theguardian--2020-05-01--Trump press secretary attacks China and WHO at first White House briefing

Donald Trump ’ s fourth White House press secretary delivered a 30-minute briefing on Friday , ending a more than year-long hiatus for the once-daily occasions .
It was effectively a public debut for Kayleigh McEnany , whose immediate predecessor , Stephanie Grisham , never delivered a briefing in nine months in the role .
Recently , Trump has turned daily coronavirus task force briefings into multi-hour back-and-forths with the press .
Taking the lectern for the first time , McEnany stressed that she would be speaking on behalf of the president and the highest-ranking officials in his administration .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost the entire day , ” she said .
“ I was just with him before I left to come out and speak with you guys .
“ I think my staff can attest to the fact that they have a very hard time finding me because I ’ m normally with the president in the Oval Office .
So I ’ m consistently with him , absorbing his thinking , and it ’ s my mission to bring you the mindset of the president , deliver those facts so this president gets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people get fair and accurate information.
” McEnany was less outwardly combative than Trump .
She did not accuse White House reporters of being or peddling “ fake news ” .
Nor did she say any outlet had terrible ratings .
Still , she repeated Trump ’ s main arguments .
Regarding the World Health Organization and its role in battling the coronavirus outbreak , for example , she said : “ The WHO appears to clearly have a China bias .
“ I mean , you look at this timeline and it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when you consider the fact that on 31 December you had Taiwanese officials warning about human-to-human transmission , the WHO did not make that public .
“ On 9 January , the WHO repeated China ’ s claim that the virus does not transmit readily between people , that was quite apparently false .
On 14 January , the WHO again repeated China ’ s talking points about no human-to-human transmission.
” Under fire for his own administration ’ s response to Covid-19 , which as of Friday afternoon had infected more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 63,000 , Trump has accused the WHO of slow-walking moves that could have prevented global spread .
Earlier in April , he announced that his administration would halt funding to the organization , pending a review .
McEnany ’ s first briefing also landed on the day that Trump ’ s all-but-certain general election opponent , the former vice-president Joe Biden , publicly responded to an allegation of sexual assault by a former Senate staffer .
McEnany was asked about comments made by the president in an interview with a conservative radio host @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tara Reade was more credible than those made against the supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford or against Trump by numerous women .
McEnany framed the accusations as old news that had been cleared up by Trump ’ s victory in the 2016 election .
“ He has always told the truth on these issues , ” she claimed .
“ He ’ s denied them immediately and you ’ re bringing up issues … from four years ago that were asked and answered and the American people had their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump as president of the United States .
“ Leave it to the media to really take an issue about the former vice-president [ Biden ] and turn it on the president and bring up accusations from four years ago that were asked and answered in the form of the vote of the American people.
” McEnany also discussed Michael Flynn , the first of Trump ’ s four national security advisers who resigned after a brief spell in the role and pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about conversations with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indicated a potential pardon for Flynn , who has not yet been sentenced .
On the subject of recently unsealed investigative documents , McEnany was asked why she called the FBI investigation of Flynn a “ miscarriage of justice ” , given his guilty plea .
Reporters , she answered , should more aggressively cover how the FBI handled the investigation .
Again , the press secretary – who earlier promised “ never ” to lie to reporters – sounded some of the same notes , in a the same tone , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it a miscarriage of justice when you have the FBI writing ‘ We want to get someone to lie ?
’ ” McEnany said .
“ The answer ’ s ‘ yes ’ and I encourage the media to cover it , because I ’ ve watched a lot of your networks I ’ ve read a lot of your papers .
“ I ’ ve seen a whole lot of scant information about Michael Flynn , when there was a whole lot of speculation about Russia , Russia , Russia , culminating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost , and the complete and total exoneration of President Trump.
” Most observers do not consider the special counsel Robert Mueller to have exonerated Trump in his investigation of Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow .
Indeed , though he did not establish a criminal conspiracy or recommend charges of obstruction of justice , Mueller said he was not clearing the president .
Trump and his allies have regularly claimed exoneration regardless .
It is unclear how often McEnany will appear in the White House briefing room .
Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the president decided they were doing an inadequate job .
“ As to the timing of the briefings , we do plan to do them , ” McEnany said .
“ I will announce the timing of that forthcoming but we do plan to continue these.
” Her first appearance had lasted about half an hour , well short of Trump ’ s marathon sessions .

Donald Trump’s fourth White House press secretary delivered a 30-minute briefing on Friday, ending a more than year-long hiatus for the once-daily occasions.
It was effectively a public debut for Kayleigh McEnany, whose immediate predecessor, Stephanie Grisham, never delivered a briefing in nine months in the role.
Recently, Trump has turned daily coronavirus task force briefings into multi-hour back-and-forths with the press. Taking the lectern for the first time, McEnany stressed that she would be speaking on behalf of the president and the highest-ranking officials in his administration.
“I’m around the president almost the entire day,” she said. “I was just with him before I left to come out and speak with you guys.
“I think my staff can attest to the fact that they have a very hard time finding me because I’m normally with the president in the Oval Office. So I’m consistently with him, absorbing his thinking, and it’s my mission to bring you the mindset of the president, deliver those facts so this president gets fair and accurate reporting and the American people get fair and accurate information.”
McEnany was less outwardly combative than Trump. She did not accuse White House reporters of being or peddling “fake news”. Nor did she say any outlet had terrible ratings.
Still, she repeated Trump’s main arguments. Regarding the World Health Organization and its role in battling the coronavirus outbreak, for example, she said: “The WHO appears to clearly have a China bias.
“I mean, you look at this timeline and it’s really damning for the WHO when you consider the fact that on 31 December you had Taiwanese officials warning about human-to-human transmission, the WHO did not make that public.
“On 9 January, the WHO repeated China’s claim that the virus does not transmit readily between people, that was quite apparently false. On 14 January, the WHO again repeated China’s talking points about no human-to-human transmission.”
Under fire for his own administration’s response to Covid-19, which as of Friday afternoon had infected more than 1 million Americans and killed more than 63,000, Trump has accused the WHO of slow-walking moves that could have prevented global spread. Earlier in April, he announced that his administration would halt funding to the organization, pending a review.
McEnany’s first briefing also landed on the day that Trump’s all-but-certain general election opponent, the former vice-president Joe Biden, publicly responded to an allegation of sexual assault by a former Senate staffer.
McEnany was asked about comments made by the president in an interview with a conservative radio host, that the allegation against Biden by Tara Reade was more credible than those made against the supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford or against Trump by numerous women.
McEnany framed the accusations as old news that had been cleared up by Trump’s victory in the 2016 election.
“He has always told the truth on these issues,” she claimed. “He’s denied them immediately and you’re bringing up issues … from four years ago that were asked and answered and the American people had their say in the matter when they elected President Trump as president of the United States.
“Leave it to the media to really take an issue about the former vice-president [Biden] and turn it on the president and bring up accusations from four years ago that were asked and answered in the form of the vote of the American people.”
McEnany also discussed Michael Flynn, the first of Trump’s four national security advisers who resigned after a brief spell in the role and pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about conversations with the Russian ambassador. The president has indicated a potential pardon for Flynn, who has not yet been sentenced.
On the subject of recently unsealed investigative documents, McEnany was asked why she called the FBI investigation of Flynn a “miscarriage of justice”, given his guilty plea. Reporters, she answered, should more aggressively cover how the FBI handled the investigation.
Again, the press secretary – who earlier promised “never” to lie to reporters – sounded some of the same notes, in a the same tone, as Trump.
“Do you not consider it a miscarriage of justice when you have the FBI writing ‘We want to get someone to lie?’” McEnany said. “The answer’s ‘yes’ and I encourage the media to cover it, because I’ve watched a lot of your networks I’ve read a lot of your papers.
“I’ve seen a whole lot of scant information about Michael Flynn, when there was a whole lot of speculation about Russia, Russia, Russia, culminating in $40m of taxpayer money being lost, and the complete and total exoneration of President Trump.”
Most observers do not consider the special counsel Robert Mueller to have exonerated Trump in his investigation of Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow. Indeed, though he did not establish a criminal conspiracy or recommend charges of obstruction of justice, Mueller said he was not clearing the president. Trump and his allies have regularly claimed exoneration regardless.
It is unclear how often McEnany will appear in the White House briefing room. Trump press secretaries had their appearances scaled back after the president decided they were doing an inadequate job.
“As to the timing of the briefings, we do plan to do them,” McEnany said. “I will announce the timing of that forthcoming but we do plan to continue these.”
Her first appearance had lasted about half an hour, well short of Trump’s marathon sessions.


theguardian--2020-05-01--US lawmakers demand Jeff Bezos testify over Amazon’s 'possibly criminally false' statements

A bipartisan group of House lawmakers investigating Amazon for possible antitrust violations have demanded that Jeff Bezos testify before Congress to address statements by the company that “ appear to be misleading , and possibly criminally false or perjurious ” .
“ Although we expect that you will testify on a voluntary basis , we reserve the right to resort to compulsory process if necessary , ” seven leaders of the House judiciary committee , including the chair Jerry Nadler , wrote in a letter to the Amazon CEO on Friday .
Representative David Cicilline , the chair of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been leading investigations into the major internet platforms , further stated on Twitter that he is considering a referral to prosecutors .
“ As CEO and founder of the company , [ Jeff Bezos ] must be accountable for Amazon ’ s record of dishonesty before Congress , ” he tweeted .
“ In light of the gravity of this situation , I am also considering whether a perjury referral is warranted.
” While Amazon had already been a subject of the antitrust subcommittee ’ s investigation , pressure on the company increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Journal investigation into the company ’ s use of data to compete with sellers on its marketplace .
Amazon was launched as an e-commerce site where customers could buy products directly from Amazon itself , but in 2000 it began allowing third-party retailers to sell goods through the site as well .
The move to running a “ marketplace ” allowed Amazon to increase the range of products offered on its site , while giving sellers access to Amazon ’ s vast customer base .
In 2019 , Bezos told shareholders that third-party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 58 % ) of the physical gross merchandise sold on Amazon .
But the situation caused unease among antitrust campaigners and advocates for fair competition , especially as Amazon moved more aggressively into selling private label goods that compete directly with marketplace sellers .
Senator Elizabeth Warren , a fierce critic of the company , has compared Amazon ’ s position with regard to the marketplace as akin to being “ both the umpire and a player in the game ” .
In July 2019 , Nate Sutton , the associate general counsel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ congress that Amazon does “ not use any seller data to compete with ” third-party sellers or to inform decisions about launching its private label brands .
But more than 20 former employees of the company ’ s private label brands told the Wall Street Journal that it was “ standard operating practice ” for Amazon employees use data about individual sellers to inform decisions about their own products .
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment .
The company has previously denied misleading Congress and has said that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employee misconduct ” described in the Journal ’ s report .
“ Amazon often acts as though it ’ s above the law , ” said Stacy Mitchell , the co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance .
“ Today , the House judiciary committee firmly demonstrated that it ’ s not.
” Mitchell also testified before the House committee , at the same hearing in which Sutton made his disputed statement .
“ Amazon doesn ’ t just dominate markets , ” she said at the time .
“ Through its control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governing authority over a growing share of our commerce … Amazon has the power to regulate , tax , and punish Americans engaged in trade … To restore competition and safeguard our liberty , we need to both restructure and regulate Amazon .
”

A bipartisan group of House lawmakers investigating Amazon for possible antitrust violations have demanded that Jeff Bezos testify before Congress to address statements by the company that “appear to be misleading, and possibly criminally false or perjurious”.
“Although we expect that you will testify on a voluntary basis, we reserve the right to resort to compulsory process if necessary,” seven leaders of the House judiciary committee, including the chair Jerry Nadler, wrote in a letter to the Amazon CEO on Friday.
Representative David Cicilline, the chair of the House’s antitrust subcommittee who has been leading investigations into the major internet platforms, further stated on Twitter that he is considering a referral to prosecutors.
“As CEO and founder of the company, [Jeff Bezos] must be accountable for Amazon’s record of dishonesty before Congress,” he tweeted. “In light of the gravity of this situation, I am also considering whether a perjury referral is warranted.”
While Amazon had already been a subject of the antitrust subcommittee’s investigation, pressure on the company increased following the publication of a Wall Street Journal investigation into the company’s use of data to compete with sellers on its marketplace.
Amazon was launched as an e-commerce site where customers could buy products directly from Amazon itself, but in 2000 it began allowing third-party retailers to sell goods through the site as well. The move to running a “marketplace” allowed Amazon to increase the range of products offered on its site, while giving sellers access to Amazon’s vast customer base.
In 2019, Bezos told shareholders that third-party sellers accounted for more than half (58%) of the physical gross merchandise sold on Amazon.
But the situation caused unease among antitrust campaigners and advocates for fair competition, especially as Amazon moved more aggressively into selling private label goods that compete directly with marketplace sellers. Senator Elizabeth Warren, a fierce critic of the company, has compared Amazon’s position with regard to the marketplace as akin to being “both the umpire and a player in the game”.
In July 2019, Nate Sutton, the associate general counsel for Amazon, provided sworn testimony to congress that Amazon does “not use any seller data to compete with” third-party sellers or to inform decisions about launching its private label brands.
But more than 20 former employees of the company’s private label brands told the Wall Street Journal that it was “standard operating practice” for Amazon employees use data about individual sellers to inform decisions about their own products.
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company has previously denied misleading Congress and has said that it is investigating the “serious allegations of employee misconduct” described in the Journal’s report.
.@RepJerryNadler Respectfully, suggestions we misled Congress are unfounded. We've been clear w/ the Committee that Amazon prohibits use of individual sellers’ data as WSJ alleged. As w/ any serious allegation of employee misconduct, we are investigating. https://t.co/umZ7IC6twz https://t.co/ES3XA7SwsY pic.twitter.com/R43YksTPYQ — Amazon Policy (@amazon_policy) April 24, 2020
“Amazon often acts as though it’s above the law,” said Stacy Mitchell, the co-director of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. “Today, the House judiciary committee firmly demonstrated that it’s not.”
Mitchell also testified before the House committee, at the same hearing in which Sutton made his disputed statement.
“Amazon doesn’t just dominate markets,” she said at the time. “Through its control of essential infrastructure, it has assumed governing authority over a growing share of our commerce … Amazon has the power to regulate, tax, and punish Americans engaged in trade … To restore competition and safeguard our liberty, we need to both restructure and regulate Amazon.”


theguardian--2020-05-01--Trump 'cannot tell a lie' – but can Kayleigh McEnany, his new press secretary?

Channeling George Washington , Donald Trump , who has reportedly made 18,000 false or misleading claims in 1,170 days , recently proclaimed : “ I can not tell a lie.
” The president ’ s ministry of untruth has produced some whoppers over the years .
Kellyanne Conway gained immortality with “ alternative facts ” .
Sean Spicer used his first briefing as White House press secretary to inflate the size of Trump ’ s inauguration crowd .
His successor , Sarah Sanders , admitted to lying to reporters about the firing of the FBI director James Comey .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House podium – because she never held a press briefing .
So when the latest incumbent , Kayleigh McEnany , on Friday held the first such briefing in 417 days , the Associated Press reporter Jill Colvin had a question : “ Will you pledge to never lie to us from that podium ?
” Without missing a beat , McEnany replied : “ I will never lie to you .
You have my word on that.
” Expect to hear replays of that line before this presidency is done .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , McEnany skated close to peddling dodgy information about Trump ’ s responses to the coronavirus pandemic ( “ This president has always sided on the side of data ” ) and to allegations of sexual misconduct ( “ He has always told the truth ” ) .
But the good news for the White House is that McEnany , 32 , benefits by comparison with the desperately low standards of both her boss and her predecessors .
Over the past month Trump has been a verbal cannon of insults , mendacity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ culminating in a proposal about bleach injection to fight Covid-19 that caused him to be metaphorically led away by men in white coats .
Spicer , who turned up at his first briefing in an oversized jacket and a foul mood , often resembled a rabbit caught in headlights , sealing his fate by claiming Adolf Hitler never used chemical weapons .
Sanders was an aggressive propagandist on her boss ’ s behalf .
Grisham was missing in action .
But McEnany , a devout Christian dressed in black and wearing a cross @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a binder of notes on a lectern that last year literally gathered dust , has plenty of TV experience and is a more polished performer than any of them .
Set against Trump ’ s word salads , she sounded like a model of concision .
Set against his temperament , she was the calm after the storm .
She described Trump as “ the most accessible president in history ” and insisted his son-in-law , Jared Kushner , who recently called the administration ’ s response to a pandemic which has killed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has done a great job ” .
She echoed Trump ’ s accusation that the World Health Organization “ praised China ’ s leadership on the 22nd and 23rd ” of January , without mentioning that on 22 January Trump tweeted “ Terrific working with President Xi ” and on 24 January wrote : “ China has been working very hard to contain the coronavirus .
The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency .
It will all work out well.
” Thankfully for McEnany , reporters were too polite to point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here.
” On the contrast between sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden and Brett Kavanaugh , she called the latter “ a grave miscarriage of justice ” so forcefully one might have assumed Kavanaugh had been destroyed , rather than now sitting on the supreme court .
McEnany also went on the offensive over the FBI ’ s handling of the case against the former national security adviser Michael Flynn , suggesting it should “ should scare every American ” and parroting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Russia , Russia ” .
When Jon Karl of ABC News asked about it , she tried to turn the tables : “ Does it trouble you that the FBI said , ‘ We ’ ve got ta get Flynn to lie ?
’ Doesn ’ t that trouble you as a journalist and , not only that , as an American citizen ?
” Karl replied dryly : “ Well , it ’ s certainly something worth reporting .
It ’ s not my job to say whether or not it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left eyebrow at that .
She also proved adept on the most important aspects of any press secretary ’ s job : the art of saying nothing .
There were plenty of “ I don ’ t want to get ahead of the president ” deflections .
As for policy depth , which is what the briefings are meant be about , that remains to be seen .
Kurt Bardella , a political commentator , tweeted : “ Objectively @ kayleighmcenany is doing the best job ( so far ) at the podium @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has served as @ PressSec ... her experience on cable news makes her a far more seasoned spokesperson than her predecessors.
” From the Trump team ’ s point of view , Bardella added , “ she is poised , capable , on-message , in-command , prepares and a very effective communicator ” .
Mark Meadows , the new White House chief of staff who has shaken up the communications operation , will probably be pleased .
But it was McEnany ’ s sign-off that was perhaps the most revealing insight into what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you the mindset of the president ” .
She declared : “ Of course , everyone should watch the Fox News town hall with the president from 7pm to 9pm [ on Sunday ] .
It ’ ll be can ’ t-miss television – much like the highly rated President Trump coronavirus task force briefings have been.
” If Trump ’ s attention span stretched to the end of the half-hour briefing , he will have been happy with that .

Channeling George Washington, Donald Trump, who has reportedly made 18,000 false or misleading claims in 1,170 days, recently proclaimed: “I cannot tell a lie.”
The president’s ministry of untruth has produced some whoppers over the years. Kellyanne Conway gained immortality with “alternative facts”. Sean Spicer used his first briefing as White House press secretary to inflate the size of Trump’s inauguration crowd. His successor, Sarah Sanders, admitted to lying to reporters about the firing of the FBI director James Comey.
The press secretary Stephanie Grisham never lied from the White House podium – because she never held a press briefing. So when the latest incumbent, Kayleigh McEnany, on Friday held the first such briefing in 417 days, the Associated Press reporter Jill Colvin had a question: “Will you pledge to never lie to us from that podium?”
Without missing a beat, McEnany replied: “I will never lie to you. You have my word on that.”
Expect to hear replays of that line before this presidency is done. Even on what proved an assured debut, McEnany skated close to peddling dodgy information about Trump’s responses to the coronavirus pandemic (“This president has always sided on the side of data”) and to allegations of sexual misconduct (“He has always told the truth”).
But the good news for the White House is that McEnany, 32, benefits by comparison with the desperately low standards of both her boss and her predecessors. Over the past month Trump has been a verbal cannon of insults, mendacity, miracle cures, self-aggrandisement and self-pity, culminating in a proposal about bleach injection to fight Covid-19 that caused him to be metaphorically led away by men in white coats.
Of course, everyone should watch the Fox News town hall with the president … It’ll be can’t-miss television Kayleigh McEnany
Spicer, who turned up at his first briefing in an oversized jacket and a foul mood, often resembled a rabbit caught in headlights, sealing his fate by claiming Adolf Hitler never used chemical weapons. Sanders was an aggressive propagandist on her boss’s behalf. Grisham was missing in action.
But McEnany, a devout Christian dressed in black and wearing a cross around her neck, who set down a binder of notes on a lectern that last year literally gathered dust, has plenty of TV experience and is a more polished performer than any of them. Set against Trump’s word salads, she sounded like a model of concision. Set against his temperament, she was the calm after the storm.
She described Trump as “the most accessible president in history” and insisted his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who recently called the administration’s response to a pandemic which has killed 63,000 Americans a success story, “has done a great job”.
She echoed Trump’s accusation that the World Health Organization “praised China’s leadership on the 22nd and 23rd” of January, without mentioning that on 22 January Trump tweeted “Terrific working with President Xi” and on 24 January wrote: “China has been working very hard to contain the coronavirus. The United States greatly appreciates their efforts and transparency. It will all work out well.”
Thankfully for McEnany, reporters were too polite to point out her own remark on 25 February: “We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here.”
On the contrast between sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden and Brett Kavanaugh, she called the latter “a grave miscarriage of justice” so forcefully one might have assumed Kavanaugh had been destroyed, rather than now sitting on the supreme court.
McEnany also went on the offensive over the FBI’s handling of the case against the former national security adviser Michael Flynn, suggesting it should “should scare every American” and parroting Trump’s refrain of “Russia, Russia, Russia”.
When Jon Karl of ABC News asked about it, she tried to turn the tables: “Does it trouble you that the FBI said, ‘We’ve gotta get Flynn to lie?’ Doesn’t that trouble you as a journalist and, not only that, as an American citizen?”
Karl replied dryly: “Well, it’s certainly something worth reporting. It’s not my job to say whether or not it’s troubling.”
McEnany arched her left eyebrow at that.
She also proved adept on the most important aspects of any press secretary’s job: the art of saying nothing. There were plenty of “I don’t want to get ahead of the president” deflections. As for policy depth, which is what the briefings are meant be about, that remains to be seen.
Kurt Bardella, a political commentator, tweeted: “Objectively @kayleighmcenany is doing the best job (so far) at the podium for @realDonaldTrump than anyone else who has served as @PressSec ... her experience on cable news makes her a far more seasoned spokesperson than her predecessors.”
From the Trump team’s point of view, Bardella added, “she is poised, capable, on-message, in-command, prepares and a very effective communicator”.
Mark Meadows, the new White House chief of staff who has shaken up the communications operation, will probably be pleased. But it was McEnany’s sign-off that was perhaps the most revealing insight into what she called her “mission to bring you the mindset of the president”.
She declared: “Of course, everyone should watch the Fox News town hall with the president from 7pm to 9pm [on Sunday]. It’ll be can’t-miss television – much like the highly rated President Trump coronavirus task force briefings have been.”
If Trump’s attention span stretched to the end of the half-hour briefing, he will have been happy with that.


theguardian--2020-05-01--The Guardian view on Trump and Covid-19: Americans suffer. Will he? | Editorial

Listeners could be forgiven for a sense of deja vu : “ It ’ s going to go .
It ’ s going to leave .
It ’ s going to be gone , ” Donald Trump pronounced of coronavirus on Wednesday .
The words were eerily similar to the president ’ s prediction in late February that “ It ’ s going to disappear ” – a theme he harped on repeatedly as the caseload and fatalities rose .
Since that forecast , a million Americans have fallen ill with coronavirus – almost a third of the global total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in just a few weeks surpassing the US death toll in all the years of the Vietnam war .
This week , it was reported that almost 70 people had died at a single veterans ’ nursing home in Massachusetts .
New York is struggling to bury its dead .
This is what the president ’ s son-in-law , Jared Kushner , describes as “ a great success story ” .
This is the context in which the administration is letting its physical distancing guidelines lapse , instead advising much less stringent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ July the country could be “ really rocking again ” .
But Americans will suffer from Mr Trump ’ s keenness to get back to business , as if the pre-coronavirus state of affairs were still possible .
Medical experts have already warned about the risks of another surge in cases .
The question is whether states , cities , institutions and individuals can again mitigate the harm he is wreaking upon his country .
Some may ; others are leading his charge : in Georgia , such essential services as tattoo parlours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their trade .
Texas is allowing shops , cinemas , shopping malls and restaurants to reopen , albeit with restrictions on capacity .
Without significant testing and tracing , it is evident where such decisions will lead .
The best that can be said for Mr Trump ’ s election-driven wishful thinking is that it is less immediately dangerous than his recent public musings that people might have injections of disinfectant as a cure .
Each week of the pandemic has brought new shame upon the president : he failed to equip his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advocate physical distancing when it was desperately needed , or even to look like he was seriously concerned about the outbreak and its victims , preferring instead to boast about the ratings for his briefings .
While leaders around the world enjoyed a surge in support as the pandemic took hold – the rally-around-the-flag effect – Mr Trump ’ s appalling performance has finally taken a toll on his popularity .
He had counted on a strong economy to see him back into office in November .
But with more than 30 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last six weeks – and economists suggesting that the real level of job losses could be far worse – his confidence has been shaken .
This week it was reported that he had lashed out at his own campaign after polls showed him trailing Joe Biden in crucial states and with older voters .
With the Democrat facing a sexual assault claim and running a virtual campaign while Mr Trump commands daily airtime , it is clear that the president is doing the damage himself .
He is seeking to shift the blame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Organization ( having ignored its repeated warnings ) and to China .
On Thursday he contradicted his own director of national intelligence by claiming that he had seen evidence that the virus originated in a Wuhan laboratory ; Trump officials have reportedly leaned on the agencies to find evidence to back the theory .
This conduct too is unpleasantly familiar .
His contempt for the truth ; his determination to evade responsibility while holding the most powerful job in the world ; his ignorance , his narcissism and the threat he poses to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more painfully evident through this crisis , but were clear before .
Yet he has so far defied the laws of political gravity .
Americans have paid dearly for Mr Trump ’ s complacency , recklessness , irrationality and incompetence .
But are they at last ready to make him pay ?

Listeners could be forgiven for a sense of deja vu: “It’s going to go. It’s going to leave. It’s going to be gone,” Donald Trump pronounced of coronavirus on Wednesday.
The words were eerily similar to the president’s prediction in late February that “It’s going to disappear” – a theme he harped on repeatedly as the caseload and fatalities rose. Since that forecast, a million Americans have fallen ill with coronavirus – almost a third of the global total – and more than 60,000 have died, in just a few weeks surpassing the US death toll in all the years of the Vietnam war. This week, it was reported that almost 70 people had died at a single veterans’ nursing home in Massachusetts. New York is struggling to bury its dead.
This is what the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, describes as “a great success story”. This is the context in which the administration is letting its physical distancing guidelines lapse, instead advising much less stringent measures.
Mr Kushner suggests that by July the country could be “really rocking again”. But Americans will suffer from Mr Trump’s keenness to get back to business, as if the pre-coronavirus state of affairs were still possible. Medical experts have already warned about the risks of another surge in cases. The question is whether states, cities, institutions and individuals can again mitigate the harm he is wreaking upon his country. Some may; others are leading his charge: in Georgia, such essential services as tattoo parlours and bowling alleys are once again plying their trade. Texas is allowing shops, cinemas, shopping malls and restaurants to reopen, albeit with restrictions on capacity. Without significant testing and tracing, it is evident where such decisions will lead.
The best that can be said for Mr Trump’s election-driven wishful thinking is that it is less immediately dangerous than his recent public musings that people might have injections of disinfectant as a cure. Each week of the pandemic has brought new shame upon the president: he failed to equip his country and its health workers, to advocate physical distancing when it was desperately needed, or even to look like he was seriously concerned about the outbreak and its victims, preferring instead to boast about the ratings for his briefings.
While leaders around the world enjoyed a surge in support as the pandemic took hold – the rally-around-the-flag effect – Mr Trump’s appalling performance has finally taken a toll on his popularity. He had counted on a strong economy to see him back into office in November. But with more than 30 million US workers filing unemployment claims in the last six weeks – and economists suggesting that the real level of job losses could be far worse – his confidence has been shaken.
This week it was reported that he had lashed out at his own campaign after polls showed him trailing Joe Biden in crucial states and with older voters. With the Democrat facing a sexual assault claim and running a virtual campaign while Mr Trump commands daily airtime, it is clear that the president is doing the damage himself. He is seeking to shift the blame for the pandemic to the World Health Organization (having ignored its repeated warnings) and to China. On Thursday he contradicted his own director of national intelligence by claiming that he had seen evidence that the virus originated in a Wuhan laboratory; Trump officials have reportedly leaned on the agencies to find evidence to back the theory.
This conduct too is unpleasantly familiar. His contempt for the truth; his determination to evade responsibility while holding the most powerful job in the world; his ignorance, his narcissism and the threat he poses to his country – all have become still more painfully evident through this crisis, but were clear before. Yet he has so far defied the laws of political gravity. Americans have paid dearly for Mr Trump’s complacency, recklessness, irrationality and incompetence. But are they at last ready to make him pay?


theguardian--2020-05-01--Trump is handling coronavirus so badly, he almost makes Johnson look good | Jonathan Freedland

This government should be on the rack .
The evidence that it botched crucial decisions at crucial moments is piling up .
The litany is now so familiar it barely needs repeating , from the failure to secure personal protective equipment for frontline workers in health and social care to the 11 lost days of delay before imposing a lockdown that has proved essential for saving lives .
You can focus on specific judgments : why did ministers allow mass gatherings , from racing at Cheltenham to a Stereophonics gig in Cardiff , ignoring the warnings that such events would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ initially tell people to stay away from pubs and restaurants , but simultaneously allow those places to stay open ?
Why did the government call a halt in March to testing and tracing ?
If the answer is a lack of capacity , then why did it not immediately set about recruiting the “ army of contact tracers ” that will be required if we are ever to emerge from our homes ?
Why the focus on mega-labs , rather than seizing on the offer of small laboratories to do testing for their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nurse , director of the Francis Crick Institute , has argued , could have made those hospitals “ safe places ” ?
Why the rules initially limiting tests to those NHS employees with symptoms , which , as Nurse puts it , allowed staff to be on wards “ infecting people ” ?
Or you can look at decisions going back a decade , pointing a finger at Tory austerity that starved public services to the bone , leaving them underequipped and eroding our resilience .
Either way , the country now faces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet , far from being on the rack , the government continues to bask in public support .
True , approval for the government ’ s handling of the crisis has fallen from the dizzying 61 % it reached a month ago to 51 % at last count .
But 51 % is still the kind of approval rating most politicians long for .
What accounts for this disconnect between the government ’ s record and the public ’ s high regard for those responsible ?
Put another way , why isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any answer must begin with what pollsters call the “ rally-around-the-flag ” effect , the tendency for voters to back their leaders in a time of crisis .
Data from around the world , in this era and in others , suggests that when citizens are scared , they want to believe those in charge have the wisdom and strength to protect them .
Think of electorates as passengers on a plummeting plane : in that moment of peril , they need to trust the pilot .
In Johnson ’ s case , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No one can throw at him the traditional accusation directed at politicians , namely that he is out of touch with the seriousness of the disease .
His own near-death experience with Covid-19 immunises him from that charge .
The outpouring of sympathy while he clung to life in intensive care was real ; some of it lingers when he briefs the nation from No 10 and grows visibly tired before the hour is up .
That might prompt some voters to go a bit easier on the prime minister than they otherwise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrival this week of a Downing Street baby .
The extraordinary month Johnson has endured acts to protect the prime minister and , since this is very much his administration , the entire government .
He ’ s helped , too , by the fact that there is so little we know for certain about this disease .
The UK may have the highest death rate in Europe , but as David Spiegelhalter argued persuasively , we won ’ t be sure of that “ until the end of the year , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if Britain does turn out to be the worst hit , it ’ ll be easy to argue that it wasn ’ t the government ’ s fault but was rather a function of certain immovable facts about this country : that , for example , it includes a city , London , that has no direct European equivalent in size or scale .
Some voters are surely minded to give the government the benefit of the doubt on the grounds that it has merely been “ following the science ” .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positioning the scientists as the fall guys once all this is done .
Even those who know that when it comes to public health policy there is no such thing as “ the science ” – that there are always going to be competing views over how to act on data once you ’ ve got it – could see that as a reason to cut ministers some slack : faced with a near-unprecedented threat , politicians have had to make life-and-death decisions with no clear manual to follow .
It helps that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ putting the Johnson baby news or Capt Tom Moore on the front and condemning the dead to the inside pages .
It ’ s handy , too , to have a few outriders attacking journalists for daring to ask awkward questions at a time like this , suggesting they should be biting their tongues in the spirit of national unity ( when , of course , asking awkward questions of those in power is journalists ’ essential duty ) .
Nor does it hurt to have an opposition that – for reasons that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decided to offer mild , “ constructive ” criticism rather than to put the boot in .
All of these factors have helped insulate the government from the flak that would otherwise be coming its way .
But there ’ s one more , perhaps less obvious explanation – and it relates to judgment by comparison .
We don ’ t need to wait for a full statistical analysis to know that Johnson has not been the worst world leader in this crisis , because we can declare a winner in that contest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up to ever more jaw-dropping news from across the Atlantic .
Last week , it was Donald Trump advising Americans to inject bleach .
On Friday , it was his claim to have seen evidence that coronavirus was developed in a Wuhan laboratory , a claim denied by his own director of national intelligence .
The shocking images of protesters wielding assault weapons storming into the state assembly in Michigan on Thursday night are hardly a surprise , given that Trump himself was tweeting “ Liberate Michigan !
” a matter of days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demanding their states defy the advice of Trump ’ s own White House and prematurely end the lockdown that has so far proved to be the only way to stop the virus .
However bad Johnson and his government of conspicuously few talents is , we know they ’ re not that .
They can at least show a modicum of human empathy for those who ’ ve lost loved ones , a feat that continues to elude Trump .
They have at least – eventually – united behind a coherent “ stay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that advice at every turn .
They are not hawking quack cures and endorsing deranged conspiracy theories .
They do not seem willing to countenance mass death in the insane belief that it will help them win an election .
It ’ s a low bar , but these are low times .

This government should be on the rack. The evidence that it botched crucial decisions at crucial moments is piling up. The litany is now so familiar it barely needs repeating, from the failure to secure personal protective equipment for frontline workers in health and social care to the 11 lost days of delay before imposing a lockdown that has proved essential for saving lives.
You can focus on specific judgments: why did ministers allow mass gatherings, from racing at Cheltenham to a Stereophonics gig in Cardiff, ignoring the warnings that such events would be a virus-fest? Why did it initially tell people to stay away from pubs and restaurants, but simultaneously allow those places to stay open? Why did the government call a halt in March to testing and tracing? If the answer is a lack of capacity, then why did it not immediately set about recruiting the “army of contact tracers” that will be required if we are ever to emerge from our homes? Why the focus on mega-labs, rather than seizing on the offer of small laboratories to do testing for their local hospitals, which, as Paul Nurse, director of the Francis Crick Institute, has argued, could have made those hospitals “safe places”? Why the rules initially limiting tests to those NHS employees with symptoms, which, as Nurse puts it, allowed staff to be on wards “infecting people”?
Or you can look at decisions going back a decade, pointing a finger at Tory austerity that starved public services to the bone, leaving them underequipped and eroding our resilience. Either way, the country now faces a death toll approaching 30,000.
And yet, far from being on the rack, the government continues to bask in public support. True, approval for the government’s handling of the crisis has fallen from the dizzying 61% it reached a month ago to 51% at last count. But 51% is still the kind of approval rating most politicians long for.
What accounts for this disconnect between the government’s record and the public’s high regard for those responsible? Put another way, why isn’t Boris Johnson in more trouble?
Any answer must begin with what pollsters call the “rally-around-the-flag” effect, the tendency for voters to back their leaders in a time of crisis. Data from around the world, in this era and in others, suggests that when citizens are scared, they want to believe those in charge have the wisdom and strength to protect them. Think of electorates as passengers on a plummeting plane: in that moment of peril, they need to trust the pilot.
In Johnson’s case, there’s an additional factor. No one can throw at him the traditional accusation directed at politicians, namely that he is out of touch with the seriousness of the disease. His own near-death experience with Covid-19 immunises him from that charge. The outpouring of sympathy while he clung to life in intensive care was real; some of it lingers when he briefs the nation from No 10 and grows visibly tired before the hour is up. That might prompt some voters to go a bit easier on the prime minister than they otherwise would, an indulgence buttressed by the arrival this week of a Downing Street baby. The extraordinary month Johnson has endured acts to protect the prime minister and, since this is very much his administration, the entire government.
He’s helped, too, by the fact that there is so little we know for certain about this disease. The UK may have the highest death rate in Europe, but as David Spiegelhalter argued persuasively, we won’t be sure of that “until the end of the year, and the years after that”. Even if Britain does turn out to be the worst hit, it’ll be easy to argue that it wasn’t the government’s fault but was rather a function of certain immovable facts about this country: that, for example, it includes a city, London, that has no direct European equivalent in size or scale.
Some voters are surely minded to give the government the benefit of the doubt on the grounds that it has merely been “following the science”. That could prove a valuable alibi, nicely positioning the scientists as the fall guys once all this is done. Even those who know that when it comes to public health policy there is no such thing as “the science” – that there are always going to be competing views over how to act on data once you’ve got it – could see that as a reason to cut ministers some slack: faced with a near-unprecedented threat, politicians have had to make life-and-death decisions with no clear manual to follow.
It helps that much of the press is supportive, putting the Johnson baby news or Capt Tom Moore on the front and condemning the dead to the inside pages. It’s handy, too, to have a few outriders attacking journalists for daring to ask awkward questions at a time like this, suggesting they should be biting their tongues in the spirit of national unity (when, of course, asking awkward questions of those in power is journalists’ essential duty). Nor does it hurt to have an opposition that – for reasons that may make sound political sense – has decided to offer mild, “constructive” criticism rather than to put the boot in.
All of these factors have helped insulate the government from the flak that would otherwise be coming its way. But there’s one more, perhaps less obvious explanation – and it relates to judgment by comparison. We don’t need to wait for a full statistical analysis to know that Johnson has not been the worst world leader in this crisis, because we can declare a winner in that contest right now.
Each day Britons wake up to ever more jaw-dropping news from across the Atlantic. Last week, it was Donald Trump advising Americans to inject bleach. On Friday, it was his claim to have seen evidence that coronavirus was developed in a Wuhan laboratory, a claim denied by his own director of national intelligence. The shocking images of protesters wielding assault weapons storming into the state assembly in Michigan on Thursday night are hardly a surprise, given that Trump himself was tweeting “Liberate Michigan!” a matter of days ago, cheering on those who are demanding their states defy the advice of Trump’s own White House and prematurely end the lockdown that has so far proved to be the only way to stop the virus.
However bad Johnson and his government of conspicuously few talents is, we know they’re not that. They can at least show a modicum of human empathy for those who’ve lost loved ones, a feat that continues to elude Trump. They have at least – eventually – united behind a coherent “stay home” message, rather than undermining that advice at every turn. They are not hawking quack cures and endorsing deranged conspiracy theories. They do not seem willing to countenance mass death in the insane belief that it will help them win an election. It’s a low bar, but these are low times.


theguardian--2020-05-02--Benefit of the doubt? Joe Biden – and allies – face key questions over sexual assault claim

Nearly three decades after Joe Biden faced sharp backlash over his treatment of Anita Hill , when she came before his Senate committee to accuse Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment , he urged lawmakers not to repeat the same mistakes when considering a sexual assault claim against another supreme court nominee , Brett Kavanaugh , by Christine Blasey Ford .
“ It takes enormous courage for a woman to come forward , under the bright lights of millions of people watching , and relive something that happened to her , ” Biden said in 2018 , as he was laying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ford , he said , “ should be given the benefit of the doubt ” .
On Friday , Biden broke a months-long silence to unequivocally deny an allegation of sexual assault by a former Senate aide , Tara Reade .
But he was challenged to align his past comments on how such allegations should be viewed with his assertion that Reade ’ s account was false .
“ Are women to be believed … unless it pertains to you ?
” asked Mika Brzezinski , a host of MSNBC ’ s Morning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believed , given the benefit of the doubt , ” Biden said .
But he added that “ the facts in this case do not exist .
They never happened , and there ’ s so many inconsistencies in what has been said in this case .
So yes , look at the facts , and I assure you it did not happen .
Period .
Period.
” For weeks Biden ’ s campaign has grappled with how he should defend him while upholding the “ believe women ” ethos of the # @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in politics , entertainment and media .
Since Donald Trump ’ s election , Democrats have confronted sexual misconduct aggressively , drawing a sharp distinction with Republicans on issues of gender and equality .
Trump has been accused by more than a dozen women of sexual harassment , assault or rape .
During the 2016 election , a recording emerged of him bragging about groping women .
Trump has flatly denied the allegations , often attacking his accusers , including for their appearance .
Indeed , on Friday the president advised Biden to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Speaking to conservative conservative radio host Dan Bongino , Trump suggested the accusation could be false and likened the two men ’ s situations .
“ All of a sudden you become a wealthy guy , you ’ re a famous guy , then you become president , and people … that you ’ ve never seen , that you ’ ve never heard of make charges .
So I guess in a way you could say I ’ m … sticking up for him.
” Republicans have largely remained silent about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ By contrast , Democrats demanded Biden address the matter and some have even called for him to step down as the presumptive nominee .
“ Demanding more of Joe Biden ’ s leadership is not in contradiction with our commitment to defeat Trump , ” said Ana Maria Archila , co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy .
“ It is , in fact , central to that effort.
” Republicans have seized on an opportunity to renew the poisonous fight that erupted over Kavanaugh .
“ Democrat double standard ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Committee which portrayed Democrats as hypocrites and suggested they were holding the allegation against their nominee to a higher standard of proof than the one they used against Kavanaugh .
“ The double standard exhibited by Biden , prominent liberal women ’ s groups and Democrat elected officials – some of whom want to be Biden ’ s running mate – is glaring and can not be allowed to stand , ” said Erin Perrine , a spokeswoman for Trump ’ s election campaign .
But Karen Finney , who worked for Hillary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans were “ playing with fire ” .
Lis Smith , a senior adviser to Pete Buttigieg ’ s Democratic presidential campaign , said : “ If Republicans and Biden opponents push too hard on this , it will backfire on them and just raise the question of why President Trump has never addressed the scores of sexual misconduct allegations against him.
” Lara Brown , director of the Graduate School of Political Management at George Washington University , said : “ In this situation , the calculation that I think most Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems are , Trump is worse on every level.
” Brown said accusations of hypocrisy can “ hit more than the scandal itself ” , particularly when a candidate is attempting to define an opponent .
But in this case , she said , the effort to brand Democrats as hypocrites would be undercut by Trump ’ s record and Republican silence .
Larry Jacobs , director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota , said Republicans were attempting to “ neutralize ” Biden ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the party in 2018 .
But he said the controversy would likely be eclipsed by the economic fallout from the coronavirus outbreak and was unlikely to be a “ front-of-mind issue for voters ” come November .
Women are a core Democratic constituency .
Since Trump ’ s election , they have organized , voted and run for office in record numbers .
In the presidential primary , excitement at the prospect of nominating a woman was eclipsed by fear of losing to Trump .
Democrats chose Biden because they believed he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has promised to choose a woman as his running mate .
Biden ’ s public silence over the last month put top female allies in the position of defending him while validating the experiences of women who come forward .
Even so , party leadership and many of the women Biden is considering for vice-president , including senators Amy Klobuchar and Kamala Harris and former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams , have voiced their support in recent days .
“ I have a great comfort level with the situation as I see it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporters on Thursday , “ with all due respect in the world for any woman who comes forward , with all the highest regard for Joe Biden.
” Pelosi said she had “ complete respect ” for the # MeToo movement but added : “ There is also due process , and the fact that Joe Biden is Joe Biden.
” Juanita Broaddrick , who accused Bill Clinton of raping her in 1978 , accused Pelosi of being “ hypocritical ” and “ dishonest ” .
“ ‘ The fact is that Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she wrote on Twitter .
“ What the hell ?
Bill Clinton is Bill Clinton , but he ’ s still a rapist.
” Clinton has denied the charge .
In a statement on Friday , Biden pointed to his work in the Senate to pass the Violence Against Women Act , and as vice-president to combat campus sexual assault .
Yet as he was preparing to launch his campaign last year , eight women , including Reade , came forward with stories about unwanted touching or contact .
None alleged sexual assault @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when he made light of it days later .
For many sexual assault survivors and advocates , the current controversy has exposed how much still needs to change .
“ # MeToo happened and survivors are speaking up more but we still have a lot of people who grew up and accumulated power in the pre- # MeToo world , ” said Wagatwe Wanjuki , a writer and anti-rape activist who worked with Biden ’ s team to shape campus sexual assault policies when he was vice-president .
“ Now we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more comfortable coming forward but we still don ’ t have the systems in place for them to come forward in a way that is fair and allows both sides to be heard .
”

Nearly three decades after Joe Biden faced sharp backlash over his treatment of Anita Hill, when she came before his Senate committee to accuse Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment, he urged lawmakers not to repeat the same mistakes when considering a sexual assault claim against another supreme court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, by Dr Christine Blasey Ford.
“It takes enormous courage for a woman to come forward, under the bright lights of millions of people watching, and relive something that happened to her,” Biden said in 2018, as he was laying the groundwork for a presidential run.
Ford, he said, “should be given the benefit of the doubt”.
That statement was read back to Biden during an interview on Friday, in which the presumptive Democratic nominee broke his months-long silence to unequivocally deny an allegation of sexual assault by a former Senate aide, Tara Reade. Mika Brzezinski, a host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe, pressed him to align his past comments on how such allegations should be viewed with his assertion that Reade’s account was false.
“Are women to be believed … unless it pertains to you?” she asked.
“Women are to be believed, given the benefit of the doubt,” Biden said.
But he added that “the facts in this case do not exist. They never happened, and there’s so many inconsistencies in what has been said in this case. So yes, look at the facts, and I assure you it did not happen. Period. Period.”
For weeks Biden’s campaign has grappled with how he should defend him while upholding the “believe women” ethos of the #MeToo movement that Democrats have embraced. In the years since Donald Trump was elected, Democrats have confronted sexual misconduct aggressively, policing their own ranks to draw a sharp distinction with Republicans on issues of gender, equality and accountability.
Trump has been accused by more than a dozen women of sexual harassment, assault or rape. During the 2016 election, a recording emerged of him bragging about groping women. Trump has flatly denied the allegations, often attacking his accusers as opportunists and liars.
Indeed, on Friday the president advised Biden to “go out and fight it”.
Speaking to the conservative conservative radio host Dan Bongino, Trump suggested the accusation could be false and even sounded a note of empathy for Biden’s predicament.
“All of a sudden you become a wealthy guy, you’re a famous guy, then you become president, and people … that you’ve never seen, that you’ve never heard of make charges,” Trump said. “So I guess in a way you could say I’m … sticking up for him.”
Republicans have largely remained silent about Trump’s record on women. By contrast, Democrats demanded Biden publicly address the matter and some have even called for him to step down as the presumptive nominee.
“Demanding more of Joe Biden’s leadership is not in contradiction with our commitment to defeat Trump,” said Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy. “It is, in fact, central to that effort.”
Yet Republicans have seized on the matter in an effort to renew the poisonous political fight that erupted over Kavanaugh.
“Democrat double standard” blared a memo from the Republican National Committee which portrayed Democrats as hypocrites who held the allegation against their nominee to a higher standard of proof than the one they used against Kavanaugh.
“The double standard exhibited by Biden, prominent liberal women’s groups and Democrat elected officials – some of whom want to be Biden’s running mate – is glaring and cannot be allowed to stand,” said Erin Perrine, a spokeswoman for Trump’s election campaign.
Amy Klobuchar speaks to Ari Melber of MSNBC. Photograph: Brian Cahn/ZUMA Wire/REX/Shutterstock
But Karen Finney, who worked for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, said Republicans were “playing with fire” by attempting to create a “false equivalency” between Biden and Trump on the issue.
Lis Smith, a senior adviser to Pete Buttigieg’s Democratic presidential campaign, said: “If Republicans and Biden opponents push too hard on this, it will backfire on them and just raise the question of why President Trump has never addressed the scores of sexual misconduct allegations against him.”
Women are a core Democratic constituency. Since Trump’s election, they have organized, voted and run for office in record numbers. In the presidential primary, excitement at the prospect of nominating a woman was eclipsed by fear of losing to Trump. Democrats chose Biden because they believed he was the most electable candidate. He has promised to choose a woman as his running mate.
Lara Brown, director of the Graduate School of Political Management at George Washington University, said: “In this situation, the calculation that I think most Democrats will make is whatever Biden’s problems are, Trump is worse on every level.”
Brown said accusations of hypocrisy can “hit more than the scandal itself”, particularly when a candidate is attempting to define an opponent. But in this case, she said, the effort to brand Democrats as hypocrites would be undercut by Trump’s record and Republican silence.
Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, said Republicans were attempting to “neutralize” Biden’s appeal to suburban women who revolted from the party in 2018.
But he said the controversy would probably be eclipsed by the economic fallout from the coronavirus outbreak and was unlikely to be a “front-of-mind issue for voters” come November.
Biden’s public silence over the last month has put top female allies in the position of defending him while validating the experiences of women who come forward. Even so, party leadership and many of the women Biden is considering for vice-president, including Senators Amy Klobuchar and Kamala Harris and former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, have voiced their support in recent days.
“I have a great comfort level with the situation as I see it,” the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, told reporters on Thursday, “with all due respect in the world for any woman who comes forward, with all the highest regard for Joe Biden.”
Stacey Abrams speaks to Jake Tapper of CNN. Photograph: Brian Cahn/ZUMA Wire/REX/Shutterstock
Pelosi said she had “complete respect” for the #MeToo movement but added: “There is also due process, and the fact that Joe Biden is Joe Biden.”
Juanita Broaddrick, who accused Bill Clinton of raping her in 1978, accused Pelosi of being “hypocritical” and “dishonest”.
“‘The fact is that Joe Biden is Joe Biden’,” she wrote on Twitter. “What the hell? Bill Clinton is Bill Clinton, but he’s still a rapist.” Clinton has denied the charge.
‘#MeToo happened’
In a statement on Friday, Biden pointed to his work in the Senate to pass the Violence Against Women Act, and as vice-president to combat campus sexual assault.
Yet as he was preparing to launch his campaign last year, eight women, including Reade, came forward with stories about unwanted touching or contact. None alleged sexual assault. He apologized but advocates were dismayed when he made light of it days later.
For many sexual assault survivors and advocates, the current controversy has exposed how much still needs to change.
“#MeToo happened and survivors are speaking up more but we still have a lot of people who grew up and accumulated power in the pre-#MeToo world,” said Wagatwe Wanjuki, a writer and anti-rape activist who worked with Biden’s team to shape campus sexual assault policies when he was vice-president.
“Now we’re in this transitionary period where survivors feel more comfortable coming forward but we still don’t have the systems in place for them to come forward in a way that is fair and allows both sides to be heard.”


theguardian--2020-05-02--No leadership and no plan: is Trump about to fail the US on coronavirus testing?

A broad coalition of US health systems has mobilized to ramp up coronavirus testing in a national effort on a scale not seen since the second world war .
But declarations of false victory by the Trump administration and a vacuum of federal leadership have undermined the endeavor , leading experts to warn that reopening the US could result in a disaster .
Interviews with agents on the frontlines of the coronavirus battle – lab directors , chemists , manufacturers , epidemiologists , academics and technologists – reveal as diverse an application of the legendary American ingenuity as the century @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running production lines around the clock to triple their output , and triple it again .
A private healthcare institute in California has constructed a mega-lab to process thousands of tests daily and deliver the results by text message alert .
In smaller labs across the country , microbiologists improvise each day to fill unpredictable supply chain gaps that might leave them without swabs one day , and without crucial chemicals the next .
“ It ’ s incredible what we ’ ve done together over a short period of time , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ briefing this week , praising his administration ’ s response to the pandemic .
But analysts say that without centralized governance and coordination , the national effort remains a competing coalition of state and local outfits hampered by duplicated work , competition for supplies , siloed pursuits of non-transferable solutions and red tape that leaves some labs with testing backlogs and others with excess capacity .
All of which leaves the US without a unified , coherent strategy for testing and contact tracing to contain a virus that does not respect state borders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans .
Without it , the imminent experiment of reopening the country could be catastrophic , warned Harvard epidemiologist Michael Mina in a conference call with reporters this week .
“ My concern is that we ’ ll end up right where we have been , with major cities having healthcare systems that get overrun quickly because of major outbreaks , ” Mina said .
Meanwhile , as states begin to relax social distancing measures , the Trump administration is spreading dangerous misinformation , denying persistent supply shortages , underestimating the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety conferred by the current volume of testing and contact-tracing , experts say .
“ We ’ ve done more than 200,000 tests in a single day , ” Mike Pence said at a taskforce briefing this week , in which Trump touted testing as “ one of the great assets that we have ” in reopening the US .
But at current testing levels , with only rudimentary plans for contact tracing for new cases , the US will be flying virtually blind as it reopens , said Glen Weyl , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harvard ’ s Safra Center for Ethics that calls for 5m tests a day by early June .
“ No , definitely not , you can ’ t open up with that number , ” Weyl said of Pence ’ s announcement .
“ It ’ s not even remotely in the right ballpark .
It ’ s off by a factor of 10.
” Testing is one of the biggest challenges the coronavirus crisis poses .
And as Asian countries that have succeeded in temporarily containing the virus have shown , testing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contact tracing and isolating confirmed and suspected Covid-19 patients .
There are multiple categories of tests with multiple different modes for sampling , storage and transport .
A test might detect the virus itself , detect traces of the virus or detect the body ’ s reaction to having had the virus .
The experience of being tested could be different in each case .
One patient might have his or her sinuses probed by a swab at a drive-thru , while another might spit in a tube at home and another give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Each test has a different degree of reliability , with different amounts of time and labor required to complete the boomerang curve of sample collection to testing to result report .
“ We have too many [ brands of ] tests , and now there are a lot of people who are committed to their tests and they run their tests on their platforms , ” said Paul Reider , a renowned research chemist in the pharmaceuticals industry who teaches at Princeton University .
“ If we had an effective administration – this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – they could essentially turn around and say , ‘ What we would like to do is , we want one test , maybe two , that are fast , that are accurate , that are scalable and transferable , .
In the US , regulatory and administrative hurdles are everywhere , with clinics unable to send samples to private labs that might be out of their usual networks , a lack of protocols for reporting testing data , slow regulatory approval for the use of alternative testing materials , insufficient federal funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leadership steering the country ’ s massive laboratory apparatus .
“ We don ’ t have a system that ’ s ever been built for surveillance , for wide-scale population surveillance or wide-scale testing for people who aren ’ t presenting to the hospital or the clinic , ” said Mina .
“ The demand is just so much larger than our system was built for.
” The Trump administration ’ s response to this complicated thicket has been to declare the federal government a “ supplier of last resort ” and wish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s pretty simple , ” Trump has said .
“ They have tremendous capacity .
We hope to be able to help out.
” In an attempt to meet the demand they have encountered , lab scientists have improvised constantly , substituting materials where possible or stacking testing platforms from different manufacturers – Roche , Qiagen , Abbott , Hologic , DiaSorin – so that if one goes down another can take its place .
The result is that labs have delivered an unprecedented number of tests in record time – but with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could be achieved through better coordination , said Reider .
“ If Jared Kushner wanted to do something decent , and Vice-President Pence , they could try to standardize and distribute nationally a global test , ” said Reider .
“ At least make it available and let people choose if they want to use it.
” The Harvard report called for the establishment of a “ Pandemic Testing Board ” “ akin to the War Production Board that the United States created in World War II ” .
The director of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( CIDRAP ) at the University of Minnesota calls for a new Marshall plan to stand up testing in the US .
But no efforts to create such a central authority are apparent , said Michael Osterholm , CIDRAP director , who described a shortage of reagents , or chemicals used in testing , on his Osterholm Update podcast this week .
“ We have had a number of our testing laboratories unable to get the needed reagents they could ’ ve and should ’ ve had to increase testing , ” Osterholm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marshall plan where the federal government and the private sector get together and decide what are the challenges , what can we do to quickly boost these reagents , what can we do to actually increase the reagent pool ?
” Demand signal or no , some big private sector players have already moved aggressively .
Early on in the crisis , Color , a private healthcare institute that does genomic testing in California , resolved to stand up a mega-lab that is now on the verge of processing 10,000 tests a day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capacity by an order of magnitude , said Othman Laraki , CEO .
The company has since partnered with the city of San Francisco to provide Covid-19 testing for all private-sector and nonprofit essential employees , as well as any resident with symptoms who can not find testing elsewhere .
Next-day results are delivered via email and text-message alerts .
“ Our thinking was that you needed to have a few massively scaled labs as opposed to having a big sprinkling of small-scale labs , ” Laraki said .
“ We believe that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ type of capacity that ’ s needed really to bring the country back to work.
” In Minnesota , academics at the state university partnered with scientists at the Mayo clinic , one of the country ’ s premier labs , to deliver on a challenge by governor Tim Walz to stop coronavirus in the state with comprehensive testing and contact tracing .
“ We just made the decision that we ’ re probably going to be on our own and that we need to be ready to care for our patients , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research at the University of Minnesota and an architect of the project .
As a first step , the scientists invented a molecular test “ that was mostly independent of the supply chain problems ” , Schacker said .
Robin Patel , the president of the American Society for Microbiology , said supply chain issues continue to represent a daily challenge for laboratories , from swabs to chemicals to materials used to extract viral RNA and amplify DNA .
“ The situation has changed , yes , but it ’ s a different @ @ @ @ @ @ @ word ‘ improved ’ is I don ’ t think appropriate , ” she said .
“ This isn ’ t just an American situation .
People throughout the world are dealing with the same issues .
The supply chain we ’ re talking about is not just an American supply chain , it ’ s a worldwide supply chain.
” To celebrate America ’ s reopening , Trump appears to be preparing to hit the road , with plans to visit warehouses and factory sites to advertise the economic comeback he has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy the world has ever seen , ” Trump said this week .
“ And we ’ re going to do it again .
And it ’ s not going to be that long .
OK ?
” Polling indicates that a majority of Americans does not share Trump ’ s optimism .
About two in three Americans think restrictions on restaurants , stores and other businesses are appropriate , and 16 % on top of that wanted tighter restrictions , a poll this week from the Washington Post and the University of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s possible that the US could get some kind of reprieve from the virus in the warmer months ahead .
If that happens , the summer could feature the scenes Trump has dreamed about , of packed churches , humming factories , crowded beaches and sold-out flights .
But Trump ’ s dream that the virus will simply disappear is just that – a dream , epidemiologists say .
“ I hope that over the course of the next few weeks to two months , we ’ re going to actually see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Osterholm said .
“ And if it does , it shouldn ’ t be interpreted that we won , or that somehow we ’ re in control .
“ I hope that the case numbers continue to decrease over time , but I ’ m also very , very aware that they ’ re coming back , and we just have to remember that .
”

A broad coalition of US health systems has mobilized to ramp up coronavirus testing in a national effort on a scale not seen since the second world war. But declarations of false victory by the Trump administration and a vacuum of federal leadership have undermined the endeavor, leading experts to warn that reopening the US could result in a disaster.
Interviews with agents on the frontlines of the coronavirus battle – lab directors, chemists, manufacturers, epidemiologists, academics and technologists – reveal as diverse an application of the legendary American ingenuity as the century has seen.
Test kit manufacturers are running production lines around the clock to triple their output, and triple it again. A private healthcare institute in California has constructed a mega-lab to process thousands of tests daily and deliver the results by text message. In smaller labs across the country, microbiologists improvise each day to fill unpredictable supply chain gaps that might leave them without swabs one day, and without crucial chemicals the next.
Health workers dressed in personal protective equipment handle a coronavirus test at a drive-thru testing station in Stamford, Connecticut. Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images
“It’s incredible what we’ve done together over a short period of time,” Donald Trump said at a White House briefing this week, praising his administration’s response to the pandemic.
But analysts say that without centralized governance and coordination, the national effort remains a competing coalition of state and local outfits hampered by duplicated work, competition for supplies, siloed pursuits of non-transferable solutions and red tape that leaves some labs with testing backlogs and others with excess capacity.
All of which leaves the US without a unified, coherent strategy for testing and contact tracing to contain a virus that does not respect state borders and has already killed more than 60,000 Americans.
Without it, the imminent experiment of reopening the country could be catastrophic, warned Harvard epidemiologist Michael Mina in a conference call with reporters this week.
“My concern is that we’ll end up right where we have been, with major cities having healthcare systems that get overrun quickly because of major outbreaks,” Mina said.
I’m afraid we’ll just end up repeating the past Michael Mina, Harvard epidemiologist
Meanwhile, as states begin to relax social distancing measures, the Trump administration is spreading dangerous misinformation, denying supply shortages, underestimating the number of Covid-19 cases and exaggerating the margin of safety conferred by the current volume of testing and contact-tracing, experts say.
“We’ve done more than 200,000 tests in a single day,” Mike Pence said at a taskforce briefing this week, in which Trump touted testing as “one of the great assets that we have” in reopening the US.
But at current testing levels, with only rudimentary plans for contact tracing for new cases, the US will be flying virtually blind as it reopens, said Glen Weyl, a technologist who co-authored a report issued by Harvard’s Safra Center for Ethics that calls for 5m tests a day by early June.
“No, definitely not, you can’t open up with that number,” Weyl said of Pence’s announcement. “It’s not even remotely in the right ballpark. It’s off by a factor of 10.”
Cars line up at a coronavirus testing site in Brooklyn, New York, on 21 April. Photograph: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
A new Marshall plan
Testing is one of the biggest challenges the coronavirus crisis poses. And as Asian countries that have succeeded in temporarily containing the virus have shown, testing strategy is entwined with the need for contact tracing and isolating confirmed and suspected Covid-19 patients.
There are multiple categories of tests with multiple different modes for sampling, storage and transport. A test might detect the virus itself, detect traces of the virus or detect the body’s reaction to having had the virus. The experience of being tested could be different in each case. One patient might have his or her sinuses probed by a swab at a drive-thru, while another might spit in a tube at home and another give a blood sample at a clinic.
Each test has a different degree of reliability, with different amounts of time and labor required to complete the boomerang curve of sample collection to testing to result report.
“We have too many [brands of] tests, and now there are a lot of people who are committed to their tests and they run their tests on their platforms,” said Paul Reider, a renowned research chemist in the pharmaceuticals industry who teaches at Princeton University.
We have too many [brands of] tests, and now there are a lot of people who are committed to their tests Paul Reider, Princeton University
“If we had an effective administration – this is where the federal government comes in – they could essentially turn around and say, ‘What we would like to do is, we want one test, maybe two, that are fast, that are accurate, that are scalable and transferable, .
“You want a gold-standard test.”
In the US, regulatory and administrative hurdles are everywhere, with clinics unable to send samples to private labs that might be out of their usual networks, a lack of protocols for reporting testing data, slow regulatory approval for the use of alternative testing materials, insufficient federal funding to support lab efforts and no central leadership steering the country’s massive laboratory apparatus.
“We don’t have a system that’s ever been built for surveillance, for wide-scale population surveillance or wide-scale testing for people who aren’t presenting to the hospital or the clinic,” said Mina. “The demand is just so much larger than our system was built for.”
The Trump administration’s response to this complicated thicket has been to declare the federal government a “supplier of last resort” and wish the states luck. “It’s pretty simple,” Trump has said. “They have tremendous capacity. We hope to be able to help out.”
Members of the Nevada air national guard work at a drive-thru coronavirus testing site in Las Vegas on 28 April. Photograph: John Locher/AP
In an attempt to meet the demand they have encountered, lab scientists have improvised constantly, substituting materials where possible or stacking testing platforms from different manufacturers – Roche, Qiagen, Abbott, Hologic, DiaSorin – so that if one goes down another can take its place.
The result is that labs have delivered an unprecedented number of tests in record time – but with a fraction of the potential efficiency that could be achieved through better coordination, said Reider.
“If Jared Kushner wanted to do something decent, and Vice-President Pence, they could try to standardize and distribute nationally a global test,” said Reider. “At least make it available and let people choose if they want to use it.”
The Harvard report called for the establishment of a “Pandemic Testing Board” “akin to the War Production Board that the United States created in World War II”. The director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota calls for a new Marshall plan to stand up testing in the US.
But no efforts to create such a central authority are apparent, said Michael Osterholm, CIDRAP director, who described a shortage of reagents, or chemicals used in testing, on his Osterholm Update podcast this week.
“We have had a number of our testing laboratories unable to get the needed reagents they could’ve and should’ve had to increase testing,” Osterholm said. “We really need a Marshall plan where the federal government and the private sector get together and decide what are the challenges, what can we do to quickly boost these reagents, what can we do to actually increase the reagent pool?”
Jared Kushner attends a teleconference with governors at the Federal Emergency Management Agency headquarters in Washington DC, on 19 March. Photograph: Evan Vucci/AP
‘Running towards a moving target’
Demand signal or no, some big private sector players have already moved aggressively. Early on in the crisis, Color, a private healthcare institute that does genomic testing in California, resolved to stand up a mega-lab that is now on the verge of processing 10,000 tests a day, with a goal of expanding that capacity by an order of magnitude, said Othman Laraki, CEO.
The company has since partnered with the city of San Francisco to provide Covid-19 testing for all private-sector and nonprofit essential employees, as well as any resident with symptoms who cannot find testing elsewhere. Next-day results are delivered via email and text-message alerts.
“Our thinking was that you needed to have a few massively scaled labs as opposed to having a big sprinkling of small-scale labs,” Laraki said. “We believe that’s the way to build the type of capacity that’s needed really to bring the country back to work.”
In Minnesota, academics at the state university partnered with scientists at the Mayo clinic, one of the country’s premier labs, to deliver on a challenge by governor Tim Walz to stop coronavirus in the state with comprehensive testing and contact tracing.
We really need a Marshall plan where the federal government and the private sector get together Michael Osterholm, CIDRAP director
“We just made the decision that we’re probably going to be on our own and that we need to be ready to care for our patients,” said Tim Schacker, vice-dean for research at the University of Minnesota and an architect of the project.
As a first step, the scientists invented a molecular test “that was mostly independent of the supply chain problems”, Schacker said.
Vials with samples taken for the coronavirus are counted before they are prepared for RNA testing at Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana, on 2 April. Photograph: Gerald Herbert/AP
Broken supply chains
Robin Patel, the president of the American Society for Microbiology, said supply chain issues continue to represent a daily challenge for laboratories, from swabs to chemicals to materials used to extract viral RNA and amplify DNA.
“The situation has changed, yes, but it’s a different situation every day, so using the word ‘improved’ is I don’t think appropriate,” she said.
“This isn’t just an American situation. People throughout the world are dealing with the same issues. The supply chain we’re talking about is not just an American supply chain, it’s a worldwide supply chain.”
A man rides a skateboard in Savannah, Georgia, on 25 April. Photograph: Chandan Khanna/AFP via Getty Images
The reopening
To celebrate America’s reopening, Trump appears to be preparing to hit the road, with plans to visit warehouses and factory sites to advertise the economic comeback he has promised. “We built the greatest economy the world has ever seen,” Trump said this week. “And we’re going to do it again. And it’s not going to be that long. OK?”
Polling indicates that a majority of Americans do not share Trump’s optimism. About two in three Americans think restrictions on restaurants, stores and other businesses are appropriate, and 16% on top of that wanted tighter restrictions, a poll this week from the Washington Post and the University of Maryland found.
Top epidemiologists believe it’s possible that the US could get some kind of reprieve from the virus in the warmer months ahead. If that happens, the summer could feature the scenes Trump has dreamed about, of packed churches, humming factories, crowded beaches and sold-out flights.
But Trump’s dream that the virus will simply disappear is just that – a dream, epidemiologists say.
“I hope that over the course of the next few weeks to two months, we’re going to actually see a substantial reduction in transmission,” Osterholm said. “And if it does, it shouldn’t be interpreted that we won, or that somehow we’re in control.
“I hope that the case numbers continue to decrease over time, but I’m also very, very aware that they’re coming back, and we just have to remember that.”


theguardian--2020-05-02--Michael Bloomberg expands influence network within Democratic party

The former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg spent almost a billion dollars to try to win the Democratic nomination but his audacious bid ended with victory only in tiny American Samoa .
That embarrassing defeat was held up by some critics as proof it is still hard to use spending power alone to win a US election .
But Bloomberg ’ s enormous wealth and influence is still strong in the party via a growing network of groups , former associates and allies sprinkled across the Democratic party universe .
Even before Bloomberg dropped out of the presidential race in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would work to defeat Donald Trump even if he didn ’ t get the nomination .
That ’ s precisely what he is doing .
“ He was one of the biggest contributors to Democratic causes before he ran and he still is after , ” Abe Rakov , a veteran Democratic campaign manager , said of Bloomberg .
“ There are a lot of organizations and programs across the country that would be in really bad shape if he decided to disengage after he ran.
” The initial plan was to continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s campaign built .
The former mayor changed his mind and instead transferred $ 18m to the Democratic National Committee , the main organization charged with boosting the party ’ s presidential nominee .
It ’ s possible Bloomberg could move more money as well .
The Bloomberg campaign also transferred leases for over a dozen of its field offices to the DNC , adding to the DNC ’ s campaign spaces around the country .
Bloomberg himself is staying visible , working with the New York governor , Andrew Cuomo , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He spoke via video conference call during Cuomo ’ s press briefing on Thursday .
The governor , currently one of the most prominent Democrats in the country , said in late April that Bloomberg was working with him .
A network of operatives and Bloomberg-connected political organizations is also active in Democratic presidential circles .
Bill Knapp , a longtime Bloomberg adviser , recently joined Priorities USA , the Super Pac the Joe Biden campaign has signaled is its outside organization of choice for the general election .
During Bloomberg ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 67m into a new digital and technology firm called Hawkfish .
Hawkfish has stayed active since Bloomberg dropped out .
The firm is reportedly in talks to work for Biden ’ s presidential campaign although nothing is finalized .
Hawkfish also got into negotiations to buy another Democratic analytics firm , Blue Labs Analytics , according to four Democrats with knowledge of those talks , but negotiations fell through .
Hawkfish and Blue Labs still have ties .
In Washington Democratic analytics circles Hawkfish has become a hot topic as a firm trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of top-tier data analytics firms .
The business discussions between Hawkfish and various campaigns and outlets within the Democratic campaign universe underscores how Bloomberg-connected operatives and groups continue to set down deep roots within the party .
Some former digital and data staffers for the Bloomberg campaign have talked with Biden campaign officials about joining the campaign , according to a Democratic strategist with knowledge of those talks .
The Biden campaign did not return a request for comment .
“ I think Mayor Bloomberg has made it very plain , through his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to defeating Donald Trump and helping to elect Democrats across the country , ” said the former Michigan congressman Mark Schauer , who supported Bloomberg during the mayor ’ s short-lived presidential campaign .
“ I think those contributions are valuable , they ’ re significant , and they ’ ll have an impact this November.
” The end goal for Bloomberg , 78 , is still somewhat murky .
The former mayor has repeatedly said he would use his considerable resources to oust Trump from office .
But the rapid expansion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggests Bloomberg intends to hold a seat at the table among the most influential Democratic party leaders , albeit one outside of elected office .

The former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg spent almost a billion dollars to try to win the Democratic nomination but his audacious bid ended with victory only in tiny American Samoa.
That embarrassing defeat was held up by some critics as proof it is still hard to use spending power alone to win a US election. But Bloomberg’s enormous wealth and influence is still strong in the party via a growing network of groups, former associates and allies sprinkled across the Democratic party universe.
Even before Bloomberg dropped out of the presidential race in May the media mogul billionaire vowed he would work to defeat Donald Trump even if he didn’t get the nomination.
That’s precisely what he is doing.
“He was one of the biggest contributors to Democratic causes before he ran and he still is after,” Abe Rakov, a veteran Democratic campaign manager, said of Bloomberg. “There are a lot of organizations and programs across the country that would be in really bad shape if he decided to disengage after he ran.”
The initial plan was to continue to fuel the massive field operation Bloomberg’s campaign built. The former mayor changed his mind and instead transferred $18m to the Democratic National Committee, the main organization charged with boosting the party’s presidential nominee.
It’s possible Bloomberg could move more money as well. The Bloomberg campaign also transferred leases for over a dozen of its field offices to the DNC, adding to the DNC’s campaign spaces around the country.
Bloomberg himself is staying visible, working with the New York governor, Andrew Cuomo, to launch a testing and tracing program. He spoke via video conference call during Cuomo’s press briefing on Thursday. The governor, currently one of the most prominent Democrats in the country, said in late April that Bloomberg was working with him.
A network of operatives and Bloomberg-connected political organizations is also active in Democratic presidential circles. Bill Knapp, a longtime Bloomberg adviser, recently joined Priorities USA, the Super Pac the Joe Biden campaign has signaled is its outside organization of choice for the general election.
During Bloomberg’s campaign, he poured almost $67m into a new digital and technology firm called Hawkfish. Hawkfish has stayed active since Bloomberg dropped out. The firm is reportedly in talks to work for Biden’s presidential campaign although nothing is finalized.
Hawkfish also got into negotiations to buy another Democratic analytics firm, Blue Labs Analytics, according to four Democrats with knowledge of those talks, but negotiations fell through. Hawkfish and Blue Labs still have ties.
In Washington Democratic analytics circles Hawkfish has become a hot topic as a firm trying to elbow its way into the group of top-tier data analytics firms.
The business discussions between Hawkfish and various campaigns and outlets within the Democratic campaign universe underscores how Bloomberg-connected operatives and groups continue to set down deep roots within the party.
Some former digital and data staffers for the Bloomberg campaign have talked with Biden campaign officials about joining the campaign, according to a Democratic strategist with knowledge of those talks.
The Biden campaign did not return a request for comment.
“I think Mayor Bloomberg has made it very plain, through his actions and his investments, his commitment to defeating Donald Trump and helping to elect Democrats across the country,” said the former Michigan congressman Mark Schauer, who supported Bloomberg during the mayor’s short-lived presidential campaign. “I think those contributions are valuable, they’re significant, and they’ll have an impact this November.”
The end goal for Bloomberg, 78, is still somewhat murky.
The former mayor has repeatedly said he would use his considerable resources to oust Trump from office. But the rapid expansion of Bloomberg-connected groups and operatives around Washington also suggests Bloomberg intends to hold a seat at the table among the most influential Democratic party leaders, albeit one outside of elected office.