.”
Unlike COVID-19 restrictions designed to protect public health, the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II was based on racism, xenophobia and false assumptions. After Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941, Japanese Americans were falsely accused of harboring loyalties for Japan or being spies. President Franklin D. Roosevelt then ordered the mass removal and detention of more than 100,000 Japanese Americans, often separating families — part of a long, racist history of Asian Americans having their Americanness challenged.
Bradley’s concurring opinion was part of a decision by the court’s Republican-appointed justices to strike down Evers’ extension of the stay-at-home order, in a legal challenge brought by the state’s GOP-majority Legislature.
Advertisement
People hold signs during a protest against the coronavirus shutdown in front of the state Capitol in Madison, Wisconsin, on April 24. KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI via Getty Images
Public health officials have warned against lifting these restrictions too early, as COVID-19 cases continue to rise in many parts of the country and the virus is far from contained. But conservative opponents of the stay-at-home orders in multiple states have led protests against the measures, with some comparing themselves to civil rights activists and claiming their rights have been infringed upon.
Densho, an organization that works to preserve the history of Japanese Americans’ incarceration during World War II, rejected the false comparisons to those concentration camps in a statement on April 30:
We can’t believe this actually needs to be said, but … staying home during a global pandemic is not the same thing as being incarcerated and stripped of basic civil rights. Your living room is not a concentration camp, and exposing service providers to hazardous working conditions so you can get a haircut is not an inalienable right. Your sense of entitlement and lack of any lived or historical knowledge of real systemic oppression makes you a whiny, privileged brat who can’t distinguish between inconvenience and state violence — not a freedom fighter. Sit down, stay home, and stop calling yourself a modern day Fred Korematsu or Rosa Parks.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Time Torches Donald Trump's Coronavirus Blunders With Cutting New Cover

President Donald Trump is the screaming cover star of Time ’ s new issue that explores his mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic and his push to reopen the economy against the advice of public health experts .
Artist Edel Rodriguez depicted the president as yelling ― with a Stars and Stripes mask on his face , but not over his mouth ― to illustrate the cover for the magazine ’ s May 25 edition .
“ There ’ s a right way to reopen America .
This isn ’ t it , ” reads the headline : Time ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sensible Ways to Reopen a Country .
Then There ’ s America ’ s Approach ” ― breaks down the Trump government ’ s fumbled response to the public health crisis .
It also explains how the U.S. “ risks making matters worse ” as dozens of states prepare to ease lockdown restrictions aimed at slowing the spread of the contagion .
More than 85,000 people in the U.S. have now died from the virus .
Time last month dedicated an entire issue to the “ heroes on the front lines ” of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grocery store employees and more key workers were featured on a selection of front pages : Rodriguez ’ s illustrations have turned Trump into a peach , a wrecking ball and a melting man for previous Time covers : Here 's a first look at this week 's @ TIME cover -- soon you 'll see it everywhere -- the cover is by @ EdelStudio pic.twitter.com/Czwn9e9zRN — Brian Stelter ( @ brianstelter ) March 14 , 2019

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump is the screaming cover star of Time’s new issue that explores his mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic and his push to reopen the economy against the advice of public health experts.
Artist Edel Rodriguez depicted the president as yelling ― with a Stars and Stripes mask on his face, but not over his mouth ― to illustrate the cover for the magazine’s May 25 edition.
Advertisement
“There’s a right way to reopen America. This isn’t it,” reads the headline:
TIME's new cover: There are sensible ways to reopen a country. Then there's America's approach https://t.co/Il7plhj6Bx pic.twitter.com/BzQPR4zpN3 — TIME (@TIME) May 14, 2020
Time’s cover story ― titled “There Are Sensible Ways to Reopen a Country. Then There’s America’s Approach” ― breaks down the Trump government’s fumbled response to the public health crisis.
It also explains how the U.S. “risks making matters worse” as dozens of states prepare to ease lockdown restrictions aimed at slowing the spread of the contagion.
More than 85,000 people in the U.S. have now died from the virus.
Time last month dedicated an entire issue to the “heroes on the front lines” of the pandemic. Nurses, doctors, grocery store employees and more key workers were featured on a selection of front pages:
Advertisement
TIME’s new issue: Meet the heroes of the front lines https://t.co/hEu48cMdIK pic.twitter.com/1goLm6mJmb — TIME (@TIME) April 9, 2020
Rodriguez’s illustrations have turned Trump into a peach, a wrecking ball and a melting man for previous Time covers:
Here's a first look at this week's @TIME cover -- soon you'll see it everywhere -- the cover is by @EdelStudio pic.twitter.com/Czwn9e9zRN — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) March 14, 2019
Edel Rodriguez


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Richard Burr Steps Down As Intelligence Chair Amid Stock Trading Probe

Republican Sen. Richard Burr is stepping down as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee after the FBI launched an investigation into a series of stock trades he made earlier this year as the coronavirus pandemic began to spread in the U.S. “ Senator Burr contacted me this morning to inform me of his decision to step aside as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee during the pendency of the investigation , ” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement to reporters on Thursday .
“ We agreed that this decision would be in the best interests of the committee.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ North Carolina , is under investigation for selling stocks after attending a briefing on the potential impact of the coronavirus pandemic .
On Wednesday night , FBI investigators reportedly seized Burr ’ s cellphone in connection with the probe , after agents served a search warrant at the senator ’ s home in the Washington , D.C. , area and he turned over the device .
In March , ProPublica reported that Burr dumped between $ 628,000 and $ 1.72 million ’ s worth of holdings on Feb. 13 , shortly after Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the coronavirus .
At the time , Burr had been assuring the public that the government was prepared to respond to the threat .
Since then , the pandemic has infected more than 1.3 million people in the country and prompted a severe economic crisis .
Sen. Jim Risch is next in line to be chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee .
The Idaho Republican , however , already chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and is expected to remain at that post .
The opportunity to lead congressional oversight over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fall on Sen. Marco Rubio ( R-Fla. ) .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Republican Sen. Richard Burr is stepping down as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee after the FBI launched an investigation into a series of stock trades he made earlier this year as the coronavirus pandemic began to spread in the U.S.
“Senator Burr contacted me this morning to inform me of his decision to step aside as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee during the pendency of the investigation,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement to reporters on Thursday. “We agreed that this decision would be in the best interests of the committee.”
Advertisement
Burr, the senior senator from North Carolina, is under investigation for selling stocks after attending a briefing on the potential impact of the coronavirus pandemic. On Wednesday night, FBI investigators reportedly seized Burr’s cellphone in connection with the probe, after agents served a search warrant at the senator’s home in the Washington, D.C., area and he turned over the device.
In March, ProPublica reported that Burr dumped between $628,000 and $1.72 million’s worth of holdings on Feb. 13, shortly after Congress began receiving intelligence briefings about the threat of the coronavirus. At the time, Burr had been assuring the public that the government was prepared to respond to the threat. Since then, the pandemic has infected more than 1.3 million people in the country and prompted a severe economic crisis.
Sen. Jim Risch is next in line to be chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The Idaho Republican, however, already chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and is expected to remain at that post. The opportunity to lead congressional oversight over the nation’s intelligence community would then fall on Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.).
Igor Bobic contributed reporting.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Republicans Say Congress Has Given Out Enough Coronavirus Relief For Now

The U.S. keeps shedding jobs by the millions , a deepening economic calamity that has the Federal Reserve pleading with Congress to keep its foot on the gas in providing Americans additional fiscal relief amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic .
“ I don ’ t think we have yet felt the urgency of acting immediately .
That time could develop , but I don ’ t think it has yet , ” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) said earlier this week , urging lawmakers to instead consider the trillions that Congress has already appropriated to emergency coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we may need additional money to address this crisis , ” added Sen. John Thune ( R-S.D . )
on Wednesday .
“ But it ’ s important to remember that every dollar of what we ’ ve appropriated for coronavirus is borrowed money.
” Since returning to Washington two weeks ago , the Republican-controlled Senate has done no legislating directly related to the coronavirus pandemic .
It has held several hearings on testing and reopening the economy , as well as one for an inspector general nominee in charge of oversight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 2 trillion stimulus package Congress passed in March .
Other than coalescing around a yet-to-be-unveiled proposal to shield corporations and health care providers from lawsuits , Senate Republicans and the Trump administration appear satisfied with a wait-and-see approach on further spending , even as jobless claims hit 36 million and deaths from the virus crossed the 86,000 mark this week .
While speaking with HuffPost , Sen. Joe Manchin ( D-W.Va. ) addressed the majority leader : “ We ’ ve already hit the pause , Mitch .
You want to hit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pause has already been hit .
Next thing you hit stop , I guess .
We ’ ve still got people hurting.
” Their case was echoed on Wednesday by Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell , who was picked for the job by President Donald Trump .
Appearing on a livestream sponsored by the Peterson Institute for International Economics , Powell urged Congress to continue providing stimulus , warning that failing to do so would only prolong the nation ’ s economic recovery in the future .
“ Additional fiscal support could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helps avoid long-term economic damage and leaves us with a stronger recovery , ” Powell said .
“ This tradeoff is one for our elected representatives , who wield powers of taxation and spending.
” But conservative senators anxious about the added levels of debt were unswayed by calls for more federal spending , including to finance another round of economic relief payments from the federal government .
Congress provided most Americans with stimulus checks of up to $ 1,200 , with an additional $ 500 per child , but many Democratic lawmakers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans .
The bill unveiled by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) includes a second wave of $ 1,200 payments with more inclusive eligibility requirements .
“ I would be glad to do that if we weren ’ t stacking on this deficit on the $ 25 trillion existing deficit .
...
There is not an unlimited borrowing in the world , ” Sen. James Lankford ( R-Okla. ) said when asked about Powell ’ s comments .
Josh Hawley ( R-Mo . )
, a freshman senator who has been floated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , proposed a radical program along with Cory Gardner ( R-Colo. ) that would subsidize business ’ payrolls during the crisis .
The plan calls for the federal government to reimburse 80 % of wages up to $ 50,000 to keep workers on payroll through the year ― with more provided to employers who rehire workers who have been laid off .
Sen. Mitt Romney ( R-Utah ) also introduced a plan to provide front-line workers with hazard pay during the pandemic , the only GOP lawmaker to endorse such a proposal .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ now face a greater risk of contracting the coronavirus , like people in the health care or food processing industries .
But Hawley and Romney remain outliers within the broader Senate GOP conference .
Republican leaders are continuing to push for added employer liability protections and don ’ t expect actual negotiating with House Democrats to take place for at least several more weeks .
Trump , meanwhile , seems more focused on former President Barack Obama and his vice president Joe Biden , the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee .
On Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Committee to call Obama to testify regarding something he ’ s referred to as “ OBAMAGATE .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The U.S. keeps shedding jobs by the millions, a deepening economic calamity that has the Federal Reserve pleading with Congress to keep its foot on the gas in providing Americans additional fiscal relief amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
But to many Republicans, the daunting situation calls for introspection and not further legislative action on major programs to help people struggling to make ends meet.
Advertisement
“I don’t think we have yet felt the urgency of acting immediately. That time could develop, but I don’t think it has yet,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said earlier this week, urging lawmakers to instead consider the trillions that Congress has already appropriated to emergency coronavirus relief programs.
“Nobody is questioning that we may need additional money to address this crisis,” added Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) on Wednesday. “But it’s important to remember that every dollar of what we’ve appropriated for coronavirus is borrowed money.”
Since returning to Washington two weeks ago, the Republican-controlled Senate has done no legislating directly related to the coronavirus pandemic. It has held several hearings on testing and reopening the economy, as well as one for an inspector general nominee in charge of oversight of major relief programs, including the $2 trillion stimulus package Congress passed in March.
Other than coalescing around a yet-to-be-unveiled proposal to shield corporations and health care providers from lawsuits, Senate Republicans and the Trump administration appear satisfied with a wait-and-see approach on further spending, even as jobless claims hit 36 million and deaths from the virus crossed the 86,000 mark this week.
Advertisement
The slowdown has left Democrats, who introduced another massive $3 trillion emergency relief measure in the House, screaming for more federal action.
“Just how long will it take, how much economic hardship will suffice, before Senate Republicans feel the urgency to act?” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) asked in a floor speech Thursday.
While speaking with HuffPost, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) addressed the majority leader: “We’ve already hit the pause, Mitch. You want to hit the stop or the pause? The pause has already been hit. Next thing you hit stop, I guess. We’ve still got people hurting.”
Their case was echoed on Wednesday by Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell, who was picked for the job by President Donald Trump. Appearing on a livestream sponsored by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Powell urged Congress to continue providing stimulus, warning that failing to do so would only prolong the nation’s economic recovery in the future.
“Additional fiscal support could be costly, but worth it if it helps avoid long-term economic damage and leaves us with a stronger recovery,” Powell said. “This tradeoff is one for our elected representatives, who wield powers of taxation and spending.”
Advertisement
But conservative senators anxious about the added levels of debt were unswayed by calls for more federal spending, including to finance another round of economic relief payments from the federal government. Congress provided most Americans with stimulus checks of up to $1,200, with an additional $500 per child, but many Democratic lawmakers are pushing for more direct aid to Americans. The bill unveiled by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) includes a second wave of $1,200 payments with more inclusive eligibility requirements.
“I would be glad to do that if we weren’t stacking on this deficit on the $25 trillion existing deficit. ... There is not an unlimited borrowing in the world,” Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said when asked about Powell’s comments.
Not every Republican believes the Senate should be hitting the brakes on more government spending to address the coronavirus pandemic, however.
Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a freshman senator who has been floated as a potential presidential candidate in 2024, proposed a radical program along with Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) that would subsidize business’ payrolls during the crisis. The plan calls for the federal government to reimburse 80% of wages up to $50,000 to keep workers on payroll through the year ― with more provided to employers who rehire workers who have been laid off.
The idea is modeled after countries like Germany and Denmark. Senate Democrats introduced a similar measure this month, though the legislation authored by House Democrats did not include direct government payroll support.
Advertisement
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) also introduced a plan to provide front-line workers with hazard pay during the pandemic, the only GOP lawmaker to endorse such a proposal. The initiative would compensate essential workers who now face a greater risk of contracting the coronavirus, like people in the health care or food processing industries.
But Hawley and Romney remain outliers within the broader Senate GOP conference. Republican leaders are continuing to push for added employer liability protections and don’t expect actual negotiating with House Democrats to take place for at least several more weeks.
Trump, meanwhile, seems more focused on former President Barack Obama and his vice president Joe Biden, the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee. On Thursday, the president urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to call Obama to testify regarding something he’s referred to as “OBAMAGATE.”
Asked Thursday about the 20% unemployment rate and the tens of millions of Americans out of work, Trump quickly interjected, seeking to absolve himself of responsibility.
“Nobody blames me for that,” the president said in interview with Fox News.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--The Coronavirus Economy Is Coming For Your Family Doctor

Jennifer Bacani McKenney runs a small practice in Fredonia , Kansas , about 90 miles east of Wichita , and she has had to scramble to keep her office open .
She took over running the practice from her father , Oswaldo Bacani , 11 years ago , and today the daughter-father pair are two of just five medical doctors in Fredonia and nine in all of Wilson County , she said .
McKenney also works in the local hospital ’ s emergency department and serves as a county health official .
The effect of the pandemic on her own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers went down pretty quick , ” McKenney said .
When the cash crunch hit in early March after the first COVID-19 case in Kansas , McKenney didn ’ t pay herself for a month and spent many hours trying to navigate the systems that dispense federal relief funding to small businesses and health care entities .
The two medical doctors , one osteopathic doctor and one nurse practitioner in McKenney ’ s practice would each typically treat 20 or so patients a day , she said .
In March , that dropped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day among all four of them , she said .
Like many doctors , McKenney quickly set up telemedicine services , both by phone and video chat .
But health insurance companies usually pay less for those sessions than for in-person visits , although Medicare has temporarily increased its telemedicine fees .
Plus , telehealth has its clinical limitations ; much medical care must be done in person .
McKenney is grateful for the relief funds she ’ s received from the Department of Health and Human Services , and her office has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paycheck Protection Program .
But even that will only keep her practice going for a few months , she said .
“ A lot of things that we have right now are really great Band-Aids for being able to continue on for the next few months , ” McKenney said .
“ We are going to be dealing with this for quite a while.
” “ The people that are doing the nuts-and-bolts , mom-and-pop type of practices out there , they ’ re the ones that are screaming loudest that they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ survive , ” LeRoy said .
“ What are we going to do next week ?
Are we going to make payroll ?
Are we going to have to close our practice and go work for somebody else ?
” Many doctors are worried that the health of their patients , especially those who have chronic conditions like diabetes that need monitoring , will worsen because of delayed care .
A Primary Care Collaborative survey this month found that 60 % of primary care doctors are concerned their patients will suffer an avoidable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t see their family doctors .
Federal relief money and revenue from telemedicine have already enabled Ladd to begin rehiring workers she laid off .
But she said , “ I never thought in a million years that I would have to be dealing with some of the things that we have had to deal with.
” In addition to managing the crisis in real time , Christi Siedlecki is worried about what lies ahead for the Grants Pass Clinic in Grants Pass , Oregon , a small town about 50 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The risk is the owners not earning enough money to stay , if they can go somewhere else where they can earn more money , ” said Siedlecki , a nurse by training who is CEO of the clinic .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The economic devastation the coronavirus pandemic has wrought on workers of all types is causing serious damage to the very professionals needed to protect Americans’ health: primary care physicians.
It might seem counterintuitive that physicians would suffer financially during a health care crisis, but the COVID-19 downturn is affecting doctors’ offices much like other small and midsize businesses.
Advertisement
Doctors postponing elective care and patients canceling visits out of fear or because of lockdown orders has had an immediate impact. In the for-profit, fee-for-service U.S. health care system, fewer patients really means fewer customers and less money coming in.
An April survey of physician practices found that 97% reported a negative financial impact from the coronavirus outbreak, according to the Medical Group Management Association, an Englewood, Colorado-based trade group. The same survey revealed that, on average, doctors’ offices have experienced a 60% decline in the volume of patients they treat and a 55% decline in revenue.
The Medical Group Management Association estimates that 60% of physicians’ offices had furloughed staff and 36% had laid off workers as of early May. Last week, the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that 1.4 million health care jobs disappeared in April, including 243,000 employees at doctors’ offices.
Jennifer Bacani McKenney runs a small practice in Fredonia, Kansas, about 90 miles east of Wichita, and she has had to scramble to keep her office open. She took over running the practice from her father, Oswaldo Bacani, 11 years ago, and today the daughter-father pair are two of just five medical doctors in Fredonia and nine in all of Wilson County, she said. McKenney also works in the local hospital’s emergency department and serves as a county health official.
Advertisement
The effect of the pandemic on her own practice was almost immediate. “Our numbers went down pretty quick,” McKenney said. When the cash crunch hit in early March after the first COVID-19 case in Kansas, McKenney didn’t pay herself for a month and spent many hours trying to navigate the systems that dispense federal relief funding to small businesses and health care entities.
The two medical doctors, one osteopathic doctor and one nurse practitioner in McKenney’s practice would each typically treat 20 or so patients a day, she said. In March, that dropped down to a dozen or fewer a day among all four of them, she said.
Like many doctors, McKenney quickly set up telemedicine services, both by phone and video chat. But health insurance companies usually pay less for those sessions than for in-person visits, although Medicare has temporarily increased its telemedicine fees. Plus, telehealth has its clinical limitations; much medical care must be done in person.
McKenney is grateful for the relief funds she’s received from the Department of Health and Human Services, and her office has been approved for a loan under the Paycheck Protection Program. But even that will only keep her practice going for a few months, she said.
“A lot of things that we have right now are really great Band-Aids for being able to continue on for the next few months,” McKenney said. “We are going to be dealing with this for quite a while.”
Advertisement
Doctors Plead For Help
Around the country, physicians’ offices are facing major declines in revenue, leading to layoffs and other cutbacks. Like hospitals, they’re losing money as many elective procedures have been postponed.
“It’s like anything else ― a business, like a restaurant or a hotel or whatever. We’re all suffering from a fiscal standpoint,” said Gary LeRoy, a physician who practices at the East Dayton Health Center in Dayton, Ohio, and the president of the Leawood, Kansas-based American Academy of Family Physicians.
Unlike restaurants, however, people can’t safely just stop seeing doctors, he said. “We’re not making hot dogs and hamburgers here, OK? This is medicine. This is life and death.”
The American Academy of Family Physicians and a slew of other health care industry groups are lobbying Congress and health insurance companies for additional relief. Like many other small and medium-sized businesses have discovered, the bulk of the federal relief money is going to larger companies, LeRoy said.
“The people that are doing the nuts-and-bolts, mom-and-pop type of practices out there, they’re the ones that are screaming loudest that they can’t survive and they may not survive,” LeRoy said. “What are we going to do next week? Are we going to make payroll? Are we going to have to close our practice and go work for somebody else?”
Advertisement
An economic downturn hits doctors’ offices “in a way that most people wouldn’t understand or expect” because of the industry’s financial practices, said Halee Fischer-Wright, a medical doctor who is the CEO of the Medical Group Management Association.
Their billing cycle is typically weeks behind, so lost revenue from the drop in patient volume hasn’t fully caught up with physicians yet ― but it will. Doctors in private practice also tend to avoid keeping large cash reserves to protect themselves against malpractice claims, leaving them little fiscal wiggle room.
“This acute, unexpected drop in volume that translates within 30 days to no revenue is adversely impacting medical practices at a time of national health crisis,” Fischer-Wright said.
Telemedicine visits are replacing a large share of in-person doctor's appointments, but they don't generate as much revenue. Andrey Popov/Getty Images
Patients Are Fearful
Physicians are also coping with a reality in which patients are either unable or unwilling to leave their homes and visit offices where other sick people will be.
Advertisement
Many doctors are worried that the health of their patients, especially those who have chronic conditions like diabetes that need monitoring, will worsen because of delayed care. A Primary Care Collaborative survey this month found that 60% of primary care doctors are concerned their patients will suffer an avoidable illness because they can’t or won’t see their family doctors.
Beyond the limitations created by state-ordered lockdowns and social distancing guidelines, the plummeting volume of visits is a demand-side problem. Just 39% of respondents reported they would feel comfortable visiting a primary care doctor for medical treatment not related to COVID-19, a Morning Consult poll last month found.
“People were afraid to come in,” said Kelly Ladd, CEO of Piedmont Internal Medicine in Atlanta. Ladd estimates that 75% of her practice’s patients who had appointments in April said they were fearful about coming to the office, although volume has increased this month.
Still, the loss of routine business like physicals and checkups has led to a more than 40% drop in patient visits, she said. And about 60% of visits are now telemedicine. “It’s been a huge, huge shift,” Ladd said.
Federal relief money and revenue from telemedicine have already enabled Ladd to begin rehiring workers she laid off. But she said, “I never thought in a million years that I would have to be dealing with some of the things that we have had to deal with.”
Advertisement
Looking At A Slow Recovery
Even when the present emergency subsides, doctors and medical practice administrators predict lasting damage and permanent change to how family physicians’ offices operate. In the shorter term, the massive rise in joblessness translates into an estimated 27 million people losing their employer-based health benefits, meaning those people are more likely to skip needed medical care because of cost.
Medical professionals don’t see their businesses ever returning to pre-COVID-19 levels and envision a future with fewer family doctors in private practice and a greater reliance on telemedicine services in lieu of in-person visits. “They won’t hit peak volume again,” said Fischer-Wright, who predicted physicians’ offices eventually will get back to about 70% to 80% of their pre-coronavirus business.
Doctors and administrators also foresee more doctors abandoning private practice, accelerating an ongoing trend. As of 2018, more physicians worked as employees for hospitals, investor-owned practices or other larger companies than owned or co-owned their own practices, according to the Chicago-based American Medical Association.
In addition to managing the crisis in real time, Christi Siedlecki is worried about what lies ahead for the Grants Pass Clinic in Grants Pass, Oregon, a small town about 50 miles north of the California border. “The risk is the owners not earning enough money to stay, if they can go somewhere else where they can earn more money,” said Siedlecki, a nurse by training who is CEO of the clinic.
In the meantime, her practice, like the others, will try to hang on.
“I can pay the bills and I can pay the staff who are here,” Siedlecki said. “One of the things that I’m worrying about is how long this will go on.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--State Governments Are Not Doing Nearly Enough To Help Renters During The Coronavirus Pandemic

Times have not been good for American renters for a while , but they have never been this bad .
In April , a quarter of tenants couldn ’ t pay their full rent ; in May , the proportion has risen to nearly a third .
Government officials at every level have attempted to address the coronavirus-related housing crisis , but so far their efforts offer only partial relief .
A temporary pause on evictions has protected millions of renters , but landlords have begun to find loopholes .
And rental assistance policies that seemed generous in late March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the most controversial provisions in the coronavirus stimulus package , the CARES Act , was a ban on all foreclosures and evictions in federally managed properties and housing financed with federally backed loans .
Under the moratorium , homeowners can request a six-month forbearance for their home loans and landlords are prohibited from evicting tenants until July 25 .
While the law ’ s housing provisions sound simple , they contain important complexities .
Only around one-quarter of properties in the United States are financed by the federal government .
And even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ban covers , many have had no way of knowing for sure that they qualify .
Luckily , most states have taken at least some action to enact coronavirus-related tenant protections .
The best performer ( according to the Princeton Eviction Lab ’ s Housing Policy Scorecard , anyway ) is Massachusetts , which has suspended eviction hearings , halted removals and prevented utility companies from shutting off renters ’ water , gas or electricity .
At the other end of the spectrum are six states ― Arkansa , Idaho , Missouri , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ― that have passed no tenant protections whatsoever .
While some cities within those states have attempted to close the gap themselves , many of America ’ s renters lack clear information about whether they ’ re at risk of eviction .
While Arizona Gov .
Doug Ducey issued an order in March halting all lockouts for tenants who provide notice of COVID-19-related hardship , “ the order wasn ’ t really a moratorium on evictions , ” Bridge said .
“ Tenants are still receiving eviction judgments for nonpayment of rent and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be locked out of their homes — it will just be after July 22 , the day the governor ’ s order ends.
” Arizona ’ s eviction ban has other shortcomings , as do the bans in many other states .
Tenants are still obligated to pay their landlords and are still receiving judgments for missing rent ― they just can ’ t get kicked out for the time being .
Plus , having an eviction on their record will make it almost impossible to find another apartment .
Residents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vouchers will likely lose their access to federal housing benefits .
Rental Assistance : Too Little , Too Late Since the passage of the CARES Act , the federal government has proposed various efforts to help renters cover their back rent before the topic of an eviction even arises .
The new COVID-19 stimulus proposal , the HEROES Act , would provide $ 175 billion in housing relief , including $ 100 billion in rental assistance .
Edmund Witter , a senior managing attorney for Seattle legal aid service The Housing Justice Project @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unlikely that throwing more money at the problem will be enough .
Last month , King County ― where Seattle is located ― announced an extra $ 5 million in rental assistance to keep low-income tenants in their homes during the coronavirus pandemic .
The program ran out of money in less than 48 hours .
“ We need to figure out a bigger solution or else we ’ re going to see a lot of people hitting the streets , ” Witter said .
He pointed to figures showing that even in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are showing delinquency rates as high as 10 % .
Some cities are releasing form letters for tenants to tell landlords that they can ’ t pay the rent in full .
No matter what happens at the federal level , organized tenant actions will be local .
And city leaders don ’ t have time to get ready .
“ I ’ ve organized rent strikes before , and they tend to work when you have a whole building saying , ‘ We know what we want , we have a concrete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s addressed , ’ ” he said .
“ It gets harder in a situation like this , where people have different ideas of what their demands are and what the stopping point will be .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Times have not been good for American renters for a while, but they have never been this bad. In April, a quarter of tenants couldn’t pay their full rent; in May, the proportion has risen to nearly a third.
With the economy still frozen and roughly 36 million newly unemployed workers in the last two months, June will likely see that percentage rise even higher.
Advertisement
Government officials at every level have attempted to address the coronavirus-related housing crisis, but so far their efforts offer only partial relief. A temporary pause on evictions has protected millions of renters, but landlords have begun to find loopholes. And rental assistance policies that seemed generous in late March seem meager in early May.
Across the country, tenants are pressuring city politicians to freeze or cancel rent — and threatening strikes if they don’t get more relief.
Michele Lapini via Getty Images
Evictions: Paused But Not Forgotten
One of the most controversial provisions in the coronavirus stimulus package, the CARES Act, was a ban on all foreclosures and evictions in federally managed properties and housing financed with federally backed loans. Under the moratorium, homeowners can request a six-month forbearance for their home loans and landlords are prohibited from evicting tenants until July 25.
Advertisement
While the law’s housing provisions sound simple, they contain important complexities. Only around one-quarter of properties in the United States are financed by the federal government. And even for tenants living in a building that ban covers, many have had no way of knowing for sure that they qualify.
“We need to figure out a bigger solution or else we’re going to see a lot of people hitting the streets.” - Edmund Witter, The Housing Justice Project
Luckily, most states have taken at least some action to enact coronavirus-related tenant protections. The best performer (according to the Princeton Eviction Lab’s Housing Policy Scorecard, anyway) is Massachusetts, which has suspended eviction hearings, halted removals and prevented utility companies from shutting off renters’ water, gas or electricity.
At the other end of the spectrum are six states ― Arkansa, Idaho, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming ― that have passed no tenant protections whatsoever. While some cities within those states have attempted to close the gap themselves, many of America’s renters lack clear information about whether they’re at risk of eviction.
Pamela Bridge, the director of litigation and advocacy for Community Legal Services, a Phoenix-based nonprofit law firm that assists tenants, said that despite the unprecedented social and economic circumstances, people are still being removed from their homes.
Advertisement
In Mississippi, lawmakers have passed few protections for tenants. ASSOCIATED PRESS
“Evictions are the one thing that isn’t paused,” she said.
While Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey issued an order in March halting all lockouts for tenants who provide notice of COVID-19-related hardship, “the order wasn’t really a moratorium on evictions,” Bridge said. “Tenants are still receiving eviction judgments for nonpayment of rent and other violations. Those tenants are still going to be locked out of their homes — it will just be after July 22, the day the governor’s order ends.”
Arizona’s eviction ban has other shortcomings, as do the bans in many other states. Tenants are still obligated to pay their landlords and are still receiving judgments for missing rent ― they just can’t get kicked out for the time being. Plus, having an eviction on their record will make it almost impossible to find another apartment. Residents of public housing and recipients of housing vouchers will likely lose their access to federal housing benefits.
“The hearings are by phone now,” Bridge said. “But other than that, it’s business as usual.”
Rental Assistance: Too Little, Too Late
Since the passage of the CARES Act, the federal government has proposed various efforts to help renters cover their back rent before the topic of an eviction even arises. The new COVID-19 stimulus proposal, the HEROES Act, would provide $175 billion in housing relief, including $100 billion in rental assistance.
On Wednesday, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden proposed forgiving all mortgage and rent payments, aligning himself with a Congressional Progressive Caucus proposal. “Forgiveness,” he said, “Not paid later.” While the passage of these bills remains unlikely, renters and low-income homeowners need more relief, and soon.
Advertisement
Edmund Witter, a senior managing attorney for Seattle legal aid service The Housing Justice Project, said it’s looking increasingly unlikely that throwing more money at the problem will be enough. Last month, King County ― where Seattle is located ― announced an extra $5 million in rental assistance to keep low-income tenants in their homes during the coronavirus pandemic. The program ran out of money in less than 48 hours.
“We need to figure out a bigger solution or else we’re going to see a lot of people hitting the streets,” Witter said. He pointed to figures showing that even in the most expensive rentals, some cities are showing delinquency rates as high as 10%.
“It’s spreading to everyone, at every income,” he said.
Luis Sinco via Getty Images
Rent Strikes: Uncharted Territory
Without meaningful relief for renters and low-income homeowners, tensions over housing payments will only get worse. The Anti-Eviction Mapping Project is keeping a running tally of organized rent strikes.
Some cities are releasing form letters for tenants to tell landlords that they can’t pay the rent in full. No matter what happens at the federal level, organized tenant actions will be local. And city leaders don’t have time to get ready.
Advertisement
But still, rent strikes are just one response that could come out of the coronavirus-driven housing crisis. Witter pointed out that rent strikes have never been applied to the scale of a global pandemic.
“I’ve organized rent strikes before, and they tend to work when you have a whole building saying, ‘We know what we want, we have a concrete grievance and we’ll pay when it’s addressed,’” he said. “It gets harder in a situation like this, where people have different ideas of what their demands are and what the stopping point will be.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Looks Like 2 Government Agencies Cite Mount St. Helens Eruption To Warn Against Reopening

It sure looks like two government agencies just used the upcoming 40th anniversary of the eruption of the Mount St. Helens volcano in Washington state to warn against a hasty reopening of the economy during the coronavirus pandemic .
The U.S. Geological Survey ’ s Volcano Hazards Program and the Washington Military Department on Wednesday pointed out on Twitter that days before the 1980 eruption , people pushed to reopen areas around the active volcano to boost tourism and the local economy , against the advice of scientists .
The volcano erupted five days later , killing 57 people and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ damage .
40 years ago today , people pushed the state to reopen areas around Mt .
St. Helens citing tourism & the economy against advice of scientists .
Five days later , the volcano erupted .
# msh40 https : //t.co/ok5Vmjwug8 — WA Emergency Management ( @ waEMD ) May 14 , 2020 The agencies ’ posts did not specifically mention the coronavirus pandemic that has now killed more than 85,000 people in the U.S. People on Twitter , however , suggested they were subtweeting public figures ― such as President Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Fox News ― who are pushing for the resumption of business against the advice of public health experts .
There are a remarkable number of parallels one can draw between 40 years ago on the slopes of a very dangerous volcano & today in the face of a very dangerous virus .
Listen to scientists .
https : //t.co/W7aVTIfbKt — Jess Phoenix 🌋 ( @ jessphoenix2018 ) May 13 , 2020 Ah leesons from the past that are useful again today .
— Loretta Duke ( @ lduke01 ) May 14 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ documentary on the eruption here :

LOADING ERROR LOADING
It sure looks like two government agencies just used the upcoming 40th anniversary of the eruption of the Mount St. Helens volcano in Washington state to warn against a hasty reopening of the economy during the coronavirus pandemic.
The U.S. Geological Survey’s Volcano Hazards Program and the Washington Military Department on Wednesday pointed out on Twitter that days before the 1980 eruption, people pushed to reopen areas around the active volcano to boost tourism and the local economy, against the advice of scientists.
Advertisement
The volcano erupted five days later, killing 57 people and causing more than $1 billion in damage.
40 years ago today, people pushed the state to reopen areas around Mt. St. Helens citing tourism & the economy against advice of scientists. Five days later, the volcano erupted. #msh40 https://t.co/ok5Vmjwug8 — WA Emergency Management (@waEMD) May 14, 2020
The agencies’ posts did not specifically mention the coronavirus pandemic that has now killed more than 85,000 people in the U.S.
People on Twitter, however, suggested they were subtweeting public figures ― such as President Donald Trump, his Republican allies and personalities on Fox News ― who are pushing for the resumption of business against the advice of public health experts.
“Listen to scientists,” several tweeters responded.
There are a remarkable number of parallels one can draw between 40 years ago on the slopes of a very dangerous volcano & today in the face of a very dangerous virus.
Listen to scientists. https://t.co/W7aVTIfbKt — Jess Phoenix 🌋 (@jessphoenix2018) May 13, 2020
Advertisement
Please listen to scientists. https://t.co/Cj47zbk8Fi — Matt Serwe KETV (@MattSerweKETV) May 14, 2020
Seems there’s a lesson in there somewhere 🧐 — wendean in quarantine (@phishcaspian) May 14, 2020
What a reminder from the near past. https://t.co/q252R2GX6U — Duncan Davidson (@duncan) May 14, 2020
I'll just leave this totally not-relevant lil' piece of history right here... https://t.co/ysnUc4oabd — J. Paul Hindsight Bias is 2020 (@jpaulreed) May 14, 2020
Opening access despite scientists' warnings, you say? https://t.co/a26Fcs2796 — Angela Colter (@angelacolter) May 14, 2020
Advertisement
I think this wins the 2020 International Subtweeting Prize™ — Adrian ''Moonface'' Wapcaplet (@AdrianWapcapIet) May 14, 2020
Love the subtext here. https://t.co/kMhtBCxJlP — eNuminous & Archimedes (@enuminous) May 14, 2020
Ah leesons from the past that are useful again today. — Loretta Duke (@lduke01) May 14, 2020
Check out The Smithsonian’s documentary on the eruption here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Domestic Violence Programs Can't Get Funds Quickly During COVID-19. This Bill Can Fix That.

A bipartisan group of senators is pushing to provide more funding to domestic violence shelters , which are facing financial struggles , even though they are needed more than ever as millions are confined to their homes during the coronavirus pandemic .
The new bill , shared with HuffPost before its release , will be introduced on Thursday .
It is spearheaded by Sens .
Bob Casey ( D-Pa. ) and Lisa Murkowski ( R-Alaska ) and , through a temporary technical change , would allow domestic violence-related organizations to use federal funding they would otherwise be unable to access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundraising .
Typically , organizations are required by the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act to match a percentage of the funds they receive from the federal government .
But many organizations are not able to meet the matching requirement these days because they ’ ve had to cancel fundraising campaigns and events due to the coronavirus pandemic .
The new bill , called the POWER Act — an acronym for Protect Our Women and Waive Emergency Requirements Act — would waive this requirement .
That would allow organizations to focus solely on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the coronavirus pandemic , which has led to a domestic violence crisis .
Since stay-at-home orders were implemented over the last two months , experts have seen an uptick in child sexual abuse and domestic violence reports .
And while some lawmakers have already backed measures in response , they believe far more needs to be done to keep vital organizations going .
“ Staying home may be a safe place for many during the COVID-19 pandemic .
However , for those experiencing domestic violence , spending more time at home during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and wellbeing , ” Casey told HuffPost .
“ As domestic violence incidents increase due to the financial and emotional stress of the pandemic , we must ensure these vital organizations are able to leverage federal funding to help them provide prevention , resources and support to those who are in crisis , ” Casey added .
Incidences of violence often increase during emergency situations like the one the world is currently facing , studies show .
Domestic abuse increased in frequency and intensity after crises like 9/11 , Hurricane Sandy and Hurricane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because perpetrators have more contact with their families during these times and , as support systems break down in the wake of emergencies , victims are less likely or less able to seek help .
Many domestic violence shelters were already at mass capacity before the pandemic hit , said Catherine Beane , vice president of public policy and advocacy at YWCA USA , one of the organizations that supported the POWER Act .
Once the coronavirus spread , YWCA USA and other organizations supporting the bill saw an uptick in demand for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social distancing guidelines , domestic violence victims couldn ’ t be sheltered together , and instead needed to be housed in separate hotel rooms .
This led to an immediate increase in expenses and a dire need for more funding .
With many tentpole fundraising events canceled and more people pocketing their monthly donations because financial priorities have shifted amid rampant unemployment , many organizations offering domestic violence services are struggling desperately .
“ This bill is so critical right now because the individuals who are experiencing domestic and sexual violence and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have time to wait for a better time financially for YWCA or any other organization to have room in their shelter , ” Beane told HuffPost .
“ They need shelter now ― not a month from now or a year from now when there ’ s recovery.
” “ Waiving the match requirement will enable YWCA as well as other non-profits to actually provide the services that are needed when and where they ’ re needed , and keep families safe , ” she added .
Casey and Murkowski , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have previously called on the Trump administration to ensure that intimate partner violence and sexual assault survivors are not forgotten during the pandemic .
Two dozen senators wrote a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services in March , requesting more funding and resources for “ critical services ” for domestic violence shelters .
Last month , a bipartisan group of senators wrote two letters urging leadership to include more funding relief in the next COVID-19 bailout bill and asked for more resources specifically for native and indigenous survivors of domestic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the middle of a pandemic , [ victims of domestic violence ] are not going to be forgotten , ” Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-Minn. ) , who co-wrote the letters to Senate leadership in April , told HuffPost last month .
“ We have to stand by their side , even when we can ’ t see them .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A bipartisan group of senators is pushing to provide more funding to domestic violence shelters, which are facing financial struggles, even though they are needed more than ever as millions are confined to their homes during the coronavirus pandemic.
The new bill, shared with HuffPost before its release, will be introduced on Thursday. It is spearheaded by Sens. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and, through a temporary technical change, would allow domestic violence-related organizations to use federal funding they would otherwise be unable to access unless they matched it with their own fundraising.
Advertisement
Typically, organizations are required by the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act to match a percentage of the funds they receive from the federal government. But many organizations are not able to meet the matching requirement these days because they’ve had to cancel fundraising campaigns and events due to the coronavirus pandemic. The new bill, called the POWER Act — an acronym for Protect Our Women and Waive Emergency Requirements Act — would waive this requirement.
That would allow organizations to focus solely on helping families rather than worrying about funding during the coronavirus pandemic, which has led to a domestic violence crisis. Since stay-at-home orders were implemented over the last two months, experts have seen an uptick in child sexual abuse and domestic violence reports. And while some lawmakers have already backed measures in response, they believe far more needs to be done to keep vital organizations going.
“Staying home may be a safe place for many during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, for those experiencing domestic violence, spending more time at home during the public health crisis threatens their safety and wellbeing,” Casey told HuffPost.
“As domestic violence incidents increase due to the financial and emotional stress of the pandemic, we must ensure these vital organizations are able to leverage federal funding to help them provide prevention, resources and support to those who are in crisis,” Casey added.
Advertisement
Incidences of violence often increase during emergency situations like the one the world is currently facing, studies show. Domestic abuse increased in frequency and intensity after crises like 9/11, Hurricane Sandy and Hurricane Katrina. Experts say this is likely because perpetrators have more contact with their families during these times and, as support systems break down in the wake of emergencies, victims are less likely or less able to seek help.
Many domestic violence shelters were already at mass capacity before the pandemic hit, said Catherine Beane, vice president of public policy and advocacy at YWCA USA, one of the organizations that supported the POWER Act.
“They need shelter now — not a month from now or a year from now when there’s recovery.” - Catherine Beane, YWCA USA
Once the coronavirus spread, YWCA USA and other organizations supporting the bill saw an uptick in demand for space in shelters. Due to COVID-19 social distancing guidelines, domestic violence victims couldn’t be sheltered together, and instead needed to be housed in separate hotel rooms. This led to an immediate increase in expenses and a dire need for more funding. With many tentpole fundraising events canceled and more people pocketing their monthly donations because financial priorities have shifted amid rampant unemployment, many organizations offering domestic violence services are struggling desperately.
“This bill is so critical right now because the individuals who are experiencing domestic and sexual violence and other forms of family violence, they don’t have time to wait for a better time financially for YWCA or any other organization to have room in their shelter,” Beane told HuffPost. “They need shelter now ― not a month from now or a year from now when there’s recovery.”
Advertisement
“Waiving the match requirement will enable YWCA as well as other non-profits to actually provide the services that are needed when and where they’re needed, and keep families safe,” she added.
Casey and Murkowski, along with dozens of other senators, have previously called on the Trump administration to ensure that intimate partner violence and sexual assault survivors are not forgotten during the pandemic. Two dozen senators wrote a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services in March, requesting more funding and resources for “critical services” for domestic violence shelters. Last month, a bipartisan group of senators wrote two letters urging leadership to include more funding relief in the next COVID-19 bailout bill and asked for more resources specifically for native and indigenous survivors of domestic and sexual violence.
“Even during the middle of a pandemic, [victims of domestic violence] are not going to be forgotten,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who co-wrote the letters to Senate leadership in April, told HuffPost last month. “We have to stand by their side, even when we can’t see them.”
Need help? In the U.S., call 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) for the National Domestic Violence Hotline.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--100 Prominent Health Officials Sign Open Letter To Make Masks Mandatory

More than 100 prominent health officials have signed an open letter urging governors to make wearing cloth masks in public mandatory , citing a “ preponderance of evidence ” they greatly reduce the transmissibility of COVID-19 .
The letter was written by Jeremy Howard , a research scientist at the University of San Francisco who , along with a team of other researchers , has studied the efficacy of masks at length .
Howard also wrote an opinion piece in Thursday ’ s USA Today about the letter ’ s recommendation .
Just how effective would mass mask-wearing be ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread of the virus ― but only if at least 80 % , and ideally all people , wear them .
“ The preponderance of evidence , in both laboratory and clinical settings , indicates that mask wearing reduces the transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected droplets , ” the letter notes .
“ The decreased transmissibility could substantially reduce the death toll , other harms to public health , job losses and economic losses .
The cost of such masks is very low by comparison .
“ Modeling suggests that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with other measures , could bring [ down ] the effective reproduction number ... thus halting the growth of the pandemic.
” By now , those “ other measures ” should be familiar to most people : proper hand hygiene , social distancing , testing and contact tracing .
A study published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine found a cloth mask can stop more than 90 % of the droplets that can spread the coronavirus .
But that ’ s only the case when the mask captures droplets at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person who ’ s infected .
Since not all infected people show symptoms , everyone should wear a mask .
The letter ’ s co-signers include a trove of noted academics , researchers and medical professionals , including Nobel Prize winners , medical school professors and editors of prestigious science and medical journals .
“ We ask that government officials require cloth masks to be worn in all public places , such as stores , transportation systems , and public buildings as soon as possible , ” the open letter says .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infectious from unknowingly spreading the disease .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
More than 100 prominent health officials have signed an open letter urging governors to make wearing cloth masks in public mandatory, citing a “preponderance of evidence” they greatly reduce the transmissibility of COVID-19.
The letter was written by Jeremy Howard, a research scientist at the University of San Francisco who, along with a team of other researchers, has studied the efficacy of masks at length. Howard also wrote an opinion piece in Thursday’s USA Today about the letter’s recommendation.
Advertisement
Just how effective would mass mask-wearing be? Research suggests it could effectively halt the spread of the virus ― but only if at least 80%, and ideally all people, wear them.
“The preponderance of evidence, in both laboratory and clinical settings, indicates that mask wearing reduces the transmissibility per contact by reducing transmission of infected droplets,” the letter notes. “The decreased transmissibility could substantially reduce the death toll, other harms to public health, job losses and economic losses. The cost of such masks is very low by comparison.
“Modeling suggests that widespread public mask use, in conjunction with other measures, could bring [down] the effective reproduction number ... thus halting the growth of the pandemic.”
By now, those “other measures” should be familiar to most people: proper hand hygiene, social distancing, testing and contact tracing.
Advertisement
A study published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine found a cloth mask can stop more than 90% of the droplets that can spread the coronavirus. But that’s only the case when the mask captures droplets at the source, when worn by a person who’s infected. Since not all infected people show symptoms, everyone should wear a mask.
The letter’s co-signers include a trove of noted academics, researchers and medical professionals, including Nobel Prize winners, medical school professors and editors of prestigious science and medical journals.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--Evangelical Leaders Seek To Insulate Churches From Some COVID-19 Lawsuits

As some U.S. churches seek to open their doors for in-person services , a group of mostly evangelical Christian religious leaders is urging Congress to grant faith-based organizations legal immunity from coronavirus-related negligence lawsuits .
In a letter submitted to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on Tuesday , nearly 300 religious leaders said they ’ re concerned about facing a “ swarm of lawsuits ” from people who will claim they ’ ve contracted COVID-19 at a house of worship or while receiving services from a religious charity .
“ There is legitimate concern that some people — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guidelines from around the nation in order to assign liability to religious organizations , ” the letter stated .
“ Indeed , the mere threat of litigation may cause many religious organizations to remain closed far beyond what is necessary , ” the letter states .
Most of the letter ’ s signers appear to be evangelical Christians , including some prominent figures such as the evangelist Franklin Graham , Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler , and Family Research Council president Tony Perkins .
Their involvement highlights just how neatly issues that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priorities of the Republican Party .
As coronavirus restrictions begin lifting in parts of the country , Republican leaders have pushed liability limitations a way to encourage businesses to reopen .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has suggested that the issue needs to be resolved before Congress doles out any additional aid to states .
The Kentucky senator announced Tuesday that he ’ s spearheading a coronavirus liability bill that he says would protect “ businesses , nonprofits , governments and workers and schools ” from virus-related litigation .
Christian legal groups have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the pandemic .
Some are actively encouraging churches to reopen en masse with safety measures in place , in defiance of the stay-at-home orders issued by local and state authorities .
Others , like the First Liberty Institute , say that governmental requests to temporarily halt in-person church gatherings are fine as long as religious groups aren ’ t being singled out .
The leaders named in the letter are seeking liability protections from “ negligence suits resulting from [ religious groups ] serving the public or reopening in accordance with local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal obligations that businesses have to exercise reasonable care to protect the health and safety of the people they serve , according to Timothy Lytton , a Georgia State University law professor who researches health and safety regulations .
In light of COVID-19 , that might mean wearing masks when interacting with others in close proximity , following public health guidelines , and conforming to the standards of other similar organizations in their area , he said .
Failing to exercise reasonable care could potentially expose houses of worship to a lawsuit .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ fear of a wave of COVID-19 lawsuits is “ greatly exaggerated , ” partly because of how hard it would be for a plaintiff to definitely prove they contracted the virus from a particular organization .
The fear of liability exposure will likely help religious organizations bent on opening to focus on proceeding with reasonable care , Lytton said .
But granting these groups immunity from lawsuits could be risky .
“ Immunity from liability would be a dangerous green light to those rare religious organizations and businesses that are in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the need to proceed with caution , ” he said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As some U.S. churches seek to open their doors for in-person services, a group of mostly evangelical Christian religious leaders is urging Congress to grant faith-based organizations legal immunity from coronavirus-related negligence lawsuits.
In a letter submitted to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary on Tuesday, nearly 300 religious leaders said they’re concerned about facing a “swarm of lawsuits” from people who will claim they’ve contracted COVID-19 at a house of worship or while receiving services from a religious charity.
Advertisement
As a result, the religious leaders want Congress to include liability limitations for religious organizations in the next COVID-19 economic recovery package.
“There is legitimate concern that some people — and their lawyers — will cherry pick certain guidelines from around the nation in order to assign liability to religious organizations,” the letter stated.
The cost of defending itself in a negligence lawsuit could cause a faith-based charity to shutter, the leaders wrote.
“Indeed, the mere threat of litigation may cause many religious organizations to remain closed far beyond what is necessary,” the letter states.
Advertisement
People in cars attend services at a Daytona Beach church on Easter Sunday. Photo by Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
Most of the letter’s signers appear to be evangelical Christians, including some prominent figures such as the evangelist Franklin Graham, Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler, and Family Research Council president Tony Perkins.
Their involvement highlights just how neatly issues that are important to evangelicals line up with the priorities of the Republican Party.
As coronavirus restrictions begin lifting in parts of the country, Republican leaders have pushed liability limitations a way to encourage businesses to reopen. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has suggested that the issue needs to be resolved before Congress doles out any additional aid to states. The Kentucky senator announced Tuesday that he’s spearheading a coronavirus liability bill that he says would protect “businesses, nonprofits, governments and workers and schools” from virus-related litigation.
On the other hand, Democrats are wary that these protections could limit workers’ rights and safety during the pandemic.
Advertisement
The religious leaders’ letter was submitted on the same day that the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing about limiting businesses’ liability during the pandemic.
The letter was organized by the First Liberty Institute, a prominent player in the Christian legal defense movement, which seeks to advance and protect conservative religious values.
Christian legal groups have adopted a range of stances on worship during the pandemic. Some are actively encouraging churches to reopen en masse with safety measures in place, in defiance of the stay-at-home orders issued by local and state authorities. Others, like the First Liberty Institute, say that governmental requests to temporarily halt in-person church gatherings are fine as long as religious groups aren’t being singled out. The leaders named in the letter are seeking liability protections from “negligence suits resulting from [religious groups] serving the public or reopening in accordance with local orders.”
A pastor leads a drive-in Easter service during the coronavirus pandemic in Las Vegas, Nevada, on April 12. BRIDGET BENNETT via Getty Images
Religious organizations have the same legal obligations that businesses have to exercise reasonable care to protect the health and safety of the people they serve, according to Timothy Lytton, a Georgia State University law professor who researches health and safety regulations. In light of COVID-19, that might mean wearing masks when interacting with others in close proximity, following public health guidelines, and conforming to the standards of other similar organizations in their area, he said.
Advertisement
Failing to exercise reasonable care could potentially expose houses of worship to a lawsuit. Still, Lytton said the religious leaders’ fear of a wave of COVID-19 lawsuits is “greatly exaggerated,” partly because of how hard it would be for a plaintiff to definitely prove they contracted the virus from a particular organization.
The fear of liability exposure will likely help religious organizations bent on opening to focus on proceeding with reasonable care, Lytton said. But granting these groups immunity from lawsuits could be risky.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-15--Barack Obama’s Cryptic Tweet Sets Twitter Alight With Speculation

One word was all it took for former President Barack Obama to set social media alight on Thursday .
It ’ s unclear why Obama chose this moment to issue the call to vote , some six months before the 2020 presidential election .
But many people suggested it was in response to Trump ’ s earlier single-word post referencing his murky “ Obamagate ” conspiracy theory that alleges Obama in 2016 led attempts to sabotage his incoming administration .
Trump has intensified his attacks on Obama in recent days ― an apparent effort to distract from criticism of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s recent attacks on mail-in voting and his widely criticized handling of the coronavirus pandemic could have prompted Obama ’ s tweet .
They also noted Obama ’ s post garnered more than four times the number of “ likes ” as his successor ’ s tweet .
One-word response from Obama as Trump , Fox News , and the right-wing media machine target him and his admin with this `` OBAMAGATE '' conspiracy theory : https : //t.co/dxQF9ZXIIn — Oliver Darcy ( @ oliverdarcy ) May 14 , 2020 Weird @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote while the current one is encouraging people not to vote .
— Denise Wu ( @ denisewu ) May 14 , 2020 This is amazing .
Trump has tried to reduce this race to one-word tweets like “ Obamagate ” and so President Obama is tweeting the only word in all of this that matters : “ Vote.
” — Palmer Report ( @ PalmerReport ) May 14 , 2020 Vote like our lives depend on it .
Because our lives depend on it.https : //t.co/HPQzihpz1q https : //t.co/8Sz1shxr0f — Adam Rifkin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2020 I 'm loving the new `` I 'm tweeting every day and you ca n't stop me from being awesome '' Obama .
https : //t.co/6GfyLvlDnu — Aurora Browne ( @ aurorabrowne ) May 14 , 2020 This is how a real President tweets .
Thank you , @ BarackObama .
We miss you .
# TrumpsJealousOfObama # TrumpPandemic # TrumpVirus # TrumpPlague # TrumpCrash https : //t.co/oNZLGABCLx — Alan Bennett Ilagan ( @ alanilagan ) May 14 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
One word was all it took for former President Barack Obama to set social media alight on Thursday.
“Vote.” he tweeted.
Vote. — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) May 14, 2020
It’s unclear why Obama chose this moment to issue the call to vote, some six months before the 2020 presidential election.
Advertisement
But many people suggested it was in response to Trump’s earlier single-word post referencing his murky “Obamagate” conspiracy theory that alleges Obama in 2016 led attempts to sabotage his incoming administration. Trump has intensified his attacks on Obama in recent days ― an apparent effort to distract from criticism of his blundering coronavirus response.
OBAMAGATE! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 14, 2020
Others speculated that Trump’s recent attacks on mail-in voting and his widely criticized handling of the coronavirus pandemic could have prompted Obama’s tweet. They also noted Obama’s post garnered more than four times the number of “likes” as his successor’s tweet.
One-word response from Obama as Trump, Fox News, and the right-wing media machine target him and his admin with this "OBAMAGATE" conspiracy theory: https://t.co/dxQF9ZXIIn — Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) May 14, 2020
Advertisement
Weird how an ex-President is telling people to vote while the current one is encouraging people not to vote. — Denise Wu (@denisewu) May 14, 2020
This is amazing. Trump has tried to reduce this race to one-word tweets like “Obamagate” and so President Obama is tweeting the only word in all of this that matters: “Vote.” — Palmer Report (@PalmerReport) May 14, 2020
Vote like our lives depend on it. Because our lives depend on it.https://t.co/HPQzihpz1q https://t.co/8Sz1shxr0f — Adam Rifkin 🐼 (@ifindkarma) May 14, 2020
OMG, how to decipher this? https://t.co/dcFcGAuxjd — David Emery 😷 (@debunker) May 14, 2020
I'm loving the new "I'm tweeting every day and you can't stop me from being awesome" Obama. https://t.co/6GfyLvlDnu — Aurora Browne (@aurorabrowne) May 14, 2020
Advertisement
NEXT ON HANNITY: Socialist Obama Encourages Mass Voter Fraud with Order for Illegals to Stuff Ballot Boxes https://t.co/DP1aEGya0u — The Daily Show (@TheDailyShow) May 14, 2020
The subtweet of this... 😂😂😂😂😂 https://t.co/txoQW4xOsG — Adam Holisky (@AdamHolisky) May 14, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-05-14--McConnell Says He Was ‘Wrong’ To Claim Obama Didn’t Leave A Pandemic Playbook

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday that he was wrong to claim former President Barack Obama didn ’ t leave a “ game plan ” to deal with a pandemic when he left the White House to President Donald Trump .
“ I was wrong , ” McConnell told Fox News ’ Bret Baier .
“ They did leave behind a plan , so I clearly made a mistake in that regard .
As to whether or not the plan was followed , or who ’ s the critic and all the rest , I don ’ t have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t know enough about the details.
” The senator sparked controversy earlier this week during an online interview with Lara Trump , the president ’ s daughter-in-law and campaign adviser , when he went after the Obama administration ’ s handover to Trump ’ s team .
He also lambasted the former president for criticizing in a private meeting Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic , which has infected more than 1.4 million people in the U.S. , saying Obama had been “ a little bit classless ” and “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ They claim pandemics only happen once every hundred years , but what if that ’ s no longer true ?
” McConnell said during the interview .
“ We want to be early , ready for the next one , because clearly the Obama administration did not leave to this administration any kind of game plan for something like this.
” In fact , Politico reported in March that the Obama White House did leave a detailed , 69-page document on fighting pandemics that included a bevy of measures the administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new viral pathogen was spreading overseas .
At the time , a National Security Council official told Politico the document was “ quite dated ” and said the administration ’ s own efforts were “ a better fit ” and “ more detailed.
” Trump has been criticized by some for being slow to respond to the virus as it first began to spread in the United States , but he has lashed out at those claims , instead seeking to blame Obama , the World Health Organization and even his own medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Ebola czar ” in the Obama administration , challenged McConnell ’ s comments earlier this week , writing on Twitter that the Trump administration had “ ignored ” the playbook that was passed along to them .
Obama ’ s team also led an in-person pandemic response exercise for senior Trump officials , as required by law , during the presidential transition .
In his interview with Fox News on Thursday , McConnell went on to champion efforts to reopen parts of the country despite the ongoing spread of the virus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ d like the American people to begin to benefit from a comeback as soon as possible , ” he said , while noting states should follow the three-phase plan released by the White House last month .
“ We have to begin to engage the economy again .
I ’ m convinced that we can do that safely .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday that he was wrong to claim former President Barack Obama didn’t leave a “game plan” to deal with a pandemic when he left the White House to President Donald Trump.
“I was wrong,” McConnell told Fox News’ Bret Baier. “They did leave behind a plan, so I clearly made a mistake in that regard. As to whether or not the plan was followed, or who’s the critic and all the rest, I don’t have any observation about that because I don’t know enough about the details.”
Advertisement
The senator sparked controversy earlier this week during an online interview with Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law and campaign adviser, when he went after the Obama administration’s handover to Trump’s team. He also lambasted the former president for criticizing in a private meeting Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, which has infected more than 1.4 million people in the U.S., saying Obama had been “a little bit classless” and “should’ve kept his mouth shut.”
“They claim pandemics only happen once every hundred years, but what if that’s no longer true?” McConnell said during the interview. “We want to be early, ready for the next one, because clearly the Obama administration did not leave to this administration any kind of game plan for something like this.”
“I was wrong. They did leave behind a plan. I clearly made a mistake in that regard” — Mitch McConnell walks back his comment about Obama not leaving a pandemic plan for Trump pic.twitter.com/2r8DqSdUyy — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 14, 2020
In fact, Politico reported in March that the Obama White House did leave a detailed, 69-page document on fighting pandemics that included a bevy of measures the administration should have taken amid early reports a new viral pathogen was spreading overseas. At the time, a National Security Council official told Politico the document was “quite dated” and said the administration’s own efforts were “a better fit” and “more detailed.”
Advertisement
Trump has been criticized by some for being slow to respond to the virus as it first began to spread in the United States, but he has lashed out at those claims, instead seeking to blame Obama, the World Health Organization and even his own medical advisers.
Ronald Klain, the former “Ebola czar” in the Obama administration, challenged McConnell’s comments earlier this week, writing on Twitter that the Trump administration had “ignored” the playbook that was passed along to them. Obama’s team also led an in-person pandemic response exercise for senior Trump officials, as required by law, during the presidential transition.
We literally left them a 69-page Pandemic Playbook.... that they ignored
And an office called the Pandemic Preparedness Office... that they abolished.
And a global monitoring system called PREDICT .. that they cut by 75% https://t.co/OD94v0UI4n — Ronald Klain (@RonaldKlain) May 12, 2020
In his interview with Fox News on Thursday, McConnell went on to champion efforts to reopen parts of the country despite the ongoing spread of the virus.
“We had a fabulous economy … we’d like the American people to begin to benefit from a comeback as soon as possible,” he said, while noting states should follow the three-phase plan released by the White House last month. “We have to begin to engage the economy again. I’m convinced that we can do that safely.”