bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Trump to Purchase $75 Million Barrels of Oil for Strategic Petroleum Reserve

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox .
Sign up here .
With oil prices sitting deep in the red for the first time in history , shocking even the most seasoned energy veterans , President Trump plans to turn the financial bloodletting into an opportunity for the United States .
“ Based on the record low price of oil , it is at a level that is very interesting to a lot of people , we ’ re filling up our national petroleum reserves , strategic reserves and we are looking to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the reserves themselves that would top it out , that would be the first time in a long time its been topped out and we ’ d get it at the right price , ” said Trump .
During Monday 's session , West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures for May delivery cratered by 305 percent to - $ 36.73 a barrel .
At a price below zero , buyers would be paid to take delivery as there are costs associated with transportation and storage .
WTI closed at its lowest level @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to Dow Jones Market Data .
OIL PRICES NEGATIVE BUT DO N'T EXPECT PRICES AT THE PUMP TO FOLLOW The SPR was created between 1973-1974 after the oil embargo , as noted by the U.S. Department of Energy .
Its purpose is to act as a shield against the disruption or depletion of oil supplies for the U.S .
If Trump 's plan gets approved by Congress the SPR would act as the motherload of U.S. storage purchased on the cheap .
“ We ’ ll ask for permission to buy it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other it will be full '' he added .
Oil has been crushed this year as the coronavirus has eliminated global demand , even before dipping into negative territory crude had lost over 60 percent of its value this year alone .
Adding fuel to the fire , a price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia that delayed a production cut in concert with OPEC , that failed to stop the global carnage .
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE As for a potential rebound in crude ?
`` Nobody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but it is short-term , '' Trump said .
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.
With oil prices sitting deep in the red for the first time in history, shocking even the most seasoned energy veterans, President Trump plans to turn the financial bloodletting into an opportunity for the United States.
OIL CRASHES 305% NOW -$36.73 A BARREL
“Based on the record low price of oil, it is at a level that is very interesting to a lot of people, we’re filling up our national petroleum reserves, strategic reserves and we are looking to put as much as 75 million barrels into the reserves themselves that would top it out, that would be the first time in a long time it's been topped out and we’d get it at the right price,” said Trump.
Ticker Security Last Change Change % USO UNITED STATES OIL FUND L.P. 72.62 -1.20 -1.63%
During Monday's session, West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures for May delivery cratered by 305 percent to -$36.73 a barrel. At a price below zero, buyers would be paid to take delivery as there are costs associated with transportation and storage. WTI closed at its lowest level since recordkeeping began in March 1983, according to Dow Jones Market Data.
OIL PRICES NEGATIVE BUT DON'T EXPECT PRICES AT THE PUMP TO FOLLOW
The SPR was created between 1973-1974 after the oil embargo, as noted by the U.S. Department of Energy. Its purpose is to act as a shield against the disruption or depletion of oil supplies for the U.S.
If Trump's plan gets approved by Congress the SPR would act as the motherload of U.S. storage purchased on the cheap.
“We’ll ask for permission to buy it or store it one way or the other it will be full" he added.
Oil has been crushed this year as the coronavirus has eliminated global demand, even before dipping into negative territory crude had lost over 60 percent of its value this year alone. Adding fuel to the fire, a price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia that delayed a production cut in concert with OPEC, that failed to stop the global carnage.
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
As for a potential rebound in crude?
"Nobody has ever heard of negative oil before but it is short-term," Trump said.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Agreement Nears on $470 Billion “Phase 3.5” Coronavirus Relief Bill

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox .
Sign up here .
Negotiators from the House , Senate and White House are close to finalizing an accord on the so-called “ phase 3.5 ” response to the coronavirus pandemic and hope to have an agreement late Monday or Tuesday , Fox News is told .
The response will include $ 310 billion for the Paycheck Protection Program ( PPP ) , which offers grants to small businesses struggling to make payroll , sources tell Fox News .
The $ 350 billion fund depleted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 60 billion ( including $ 50 billion in loans and $ 10 billion in grants ) would be allocated to economic disaster loans .
Also included : $ 75 billion for hospitals and $ 25 billion for coronavirus testing .
The total of the package would be north of $ 470 billion .
House Democrats were on a caucus-wide conference call late Monday , discussing the next steps .
Progressives have some reservations with some provisions in the current bill framework – as does the Congressional Black Caucus .
Many Democrats are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for state and local governments in the planned bill .
And , some Republicans are signaling they may be reluctant to tackle other measures related to coronavirus , considering the staggering price tag of the measures already in the queue .
Fox News is told that calculus could change if lawmakers believe they now need to respond to the oil market cratering to a historic low .
The stimulus proposal currently under consideration would not include money for state and local governments “ nor the Kennedy Center , ” said one source .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ performing arts center to receive $ 25 million in the last stimulus , and Republicans have sought to claw back the money after administrators there conducted layoffs even after obtaining the funds .
However , Republicans and Democrats are still negotiating over state-driven approaches for testing .
So far , there are not specific strings as to how hospitals would use the money .
If an accord comes together , the Senate could move the package on Tuesday when it convenes at 4 p.m .
ET – with a skeleton crew on hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no other senator present in the chamber objects .
Then , the bill would move to the House , possibly Wednesday or Thursday .
“ We won ’ t know if we are able to clear it by unanimous consent until we have a product , '' Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , told Fox News on Monday afternoon .
`` The talks are continuing .
... And we 're getting closer , and hopefully we 'll have an agreement of some kind later today.
” Speaking on the Senate floor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on replenishing the PPP .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , justified the delay on Sunday by saying she wanted more funding for testing and hospitals -- uncontroversial demands that even left-of-center commentators have pointed out that Republicans never opposed .
“ It ’ s now been four days since the Paycheck Protection Program ran out of money .
Republicans have been trying to secure more funding for this critical program for a week and a half now , ” McConnell said .
“ At this hour , our Democratic colleagues are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so the Senate , regretfully , will not be able to pass more funding for Americans ’ paychecks today . ''
McConnell added : “ However , since this is so urgent , I have asked that the Senate meet again tomorrow in a new session that was not previously scheduled , and the Democratic Leader has agreed to my request .
Colleagues it ’ s past time , past time to get this done for the country.
” President Trump told reporters at Sunday 's White House coronavirus press briefing that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We 're looking to help hospitals , rural hospitals as part of the package , '' Trump said .
`` We could have an answer tomorrow . ''
At Monday 's briefing , Trump said he hoped for a Senate vote on Tuesday .
The office of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer , D-Md.
, signaled over the weekend that House members should be ready to come back Wednesday .
Hoyer ’ s office also indicated they could take a “ roll call vote.
” On Monday afternoon , Hoyer told Democrats that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but that it could slip to Thursday .
Fox News is told that the “ appetite for a roll call vote is higher ” than the vote taken in late March on the phase 3 coronavirus bill , totaling $ 2.2 trillion .
It ’ s possible the House Rules Committee may have to meet Wednesday or later in the week to prep the House to handle the measure sent over from the Senate .
The Rules Committee is prepared to meet in a larger space if necessary .
But , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to meet on the `` phase 3.5 '' bill .
The House could advance this plan as a “ suspension ” bill .
That means the House expedites the process , but needs a two-thirds supermajority to pass .
If there is a roll call vote in the House , Fox News is told the House would likely clump the entire House membership into six or seven clumps alphabetically and have members file into the chamber in groups .
This could consume several hours – but help members exercise social distancing .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that the House would be lucky to get 280 members there .
Fox News is told a big question is if the House could vote on other items .
One issue could be a vote to launch the select committee to review the pandemic response engineered by Pelosi .
Most Republicans will oppose the creation of the select committee .
That could entail action from the Rules Committee and a possible vote .
There is also discussion about the concept of “ remote ” or “ proxy ” voting .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to implement either of those strategies .
Pelosi has said a vote to change the rules temporarily for voting must be “ bipartisan.
” That could mean Pelosi doesn ’ t have to move on the proxy or remote voting issue so long as there no consensus on the next bill .
It could also mean that she is unwilling to commit because she doesn ’ t have GOP buy-in .
It could also mean that the Speaker doesn ’ t have consensus on her side for proxy or remote voting .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans for blocking the next round of funding for small businesses .
The theory is that the sides have to get a deal this week because the cupboard for the small business program went bare last week .
So , as one senior House Democratic aid said to Fox , such a deadline “ tends to focus the mind.
” Regardless , a plan for remote or proxy voting would likely have to go to the Rules Committee before the House floor .
EXCLUSIVE : LEAD NIH CORONAVIRUS RESEARCHER ENGAGED WITH THEORY THAT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FAUCI Meanwhile , oil futures plunged below zero for the first time on Monday as demand for energy collapses amid the coronavirus pandemic and traders sought to avoid owning crude with nowhere to store it .
Fox News is told the development could impact the contents of the upcoming stimulus package .
Stocks were also slipping on Wall Street in afternoon trading , with the S & P 500 down 1.2 percent , but the market ’ s most dramatic action by far was in oil , where benchmark U.S. crude for May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as of 2:30 p.m .
ET .
It was nearly $ 60 at the start of the year , before business-shutdown orders swept the world and idled factories , offices and automobiles .
Much of the drop was chalked up to technical reasons — the May delivery contract is close to expiring so its trading volume was light , which can exacerbate swings .
But prices for deliveries even further into the future , which were seeing larger trading volumes , also plunged .
Demand for oil has collapsed so much that facilities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The government can declare whatever they want in terms of encouraging people to get out and do stuff , ” said Willie Delwiche , investment strategist at Baird .
“ Whether or not broad swaths of society do that remains to be seen .
It ’ s going to take seeing people start to get out and do stuff again .
That will be the necessary positive development , not just declaring getting things open.
” Fox News ' Jason Donner and Marisa Shultz , as well as The Associated Press , @ @ @ @ @

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox. Sign up here.
Negotiators from the House, Senate and White House are close to finalizing an accord on the so-called “phase 3.5” response to the coronavirus pandemic and hope to have an agreement late Monday or Tuesday, Fox News is told.
The response will include $310 billion for the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), which offers grants to small businesses struggling to make payroll, sources tell Fox News. The $350 billion fund depleted last Thursday.
A separate provision worth $60 billion (including $50 billion in loans and $10 billion in grants) would be allocated to economic disaster loans. Also included: $75 billion for hospitals and $25 billion for coronavirus testing. The total of the package would be north of $470 billion.
CORONAVIRUS TIMELINE SHOWS MANY FLIP-FLOPS
House Democrats were on a caucus-wide conference call late Monday, discussing the next steps. Progressives have some reservations with some provisions in the current bill framework – as does the Congressional Black Caucus. Many Democrats are still concerned by the lack of money for state and local governments in the planned bill. And, some Republicans are signaling they may be reluctant to tackle other measures related to coronavirus, considering the staggering price tag of the measures already in the queue.
Fox News is told that calculus could change if lawmakers believe they now need to respond to the oil market cratering to a historic low.
The stimulus proposal currently under consideration would not include money for state and local governments “nor the Kennedy Center,” said one source. Democrats pushed for the Washington, D.C. performing arts center to receive $25 million in the last stimulus, and Republicans have sought to claw back the money after administrators there conducted layoffs even after obtaining the funds.
However, Republicans and Democrats are still negotiating over state-driven approaches for testing. So far, there are not specific strings as to how hospitals would use the money.
If an accord comes together, the Senate could move the package on Tuesday when it convenes at 4 p.m. ET – with a skeleton crew on hand – likely by unanimous consent, meaning no other senator present in the chamber objects. Then, the bill would move to the House, possibly Wednesday or Thursday.
“We won’t know if we are able to clear it by unanimous consent until we have a product," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told Fox News on Monday afternoon. "The talks are continuing. ... And we're getting closer, and hopefully we'll have an agreement of some kind later today.”
Speaking on the Senate floor, McConell criticized Democrats for delaying action on replenishing the PPP. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., justified the delay on Sunday by saying she wanted more funding for testing and hospitals -- uncontroversial demands that even left-of-center commentators have pointed out that Republicans never opposed.
“It’s now been four days since the Paycheck Protection Program ran out of money. Republicans have been trying to secure more funding for this critical program for a week and a half now,” McConnell said. “At this hour, our Democratic colleagues are still prolonging their discussions with the administration, so the Senate, regretfully, will not be able to pass more funding for Americans’ paychecks today."
McConnell added: “However, since this is so urgent, I have asked that the Senate meet again tomorrow in a new session that was not previously scheduled, and the Democratic Leader has agreed to my request. Colleagues it’s past time, past time to get this done for the country.”
President Trump told reporters at Sunday's White House coronavirus press briefing that a PPP deal was imminent. "We're looking to help hospitals, rural hospitals as part of the package," Trump said. "We could have an answer tomorrow." At Monday's briefing, Trump said he hoped for a Senate vote on Tuesday.
The office of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., signaled over the weekend that House members should be ready to come back Wednesday. Hoyer’s office also indicated they could take a “roll call vote.” On Monday afternoon, Hoyer told Democrats that they are hoping to vote Wednesday, but that it could slip to Thursday.
Fox News is told that the “appetite for a roll call vote is higher” than the vote taken in late March on the phase 3 coronavirus bill, totaling $2.2 trillion.
It’s possible the House Rules Committee may have to meet Wednesday or later in the week to prep the House to handle the measure sent over from the Senate. The Rules Committee is prepared to meet in a larger space if necessary. But, it is generally thought the Rules Committee would not have to meet on the "phase 3.5" bill. The House could advance this plan as a “suspension” bill. That means the House expedites the process, but needs a two-thirds supermajority to pass.
If there is a roll call vote in the House, Fox News is told the House would likely clump the entire House membership into six or seven clumps alphabetically and have members file into the chamber in groups. This could consume several hours – but help members exercise social distancing. One source told Fox News, however, that the House would be lucky to get 280 members there.
Fox News is told a big question is if the House could vote on other items. One issue could be a vote to launch the select committee to review the pandemic response engineered by Pelosi. Most Republicans will oppose the creation of the select committee. That could entail action from the Rules Committee and a possible vote.
There is also discussion about the concept of “remote” or “proxy” voting. It’s unclear if there is any energy to implement either of those strategies. Pelosi has said a vote to change the rules temporarily for voting must be “bipartisan.”
That could mean Pelosi doesn’t have to move on the proxy or remote voting issue so long as there no consensus on the next bill. It could also mean that she is unwilling to commit because she doesn’t have GOP buy-in. It could also mean that the Speaker doesn’t have consensus on her side for proxy or remote voting.
That said, Democrats have been hammered by Republicans for blocking the next round of funding for small businesses. The theory is that the sides have to get a deal this week because the cupboard for the small business program went bare last week. So, as one senior House Democratic aid said to Fox, such a deadline “tends to focus the mind.”
Regardless, a plan for remote or proxy voting would likely have to go to the Rules Committee before the House floor.
EXCLUSIVE: LEAD NIH CORONAVIRUS RESEARCHER ENGAGED WITH THEORY THAT PANDEMIC IS BLACK 'GENOCIDE,' SLAMMED FAUCI
Meanwhile, oil futures plunged below zero for the first time on Monday as demand for energy collapses amid the coronavirus pandemic and traders sought to avoid owning crude with nowhere to store it. Fox News is told the development could impact the contents of the upcoming stimulus package.
Stocks were also slipping on Wall Street in afternoon trading, with the S&P 500 down 1.2 percent, but the market’s most dramatic action by far was in oil, where benchmark U.S. crude for May delivery plummeted to negative $35.20, as of 2:30 p.m. ET. It was nearly $60 at the start of the year, before business-shutdown orders swept the world and idled factories, offices and automobiles.
Much of the drop was chalked up to technical reasons — the May delivery contract is close to expiring so its trading volume was light, which can exacerbate swings. But prices for deliveries even further into the future, which were seeing larger trading volumes, also plunged. Demand for oil has collapsed so much that facilities for storing crude are nearly full.
“The government can declare whatever they want in terms of encouraging people to get out and do stuff,” said Willie Delwiche, investment strategist at Baird. “Whether or not broad swaths of society do that remains to be seen. It’s going to take seeing people start to get out and do stuff again. That will be the necessary positive development, not just declaring getting things open.”
Fox News' Jason Donner and Marisa Shultz, as well as The Associated Press, contributed to this report.


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--DC Police “Actively Investigating” Biden Sexual Assault Allegation

The Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia is actively investigating the complaint against Joe Biden brought by Tara Reade , the woman who accused Biden of sexually assaulting her in 1993 , despite her allegation being impossible to prosecute since it is past the statute of limitations .
“ This is an active , ongoing investigation , and there are no further details to provide at this time , ” a Metropolitan Police Department spokesperson told the Washington Examiner Tuesday regarding Reade ’ s case .
“ Cases that are handled by the Metropolitan Police Department ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prior to being assigned a disposition .
This case is progressing through the review process.
” The investigation remaining open , despite the alleged incident occurring past the statute of limitations , struck multiple experts as highly unusual .
that in 1993 when she worked as a staff assistant in Biden ’ s Senate office , he pushed her up against the wall and penetrated her with his fingers .
Biden ’ s presidential campaign vehemently denies Reade ’ s allegations , although the former two-term vice president has yet to comment on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this story : Everything we know about the Biden sexual assault allegation ] On April 9 , Reade filed an incident report with the D.C. police that said she “ disclosed that she was the victim of a sexual assault which was committed by Subject-2 in 1993 . ''
Reade has confirmed that Subject-2 is Joe Biden , 77 , who was a Delaware senator from 1973-2009 before becoming President Barack Obama 's vice president .
Reade , 56 , said that she filed an incident report for “ safety reasons , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trail in case “ something happened to me ” and to show that she is serious about her allegation since it is illegal to make a false police report .
Since coming forward with her allegations against Biden , she regularly receives threatening and vulgar messages , she told the Washington Examiner .
Because the incident is past the statute of limitations , she told the Washington Examiner that she expected the police to do no more than note her complaint and not investigate it .
Reade told the Washington Examiner that she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civil court , where D.C. has removed the statute of limitations on sex crimes .
Reade said that she was assigned a victim ’ s advocate within the police department and connected to another one through an outside nonprofit group .
“ They 're helping me mainly with safety planning , ” she said .
The D.C. police did not confirm that Reade was assigned a victim ’ s advocate , although experts say such aid is standard for any individual who claims they were assaulted .
Former police officers who have worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , say there could be numerous reasons why the case has yet to be closed .
“ Sometimes they receive information that is never going to lead to a criminal charge , but nonetheless , does invoke some of their obligations as public safety officials , ” said Wendy Murphy , a professor of sexual violence law at New England Law Boston and a former sex crimes prosecutor .
“ Is it usual or typical ?
I think the answer is no .
But this is also not a usual , typical case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasons that the case remains open nearly two weeks after Reade made her report , Murphy said , could be that the officers have concerns about safety , or they could think that what Reade reported leads to other revelations .
“ You don ’ t waste resources reviewing something that has no purpose , ” Murphy said .
The decision by the D.C. police department struck several former police officers as peculiar , citing the fact that there is ultimately little law enforcement can do should they believe Reade ’ s allegations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years on the force in Washington and spoke to the Washington Examiner on the condition of anonymity because he now works as a consultant for various police departments around the country , said the move struck him as out-of-the-ordinary .
“ I wouldn ’ t expect a department to look into this for that long , maybe just take a report and close it out .
It would also automatically be closed .
They wouldn ’ t spend time investigating something they can ’ t prosecute , ” the individual said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has plenty of work without creating it .
Obviously , it ’ s a very high-profile case , so high-profile cases get a lot more attention , unfortunately , than if the victim or offender wasn ’ t a known public figure .
In spite of that , I wouldn ’ t expect them to proceed on something that had no chance of getting prosecution.
” Robert Pusins , a former police officer in Florida who now serves as an expert witness in civil trials , said that he thinks the case is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person such as a former vice president.
” “ It ’ s a balancing act , and either way , the police are gon na be caught in the middle and criticized for not investigating thoroughly or investigating thoroughly a 30-year-old claim , ” Pusins said .
Reade told the Washington Examiner that she hopes this development encourages any other people who might have an allegation against Biden .
“ There is a mechanism for them to remain anonymous by going to the D.C. metro police , or they can direct them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

The Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia is actively investigating the complaint against Joe Biden brought by Tara Reade, the woman who accused Biden of sexually assaulting her in 1993, despite her allegation being impossible to prosecute since it is past the statute of limitations.
“This is an active, ongoing investigation, and there are no further details to provide at this time,” a Metropolitan Police Department spokesperson told the Washington Examiner Tuesday regarding Reade’s case. “Cases that are handled by the Metropolitan Police Department’s Sexual Assault Unit go through a multi-review prior to being assigned a disposition. This case is progressing through the review process.”
The investigation remaining open, despite the alleged incident occurring past the statute of limitations, struck multiple experts as highly unusual.
Reade alleges that in 1993 when she worked as a staff assistant in Biden’s Senate office, he pushed her up against the wall and penetrated her with his fingers. Biden’s presidential campaign vehemently denies Reade’s allegations, although the former two-term vice president has yet to comment on the matter directly.
[More on this story: Everything we know about the Biden sexual assault allegation]
On April 9, Reade filed an incident report with the D.C. police that said she “disclosed that she was the victim of a sexual assault which was committed by Subject-2 in 1993." Reade has confirmed that Subject-2 is Joe Biden, 77, who was a Delaware senator from 1973-2009 before becoming President Barack Obama's vice president.
Reade, 56, said that she filed an incident report for “safety reasons,” for the purpose of establishing a paper trail in case “something happened to me” and to show that she is serious about her allegation since it is illegal to make a false police report. Since coming forward with her allegations against Biden, she regularly receives threatening and vulgar messages, she told the Washington Examiner.
Because the incident is past the statute of limitations, she told the Washington Examiner that she expected the police to do no more than note her complaint and not investigate it. Reade told the Washington Examiner that she has no plans to sue Biden in civil court, where D.C. has removed the statute of limitations on sex crimes.
Reade said that she was assigned a victim’s advocate within the police department and connected to another one through an outside nonprofit group. “They're helping me mainly with safety planning,” she said. The D.C. police did not confirm that Reade was assigned a victim’s advocate, although experts say such aid is standard for any individual who claims they were assaulted.
Former police officers who have worked in D.C., and sex crime experts, say there could be numerous reasons why the case has yet to be closed.
“Sometimes they receive information that is never going to lead to a criminal charge, but nonetheless, does invoke some of their obligations as public safety officials,” said Wendy Murphy, a professor of sexual violence law at New England Law Boston and a former sex crimes prosecutor.
“Is it usual or typical? I think the answer is no. But this is also not a usual, typical case,” Murphy said.
Among the reasons that the case remains open nearly two weeks after Reade made her report, Murphy said, could be that the officers have concerns about safety, or they could think that what Reade reported leads to other revelations.
“You don’t waste resources reviewing something that has no purpose,” Murphy said.
The decision by the D.C. police department struck several former police officers as peculiar, citing the fact that there is ultimately little law enforcement can do should they believe Reade’s allegations.
One former officer, who spent years on the force in Washington and spoke to the Washington Examiner on the condition of anonymity because he now works as a consultant for various police departments around the country, said the move struck him as out-of-the-ordinary.
“I wouldn’t expect a department to look into this for that long, maybe just take a report and close it out. It would also automatically be closed. They wouldn’t spend time investigating something they can’t prosecute,” the individual said. “I’m sure the D.C. PD has plenty of work without creating it. Obviously, it’s a very high-profile case, so high-profile cases get a lot more attention, unfortunately, than if the victim or offender wasn’t a known public figure. In spite of that, I wouldn’t expect them to proceed on something that had no chance of getting prosecution.”
Robert Pusins, a former police officer in Florida who now serves as an expert witness in civil trials, said that he thinks the case is open because “it involves a high-profile person such as a former vice president.”
“It’s a balancing act, and either way, the police are gonna be caught in the middle and criticized for not investigating thoroughly or investigating thoroughly a 30-year-old claim,” Pusins said.
Reade told the Washington Examiner that she hopes this development encourages any other people who might have an allegation against Biden.
“There is a mechanism for them to remain anonymous by going to the D.C. metro police, or they can direct them to their law enforcement,” she said.


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Negative Views of China Continue Growing in U.S.

Since President Donald Trump took office in 2017 , his approach to U.S.-China relations has included increased pressure via tariffs and trade war rhetoric , and now , with the onset of an unprecedented pandemic , the stage has been set for both sides to cast aspersions on the other .
Against this backdrop , negative views of China have continued to grow , according to a new Pew Research Center survey of Americans conducted in March .
Roughly two-thirds now say they have an unfavorable view of China , the most negative rating for the country since the Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and up nearly 20 percentage points since the start of the Trump administration .
Positive views of China ’ s leader , President Xi Jinping , are also at historically low levels .
Economic factors , such as job losses to China and the trade deficit , remain key concerns for the American public .
But other issues – including Chinese human rights policies and environmental degradation – also worry Americans .
Many of these issues play a role in how the public views China more broadly : Those who see the China-related @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serious problem generally have less favorable views of China overall .
As the economies of both China and the United States struggle with the impact of the current pandemic , more Americans now see the U.S. as the world ’ s leading economic power than at any time over the past 12 years .
In fact , Americans now see the U.S. as more of an economic powerhouse than China by roughly two-to-one ( 59 % vs. 30 % ) .
Americans also overwhelmingly believe their country leads the world militarily and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leadership as opposed to that of China .
In some ways , this is a partisan story .
Republicans continue to be more wary of China than Democrats across many questions in this report .
Nearly three-quarters of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents see China unfavorably , compared with roughly six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic leaners .
They are also more worried about China when it comes to cybersecurity and economic issues such as job losses to China and the trade imbalance .
Republicans are more likely than Democrats to see the United States outpacing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic power as well as the world ’ s top military .
And GOP supporters almost universally say it is better that the world be led by the U.S .
Still , negative views of China increased slightly among Democrats this year , so partisans of both stripes are now largely negative toward the superpower .
In fact , after seeing large increases in negative views of China from 2018 to 2019 , both parties registered their most unfavorable opinions to date in 2020 .
These are among the findings of a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March 3 to 29 , 2020 , among 1,000 adults in the U.S .
The survey also finds that younger people , who have historically been more positive than older Americans toward China , now increasingly hold negative views of the country and are more prone to see it as a threat to the U.S. than in previous years .
Older Americans , however , still take a more negative stance than their younger compatriots on most aspects of the U.S.-China relationship .
Views of China have soured further in 2020 , building @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between 2018 and 2019 .
Roughly two-thirds of Americans now have a negative opinion of China , the highest percentage recorded since Pew Research Center began asking the question in 2005 .
Only about a quarter in the U.S. report a favorable attitude .
The survey took place as the coronavirus outbreak spread throughout the U.S. , with several states implementing lockdowns and death tolls multiplying at a rapid clip .
While China ’ s handling of the virus may have made an impression on some Americans , it does not appear that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ course of March shifted attitudes toward China during that period .
Views of China did not significantly change when comparing those surveyed before and after March 12 , approximately when the NBA indefinitely postponed the remainder of the season and actor Tom Hanks announced testing positive for COVID-19 on social media .
Americans interviewed prior to March 13 , when the U.S. government declared a national emergency , had equally negative views toward China as those interviewed on or after that date , even when holding constant age , education , gender and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how the Center has dealt with unforeseen events during fieldwork in the past , see “ When the Unexpected Happens , What ’ s a Survey Researcher To Do ?
” ) Across demographic groups , negative views of China abound .
Roughly six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have unfavorable views of China , as do roughly seven-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents .
Those with a college degree are just as likely as those with less than a college degree to hold negative views of China ; roughly two-thirds of each group voice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ages 50 and older , are more likely than those ages 18 to 29 to have unfavorable views of China .
This has been the case every year since the Center first asked the question 15 years ago .
But while half or more of those 50 and older have held negative views of China since 2012 , this is the first year in which more than half of younger Americans also have an unfavorable opinion .
Among this age group , negative views have roughly doubled since the question was first asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with Republicans tending to be more negative than Democrats .
Still , both partisan groups – for the second year in a row – have recorded their most negative assessments of China since the Center began asking this question in 2005 .
Views of President Xi reach new low in U.S. As ratings for China have declined , so too has confidence in Chinese President Xi Jinping .
Roughly seven-in-ten Americans ( 71 % ) say they do not have confidence in Xi to do the right thing when it comes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center first asked the question .
Just 22 % say they have faith in the Chinese leader , down 15 percentage points since last year .
The drop in confidence from 2019 to 2020 is especially notable .
While views of Xi have been fairly stable for the past few years , remaining within a 10 percentage point range , in just the last year the percentage saying they lack confidence in him has increased by 21 points .
This shift occurred among both Republicans and Democrats , as well as among older @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. president ’ s rhetoric toward China ’ s leadership during the outbreak has fluctuated in tone , the American public ’ s attitudes remained fairly stable over the course of this survey .
As with views of China , a shifting news environment over the course of March with regard to the role Beijing played in handling the initial outbreak does not appear to have affected how Americans view President Xi in the short term .
Those interviewed prior to the U.S. government declaring a national emergency on March 13 were just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March to lack confidence in the Chinese leader .
This remains true even when holding constant factors including age , gender , education and political affiliation .
Many see Chinese power and influence as threat to the U.S. About nine-in-ten U.S. adults see China ’ s power and influence as a threat – including 62 % who say it is a major threat .
While the total portion that sees China ’ s power and influence as a threat has not changed significantly since the question was last asked in 2018 , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has increased 14 percentage points since 2018 .
Older Americans are more concerned than younger adults about China .
Nearly seven-in-ten of those ages 50 and older see China ’ s power and influence as a major threat , compared with roughly half of those 18 to 29 .
Americans were also asked if they consider the condition of the global economy a major threat , minor threat , or not a threat to the U.S. Those who see global economic conditions as a major threat are 15 percentage points more likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a significant threat than those who feel less threatened by the global economic situation ( 71 % vs. 56 % ) .
Americans most concerned about China ’ s environmental impact and cyberattacks When asked whether various issues involving China pose a problem for the U.S. , at least two-thirds of Americans say each is a serious concern for their country – and most issues are seen as very serious problems by roughly half or more .
Topping the list is China ’ s impact on the global environment .
A majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s environmental footprint is a very serious problem for the U.S. , a 10 percentage point increase from when the question was last asked in 2018 .
( China was recently estimated to emit roughly 30 % of the world ’ s total amount of carbon dioxide but produces fewer greenhouse gases per capita than the U.S .
does . )
Those who see global climate change as a major threat are 28 points more likely than those who do not see global warming as a threat to be very concerned with China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similarly concerned with cyberattacks from China .
A majority of 57 % say this poses a very serious problem to the U.S .
This is unchanged from 2018 but up 7 percentage points from 2012 when the question was first asked .
Similarly , 57 % say China ’ s human rights policies pose a very serious problem – an 8-point increase from 2018 .
Economic and military issues trigger slightly lower , though still high , levels of concern for Americans .
The loss of U.S. jobs to China is seen as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Americans , but this has fallen from 71 % who called it a very serious issue in 2012 .
The U.S. trade deficit with China – which recently shrank for the first time in half a decade – is also considered a very serious problem by about half in the U.S. ( 49 % ) , a decline of 12 percentage points since 2012 .
Another 49 % say China ’ s growing military power is a substantial concern .
As the U.S. keeps its market closed to the Chinese telecommunications giant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Chinese technology , about half of U.S. adults ( 47 % ) are concerned about China ’ s growing technological power .
China has also recently overtaken the U.S. as the world ’ s top producer of patent applications .
Widespread protests over an extradition bill ’ s potential effects on Hong Kong ’ s judiciary independence erupted across the special administrative region last year .
But tensions between mainland China and Hong Kong are the least concerning to Americans of the issues polled .
Only three-in-ten consider this issue a very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each of these issues generally coincides with less favorable overall views of China .
For instance , among those who say China ’ s growing military power is not too serious a problem or not a problem at all , 47 % have a favorable view of China .
But , among those who believe China ’ s military strength poses a very serious threat to the U.S. , just 19 % see China favorably .
Evaluations of these issues tend to differ based on individuals ’ concerns about other threats .
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy poses a major threat to the U.S. are more likely to rate most issues in the China-U.S. relationship as very serious problems .
For instance , about six-in-ten ( 58 % ) of those who see international economic conditions as a major threat are also very concerned about America ’ s trade deficit with China .
On the other hand , 39 % of those who consider the economy a minor threat are very concerned about the deficit – a 19 percentage point difference .
People who are at least somewhat concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see China as a major threat than those who do not see the issues as serious problems .
For example , when looking at China ’ s growing military power or its growing technological power , those who see either as a serious problem for the U.S. are 46 percentage points more likely to say that China ’ s growing power and influence pose a major threat to the U.S .
The difference is smallest when looking at the U.S. trade deficit with China , but even then , those who see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 23 points more likely to see China as a major threat .
Additionally , a partisan gap exists when evaluating certain issues in the Sino-American relationship .
Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are more likely than Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents to see the U.S. trade deficit with China , the loss of U.S. jobs to China and China ’ s growing technological capabilities as very serious problems .
The same divide exists over China ’ s growing military power and cyberattacks from China .
What ’ s more , Republicans have become more concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since last polled on the topic in 2018 , when the latest U.S.-China trade war began .
Concern for the trade deficit among Democrats did not change over that same time .
China ’ s environmental impact is the only issue that Democrats are more likely to see as a very serious problem : Concern among Democrats on this issue has increased by 14 percentage points since 2018 .
Still , both sides of the aisle share the same level of concern for tensions between mainland China and Hong Kong and China ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are more likely than their younger counterparts to see several of these issues as major problems .
Evaluations of China ’ s growing military power evoke the greatest generational divide .
While 61 % of those ages 50 and older see China ’ s growing military power as a very serious problem , 32 % of those ages 18 to 29 say the same – a difference of 29 percentage points .
Similar divides accompany opinions on cyberattacks from China ( 27 points ) and China ’ s growing technological prowess ( 25 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across all age groups see China ’ s environmental impact as a very serious problem .
Majority sees U.S. as leading economy , but perceptions colored by financial views China ’ s economic growth has slowed in recent quarters , and the U.S. stock market logged one of its worst first quarters in history amid the spread of COVID-19 .
Even though unemployment surged in the U.S. throughout the March field period , marking the worst period for jobs since the 2008 recession , Americans ’ sense that the U.S. is the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Today , when asked to choose between the U.S. , China , Japan and the countries of the European Union as the world ’ s leading economic power , 59 % of Americans choose their own country , up from 50 % last year .
This is both the largest share to name the U.S. and the largest year-on-year increase since the question was first asked in 2008 .
Only three-in-ten name China , and this is largely unchanged over recent years .
People ’ s personal economic situations , as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global economy , color their sense of how the U.S. economy rates on the world stage .
Those who have higher incomes are more likely than those who are less well-off to say the U.S. is the world ’ s leading economic power ( 63 % vs. 53 % ) .
The same is true of those who say their country ’ s economic situation is good compared with those who say the opposite ( 66 % vs. 52 % ) .
And those who say the condition of the global economy is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are less likely to see the U.S. as economically superior ( and more likely to name China ) than those who see it as a minor threat or no threat at all .
Those who see China ’ s power and influence as a major threat are also more likely to name China as the world ’ s leading economy than those who see it as less of a threat .
Older Americans are more likely than younger Americans to say the U.S. is the leading economic power : 63 % of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while fewer than half ( 47 % ) of those ages 18 to 29 do the same .
Americans younger than 30 are not only more likely to name China as the world ’ s leading economy than older Americans ( 38 % vs. 26 % ) , but they are also more likely to name the countries of the EU ( 9 % vs. 2 % ) .
Partisanship is also related to how Americans evaluate the world ’ s top economic power .
While both Republicans and Democrats are more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world ’ s leading economic power than China , Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are particularly convinced of America ’ s economic superiority .
Republicans and those who lean Republican are more than twice as likely to name the U.S. as they are China ( 66 % and 27 % , respectively ) , whereas Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents name the U.S. at a lower rate ( 54 % and 33 % , respectively ) .
And , while partisanship also colored views of which economy was strongest last year , this gap is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is militarily dominant , should lead globally When it comes to which country is the world ’ s leading military power , more than eight-in-ten Americans agree that it ’ s the U.S. , up 11 percentage points since the question was last asked in 2016 .
Only 6 % name China , a 6-point decrease .
Similarly , few name Russia ( 8 % ) , a view largely unchanged since four years ago .
Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are more likely to name the U.S. as the leading military power than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vs. 80 % ) .
While Democrats are about as likely as Republicans to name China , they are somewhat more likely to name Russia as the world ’ s leading military power ( 9 % vs. 4 % ) .
Men , those with higher incomes and those with higher levels of education are more likely to say the U.S. is the leading military power than women , the less affluent or less educated people , respectively , though differences between people of different educational backgrounds are muted .
Regardless of whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic or military power today , nearly all Americans also think that a future with U.S. leadership is a better thing than one with Chinese leadership .
When forced to choose between which would be better for the world , 91 % of Americans say it is better for the U.S. to be the world ’ s leading power than China ( 4 % ) , largely unchanged since 2018 when the question was last asked .
While there is widespread agreement across all groups in society , Republicans and those who see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a major threat are more likely than Democrats and those who feel less threatened to value U.S. global leadership .

How we did this This analysis focuses on Americans’ views of China on topics including Chinese leadership, economic standing, military strength and attitudes about the country more broadly. Pew Research Center has been tracking attitudes toward China since 2005. This report also includes demographic analysis comparing groups with different levels of education, age and political leanings, as well as attitudinal changes occurring simultaneously with the spread of the coronavirus. For this report, we used data from a nationally representative survey of 1,000 U.S. adults conducted by telephone from March 3 to 29, 2020. Here are the questions used for the report, along with responses and survey methodology.
For updated data on American views of China, see here.
Since President Donald Trump took office in 2017, his approach to U.S.-China relations has included increased pressure via tariffs and trade war rhetoric, and now, with the onset of an unprecedented pandemic, the stage has been set for both sides to cast aspersions on the other. Against this backdrop, negative views of China have continued to grow, according to a new Pew Research Center survey of Americans conducted in March. Roughly two-thirds now say they have an unfavorable view of China, the most negative rating for the country since the Center began asking the question in 2005, and up nearly 20 percentage points since the start of the Trump administration. Positive views of China’s leader, President Xi Jinping, are also at historically low levels.
Economic factors, such as job losses to China and the trade deficit, remain key concerns for the American public. But other issues – including Chinese human rights policies and environmental degradation – also worry Americans. Many of these issues play a role in how the public views China more broadly: Those who see the China-related topics included in the study as a serious problem generally have less favorable views of China overall.
As the economies of both China and the United States struggle with the impact of the current pandemic, more Americans now see the U.S. as the world’s leading economic power than at any time over the past 12 years. In fact, Americans now see the U.S. as more of an economic powerhouse than China by roughly two-to-one (59% vs. 30%). Americans also overwhelmingly believe their country leads the world militarily and that the world is better off with U.S. leadership as opposed to that of China.
In some ways, this is a partisan story. Republicans continue to be more wary of China than Democrats across many questions in this report. Nearly three-quarters of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents see China unfavorably, compared with roughly six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic leaners. They are also more worried about China when it comes to cybersecurity and economic issues such as job losses to China and the trade imbalance. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to see the United States outpacing China as the world’s leading economic power as well as the world’s top military. And GOP supporters almost universally say it is better that the world be led by the U.S. Still, negative views of China increased slightly among Democrats this year, so partisans of both stripes are now largely negative toward the superpower. In fact, after seeing large increases in negative views of China from 2018 to 2019, both parties registered their most unfavorable opinions to date in 2020.
These are among the findings of a new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted March 3 to 29, 2020, among 1,000 adults in the U.S. The survey also finds that younger people, who have historically been more positive than older Americans toward China, now increasingly hold negative views of the country and are more prone to see it as a threat to the U.S. than in previous years. Older Americans, however, still take a more negative stance than their younger compatriots on most aspects of the U.S.-China relationship.
Unfavorable views of China continue to climb
Views of China have soured further in 2020, building on the dramatic uptick in negativity seen between 2018 and 2019. Roughly two-thirds of Americans now have a negative opinion of China, the highest percentage recorded since Pew Research Center began asking the question in 2005. Only about a quarter in the U.S. report a favorable attitude.
The survey took place as the coronavirus outbreak spread throughout the U.S., with several states implementing lockdowns and death tolls multiplying at a rapid clip. While China’s handling of the virus may have made an impression on some Americans, it does not appear that escalating conditions in the U.S. over the course of March shifted attitudes toward China during that period. Views of China did not significantly change when comparing those surveyed before and after March 12, approximately when the NBA indefinitely postponed the remainder of the season and actor Tom Hanks announced testing positive for COVID-19 on social media. Americans interviewed prior to March 13, when the U.S. government declared a national emergency, had equally negative views toward China as those interviewed on or after that date, even when holding constant age, education, gender and political affiliation. (For more on how the Center has dealt with unforeseen events during fieldwork in the past, see “When the Unexpected Happens, What’s a Survey Researcher To Do?”)
Across demographic groups, negative views of China abound. Roughly six-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have unfavorable views of China, as do roughly seven-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. Those with a college degree are just as likely as those with less than a college degree to hold negative views of China; roughly two-thirds of each group voice this opinion.
Older Americans, those ages 50 and older, are more likely than those ages 18 to 29 to have unfavorable views of China. This has been the case every year since the Center first asked the question 15 years ago. But while half or more of those 50 and older have held negative views of China since 2012, this is the first year in which more than half of younger Americans also have an unfavorable opinion. Among this age group, negative views have roughly doubled since the question was first asked.
Largely similar patterns emerge by party, with Republicans tending to be more negative than Democrats. Still, both partisan groups – for the second year in a row – have recorded their most negative assessments of China since the Center began asking this question in 2005.
Views of President Xi reach new low in U.S.
As ratings for China have declined, so too has confidence in Chinese President Xi Jinping. Roughly seven-in-ten Americans (71%) say they do not have confidence in Xi to do the right thing when it comes to world affairs – a high since the Center first asked the question. Just 22% say they have faith in the Chinese leader, down 15 percentage points since last year.
The drop in confidence from 2019 to 2020 is especially notable. While views of Xi have been fairly stable for the past few years, remaining within a 10 percentage point range, in just the last year the percentage saying they lack confidence in him has increased by 21 points. This shift occurred among both Republicans and Democrats, as well as among older and younger Americans.
And while the U.S. president’s rhetoric toward China’s leadership during the outbreak has fluctuated in tone, the American public’s attitudes remained fairly stable over the course of this survey. As with views of China, a shifting news environment over the course of March with regard to the role Beijing played in handling the initial outbreak does not appear to have affected how Americans view President Xi in the short term. Those interviewed prior to the U.S. government declaring a national emergency on March 13 were just as likely as those interviewed later in March to lack confidence in the Chinese leader. This remains true even when holding constant factors including age, gender, education and political affiliation.
Many see Chinese power and influence as threat to the U.S.
About nine-in-ten U.S. adults see China’s power and influence as a threat – including 62% who say it is a major threat. While the total portion that sees China’s power and influence as a threat has not changed significantly since the question was last asked in 2018, the share perceiving China as a major threat has increased 14 percentage points since 2018.
Older Americans are more concerned than younger adults about China. Nearly seven-in-ten of those ages 50 and older see China’s power and influence as a major threat, compared with roughly half of those 18 to 29.
Americans were also asked if they consider the condition of the global economy a major threat, minor threat, or not a threat to the U.S. Those who see global economic conditions as a major threat are 15 percentage points more likely to see China’s power and influence as a significant threat than those who feel less threatened by the global economic situation (71% vs. 56%).
Americans most concerned about China’s environmental impact and cyberattacks
When asked whether various issues involving China pose a problem for the U.S., at least two-thirds of Americans say each is a serious concern for their country – and most issues are seen as very serious problems by roughly half or more. Topping the list is China’s impact on the global environment. A majority (61%) says China’s environmental footprint is a very serious problem for the U.S., a 10 percentage point increase from when the question was last asked in 2018. (China was recently estimated to emit roughly 30% of the world’s total amount of carbon dioxide but produces fewer greenhouse gases per capita than the U.S. does.) Those who see global climate change as a major threat are 28 points more likely than those who do not see global warming as a threat to be very concerned with China’s environmental impact.
Americans are similarly concerned with cyberattacks from China. A majority of 57% say this poses a very serious problem to the U.S. This is unchanged from 2018 but up 7 percentage points from 2012 when the question was first asked.
Similarly, 57% say China’s human rights policies pose a very serious problem – an 8-point increase from 2018.
Economic and military issues trigger slightly lower, though still high, levels of concern for Americans. The loss of U.S. jobs to China is seen as a very serious problem by 52% of Americans, but this has fallen from 71% who called it a very serious issue in 2012. The U.S. trade deficit with China – which recently shrank for the first time in half a decade – is also considered a very serious problem by about half in the U.S. (49%), a decline of 12 percentage points since 2012. Another 49% say China’s growing military power is a substantial concern.
As the U.S. keeps its market closed to the Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei and raises alarms about the security of Chinese technology, about half of U.S. adults (47%) are concerned about China’s growing technological power. China has also recently overtaken the U.S. as the world’s top producer of patent applications.
Widespread protests over an extradition bill’s potential effects on Hong Kong’s judiciary independence erupted across the special administrative region last year. But tensions between mainland China and Hong Kong are the least concerning to Americans of the issues polled. Only three-in-ten consider this issue a very serious problem for the U.S.
Concern about each of these issues generally coincides with less favorable overall views of China. For instance, among those who say China’s growing military power is not too serious a problem or not a problem at all, 47% have a favorable view of China. But, among those who believe China’s military strength poses a very serious threat to the U.S., just 19% see China favorably.
Evaluations of these issues tend to differ based on individuals’ concerns about other threats. Those who say the condition of the global economy poses a major threat to the U.S. are more likely to rate most issues in the China-U.S. relationship as very serious problems. For instance, about six-in-ten (58%) of those who see international economic conditions as a major threat are also very concerned about America’s trade deficit with China. On the other hand, 39% of those who consider the economy a minor threat are very concerned about the deficit – a 19 percentage point difference.
People who are at least somewhat concerned about these issues are also more likely to see China as a major threat than those who do not see the issues as serious problems. For example, when looking at China’s growing military power or its growing technological power, those who see either as a serious problem for the U.S. are 46 percentage points more likely to say that China’s growing power and influence pose a major threat to the U.S. The difference is smallest when looking at the U.S. trade deficit with China, but even then, those who see the deficit as a serious problem are 23 points more likely to see China as a major threat.
Additionally, a partisan gap exists when evaluating certain issues in the Sino-American relationship. Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are more likely than Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents to see the U.S. trade deficit with China, the loss of U.S. jobs to China and China’s growing technological capabilities as very serious problems. The same divide exists over China’s growing military power and cyberattacks from China. What’s more, Republicans have become more concerned about the U.S. trade deficit with China since last polled on the topic in 2018, when the latest U.S.-China trade war began. Concern for the trade deficit among Democrats did not change over that same time. China’s environmental impact is the only issue that Democrats are more likely to see as a very serious problem: Concern among Democrats on this issue has increased by 14 percentage points since 2018. Still, both sides of the aisle share the same level of concern for tensions between mainland China and Hong Kong and China’s human rights policies.
Older Americans are more likely than their younger counterparts to see several of these issues as major problems. Evaluations of China’s growing military power evoke the greatest generational divide. While 61% of those ages 50 and older see China’s growing military power as a very serious problem, 32% of those ages 18 to 29 say the same – a difference of 29 percentage points. Similar divides accompany opinions on cyberattacks from China (27 points) and China’s growing technological prowess (25 points). Notably, similar majorities across all age groups see China’s environmental impact as a very serious problem.
Majority sees U.S. as leading economy, but perceptions colored by financial views
China’s economic growth has slowed in recent quarters, and the U.S. stock market logged one of its worst first quarters in history amid the spread of COVID-19. Even though unemployment surged in the U.S. throughout the March field period, marking the worst period for jobs since the 2008 recession, Americans’ sense that the U.S. is the world’s top economy has grown precipitously. Today, when asked to choose between the U.S., China, Japan and the countries of the European Union as the world’s leading economic power, 59% of Americans choose their own country, up from 50% last year. This is both the largest share to name the U.S. and the largest year-on-year increase since the question was first asked in 2008. Only three-in-ten name China, and this is largely unchanged over recent years.
People’s personal economic situations, as well as concerns about both the domestic and global economy, color their sense of how the U.S. economy rates on the world stage.
Those who have higher incomes are more likely than those who are less well-off to say the U.S. is the world’s leading economic power (63% vs. 53%). The same is true of those who say their country’s economic situation is good compared with those who say the opposite (66% vs. 52%). And those who say the condition of the global economy is a major threat to the United States are less likely to see the U.S. as economically superior (and more likely to name China) than those who see it as a minor threat or no threat at all.
Those who see China’s power and influence as a major threat are also more likely to name China as the world’s leading economy than those who see it as less of a threat.
Older Americans are more likely than younger Americans to say the U.S. is the leading economic power: 63% of those ages 50 and older name the U.S., while fewer than half (47%) of those ages 18 to 29 do the same. Americans younger than 30 are not only more likely to name China as the world’s leading economy than older Americans (38% vs. 26%), but they are also more likely to name the countries of the EU (9% vs. 2%).
Partisanship is also related to how Americans evaluate the world’s top economic power. While both Republicans and Democrats are more likely to name the U.S. as the world’s leading economic power than China, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are particularly convinced of America’s economic superiority. Republicans and those who lean Republican are more than twice as likely to name the U.S. as they are China (66% and 27%, respectively), whereas Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents name the U.S. at a lower rate (54% and 33%, respectively). And, while partisanship also colored views of which economy was strongest last year, this gap is relatively new.
Widespread sense that U.S. is militarily dominant, should lead globally
When it comes to which country is the world’s leading military power, more than eight-in-ten Americans agree that it’s the U.S., up 11 percentage points since the question was last asked in 2016. Only 6% name China, a 6-point decrease. Similarly, few name Russia (8%), a view largely unchanged since four years ago.
Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are more likely to name the U.S. as the leading military power than Democrats and Democratic leaners (90% vs. 80%). While Democrats are about as likely as Republicans to name China, they are somewhat more likely to name Russia as the world’s leading military power (9% vs. 4%). Men, those with higher incomes and those with higher levels of education are more likely to say the U.S. is the leading military power than women, the less affluent or less educated people, respectively, though differences between people of different educational backgrounds are muted.
Regardless of whether they think the U.S. is the leading economic or military power today, nearly all Americans also think that a future with U.S. leadership is a better thing than one with Chinese leadership. When forced to choose between which would be better for the world, 91% of Americans say it is better for the U.S. to be the world’s leading power than China (4%), largely unchanged since 2018 when the question was last asked. While there is widespread agreement across all groups in society, Republicans and those who see China’s power and influence as a major threat are more likely than Democrats and those who feel less threatened to value U.S. global leadership.


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Proposed Bill Would Require Warning Labels on Apps Made by China and Russia

Congress is considering new legislation that would require warning labels on smartphone applications made in countries the United States deems a national security threat , including China , Russia , and Iran .
The legislation spearheaded by Rep. Jim Banks ( R. , Ind . )
, a member of the House Armed Services Committee , would require app store operators to inform Americans before they download an application that could surreptitiously collect their data and send it to an enemy state .
`` This bill will help inform us as to what exactly we 're agreeing to when we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the app store , '' Banks told the Washington Free Beacon .
`` If an app is being used by a foreign government to take advantage of us , we need to be informed . ''
Data harvesting threatens anyone who uses a smartphone .
Applications routinely siphon off data and send it to servers hosted in foreign countries .
Any app produced by a hostile regime could pose a significant risk to American users .
Banks 's bill calls out `` China , Russia , Venezuela , Syria , Sudan , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any other country that is designated as a source of dangerous software by an expert or has provided support for international terrorism , '' according to information provided by the lawmaker 's office .
Any American who downloads an application produced in one of these countries would be presented with a warning message .
The user would then have to acknowledge the possibility his or her data may be abused before downloading the app in question .
This warning label would be separate from any other agreements the user must navigate prior to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill .
The Federal Trade Commission would be in charge of enforcing the new requirements .
As more Americans turn to their phones for entertainment , especially during the coronavirus pandemic , it has become increasingly simple for hostile foreign nations to exploit the access given when a person downloads an application .
Many of the simplest apps can surreptitiously record data from users and track their movements and purchasing history .
Reams of information about American users of the popular TikTok video app are hosted on servers in China , where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. Army blocked soldiers from using TikTok in January due to the national security threat the app poses .
Banks 's bill would impose fines of up to $ 50,000 on app developers and software marketplace operators that do not enforce the new warning labels .
Criminal punishments , including prison , could also be handed down for anyone who egregiously violates the statute .
Other countries can be added to the at-risk list as Congress sees fit .
`` Some phone apps are fun and useful , others are counterintelligence threats .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ they hit the download button , '' Banks said in a statement announcing the new legislation .
`` Parents and consumers have a right to a warning that by downloading some apps like Russia 's FaceApp or China 's TikTok , their data may be used against the United States by an adversarial or enemy regime . ''

Congress is considering new legislation that would require warning labels on smartphone applications made in countries the United States deems a national security threat, including China, Russia, and Iran.
The legislation spearheaded by Rep. Jim Banks (R., Ind.), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, would require app store operators to inform Americans before they download an application that could surreptitiously collect their data and send it to an enemy state.
"This bill will help inform us as to what exactly we're agreeing to when we hit the download button on some apps on the app store," Banks told the Washington Free Beacon. "If an app is being used by a foreign government to take advantage of us, we need to be informed."
Data harvesting threatens anyone who uses a smartphone. Applications routinely siphon off data and send it to servers hosted in foreign countries. Any app produced by a hostile regime could pose a significant risk to American users.
Banks's bill calls out "China, Russia, Venezuela, Syria, Sudan, Iran, and North Korea, and any other country that is designated as a source of dangerous software by an expert or has provided support for international terrorism," according to information provided by the lawmaker's office.
Any American who downloads an application produced in one of these countries would be presented with a warning message. The user would then have to acknowledge the possibility his or her data may be abused before downloading the app in question.
This warning label would be separate from any other agreements the user must navigate prior to downloading the application, according to the bill. The Federal Trade Commission would be in charge of enforcing the new requirements.
As more Americans turn to their phones for entertainment, especially during the coronavirus pandemic, it has become increasingly simple for hostile foreign nations to exploit the access given when a person downloads an application. Many of the simplest apps can surreptitiously record data from users and track their movements and purchasing history.
Reams of information about American users of the popular TikTok video app are hosted on servers in China, where the communist government can access it. The U.S. Army blocked soldiers from using TikTok in January due to the national security threat the app poses.
Banks's bill would impose fines of up to $50,000 on app developers and software marketplace operators that do not enforce the new warning labels. Criminal punishments, including prison, could also be handed down for anyone who egregiously violates the statute.
Other countries can be added to the at-risk list as Congress sees fit.
"Some phone apps are fun and useful, others are counterintelligence threats. Americans should know which is which before they hit the download button," Banks said in a statement announcing the new legislation. "Parents and consumers have a right to a warning that by downloading some apps like Russia's FaceApp or China's TikTok, their data may be used against the United States by an adversarial or enemy regime."


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Biden: China Fuels the World’s Prosperity

Joe Biden solidified his reputation as a Chinese Communist Party ( CCP ) sycophant and working class sellout with remarks at the US-China Strategic & Economic Dialogue in 2011 .
“ Middle-Class Joe ” had a rare opportunity to confront the greatest threat to American workers – the CCP ’ s exploitative trading practices and job poaching ad infinitum – and he failed .
Miserably .
Instead , he praised the relationship as a boon to American employment numbers and extolled the merits of a “ rising China.
” It wasn ’ t a gaffe .
It wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In his opening statement , setting a tone of appeasement for the entire dialogue , he claimed : “ Our trade supported over 500,000 jobs here in the United States , and we made tangible progress during President Hu ’ s visit especially in the areas of innovation , intellectual property , and exports , all of which we ’ re following up on.
” In reality , America has lost nearly 4 million jobs from China ’ s predatory trading practices in under 20 years , leaving factories and manufacturers reeling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CCP-spearheaded outsourcing .
And the toll of this isn ’ t purely economic : “ deaths of despair ” have risen among the American working class , inextricably linked to China siphoning their jobs and livelihoods .
Biden also lets the CCP off the hook for currency manipulation , modern-day economic warfare , whereby China artificially devalues its currency to cheapen exports .
And that ’ s on top of China ’ s lax environmental regulations and nonexistent human rights protections which keep production costs far too low for American companies to compete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s insistence , the CCP has also failed to make any meaningful strides towards axing intellectual property theft .
A study published by the US International Trade Commission the same year Biden praised China ’ s progress on the issue “ estimated that if IP protection in just China were improved to a level comparable to that in the United States , the U.S. economy would obtain an estimated $ 107 billion in additional annual sales and net U.S. employment could increase by 2.1-million jobs.
” And China ’ s exports – in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even harmed American lives : Chinese toys are made with toxic lead paint ; Chinese fish are carcinogenic due to the country ’ s polluted water ; Chinese candy has been contaminated formaldehyde ; and Chinese drywall is made with radioactive material .
And despite this long list of grievances , Biden pushed back against China only once throughout the entire speech : on the CCP ’ s dismal human rights record , calling the regime “ friends ” while doing so .
It ’ s just the latest evidence to give credence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” beyond his son ’ s suspect dealings , belief that “ China ’ s rise isn ’ t our demise , ” and pre-ordained alliteration , begging the question , if this is the tone he takes when negotiating with the CCP in public how can Americans be sure he ’ ll hold China accountable , especially post-coronavirus ?
And comments like “ a rising China is a positive development ” don ’ t instill much hope .
An increasingly powerful and predatory China certainly doesn ’ t benefit the American middle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CCP ’ s relentless and brutal authoritarianism , emboldened by further economic success .
Yet Biden worships the CCP , praising the regime for “ lifting tens of millions of people out of poverty and buil [ ding ] an economy that now helps fuel the world ’ s prosperity.
” In reality , the only people who ’ ve prospered alongside China ’ s global ascent to power have been those of the Biden ilk , establishment politicians and businesses whose affinity for the “ made in China ” label has crippled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is notorious for flip-flopping on every issue in the book , the one issue he ’ s consistent on is coddling China .
In his own words : “ As a young member of the Foreign Relations Committee , I wrote and I said and I believed then what I believe now , that a rising China is a positive , positive development , not only for China , but for America and the world writ large.
” And history will continue to repeat itself .
That ’ s why for the sake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden 2020 ” must remain a pipe dream and not a reality .

Joe Biden solidified his reputation as a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sycophant and working class sellout with remarks at the US-China Strategic & Economic Dialogue in 2011.
“Middle-Class Joe” had a rare opportunity to confront the greatest threat to American workers – the CCP’s exploitative trading practices and job poaching ad infinitum – and he failed. Miserably.
Instead, he praised the relationship as a boon to American employment numbers and extolled the merits of a “rising China.”
It wasn’t a gaffe. It wasn’t a blunder. It was quintessential Biden.
In his opening statement, setting a tone of appeasement for the entire dialogue, he claimed: “Our trade supported over 500,000 jobs here in the United States, and we made tangible progress during President Hu’s visit especially in the areas of innovation, intellectual property, and exports, all of which we’re following up on.”
In reality, America has lost nearly 4 million jobs from China’s predatory trading practices in under 20 years, leaving factories and manufacturers reeling from the beltway’s complicity in CCP-spearheaded outsourcing. And the toll of this isn’t purely economic: “deaths of despair” have risen among the American working class, inextricably linked to China siphoning their jobs and livelihoods.
Biden also lets the CCP off the hook for currency manipulation, modern-day economic warfare, whereby China artificially devalues its currency to cheapen exports. And that’s on top of China’s lax environmental regulations and nonexistent human rights protections which keep production costs far too low for American companies to compete with.
And contrary to Biden’s insistence, the CCP has also failed to make any meaningful strides towards axing intellectual property theft. A study published by the US International Trade Commission the same year Biden praised China’s progress on the issue “estimated that if IP protection in just China were improved to a level comparable to that in the United States, the U.S. economy would obtain an estimated $107 billion in additional annual sales and net U.S. employment could increase by 2.1-million jobs.”
And China’s exports – in addition to the novel coronavirus – have even harmed American lives: Chinese toys are made with toxic lead paint; Chinese fish are carcinogenic due to the country’s polluted water; Chinese candy has been contaminated formaldehyde; and Chinese drywall is made with radioactive material.
And despite this long list of grievances, Biden pushed back against China only once throughout the entire speech: on the CCP’s dismal human rights record, calling the regime “friends” while doing so.
It’s just the latest evidence to give credence to his moniker “Beijing Biden,” beyond his son’s suspect dealings, belief that “China’s rise isn’t our demise,” and pre-ordained alliteration, begging the question, if this is the tone he takes when negotiating with the CCP in public how can Americans be sure he’ll hold China accountable, especially post-coronavirus?
And comments like “a rising China is a positive development” don’t instill much hope. An increasingly powerful and predatory China certainly doesn’t benefit the American middle class or Chinese citizens subject to the CCP’s relentless and brutal authoritarianism, emboldened by further economic success.
Yet Biden worships the CCP, praising the regime for “lifting tens of millions of people out of poverty and buil[ding] an economy that now helps fuel the world’s prosperity.” In reality, the only people who’ve prospered alongside China’s global ascent to power have been those of the Biden ilk, establishment politicians and businesses whose affinity for the “made in China” label has crippled the American working class.
While Biden is notorious for flip-flopping on every issue in the book, the one issue he’s consistent on is coddling China.
In his own words: “As a young member of the Foreign Relations Committee, I wrote and I said and I believed then what I believe now, that a rising China is a positive, positive development, not only for China, but for America and the world writ large.”
And history will continue to repeat itself. That’s why for the sake of the American middle class, “Biden 2020” must remain a pipe dream and not a reality.


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Trump Shares Post Claiming Durham Indictments Could Come “This Week”

President Trump shared a report that said indictments could be coming this week in U.S. Attorney John Durham 's review of the Russia investigation .
Part of a flurry of retweets late Monday evening , Trump 's verified Twitter account , which has 77.8 million followers , shared a post from Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett 's personal website with the headline : `` More Russia Spygate Indictments Coming ‘ This Week.
’ '' The post , authored by `` staff '' and shared by Jarrett 's verified Twitter account , focused on a recent interview conducted by Fox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigative reporter John Solomon said that `` some criminal investigative activity '' indicated there `` could be a handful of indictments and much more information '' this week .
Solomon , who recently founded the new outlet JustTheNews.com became mired in controversy last year when his reporting on Ukraine for the Hill got swept up into the impeachment investigation and became subject to a review that found he `` failed '' to identify `` important details about key Ukrainian sources . ''
Attorney General William Barr picked Durham , the top federal prosecutor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of possible misconduct by federal law enforcement and intelligence officials during the Russia investigation .
Durham is said to be focused on former CIA Director John Brennan .
Democrats have criticized Durham 's review , which reportedly was upgraded into a criminal investigation last year , as a politically motivated scheme to undermine the work of special counsel Robert Mueller and attack Trump 's perceived enemies .
Republican allies of the president have championed Durham 's investigation and called for top officials , including former FBI Director James Comey , to face accountability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president .
There have not yet been any confirmed reports or official statements about indictments in the investigation .
Trump retweeted other posts shared by Jarrett , who recently said Barr `` tipped his hand '' about potential indictments in Durham 's investigation during an interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham , including one that said new evidence shows the Russia investigation was a `` witch hunt . ''
During the interview with Ingraham earlier this month , Barr argued that Trump had `` every right '' to be upset with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole pattern of events while he was president to sabotage the presidency ... or at least have the effect of sabotaging the presidency.
” “ My own view is that the evidence shows that we ’ re not dealing with just mistakes or sloppiness , '' the attorney general said .
`` There is something far more troubling here , and we ’ re going to get to the bottom of it .
And if people broke the law , and we can establish that with the evidence , they will be prosecuted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Russia investigation `` human scum '' during a coronavirus task force briefing over the weekend .

President Trump shared a report that said indictments could be coming this week in U.S. Attorney John Durham's review of the Russia investigation.
Part of a flurry of retweets late Monday evening, Trump's verified Twitter account, which has 77.8 million followers, shared a post from Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett's personal website with the headline: "More Russia Spygate Indictments Coming ‘This Week.’"
The post, authored by "staff" and shared by Jarrett's verified Twitter account, focused on a recent interview conducted by Fox Business host Lou Dobbs, during which investigative reporter John Solomon said "this week — the last couple weeks" — that "some criminal investigative activity" indicated there "could be a handful of indictments and much more information."
Solomon, who recently founded the new outlet JustTheNews.com, issued on Wednesday a denial that he ever said indictments were imminent.
He became mired in controversy last year when his reporting on Ukraine for the Hill got swept up into the impeachment investigation and became subject to a review that found he "failed" to identify "important details about key Ukrainian sources."
FBI Corruption: @jsolomonReports says indictments may be coming this week in the FBI’s corrupt handling of the sham Russia collusion investigation. #AmericaFirst #KAG2020 #Dobbs pic.twitter.com/tVuBVXnr9b — Lou Dobbs (@LouDobbs) April 17, 2020
Attorney General William Barr picked Durham, the top federal prosecutor in Connecticut, to conduct a review of possible misconduct by federal law enforcement and intelligence officials during the Russia investigation. Durham is said to be focused on former CIA Director John Brennan.
Democrats have criticized Durham's review, which reportedly was upgraded into a criminal investigation last year, as a politically motivated scheme to undermine the work of special counsel Robert Mueller and attack Trump's perceived enemies. Republican allies of the president have championed Durham's investigation and called for top officials, including former FBI Director James Comey, to face accountability for an alleged effort to undermine the president.
There have not yet been any confirmed reports or official statements about indictments in the investigation.
Trump retweeted other posts shared by Jarrett, who recently said Barr "tipped his hand" about potential indictments in Durham's investigation during an interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham, including one that said new evidence shows the Russia investigation was a "witch hunt."
During the interview with Ingraham earlier this month, Barr argued that Trump had "every right" to be upset with the Russia investigation and talked about "a whole pattern of events while he was president to sabotage the presidency ... or at least have the effect of sabotaging the presidency.”
“My own view is that the evidence shows that we’re not dealing with just mistakes or sloppiness," the attorney general said. "There is something far more troubling here, and we’re going to get to the bottom of it. And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted."
Trump called FBI leadership involved in the Russia investigation "human scum" during a coronavirus task force briefing over the weekend.


bonginoreport--2020-04-21--Biden: I’d Pick Michelle Obama for VP “In a Heartbeat”

Joe Biden said that if elected , he plans on being a one term President , and has gone as far as to express doubt that he ’ d even survive his first term .
Never before has a candidate ’ s VP been more relevant , but all we know from Biden is that he has narrowed down his choice to the 50 % of the population that is female .
That is , unless Michelle Obama is interested in the gig .
According to The Hill : “ I ’ d take her in a heartbeat , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Monday when asked if he ’ d choose Obama if she said she would be willing to be on the ticket with him .
“ She ’ s brilliant .
She knows the way around .
She is a really fine woman .
The Obamas are great friends , ” Biden added .
Biden , however , said that he doesn ’ t think she is interested in the position .
“ I don ’ t think she has any desire to live near the White House again , ” he said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the process of deciding whom to pick .
He again committed to choosing a woman but did not commit to choosing a woman of color .
If Biden does select Michelle as his VP , maybe she can explain to him why her husband waited until the last minute to finally endorse the man he worked with for nearly a decade .

Joe Biden said that if elected, he plans on being a one term President, and has gone as far as to express doubt that he’d even survive his first term.
Never before has a candidate’s VP been more relevant, but all we know from Biden is that he has narrowed down his choice to the 50% of the population that is female. That is, unless Michelle Obama is interested in the gig.
According to The Hill:
“I’d take her in a heartbeat,” Biden told Pittsburgh’s KDKA on Monday when asked if he’d choose Obama if she said she would be willing to be on the ticket with him. “She’s brilliant. She knows the way around. She is a really fine woman. The Obamas are great friends,” Biden added. Biden, however, said that he doesn’t think she is interested in the position. “I don’t think she has any desire to live near the White House again,” he said. Biden said he’s still in the process of deciding whom to pick. He again committed to choosing a woman but did not commit to choosing a woman of color.
If Biden does select Michelle as his VP, maybe she can explain to him why her husband waited until the last minute to finally endorse the man he worked with for nearly a decade.