bonginoreport--2020-04-20--Dems Continue Using Coroanvirus to Justify Releasing Prisoners – Including Murderers

After Governor Jay Inslee announced his coronavirus prisoner release plan , Seattle-area activists decided they wanted more .
They want everyone out of jail .
Inslee identified the over 1,100 Washington criminals he will release , due to concerns that crowded jails could easily spread the coronavirus .
While they ’ re supposedly non-violent offenders , the criminals include prolific DUI criminals , burglars , and drug dealers .
But activists remain unhappy .
Using the hashtag # FreeThemAllWA , some fringe activists are now urging the governor to free literally all prisoners , including murderers and rapists .
Sure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus in prison .
But who will protect the public from the prisoners ?
Many in the law enforcement community have raised concerns with the coronavirus prisoner release plan .
The proposal was unveiled the day after prisoners at the Monroe Correctional Complex rioted over COVID-19 concerns .
There are physical distancing programs in place , but the inmates seem to refuse to follow them .
The message Inslee ’ s proposal sent was you ’ ll get rewarded for rioting and ignoring physical distancing demands .
“ We have firsthand interactions with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why weren ’ t we consulted ?
” asks Seattle Police Officer ’ s Guild President Officer Mike Solan to the Jason Rantz Show on KTTH .
The coronavirus prisoner release plan comes as most misdemeanor suspects aren ’ t being booked into jail , which keeps even more criminals on the streets .
Not only does that put the community at risk , but it makes an officer ’ s job more dangerous .
The region ’ s most extreme activists have taken the opportunity to exploit the coronavirus prisoner crisis to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them , Inslee ’ s plan doesn ’ t go far enough .
Failed Seattle mayoral candidate Nikkita Oliver has called on Inslee to # FreeThemAllWA because “ The pandemic doesn ’ t discriminate by sentencing offense and neither should Inslee.
” Knowing that their plan would release the most dangerous criminals , some activists have downplayed concerns claiming they represent a small part of the prisoner population .
In other words , it ’ s just a few murderers and rapists , so what ’ s all the fuss about ?
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noise demonstration ” in Monroe and Olympia last week .
And while Inslee panned pro-Trump protesters in Michigan and here in Washington , he was silent on the progressives and socialists who protested for a more alarming plan to release murderers .
Not all are as extreme on the issue of release , but the ones that claim they ’ re taking a reasonable and fiscally responsible approach to the topic seem to lack a plan on dealing with the unintended consequences of the coronavirus prisoner release plan .
Truck driver Joshua Collins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Heck .
He ’ s a Socialist , earned the endorsement of Seattle Councilmember Kshama Sawant , and is decidedly anti-Joe Biden , whom he calls a “ senile old rapist.
” Collins backs the movement to # FreeThemAllWA , but says that it ’ s mostly “ hyperbolic ” to him and he doesn ’ t want to release murderers and rapists .
“ The point is that it is more cost effective to put people on house arrest because that ’ s really what we ’ re talking about , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ KTTH .
“ They ’ re not talking about just like , ‘ oh , you ’ re completely , you know , Scot-free from whatever you ’ ve been convicted of . '
” Collins backs a restorative justice approach to criminal justice .
On paper , it means focusing on rehabilitative efforts to get someone to reintegrate into a society where they respect laws .
It offers everything from therapy to attacking the root causes of why some people turn to criminality .
In it ’ s non-ideological form , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality , activists use the practice to shift the blame almost entirely away from the victim , claiming they ’ re not at fault for an assault , drug dealing , or stealing cars .
OK , let ’ s see how this would work To better understand the thinking , I asked Collins why , for example , should a prolific car thief be released from jail .
“ Do you think a car thief is a threat to the public ?
” Collins asked me .
I said yes , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he steals cars from — folks who depend on their car to get to their job or to pick up their kids from soccer practice .
“ If you stole a car and you didn ’ t kill anyone , you didn ’ t assault anyone , you know , that ’ s not a violent crime , ” Collins told me .
“ That ’ s something that we would like you to not do again .
But it is also something that , you know is not a danger to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ easily rehabilitated or we could have a system where we have right now where almost everyone who goes in prisons , comes out worse off and I think it ’ s pretty obvious what we should be doing.
” Car thieves , and property offenders in general , have an exceptionally high recidivism rate .
So simply claiming they can be “ very easily rehabilitated ” is just wishful thinking .
I asked how , specifically , would you deal with prolific offenders short of prison .
“ Um , I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the plan is for that ?
I ’ m not really sure , ” he explained .
They don ’ t know .
It ’ s why this is dangerous I can definitely appreciate Collins ’ honesty and we could use more politicians who acknowledge they don ’ t have some answers .
But it ’ s the problem inherent in any purely ideological position , regardless of the ideology .
You end up seeing a position with massive blinders on .
Socialism says jailing is bad because it ’ s racist .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to for-profit prisons , anyway !
Okay .
So what do we do with criminals .
Restorative justice !
Okay , what if it doesn ’ t work ?
They don ’ t have an answer .
They don ’ t even know if restorative justice will work the way they want it to .
What we do know is that when you don ’ t punish prolific offenders — like some of the criminals Inslee will release from prison and the ones King County law enforcement aren ’ t able to book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ try to book them into jail , those individuals aren ’ t held accountable for their actions , and who ends up suffering ?
It ’ s the community at large .
It ’ s the police officers who are a part of this community who end up taking the brunt and criticism of this because , ‘ hey , there ’ s not enough cops out there , ' ” Officer Solan explained .
Listen to the Jason Rantz Show weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM ( or HD @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Subscribe to the podcast here .
Follow @ JasonRantz on Twitter and Instagram or on Facebook .

After Governor Jay Inslee announced his coronavirus prisoner release plan, Seattle-area activists decided they wanted more. They want everyone out of jail.
Inslee identified the over 1,100 Washington criminals he will release, due to concerns that crowded jails could easily spread the coronavirus. While they’re supposedly non-violent offenders, the criminals include prolific DUI criminals, burglars, and drug dealers. But activists remain unhappy.
Using the hashtag #FreeThemAllWA, some fringe activists are now urging the governor to free literally all prisoners, including murderers and rapists. Sure, that could protect them from the coronavirus in prison. But who will protect the public from the prisoners?
Rantz: Citing public safety, police unions slam Inslee coronavirus prisoner release
Coronavirus prisoner release is dangerous
Many in the law enforcement community have raised concerns with the coronavirus prisoner release plan. The proposal was unveiled the day after prisoners at the Monroe Correctional Complex rioted over COVID-19 concerns. There are physical distancing programs in place, but the inmates seem to refuse to follow them. The message Inslee’s proposal sent was you’ll get rewarded for rioting and ignoring physical distancing demands.
“We have firsthand interactions with these criminals on a daily basis. Why weren’t we consulted?” asks Seattle Police Officer’s Guild President Officer Mike Solan to the Jason Rantz Show on KTTH.
The coronavirus prisoner release plan comes as most misdemeanor suspects aren’t being booked into jail, which keeps even more criminals on the streets. Not only does that put the community at risk, but it makes an officer’s job more dangerous.
Activists grow louder
The region’s most extreme activists have taken the opportunity to exploit the coronavirus prisoner crisis to help free even more criminals. To them, Inslee’s plan doesn’t go far enough.
Failed Seattle mayoral candidate Nikkita Oliver has called on Inslee to #FreeThemAllWA because “The pandemic doesn’t discriminate by sentencing offense and neither should Inslee.”
Far more people are still vulnerable to the disease in prison, and the Dept of Corrections is still punishing 18 prisoners for demanding the state protect the safety of incarcerated people. The pandemic doesn’t discriminate by sentencing offense and neither should Inslee. — Nikkita Oliver (@NikkitaOliver) April 13, 2020
Knowing that their plan would release the most dangerous criminals, some activists have downplayed concerns claiming they represent a small part of the prisoner population. In other words, it’s just a few murderers and rapists, so what’s all the fuss about?
For those deeply steeped in the swampy myth that to release prisoners will let out all the "murderers and rapists." Here's the breakdown of who's in for what. Do you homework before you speak. Otherwise #StayHumble #FreeThemAllWA #Monroehttps://t.co/AM62t1OEnD — Alan-Michael (AM) (@A_MFoucault) April 9, 2020
Just watch the proliferation of narratives that will monsterize the incarcerated folks out at #Monroe in order to further rationalize literally killing them under the #COVID19Pandemic . This is #necropolitics at work, and it will bait and switch you. Watch out! #FreeThemAllWA — Alan-Michael (AM) (@A_MFoucault) April 9, 2020
A handful of activists held a “car noise demonstration” in Monroe and Olympia last week. And while Inslee panned pro-Trump protesters in Michigan and here in Washington, he was silent on the progressives and socialists who protested for a more alarming plan to release murderers.
Not all are as extreme on the issue of release, but the ones that claim they’re taking a reasonable and fiscally responsible approach to the topic seem to lack a plan on dealing with the unintended consequences of the coronavirus prisoner release plan.
Rantz: Seattle burglary explodes 87% downtown after coronavirus policy, crisis
Enter the Socialist candidate for Congress
Truck driver Joshua Collins hopes to replace retiring WA-10 Congressman Denny Heck. He’s a Socialist, earned the endorsement of Seattle Councilmember Kshama Sawant, and is decidedly anti-Joe Biden, whom he calls a “senile old rapist.”
Collins backs the movement to #FreeThemAllWA, but says that it’s mostly “hyperbolic” to him and he doesn’t want to release murderers and rapists.
“The point is that it is more cost effective to put people on house arrest because that’s really what we’re talking about,” Collins told the Jason Rantz Show on KTTH. “They’re not talking about just like, ‘oh, you’re completely, you know, Scot-free from whatever you’ve been convicted of.'” Collins backs a restorative justice approach to criminal justice. On paper, it means focusing on rehabilitative efforts to get someone to reintegrate into a society where they respect laws. It offers everything from therapy to attacking the root causes of why some people turn to criminality. In it’s non-ideological form, I generally support the idea. But in reality, activists use the practice to shift the blame almost entirely away from the victim, claiming they’re not at fault for an assault, drug dealing, or stealing cars. OK, let’s see how this would work To better understand the thinking, I asked Collins why, for example, should a prolific car thief be released from jail. “Do you think a car thief is a threat to the public?” Collins asked me. I said yes, he’s a threat to the people he steals cars from — folks who depend on their car to get to their job or to pick up their kids from soccer practice. “If you stole a car and you didn’t kill anyone, you didn’t assault anyone, you know, that’s not a violent crime,” Collins told me. “That’s something that we would like you to not do again. But it is also something that, you know is not a danger to the public. That person can be very easily rehabilitated or we could have a system where we have right now where almost everyone who goes in prisons, comes out worse off and I think it’s pretty obvious what we should be doing.” Car thieves, and property offenders in general, have an exceptionally high recidivism rate. So simply claiming they can be “very easily rehabilitated” is just wishful thinking. I asked how, specifically, would you deal with prolific offenders short of prison. “Um, I don’t I don’t know what the plan is for that? I’m not really sure,” he explained. They don’t know. It’s why this is dangerous I can definitely appreciate Collins’ honesty and we could use more politicians who acknowledge they don’t have some answers. But it’s the problem inherent in any purely ideological position, regardless of the ideology. You end up seeing a position with massive blinders on. Socialism says jailing is bad because it’s racist. And we shouldn’t give money to for-profit prisons, anyway! Okay. So what do we do with criminals. Restorative justice! Okay, what if it doesn’t work? They don’t have an answer. They don’t even know if restorative justice will work the way they want it to. What we do know is that when you don’t punish prolific offenders — like some of the criminals Inslee will release from prison and the ones King County law enforcement aren’t able to book — they reoffend. “When we try to book them into jail, those individuals aren’t held accountable for their actions, and who ends up suffering? It’s the community at large. It’s the police officers who are a part of this community who end up taking the brunt and criticism of this because, ‘hey, there’s not enough cops out there,'” Officer Solan explained. Listen to the Jason Rantz Show weekday afternoons from 3-6 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (or HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow @JasonRantz on Twitter and Instagram or on Facebook.
Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz


bonginoreport--2020-04-20--Cities Enforce Lockdowns With Drones From China

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox .
Sign up here .
Drones being used around the country to enforce coronavirus lockdowns were donated by a company with ties to the Chinese government , raising concerns that the nation many blame for allowing the virus to become a pandemic has sneaked a powerful espionage tool into the skies above its economic rival .
Drones from Da Jiang Innovations ( DJI ) have gone to 43 law enforcement agencies in 22 states to help ensure social distancing rules .
In New Jersey , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to spy on citizens where patrol cars ca n't reach .
CITIES IN NEW JERSEY USES DRONES TO ENFORCE SOCIAL DISTANCING AMID CORONAVIRUS '' Should people be concerned ?
Yes .
Everyone should always be concerned , '' Brett Velicovich , former Army intelligence worker and author of `` Drone Warrior , '' told Fox News .
`` You can never trust China . ''
The company denies any ulterior motives , but others , including drone experts , lawmakers and watchdog groups , say it 's a slippery slope and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case .
`` Some people are trying to score ideological points by discouraging the use of important equipment and tools that save lives and protect American first responders , '' he told Fox News on Monday .
Headquartered in Shenzhen , China 's version of Silicon Valley , DJI is the world 's largest and best-known drone maker .
OFFICIALS AROUND THE COUNTRY USING DRONES TO PROMOTE SOCIAL DISTANCING In 2006 , founder Frank Wang started running DJI out of his dorm room at Hong Kong University of Science & Technology .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rise to global domination .
The company made close to $ 2 billion in 2017 and employs more than 14,000 people .
Part of its success comes from its quality of drones , which experts told Fox News is unparalleled .
Its price point is also a plus and puts DJI ahead of the game .
The company obliterates its closest competitors : Hubsan , also located in Shenzhen , Paris-based Parrot , and San Mateo , Calif. 's GoPro .
By law , because the company is so profitable and employs so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chinese government 's eye .
DJI has pushed back on claims its drones are used to spy on Americans and said that users can prevent their devices from transmitting data .
`` All DJI customers have complete control over any photos , vidoes and flight logs they generate during their operations , '' Lisberg said .
`` None of this data is ever transferred to DJI or anyone else unless they deliberately choose to do so . ''
While that may be , an expert with deep ties to the intelligence community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DJI would even know if the data was being collected or used , except Wang and the Chinese government — and neither of them are talking .
What is known is that pre-coronavirus , U.S. intelligence officials were worried enough about DJI drones to ground its entire fleet .
The rise of COVID-19 has cracked the door and allowed DJI drones to once again fly over America 's skies .
It 's not sitting well with some .
`` It 's about China 's long-term goal , not COVID , '' drone flyer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News .
`` People will give away their right to privacy because of the coronavirus , but do they know what they are signing up for ? ''
In early February , the Interior Department issued a no-fly order many thought was aimed at China .
The directive , which followed a temporary one issued in 2019 , grounded all of the department 's drone fleet following concerns that the devices could be used for government and commercial espionage .
Interior officials told The Wall Street Journal that all of the department 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China or made with Chinese parts .
Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said while the government would make some exceptions for drones – search-and-rescue operations as well as those involving emergencies where human lives are in danger – he directed U.S. officials to favor domestically made ones out of concern that data collected by aerial drones could be `` valuable to foreign entities , organizations and governments . ''
Sen. Rick Scott , R-Fla. , told Fox he had multiple conversations with the DOI and strongly supported the department 's decision .
In fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ widened .
`` It 's time to extend this policy to all federal agencies , as well as local law enforcement agencies that use federal grants , '' he said in a written statement .
Last year , the Department of Homeland Security sent an alert about how drones made by Chinese companies could pose security risks and that the data they gathered could be easily hacked or stolen .
The May 20 missive , coupled with a video on its website , warned that drones pose multiple threats including their `` potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , interference with air traffic , as well as corporate espionage and invasions of privacy . ''
The narrator in the video claimed , `` We 're not being paranoid . ''
In the DHS notice headlined `` Chinese Manufactured Unmanned Aircraft Systems , '' the department warned that U.S. officials have `` strong concern about any technology product that takes American data into the territory of an authoritarian state that permits its intelligence services to have unfettered access to that data or otherwise abuses that access . ''
Velicovich told Fox News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the intelligence community , they should be heeded .
`` I can tell you that U.S. intelligence knows the impact of their reports and if they are saying that this is going back to the Chinese , then there is something there , '' he said .
`` They do not have a political bias , they are not Republican or Democrat .
They are straight down the middle and do not have an agenda . ''
Critics , on the other hand , claim that drones provide a safer option than sending @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in May 2018 , the Interior Department sent out several drones to track lava flows at Hawaii 's Kilauea volcano .
The dozens of lava fissures surrounding rural communities on the Big Island shook the area and led to the state 's strongest earthquake in 43 years .
Within a day of a lava fissure appearing in the volcano 's rift zone , a team of scientists had a drone in the air which fed crucial information back to emergency response teams .
Drones have also become a widely used tool for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to inspect infrastructure in hard-to-reach places that had put people at risk .
Lisberg told Fox there are plenty of people in Washington trying to discredit China but cautioned against `` using fear and a bunch of hypotheticals '' to take a tool that could save lives and turn it into something sinister .
While not directly addressing drones , some lawmakers like Sen. Mark Warner , D-Va. , have introduced legislation that would prohibit large cities from buying Chinese-made subway cars due to safety concerns .
CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a whole host of sensors ( and ) communication tools , and when that equipment is manufactured in China ... and when that equipment sometimes can be upgraded on a remote basis in terms of a software upgrade , there are national security implications , '' he said .
The takeaway is that there 's an issue with technology from any Chinese company .
`` The Communist Party of China now has in their law the availability to interfere and take information from virtually every Chinese company , '' Warner warned .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provides a whole set of vulnerabilities I think American business has to consider on a going-forward basis . ''

Drones being used around the country to enforce coronavirus lockdowns were donated by a company with ties to the Chinese government, raising concerns that the nation many blame for allowing the virus to become a pandemic has sneaked a powerful espionage tool into the skies above its economic rival.
Drones from Da Jiang Innovations (DJI) have gone to 43 law enforcement agencies in 22 states to help ensure social distancing rules. In New Jersey, for example, the Chinese-made drones are being used to spy on citizens where patrol cars can't reach.
CITIES IN NEW JERSEY USES DRONES TO ENFORCE SOCIAL DISTANCING AMID CORONAVIRUS
"Should people be concerned? Yes. Everyone should always be concerned," Brett Velicovich, former Army intelligence worker and author of "Drone Warrior," told Fox News. "You can never trust China."
The company denies any ulterior motives, but others, including drone experts, lawmakers and watchdog groups, say it's a slippery slope and that the bad outweighs the good in this case.
Adam Lisberg, a spokesman for DJI Technology, disagrees.
"Some people are trying to score ideological points by discouraging the use of important equipment and tools that save lives and protect American first responders," he told Fox News on Monday.
Headquartered in Shenzhen, China's version of Silicon Valley, DJI is the world's largest and best-known drone maker.
OFFICIALS AROUND THE COUNTRY USING DRONES TO PROMOTE SOCIAL DISTANCING
In 2006, founder Frank Wang started running DJI out of his dorm room at Hong Kong University of Science & Technology. It took DJI less than a decade to rise to global domination. The company made close to $2 billion in 2017 and employs more than 14,000 people. Part of its success comes from its quality of drones, which experts told Fox News is unparalleled. Its price point is also a plus and puts DJI ahead of the game. The company obliterates its closest competitors: Hubsan, also located in Shenzhen, Paris-based Parrot, and San Mateo, Calif.'s GoPro.
Velicovich puts DJI's market share between 87 and 90 percent.
By law, because the company is so profitable and employs so many people, it automatically falls under the Chinese government's eye.
DJI has pushed back on claims its drones are used to spy on Americans and said that users can prevent their devices from transmitting data.
"All DJI customers have complete control over any photos, vidoes and flight logs they generate during their operations," Lisberg said. "None of this data is ever transferred to DJI or anyone else unless they deliberately choose to do so."
While that may be, an expert with deep ties to the intelligence community told Fox News that no one at DJI would even know if the data was being collected or used, except Wang and the Chinese government — and neither of them are talking.
What is known is that pre-coronavirus, U.S. intelligence officials were worried enough about DJI drones to ground its entire fleet. The rise of COVID-19 has cracked the door and allowed DJI drones to once again fly over America's skies.
It's not sitting well with some.
"It's about China's long-term goal, not COVID," drone flyer and Virginia resident Barry Bryer told Fox News. "People will give away their right to privacy because of the coronavirus, but do they know what they are signing up for?"
"People will give away their right to privacy because of the coronavirus but do they know what they are signing up for?" — Barry Bryer, Drone flyer and Virginia resident
In early February, the Interior Department issued a no-fly order many thought was aimed at China. The directive, which followed a temporary one issued in 2019, grounded all of the department's drone fleet following concerns that the devices could be used for government and commercial espionage. Interior officials told The Wall Street Journal that all of the department's 800 drones had either been manufactured in China or made with Chinese parts.
Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said while the government would make some exceptions for drones – search-and-rescue operations as well as those involving emergencies where human lives are in danger – he directed U.S. officials to favor domestically made ones out of concern that data collected by aerial drones could be "valuable to foreign entities, organizations and governments."
TRUMP ANNOUNCES NEXT INTERIOR SECRETARY PICK
Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., told Fox he had multiple conversations with the DOI and strongly supported the department's decision. In fact, he wants the China drone ban widened.
"It's time to extend this policy to all federal agencies, as well as local law enforcement agencies that use federal grants," he said in a written statement.
Last year, the Department of Homeland Security sent an alert about how drones made by Chinese companies could pose security risks and that the data they gathered could be easily hacked or stolen. The May 20 missive, coupled with a video on its website, warned that drones pose multiple threats including their "potential use for terrorism, mass casualty incidents, interference with air traffic, as well as corporate espionage and invasions of privacy."
FAA PROPOSES RULE CHANGE TO FORCE IDENTIFICATION OF COLORADO, NEBRASKA DRONES
The narrator in the video claimed, "We're not being paranoid."
In the DHS notice headlined "Chinese Manufactured Unmanned Aircraft Systems," the department warned that U.S. officials have "strong concern about any technology product that takes American data into the territory of an authoritarian state that permits its intelligence services to have unfettered access to that data or otherwise abuses that access."
Velicovich told Fox News that if there are warnings coming from the intelligence community, they should be heeded.
"I can tell you that U.S. intelligence knows the impact of their reports and if they are saying that this is going back to the Chinese, then there is something there," he said. "They do not have a political bias, they are not Republican or Democrat. They are straight down the middle and do not have an agenda."
Critics, on the other hand, claim that drones provide a safer option than sending helicopters into hazardous conditions. For example, in May 2018, the Interior Department sent out several drones to track lava flows at Hawaii's Kilauea volcano. The dozens of lava fissures surrounding rural communities on the Big Island shook the area and led to the state's strongest earthquake in 43 years. Within a day of a lava fissure appearing in the volcano's rift zone, a team of scientists had a drone in the air which fed crucial information back to emergency response teams.
Drones have also become a widely used tool for oil companies that fly them over pipelines to inspect infrastructure in hard-to-reach places that had put people at risk.
Lisberg told Fox there are plenty of people in Washington trying to discredit China but cautioned against "using fear and a bunch of hypotheticals" to take a tool that could save lives and turn it into something sinister.
While not directly addressing drones, some lawmakers like Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., have introduced legislation that would prohibit large cities from buying Chinese-made subway cars due to safety concerns.
CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP
"A rail car might have a whole host of sensors (and) communication tools, and when that equipment is manufactured in China... and when that equipment sometimes can be upgraded on a remote basis in terms of a software upgrade, there are national security implications," he said.
The takeaway is that there's an issue with technology from any Chinese company.
"The Communist Party of China now has in their law the availability to interfere and take information from virtually every Chinese company," Warner warned. "As long as that exists, that provides a whole set of vulnerabilities I think American business has to consider on a going-forward basis."


bonginoreport--2020-04-20--CNN’s Brian Stelter Says Coronavirus Made Him Cry

A lot of Americans are having a tough time amid the coronavirus pandemic and CNN ’ s Brian Stelter is apparently no exception .
Stelter , the liberal network ’ s in-house media critic , took to Twitter on Saturday morning to explain that he didn ’ t send out his nightly newsletter because he “ crawled in bed and cried for our pre-pandemic lives ” instead .
“ Last night , I hit a wall .
Gutted by the death toll .
Disturbed by the govt 's shortcomings .
Dismayed by political rhetoric that bears no resemblance to reality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jobs ; kids who are missing school ; and senior citizens who are living in fear , ” Stelter wrote .
“ I crawled in bed and cried for our pre-pandemic lives .
Tears that had been waiting a month to escape , ” Stelter wrote in a second tweet .
“ I wanted to share because it feels freeing to do so .
Now is not a time for faux-invincibility .
Journos are living this , hating this , like everyone else.
” Stelter echoed the message during his show on Sunday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit a wall ” after weeks of bottling up emotions .
“ All of us are grieving , whether we sense it or not .
All of us have lost something in the past few weeks , some have suffered the ultimate loss of a father , or mother or spouse or relative .
Others have lost livelihoods , they lost access to family and friends , ” Stelter said .
“ I tried to bottle it all up ; I guess I was trying to be stoic for my wife and kids @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Friday night that I hit a wall.
” Stelter then said he couldn ’ t finish his newsletter on Friday because he was “ angry ” and “ gutted ” by the ongoing pandemic .
“ That ’ s when the tears came , ” he said .
“ Almost everyone is experiencing isolation or stress or anxiety or other emotions , as a result of this crisis .
“ Stelter then encouraged people to use social media , noting that he felt better by Saturday morning .
He stressed that “ it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right now , ” and urged viewers to tell people that seek appropriate help .

A lot of Americans are having a tough time amid the coronavirus pandemic and CNN’s Brian Stelter is apparently no exception.
Stelter, the liberal network’s in-house media critic, took to Twitter on Saturday morning to explain that he didn’t send out his nightly newsletter because he “crawled in bed and cried for our pre-pandemic lives” instead.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, CHRIS CUOMO SPUR CORONAVIRUS SOCIAL DISTANCING CONCERNS
“Last night, I hit a wall. Gutted by the death toll. Disturbed by the govt's shortcomings. Dismayed by political rhetoric that bears no resemblance to reality. Worried about friends who are losing jobs; kids who are missing school; and senior citizens who are living in fear,” Stelter wrote.
“I crawled in bed and cried for our pre-pandemic lives. Tears that had been waiting a month to escape,” Stelter wrote in a second tweet. “I wanted to share because it feels freeing to do so. Now is not a time for faux-invincibility. Journos are living this, hating this, like everyone else.”
BICYCLIST FILES POLICE COMPLAINT AGAINST CNN'S CHRIS CUOMO FOLLOWING INTENSE SPAT
Stelter echoed the message during his show on Sunday, telling viewers that he finally “hit a wall” after weeks of bottling up emotions.
“All of us are grieving, whether we sense it or not. All of us have lost something in the past few weeks, some have suffered the ultimate loss of a father, or mother or spouse or relative. Others have lost livelihoods, they lost access to family and friends,” Stelter said. “I tried to bottle it all up; I guess I was trying to be stoic for my wife and kids, it wasn’t until this Friday night that I hit a wall.”
Stelter then said he couldn’t finish his newsletter on Friday because he was “angry” and “gutted” by the ongoing pandemic.
CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE CORONAVIRUS COVERAGE
“That’s when the tears came,” he said. “Almost everyone is experiencing isolation or stress or anxiety or other emotions, as a result of this crisis. “
Stelter then encouraged people to use social media, noting that he felt better by Saturday morning. He stressed that “it’s OK to not be OK right now,” and urged viewers to tell people that seek appropriate help.


bonginoreport--2020-04-20--Harvard Magazine Publishes Extremely Unconvincing Article on So-Called “Risks of Homeschooling”

In the May-June issue of the Harvard Magazine , journalist Erin O ’ Donnell published a piece entitled “ The Risks of Homeschooling ” , in which she alternated between quoting unsubstantiated assumptions and baseless accusations until , mercifully , the nearly 1000-word hit piece on America ’ s homeschooling parents concluded .
O ’ Donnell relies exclusively on Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Bartholet to lend some credibility to her thesis that homeschooling is an existential threat both to children and American democracy .
O ’ Donnell begins by asserting that between 3 % and 4 % of school-age children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , school age children made up about 23 % of the population , a total of about 73.6 million kids ) are being homeschooled , equating to roughly 2-3 million kids .
“ Yet ” , writes Ms. O ’ Donnell , “ Elizabeth Bartholet , Wasserstein Public Interest Professor of Law and faculty director of the Law School ’ s Child Advocacy Program , sees risks for children—and society—in homeschooling , and recommends a presumptive ban on the practice .
Bartholet goes on to say that homeschooling not only violates children ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” and their right to be protected from child abuse ( an implication that homeschooled children are at higher risk of child abuse presented without evidence or substantiation ) , but it also may [ my emphasis ] keep them from contributing positively to a democratic society .
One wonders what other factors Professor Bartholet believes may keep children from contributing positively to a democratic society so that we may presumptively ban them as well .
Bartholet further asserts that a largely unregulated regime in the area of homeschooling “ means , effectively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve never gone to school themselves , who don ’ t read or write themselves.
” Bartholet makes this assertion , again , absent any evidence that a significant or even statistically relevant portion of parents who homeschool their children are illiterate .
In fact , Dr. Brian Ray of the National Home Education Research Institute ( NHERI ) contends that the home-educated typically score 15 to 30 percentile points above public school students , and in particular black homeschool typically score 23 to 42 percentile points above black public school students , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ education or income .
O ’ Donnell then adds to Bartholet ’ s assertion , “ In another handful of states , parents are not required to register their children as homeschooled ; they can simply keep their kids at home.
” O ’ Donnell implies not only that parents are unaware of what is best for their child , but that they are actively working to undermine their children by effectively imprisoning them at home .
Bartholet says that “ this practice ” ( presumably referring to homeschooling , though the shoddy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by an ostensibly qualified teacher makes it difficult to discern ) can isolate children .
Again , she makes this assertion absent any evidence to substantiate the likelihood that homeschooling isolates children .
In fact , NHERI claims that the home-educated typically perform above average on measures of social , emotional , and psychological development ( research measures include peer interaction , self-concept , leadership skills , family cohesion , participation in community service , and self-esteem . )
If Ms. Bartholet is suggesting that homeschooling isolates children , she would do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support that suggestion , rather than using empty and vacuous intimations that homeschooling “ may ” isolate children .
Bartholet then points to Tara Westover ’ s memoir Educated as an example of the dangers of homeschooling .
Westover is the daughter of Idaho survivalists who never sent their children to school .
Though she concedes that Westover learned to read , she stresses that she was forced to work in her father ’ s scrap business and endured abuse by an older brother .
Bartholet does not see the book as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through the cracks , but as “ what can happen under the system in effect in most of the nation.
” Again , Bartholet relies heavily on innuendo and implication , suggesting that this “ can ” happen anywhere , and thus that we “ should ” enact a presumptive ban .
However , this is Bartholet ’ s only concrete example in a nearly 1000 word essay of a child harmed by homeschooling .
Meanwhile , a 2004 study by the Department of Education synthesized existing literature on sexual misconduct engaged in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the most accurate data available at the time came from the American Association of University Women ( AAUW ) and suggested that 9.6 % of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometimes during their school career .
In other words , according to the Department of Education , more than twice the percentage of total homeschoolers in the United States have been targets of sexual misconduct at the hands of regulated school educators .
Perhaps if Ms. Bartholet had found time for a quick Google search , and if her true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imagines is so prevalent in the home , she would have called for a presumptive ban on public schooling rather than homeschooling .
Professor Bartholet then gets to the heart of her argument against homeschooling .
She claims that parents choose homeschooling for a number of reasons , including protecting their child from bullying , or failing schools in their area .
She continues , “ But [ signaling a contradiction where none exists ] surveys of homeschoolers show that a majority of such families ( by some estimates , up to 90 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beliefs and seek to remove their children from mainstream culture.
” Ms. Bartholet could have saved us all valuable time and effort if she had merely acknowledged from the outset that her opposition to homeschooling was a thinly veiled contempt for conservative Christians .
Bartholet goes on to note that some of these parents are “ extreme religious ideologues ” who question science and promote female subservience and white supremacy .
Truthfully , this accusation is simply too ridiculous to engage in an intellectual rebuttal .
Similarly unfounded assertions about Prof. Bartholet would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by her ( lack of ) reasoning , warrant a presumptive ban on Harvard Law professors .
She concludes by saying that homeschooling will destroy American democracy and that , actually , it is the government who has the right to educate children , and not parents who have the right to dictate how their children are educated .
She engages in truly hilarious projection , saying “ I think it ’ s always dangerous to put powerful people in charge of the powerless , and to give the powerful ones total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Harvard professor with immediate access to the halls of power , advocates banning the one refuge maintained by powerless parents against a powerful government education system—the right to educate their children as they believe will be in the children ’ s best interest .
In sum , Professor Bartholet engages in the same baseless accusations , elitist ridicule , and pompous lack of intellectual rigor that have become so inextricably associated with our modern elite universities .
One hopes that she can learn a lesson from the average child of home education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a way of life she so clearly does not understand .
Nicolas Briscoe is a student at University of Miami Law School

By Nicolas Briscoe
In the May-June issue of the Harvard Magazine, journalist Erin O’Donnell published a piece entitled “The Risks of Homeschooling”, in which she alternated between quoting unsubstantiated assumptions and baseless accusations until, mercifully, the nearly 1000-word hit piece on America’s homeschooling parents concluded. O’Donnell relies exclusively on Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Bartholet to lend some credibility to her thesis that homeschooling is an existential threat both to children and American democracy.
O’Donnell begins by asserting that between 3% and 4% of school-age children in the United States (In 2016, school age children made up about 23% of the population, a total of about 73.6 million kids) are being homeschooled, equating to roughly 2-3 million kids. “Yet”, writes Ms. O’Donnell, “Elizabeth Bartholet, Wasserstein Public Interest Professor of Law and faculty director of the Law School’s Child Advocacy Program, sees risks for children—and society—in homeschooling, and recommends a presumptive ban on the practice. Bartholet goes on to say that homeschooling not only violates children’s right to a “meaningful education” and their right to be protected from child abuse (an implication that homeschooled children are at higher risk of child abuse presented without evidence or substantiation), but it also may [my emphasis] keep them from contributing positively to a democratic society. One wonders what other factors Professor Bartholet believes may keep children from contributing positively to a democratic society so that we may presumptively ban them as well.
Bartholet further asserts that a largely unregulated regime in the area of homeschooling “means, effectively, that people can homeschool who’ve never gone to school themselves, who don’t read or write themselves.” Bartholet makes this assertion, again, absent any evidence that a significant or even statistically relevant portion of parents who homeschool their children are illiterate. In fact, Dr. Brian Ray of the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI) contends that the home-educated typically score 15 to 30 percentile points above public school students, and in particular black homeschool typically score 23 to 42 percentile points above black public school students, regardless of parents’ level of formal education or income.
O’Donnell then adds to Bartholet’s assertion, “In another handful of states, parents are not required to register their children as homeschooled; they can simply keep their kids at home.” O’Donnell implies not only that parents are unaware of what is best for their child, but that they are actively working to undermine their children by effectively imprisoning them at home.
Bartholet says that “this practice” (presumably referring to homeschooling, though the shoddy writing taught to her, no doubt, by an ostensibly qualified teacher makes it difficult to discern) can isolate children. Again, she makes this assertion absent any evidence to substantiate the likelihood that homeschooling isolates children. In fact, NHERI claims that the home-educated typically perform above average on measures of social, emotional, and psychological development (research measures include peer interaction, self-concept, leadership skills, family cohesion, participation in community service, and self-esteem.) If Ms. Bartholet is suggesting that homeschooling isolates children, she would do well to make the affirmative case and support that suggestion, rather than using empty and vacuous intimations that homeschooling “may” isolate children.
Bartholet then points to Tara Westover’s memoir Educated as an example of the dangers of homeschooling. Westover is the daughter of Idaho survivalists who never sent their children to school. Though she concedes that Westover learned to read, she stresses that she was forced to work in her father’s scrap business and endured abuse by an older brother. Bartholet does not see the book as an isolated case of a family that slipped through the cracks, but as “what can happen under the system in effect in most of the nation.” Again, Bartholet relies heavily on innuendo and implication, suggesting that this “can” happen anywhere, and thus that we “should” enact a presumptive ban. However, this is Bartholet’s only concrete example in a nearly 1000 word essay of a child harmed by homeschooling. Meanwhile, a 2004 study by the Department of Education synthesized existing literature on sexual misconduct engaged in by educators against students. It found that the most accurate data available at the time came from the American Association of University Women (AAUW) and suggested that 9.6% of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometimes during their school career. In other words, according to the Department of Education, more than twice the percentage of total homeschoolers in the United States have been targets of sexual misconduct at the hands of regulated school educators. Perhaps if Ms. Bartholet had found time for a quick Google search, and if her true aim was to curb the abuse she imagines is so prevalent in the home, she would have called for a presumptive ban on public schooling rather than homeschooling.
Professor Bartholet then gets to the heart of her argument against homeschooling. She claims that parents choose homeschooling for a number of reasons, including protecting their child from bullying, or failing schools in their area. She continues, “But [signaling a contradiction where none exists] surveys of homeschoolers show that a majority of such families (by some estimates, up to 90 percent) are driven by conservative Christian beliefs and seek to remove their children from mainstream culture.” Ms. Bartholet could have saved us all valuable time and effort if she had merely acknowledged from the outset that her opposition to homeschooling was a thinly veiled contempt for conservative Christians.
Bartholet goes on to note that some of these parents are “extreme religious ideologues” who question science and promote female subservience and white supremacy. Truthfully, this accusation is simply too ridiculous to engage in an intellectual rebuttal. Similarly unfounded assertions about Prof. Bartholet would be ignorant and uncivil, but would, by her (lack of) reasoning, warrant a presumptive ban on Harvard Law professors.
She concludes by saying that homeschooling will destroy American democracy and that, actually, it is the government who has the right to educate children, and not parents who have the right to dictate how their children are educated. She engages in truly hilarious projection, saying “I think it’s always dangerous to put powerful people in charge of the powerless, and to give the powerful ones total authority.” Meanwhile, Ms. Bartholet, a Harvard professor with immediate access to the halls of power, advocates banning the one refuge maintained by powerless parents against a powerful government education system—the right to educate their children as they believe will be in the children’s best interest. In sum, Professor Bartholet engages in the same baseless accusations, elitist ridicule, and pompous lack of intellectual rigor that have become so inextricably associated with our modern elite universities. One hopes that she can learn a lesson from the average child of home education on the values of empiricism and tolerance of a way of life she so clearly does not understand.
Nicolas Briscoe is a student at University of Miami Law School


bonginoreport--2020-04-20--Poll: Nearly Everyone Wants International Inquiry Into China Coverup

The public blames China for the spread of the coronavirus and overwhelmingly supports the idea of suing the Chinese government for damages , if it can be shown to have breached international law , according to new polling .
A new Henry Jackson Society think tank poll quizzed British citizens , while new polling from Scott Rasmussen highlights the American sentiment towards China and the coronavirus .
• 74 % of British adults believe “ the Chinese Government is to blame for allowing COVID-19 to spread ” .
Just 19 % believe it is not to blame ; • 71 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ British Government suing China in international court “ if it became evident that the Chinese government breached international law in responding to the initial outbreak and spread of COVID-19 ” .
Just 6 % would oppose such action ; • More British adults now oppose Huawei ’ s role in the UK ’ s 5G network than support it .
40 % of British adults oppose allowing the firm to build the UK ’ s network , just 27 % support it .
The proportion who oppose allowing Huawei a role rises to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 election ; • 69 % of the British public believe that the virus began in a wet market in Wuhan , China ; • 83 % of the public believe that the British Government should demand an international inquiry into the response of the Chinese Government to the COVID-19 crisis ; • 45 % of the public believe that the Chinese Government is mainly to blame for the damage caused in the UK by Coronavirus .
15 % believe the UK government is mainly to blame and 31 % believe that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equally to blame .
Commenting , Dr Alan Mendoza , co-author of Coronavirus Compensation ?
said : “ When the Henry Jackson Society issued our landmark report outlining possible legal actions to be taken against China over the spread of Coronavirus , we did so from the perspective of seeking justice .
The British public clearly agrees this should be a priority.
” Meanwhile , Scott Rasmussen published new polling from the United States which highlights the following trends : • Sixty-nine percent ( 69 % ) of voters believe the Chinese government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important research and releasing false information ; • Only 10 % of people believe the information coming out of China is “ truthful and reliable ” , while 39 % say its not , and 50 % remain unsure .

The public blames China for the spread of the coronavirus and overwhelmingly supports the idea of suing the Chinese government for damages, if it can be shown to have breached international law, according to new polling.
A new Henry Jackson Society think tank poll quizzed British citizens, while new polling from Scott Rasmussen highlights the American sentiment towards China and the coronavirus.
From the UK:
74% of British adults believe “the Chinese Government is to blame for allowing COVID-19 to spread”. Just 19% believe it is not to blame;
71% of the public would support the British Government suing China in international court “if it became evident that the Chinese government breached international law in responding to the initial outbreak and spread of COVID-19”. Just 6% would oppose such action;
More British adults now oppose Huawei’s role in the UK’s 5G network than support it. 40% of British adults oppose allowing the firm to build the UK’s network, just 27% support it. The proportion who oppose allowing Huawei a role rises to 51% amongst Conservative voters in the 2019 election;
69% of the British public believe that the virus began in a wet market in Wuhan, China;
83% of the public believe that the British Government should demand an international inquiry into the response of the Chinese Government to the COVID-19 crisis;
45% of the public believe that the Chinese Government is mainly to blame for the damage caused in the UK by Coronavirus. 15% believe the UK government is mainly to blame and 31% believe that the UK and Chinese Government’s are equally to blame.
Commenting, Dr Alan Mendoza, co-author of Coronavirus Compensation? said: “When the Henry Jackson Society issued our landmark report outlining possible legal actions to be taken against China over the spread of Coronavirus, we did so from the perspective of seeking justice. The British public clearly agrees this should be a priority.”
Meanwhile, Scott Rasmussen published new polling from the United States which highlights the following trends:


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--CNN Publishes One Article on Biden Sexual Assault Allegation – But Published Nearly 700 About Kavana

CNN Publishes One Article on Biden Sexual Assault Allegation – But Published Nearly 700 About Kavanaugh Over Same Timespan

Tara Reade publicly stated on March 25 that presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Bide sexually assaulted her in 1993 .
She said Biden once “ pinned her to a wall in a Senate building , reached under her clothing and penetrated her with his fingers , ” according to an account in The New York Times The Times took 19 days to report the allegations , even though the outlet immediately reported allegations against then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh , a Republican .
CNN waited an additional five days to finally publish something about the allegations , meaning the outlet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious allegations against a prominent politician .
In contrast , CNN published nearly 700 articles about the Kavanaugh allegations in the span of 19 days between the time the allegations against Kavanaugh were made public and the Senate confirmed him .
CNN has now published something about Reade ’ s allegations that Biden sexually assaulted her nearly three decades ago while she worked for his Senate office , but the story written by CNN has less to do with the allegations and more about how other Democrats are “ grappling ” with them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Joe Biden are being asked to respond to an allegation of sexual assault leveled against the former vice president by Tara Reade , at a moment when many in the Democratic Party are eager to consolidate support for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee , ” the outlet wrote .
Notice how Biden doesn ’ t seem to be grappling with the allegations , as no one has asked him about them .
His campaign has denied them , but Biden himself has not had to answer for anything .
CNN went on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who was asked about the accusations against the man she hopes will pick her as vice president .
“ Well , I think women should be able to tell their stories .
I think that it is important that these allegations are vetted , from the media to beyond .
And I think that , you know , it is something that no one takes lightly , ” Whitmer told NPR when she was asked about the accusations .
“ But it is also something that is , you know , personal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to give you greater insight than that , not knowing more about the situation.
” NPR also asked Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-MN ) , Biden ’ s former primary opponent , about the allegations .
Klobuchar explained that “ all women in these cases have the right to be heard and have their claims thoroughly reviewed.
” Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) , Biden ’ s biggest challenger to the nomination , said that “ any woman who feels that she was assaulted has every right in the world to stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox News reported , Biden has done 10 TV interviews since Reade made her allegations , including three with CNN .
Not once during those interviews was Biden asked about the allegations .
Many of the same anchors who ignored questions about Biden were adamant about accusing Kavanaugh of being a rapist and treating his accuser as a saint .
When the Times defended its handling of the Biden allegation , Executive Editor Dean Baquet actually used the fact that outlets ignored Reade ’ s allegations as a defense for ignoring Reade ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kavanaugh was already in a public forum in a large way .
Kavanaugh ’ s status as a Supreme Court justice was in question because of a very serious allegation .
And when I say in a public way , I don ’ t mean in the public way of Tara Reade ’ s .
If you ask the average person in America , they didn ’ t know about the Tara Reade case .
So I thought in that case , if The New York Times was going to introduce this to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with some reporting and perspective .
Kavanaugh was in a very different situation .
It was a live , ongoing story that had become the biggest political story in the country .
It was just a different news judgment moment .
And none of this even scratches the surface of the hypocrisy surrounding the Left and the # MeToo movement , which claims to believe all women until a favored man like Biden is accused .

Tara Reade publicly stated on March 25 that presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Bide sexually assaulted her in 1993. She said Biden once “pinned her to a wall in a Senate building, reached under her clothing and penetrated her with his fingers,” according to an account in The New York Times
The Times took 19 days to report the allegations, even though the outlet immediately reported allegations against then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, a Republican.
CNN waited an additional five days to finally publish something about the allegations, meaning the outlet waited a whopping 24 days to cover serious allegations against a prominent politician. In contrast, CNN published nearly 700 articles about the Kavanaugh allegations in the span of 19 days between the time the allegations against Kavanaugh were made public and the Senate confirmed him.
CNN has now published something about Reade’s allegations that Biden sexually assaulted her nearly three decades ago while she worked for his Senate office, but the story written by CNN has less to do with the allegations and more about how other Democrats are “grappling” with them.
“Top Democratic leaders and allies of Joe Biden are being asked to respond to an allegation of sexual assault leveled against the former vice president by Tara Reade, at a moment when many in the Democratic Party are eager to consolidate support for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee,” the outlet wrote.
Notice how Biden doesn’t seem to be grappling with the allegations, as no one has asked him about them. His campaign has denied them, but Biden himself has not had to answer for anything.
CNN went on to quote Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who was asked about the accusations against the man she hopes will pick her as vice president.
“Well, I think women should be able to tell their stories. I think that it is important that these allegations are vetted, from the media to beyond. And I think that, you know, it is something that no one takes lightly,” Whitmer told NPR when she was asked about the accusations. “But it is also something that is, you know, personal. And so it’s hard to give you greater insight than that, not knowing more about the situation.”
NPR also asked Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Biden’s former primary opponent, about the allegations. Klobuchar explained that “all women in these cases have the right to be heard and have their claims thoroughly reviewed.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Biden’s biggest challenger to the nomination, said that “any woman who feels that she was assaulted has every right in the world to stand up and make her claims.”
As Fox News reported, Biden has done 10 TV interviews since Reade made her allegations, including three with CNN. Not once during those interviews was Biden asked about the allegations.
Many of the same anchors who ignored questions about Biden were adamant about accusing Kavanaugh of being a rapist and treating his accuser as a saint. When the Times defended its handling of the Biden allegation, Executive Editor Dean Baquet actually used the fact that outlets ignored Reade’s allegations as a defense for ignoring Reade’s allegations (emphasis added):
Kavanaugh was already in a public forum in a large way. Kavanaugh’s status as a Supreme Court justice was in question because of a very serious allegation. And when I say in a public way, I don’t mean in the public way of Tara Reade’s. If you ask the average person in America, they didn’t know about the Tara Reade case. So I thought in that case, if The New York Times was going to introduce this to readers, we needed to introduce it with some reporting and perspective. Kavanaugh was in a very different situation. It was a live, ongoing story that had become the biggest political story in the country. It was just a different news judgment moment.
And none of this even scratches the surface of the hypocrisy surrounding the Left and the #MeToo movement, which claims to believe all women until a favored man like Biden is accused.


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Victoria Coates Denies Being “Anonymous” White House Official

President Trump 's former deputy national security adviser Victoria Coates could take legal action in response to new allegations that she is the “ Anonymous ” author behind a tell-all book .
Coates denied she wrote the book and a New York Times op-ed that were critical of Trump after RealClearInvestigations published a story last week claiming a monthslong White House investigation identified Coates as `` Anonymous.
” The story cited “ people familiar with the internal probe . ''
Coates declined to comment on the record for the story , but she issued a denial Sunday .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ utterly false .
I am not Anonymous , and I do not know who Anonymous is , ” Coates said in a statement .
Cleta Mitchell , Coates ’ s lawyer , claimed the news outlet “ peddled false statements citing only anonymous sources , despite on-the-record denials from Javelin LLC ( the literary agent for Anonymous ) , the White House , and three well-respected members of the Trump Administration — and now Dr. Coates as well.
” “ We are continuing to explore all available legal options , ” Mitchell said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Energy Department in February , at which time a senior administration official told Axios : `` The White House leadership rejects rumors that have circulated recently and does not put any stock in the suggestion that Victoria Coates is the author of A Warning or the related op-ed in the New York Times . ''
The White House said Coates ’ s move to another role in the administration had nothing to do with the speculation that she was the author .

President Trump's former deputy national security adviser Victoria Coates could take legal action in response to new allegations that she is the “Anonymous” author behind a tell-all book.
Coates denied she wrote the book and a New York Times op-ed that were critical of Trump after RealClearInvestigations published a story last week claiming a monthslong White House investigation identified Coates as "Anonymous.” The story cited “people familiar with the internal probe."
Coates declined to comment on the record for the story, but she issued a denial Sunday.
“The allegations published in Real Clear Investigations are utterly false. I am not Anonymous, and I do not know who Anonymous is,” Coates said in a statement.
Cleta Mitchell, Coates’s lawyer, claimed the news outlet “peddled false statements citing only anonymous sources, despite on-the-record denials from Javelin LLC (the literary agent for Anonymous), the White House, and three well-respected members of the Trump Administration — and now Dr. Coates as well.”
“We are continuing to explore all available legal options,” Mitchell said in a statement.
Coates was reassigned to the Energy Department in February, at which time a senior administration official told Axios: "The White House leadership rejects rumors that have circulated recently and does not put any stock in the suggestion that Victoria Coates is the author of A Warning or the related op-ed in the New York Times."
The White House said Coates’s move to another role in the administration had nothing to do with the speculation that she was the author.


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Banks Lobby Treasury to Fix Coronavirus Relief PPP Rules

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox .
Sign up here .
Big banks are worried the uneven distribution of small business loans will further ignite nascent class warfare tensions and they are now trying to get ahead of what they say is a looming public relations nightmare .
FOX Business has learned senior executives at the nation 's big banks are speaking with Treasury Department officials to explore ways to close loopholes created in the Paycheck Protection Program ( PPP ) that allow profitable financial firms , law firms and restaurant chains @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the line and in front of many legitimate small businesses who were the intended recipients of the government 's pandemic stimulus program .
The PPP legislation was intended to help small businesses hardest hit by the coronavirus-related shutdowns and quarantines .
Under the pandemic stimulus plan , $ 350 billion was earmarked to provide government-backed , low-interest , forgivable loans to small businesses , as defined by companies with fewer than 500 employees .
Congress is now on the verge of passing legislation to fund another $ 250 billion in loans , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 10 million or a percentage of their payroll .
CORONAVIRUS SMALL BUSINESS LOAN PROGRAM RAN DRY — WHAT HAPPENS NOW ?
The loans are forgivable if the business does n't lay off its workers , but layoffs are often inevitable because the government checks only go so far and many did n't get the money before it ran out last week .
Thousands of small businesses applied , but as FOX Business has reported over the past two weeks , the initial funding allocated for the program was hardly enough to meet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ration the money based on factors such as customer relationships and which outfits applied first .
Banks said they were constrained by those benchmarks to make loans because Treasury didn ’ t specify how the loans would be handed out .
Thus , they were afraid of legal liability if they set their own standards .
And the result has been devastating .
According to the small business advocacy group the National Write Your Congressman organization , 70 percent of small businesses applied for the first tranche of the PPP loans , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those applications .
Meanwhile , scores of small businesses are telling FOX Business they ’ re not getting money amid reports that big restaurant chains like Ruth ’ s Chris Steakhouse as well as publicly traded companies like Shake Shack and Potbelly Sandwich Shop got millions in these loans .
Hedge funds and other financial businesses often get preferential treatment as well because they use banking services more than say a local hairdresser , as FOX Business reported .
And now banks are worried the backlash over how the loans were administered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ industry similar to or worse than what followed the 2008 financial crisis when banks got massive bailouts while Main Street suffered through the Great Recession and the weak economic recovery that followed .
FED 'S BOSTIC SAYS U.S. SMALL BUSINESS MAY NEED UP TO $ 500 BILLION MONTHLY IN SUPPORT Banks believe they will be unfairly tarnished by the problems with the loan program since the Treasury Department has given only broad guidance on handing out checks .
Executives , for example , say they ca n't prioritize their lending based on need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as lending criteria .
As a result , they argue , they were forced to lend first to their best customers , which means many smaller businesses got pushed aside and money went to bigger , more financially secure businesses .
For those reasons , banks are looking to plug the loopholes as Congress gets ready to dole out more money after the first wave of funds that were depleted last week .
Leading the effort , it appears , is JPMorgan ; One person with direct knowledge of the matter told FOX @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were “ in discussion with Treasury ” on how to ensure the true small businesses get their fair share of the loans .
A JPMorgan spokesperson had no comment .
A Treasury spokesperson did not respond to calls and text messages asking for comment .
Banking executives are n't hopeful that Treasury will write new rules to make sure small businesses are n't crowded out as the second round in loan money gets ready to be disbursed .
“ ( The Senate ) just wants to take the old bill and add an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' said a senior official at a bank lobby group who spoke on the condition of anonymity .
`` It ’ s the only way to pass this bill with Congress out of town.
” Altering any portion of the bill may prove too complicated when the money needs to be disbursed quickly , the official added .
Even though loopholes in the bill are widely criticized , changing it could take discussions back to the drawing board , he said adding : “ One person ’ s technical change is another person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And the money is needed as soon as possible .
The Federal Reserve has pumped an estimated $ 10 trillion of stimulus through money-printing , slashing interest rates and buying various risky securities in the market , which has had the effect of propping up trading revenues among investment banks , hedge funds , brokerages and private equity houses , and the stock market .
Small businesses , such as restaurants , coffee shops , butchers and any other business that depends on foot traffic , were among those companies most vulnerable to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the virus .
And they remain maybe the most important part of the economy , accounting for nearly 50 percent of the American workforce .
But unlike Wall Street , Main Street ’ s bailout has been orders of magnitude smaller ; the federal government has passed a single $ 2 trillion spending plan to help individuals through payroll tax credits and free money , while Main Street businesses could apply for just a combined $ 600 billion in forgivable loans once the new PPP allotment is approved .
And many critics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a sharp slowdown in economic growth while the stock market has come off its lows are signs the Main Street stimulus has n't been effective .
Another indication of Main Street 's economic despair as the virus shutdown continues : The price of oil .
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE Oil is seen as a key barometer of the economy 's health partly because it can be used to indicate consumption , one of the key drivers of economic growth .
Oil futures crashed Monday amid a sell-off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a realization that the economy is shakier than the recent rise in stock prices has been indicating .
However , longer-dated contracts show oil trading much higher , indicating market players believe the stimulus could help the economy recover in the summer or fall .
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox. Sign up here.
Big banks are worried the uneven distribution of small business loans will further ignite nascent class warfare tensions and they are now trying to get ahead of what they say is a looming public relations nightmare.
FOX Business has learned senior executives at the nation's big banks are speaking with Treasury Department officials to explore ways to close loopholes created in the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) that allow profitable financial firms, law firms and restaurant chains to essentially move to the front of the line and in front of many legitimate small businesses who were the intended recipients of the government's pandemic stimulus program.
The PPP legislation was intended to help small businesses hardest hit by the coronavirus-related shutdowns and quarantines. Under the pandemic stimulus plan, $350 billion was earmarked to provide government-backed, low-interest, forgivable loans to small businesses, as defined by companies with fewer than 500 employees. Congress is now on the verge of passing legislation to fund another $250 billion in loans, in which businesses would receive the lesser of $10 million or a percentage of their payroll.
CORONAVIRUS SMALL BUSINESS LOAN PROGRAM RAN DRY — WHAT HAPPENS NOW?
The loans are forgivable if the business doesn't lay off its workers, but layoffs are often inevitable because the government checks only go so far and many didn't get the money before it ran out last week.
Thousands of small businesses applied, but as FOX Business has reported over the past two weeks, the initial funding allocated for the program was hardly enough to meet demand. One reason: Banks had to ration the money based on factors such as customer relationships and which outfits applied first. Banks said they were constrained by those benchmarks to make loans because Treasury didn’t specify how the loans would be handed out. Thus, they were afraid of legal liability if they set their own standards.
And the result has been devastating. According to the small business advocacy group the National Write Your Congressman organization, 70 percent of small businesses applied for the first tranche of the PPP loans, but banks could only approve 46 percent of those applications. Meanwhile, scores of small businesses are telling FOX Business they’re not getting money amid reports that big restaurant chains like Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse as well as publicly traded companies like Shake Shack and Potbelly Sandwich Shop got millions in these loans. Hedge funds and other financial businesses often get preferential treatment as well because they use banking services more than say a local hairdresser, as FOX Business reported.
And now banks are worried the backlash over how the loans were administered will stoke class warfare against the financial industry similar to or worse than what followed the 2008 financial crisis when banks got massive bailouts while Main Street suffered through the Great Recession and the weak economic recovery that followed.
FED'S BOSTIC SAYS U.S. SMALL BUSINESS MAY NEED UP TO $500 BILLION MONTHLY IN SUPPORT
Banks believe they will be unfairly tarnished by the problems with the loan program since the Treasury Department has given only broad guidance on handing out checks. Executives, for example, say they can't prioritize their lending based on need because the Treasury didn't stipulate need as lending criteria. As a result, they argue, they were forced to lend first to their best customers, which means many smaller businesses got pushed aside and money went to bigger, more financially secure businesses.
For those reasons, banks are looking to plug the loopholes as Congress gets ready to dole out more money after the first wave of funds that were depleted last week. Leading the effort, it appears, is JPMorgan; One person with direct knowledge of the matter told FOX Business that executives at JPMorgan on Monday were “in discussion with Treasury” on how to ensure the true small businesses get their fair share of the loans.
A JPMorgan spokesperson had no comment. A Treasury spokesperson did not respond to calls and text messages asking for comment.
Banking executives aren't hopeful that Treasury will write new rules to make sure small businesses aren't crowded out as the second round in loan money gets ready to be disbursed. “(The Senate) just wants to take the old bill and add an additional $250 billion to it," said a senior official at a bank lobby group who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "It’s the only way to pass this bill with Congress out of town.”
Altering any portion of the bill may prove too complicated when the money needs to be disbursed quickly, the official added. Even though loopholes in the bill are widely criticized, changing it could take discussions back to the drawing board, he said adding: “One person’s technical change is another person’s weakening of the bill.”
And the money is needed as soon as possible. The Federal Reserve has pumped an estimated $10 trillion of stimulus through money-printing, slashing interest rates and buying various risky securities in the market, which has had the effect of propping up trading revenues among investment banks, hedge funds, brokerages and private equity houses, and the stock market.
Small businesses, such as restaurants, coffee shops, butchers and any other business that depends on foot traffic, were among those companies most vulnerable to the measures designed to limit the spread of the virus. And they remain maybe the most important part of the economy, accounting for nearly 50 percent of the American workforce.
But unlike Wall Street, Main Street’s bailout has been orders of magnitude smaller; the federal government has passed a single $2 trillion spending plan to help individuals through payroll tax credits and free money, while Main Street businesses could apply for just a combined $600 billion in forgivable loans once the new PPP allotment is approved.
And many critics of the program say high unemployment numbers and a sharp slowdown in economic growth while the stock market has come off its lows are signs the Main Street stimulus hasn't been effective. Another indication of Main Street's economic despair as the virus shutdown continues: The price of oil.
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
Oil is seen as a key barometer of the economy's health partly because it can be used to indicate consumption, one of the key drivers of economic growth. Oil futures crashed Monday amid a sell-off that was sparked by technical factors and a realization that the economy is shakier than the recent rise in stock prices has been indicating.
However, longer-dated contracts show oil trading much higher, indicating market players believe the stimulus could help the economy recover in the summer or fall.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Must-Watch Trump Ad Knocks Pelosi: “Let Them Eat Ice Cream”

The Trump campaign on Monday released a new ad slamming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) for not taking the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic seriously .
While millions of Americans are out of work and struggling to put food on the table , Pelosi decided to show off her $ 24,000 dual fridges .
The freezers are stocked with various types of ice cream bars and sorbet and she has a basket of chocolate floating in her kitchen .
`` They ask for a quarter of a trillion dollars in 48 hours .
I do n't think so , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the stimulus package she derailed .
Small businesses across America have had to close up shop because they are not deemed `` essential . ''
They have had to lay off employees .
And some are even having to permanently close their business .
Going months without any cash flow has ravaged American families and businesses and yet Pelosi seems to think this is all fun and games and politics as usual .
It 's why she derailed a bipartisan , bicameral stimulus agreement at the last minute .
Instead of worrying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pushing her far-left agenda and wish list .
Instead of getting things done so Americans could see relief , she tried attaching stupid things , like offsetting airline emissions by 2025 , bailing out the United States Postal Service and forcing the federal minimum wage to increase to $ 15 an hour .
While Pelosi 's shoving ice cream and chocolate in her face , Americans are lining up at food banks and rationing food just to survive .
This is so many 's reality but it 's far-fetched for the speaker .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ typical elitist that Americans despise .
You should be ashamed of yourself .
Editor 's Note : Want to support Townhall so we can keep telling the truth about China and the virus they unleashed on the world ?
Join Townhall VIP and use the promo code WUHAN to get 25 % off VIP membership !

The Trump campaign on Monday released a new ad slamming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for not taking the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic seriously. While millions of Americans are out of work and struggling to put food on the table, Pelosi decided to show off her $24,000 dual fridges. The freezers are stocked with various types of ice cream bars and sorbet and she has a basket of chocolate floating in her kitchen.
"They ask for a quarter of a trillion dollars in 48 hours. I don't think so," Pelosi said with a smirk, referring to the stimulus package she derailed.
Small businesses across America have had to close up shop because they are not deemed "essential." They have had to lay off employees. And some are even having to permanently close their business. Going months without any cash flow has ravaged American families and businesses and yet Pelosi seems to think this is all fun and games and politics as usual. It's why she derailed a bipartisan, bicameral stimulus agreement at the last minute. Instead of worrying about Americans, she was focused on pushing her far-left agenda and wish list. Instead of getting things done so Americans could see relief, she tried attaching stupid things, like offsetting airline emissions by 2025, bailing out the United States Postal Service and forcing the federal minimum wage to increase to $15 an hour.
While Pelosi's shoving ice cream and chocolate in her face, Americans are lining up at food banks and rationing food just to survive. This is so many's reality but it's far-fetched for the speaker.
Congrats, Nancy. You're the typical elitist that Americans despise. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Brutal video.
“?????? ???????? ?????? ?????? ??????????.”
- ?????????? ????????????????????
pic.twitter.com/dCpwuelj8D — Tim Murtaugh - Text TRUMP to 88022 (@TimMurtaugh) April 20, 2020
Editor's Note: Want to support Townhall so we can keep telling the truth about China and the virus they unleashed on the world? Join Townhall VIP and use the promo code WUHAN to get 25% off VIP membership!


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Denmark and Poland Refuse to Bail Out Companies Registered Offshore

• Denmark and Poland wo n't give financial aid to companies registered in offshore tax havens .
• Governments around the world are scrambling to bail out their economies with huge stimulus packages amid the coronavirus crisis .
• Denmark and Poland are the first to exclude firms that incorporate themselves in famous tax havens , meaning they can avoid domestic business taxes .
• `` Companies based on tax havens in accordance with EU guidelines can not receive compensation , insofar as it is possible to cut them off , '' a translation of a Saturday statement from Denmark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Companies that seek to dodge their obligations to broader society by cutting their tax bills should n't expect to get bailed out when things go wrong , '' Robert Palmer , the executive director of Tax Justice UK , told Business Insider .
Denmark and Poland are refusing to let companies registered in offshore tax havens access financial aid from their coronavirus bailout packages .
The Danish finance ministry on Saturday extended its bailout program into July but stressed that firms based in tax havens would no longer be covered .
`` Companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schemes must pay the tax to which they are liable under international agreements and national rules , '' a translation of the statement said .
`` Companies based on tax havens in accordance with EU guidelines can not receive compensation , insofar as it is possible to cut them off under EU law and any other international obligations . ''
Poland took similar measures on April 8 .
Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said large companies wanting a chunk of a roughly $ 6 billion bailout fund must pay domestic business taxes .
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are the bane of modern economies , '' he added .
A bench roped off by the police in London .
REUTERS/Henry Nicholls/File Photo Tax havens are countries that have low or no business taxes .
Companies that officially register themselves at addresses in them often avoid paying business taxes to the countries in which they operate .
Among the most famous havens are Gibraltar , the Bahamas , Andorra , Bermuda , the British Virgin Islands , the Cayman Islands , and Panama .
It is unclear whether other European nations will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but it is unlikely that authorities in the UK , the Netherlands , Switzerland , and Luxembourg will do so .
All four have provisions making them attractive to businesses that also allow them to be registered offshore .
`` Together , they are responsible for half of the world 's corporate tax avoidance risks , '' the Tax Justice Network said last year .
`` Companies that seek to dodge their obligations to broader society by cutting their tax bills should n't expect to get bailed out when things go wrong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director at Tax Justice UK , told Business Insider .
`` The UK government should seriously look at copying Denmark 's approach .
Any bailout needs to come with conditions to ensure good business behaviour . ''
A spokeswoman for Her Majesty 's Treasury told Business Insider : `` Obviously we 've set up schemes at pace , and they are designed to support jobs in Britain . ''
`` Sometimes that will involve foreign companies who employ people in the UK for example .
But we are looking into the specific point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have already taken considerable action . ''
Some industries are famous for making the most of offshore tax breaks — most notably the cruise industry , which has been ravaged by the coronavirus pandemic .
Carnival Corporation , Royal Caribbean , and Norwegian Cruise Line , which make up more than two-thirds of the industry , are formally registered in Panama , Liberia , and Bermuda .
Several cruise ships have played host to major coronavirus outbreaks while at sea , drawing international media attention .
Cruise operators had called on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate 's $ 2 trillion relief bill would provide a lifeline .
However , it stipulated that companies must be `` created or organized '' in the US , and the Cruise Lines International Association told The Washington Post on March 26 that major cruise lines would be unable to get aid .
The cruise ship Diamond Princess anchored in Yokohama , Japan , on February 7 .
Kim Kyung-Hoon/Reuters Experts and campaigners in several nations have called on governments to go after offshore funds , saying that claiming these taxes is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the coronavirus pandemic .
`` Sustainable , robust public responses to shocks require administrative capacity and tax resources , '' Rasmus Corlin Christensen , a research associate at the International Centre for Tax and Development , told the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists earlier this month .
`` Tax avoidance and global tax competition , more broadly , strain the ability of countries to raise those resources . ''
Fabio Fazio , a prominent Italian broadcaster , said tax avoiders were complicit in deaths from the virus .
A doctor in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during a night shift in his ward in the COVID-19 section of the Maggiore Hospital in Parma , Italy , on April 8 .
Associated Press '' It has become evident that those who do not pay their taxes are not only guilty of a crime , but of murder : if the beds and the respirators are not there they are partly to blame , '' he wrote in an article for La Repubblica last month .
Alan Rusbridger , the former editor of The Guardian , said the UK government should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relinquish them in exchange for government aid .
`` We 're starkly realising our public services are drastically underfunded .
So here 's a suggestion : before any company receives a penny in public Covid-19 support they must first pledge to scrap any artificial tax avoidance arrangements in future , '' he tweeted on March 22 .
`` A huge number of corporations engineer ways of avoiding putting any tax the way of our hospitals & other essential services , '' he added .
This story was edited shortly after publication to clarify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He is a research associate , not a campaigner .

Denmark and Poland won't give financial aid to companies registered in offshore tax havens.
Governments around the world are scrambling to bail out their economies with huge stimulus packages amid the coronavirus crisis.
Denmark and Poland are the first to exclude firms that incorporate themselves in famous tax havens, meaning they can avoid domestic business taxes.
"Companies based on tax havens in accordance with EU guidelines cannot receive compensation, insofar as it is possible to cut them off," a translation of a Saturday statement from Denmark's finance ministry said.
"Companies that seek to dodge their obligations to broader society by cutting their tax bills shouldn't expect to get bailed out when things go wrong," Robert Palmer, the executive director of Tax Justice UK, told Business Insider.
Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.
Morning Brew Insider recommends waking up with, a daily newsletter. Loading Something is loading. Thanks for signing up! Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. download the app Email address By clicking “Sign Up,” you also agree to marketing emails from both Insider and Morning Brew; and you accept Insider’s Terms and Privacy Policy Click here for Morning Brew’s privacy policy.
Denmark and Poland are refusing to let companies registered in offshore tax havens access financial aid from their coronavirus bailout packages.
The Danish finance ministry on Saturday extended its bailout program into July but stressed that firms based in tax havens would no longer be covered.
"Companies seeking compensation after the extension of the schemes must pay the tax to which they are liable under international agreements and national rules," a translation of the statement said.
"Companies based on tax havens in accordance with EU guidelines cannot receive compensation, insofar as it is possible to cut them off under EU law and any other international obligations."
Poland took similar measures on April 8. Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said large companies wanting a chunk of a roughly $6 billion bailout fund must pay domestic business taxes.
"Let's end tax havens, which are the bane of modern economies," he added.
A bench roped off by the police in London. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls/File Photo
Tax havens are countries that have low or no business taxes. Companies that officially register themselves at addresses in them often avoid paying business taxes to the countries in which they operate.
Among the most famous havens are Gibraltar, the Bahamas, Andorra, Bermuda, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, and Panama.
It is unclear whether other European nations will follow the example of Denmark and Poland, but it is unlikely that authorities in the UK, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Luxembourg will do so. All four have provisions making them attractive to businesses that also allow them to be registered offshore.
"Together, they are responsible for half of the world's corporate tax avoidance risks," the Tax Justice Network said last year.
"Companies that seek to dodge their obligations to broader society by cutting their tax bills shouldn't expect to get bailed out when things go wrong," Robert Palmer, the executive director at Tax Justice UK, told Business Insider.
"The UK government should seriously look at copying Denmark's approach. Any bailout needs to come with conditions to ensure good business behaviour."
A spokeswoman for Her Majesty's Treasury told Business Insider: "Obviously we've set up schemes at pace, and they are designed to support jobs in Britain."
"Sometimes that will involve foreign companies who employ people in the UK for example. But we are looking into the specific point on tax havens where as you know we have already taken considerable action."
The British Virgin Islands. wikimediacommons/Henry A-W
Some industries are famous for making the most of offshore tax breaks — most notably the cruise industry, which has been ravaged by the coronavirus pandemic.
Carnival Corporation, Royal Caribbean, and Norwegian Cruise Line, which make up more than two-thirds of the industry, are formally registered in Panama, Liberia, and Bermuda.
Several cruise ships have played host to major coronavirus outbreaks while at sea, drawing international media attention.
Cruise operators had called on the US government for a bailout and hoped the Senate's $2 trillion relief bill would provide a lifeline. However, it stipulated that companies must be "created or organized" in the US, and the Cruise Lines International Association told The Washington Post on March 26 that major cruise lines would be unable to get aid.
The cruise ship Diamond Princess anchored in Yokohama, Japan, on February 7. Kim Kyung-Hoon/Reuters
Experts and campaigners in several nations have called on governments to go after offshore funds, saying that claiming these taxes is vital to weathering the financial crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
"Sustainable, robust public responses to shocks require administrative capacity and tax resources," Rasmus Corlin Christensen, a research associate at the International Centre for Tax and Development, told the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists earlier this month.
"Tax avoidance and global tax competition, more broadly, strain the ability of countries to raise those resources."
Fabio Fazio, a prominent Italian broadcaster, said tax avoiders were complicit in deaths from the virus.
A doctor in a lounge after completing a round of examinations during a night shift in his ward in the COVID-19 section of the Maggiore Hospital in Parma, Italy, on April 8. Associated Press
"It has become evident that those who do not pay their taxes are not only guilty of a crime, but of murder: if the beds and the respirators are not there they are partly to blame," he wrote in an article for La Repubblica last month.
Alan Rusbridger, the former editor of The Guardian, said the UK government should force companies with offshore tax breaks to relinquish them in exchange for government aid.
"We're starkly realising our public services are drastically underfunded. So here's a suggestion: before any company receives a penny in public Covid-19 support they must first pledge to scrap any artificial tax avoidance arrangements in future," he tweeted on March 22.
"A huge number of corporations engineer ways of avoiding putting any tax the way of our hospitals & other essential services," he added.
This story was edited shortly after publication to clarify the job description of Rasmus Corlin Christensen. He is a research associate, not a campaigner.