presswatchers--2020-04-29--Bring back the briefing – but not with Trump

Every day , more Americans are getting sick , more Americans are dying , and all over the country , people are staying in their homes , fearful and uncertain , hoping that things will be better soon .
At a time like this , we need information – daily .
We need updates , and explanations , and reassurance .
We need to know the plan .
We need to know the future .
We get none of that from Donald Trump .
Instead , we get endless hours of lies , hyperbole , insults , self-praise , all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credibility .
The “ most recurring utterances from Mr. Trump in the briefings are self-congratulations , ” writes the New York Times .
“ The president has offered little in the way of accurate medical information or empathy for coronavirus victims , instead focusing on attacking his enemies and lauding himself and his allies , ” notes the Washington Post .
The briefings are now in limbo .
Rumors swirled over the weekend that Trump had finally sworn them off .
But he was back in full force on Monday , lying and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On Tuesday , he offered a condensed version of his greatest misinformation hits .
The rest of the week is up in the air .
But we need a daily briefing .
The right kind of daily briefing .
What we need to know Here is what we need to know .
We need to know the latest numbers .
How many new cases have there been ?
How many ER visits , hospitalizations , ICU beds filled ?
How many more people have died ?
And what do these latest numbers indicate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direction ?
Are they moving fast ?
Are there big regional and demographic differences ?
Where are there signs of hope ?
Where is the data discouraging ?
What ’ s not going well ?
What is troubling the officials and experts charged with monitoring the nation ’ s progress through this crisis ?
What is making them happy ?
What has the government done today to try to make things better ?
And what is the context for those achievements ?
Tell us what ’ s been achieved , yes , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of context are meaningless .
The briefer , who should attend the task force meetings , should also be prepared to discuss what else came up today , and to address any previous misstatement that need to be corrected .
There should be reports from any related groups – most particularly from whatever group is charged with managing and dramatically increasing the supply chain for testing .
How adequate are supplies ?
What are the roadblocks ?
What is being done to overcome them ?
What are the latest medical findings ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus works , or what treatments might help ?
There should be a daily reminder of the plan — the roadmap , the goals , whatever you want to call it — and of how far along we are .
What do we still need to do ?
How will we know when it ’ s safe to come out again ?
There should be a clear and detailed delineation of the federal government ’ s responsibilities .
And a reminder of what ’ s next .
And what of the rest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing for them ?
What are they doing for us ?
There also ought to be a human part .
The briefing should include a solemn recognition of the incredible losses being experienced by the American family .
There should be expressions of empathy and sorrow .
Maybe even a few stories about the people who have passed .
And there should also be words of hope , and inspiration : exhortation and appreciations of shared sacrifices , maybe the recounting of selfless acts taken by the too-often unsung heroes of this pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and generous , and forgiving : We are all in this together .
It should include what one critic noted is so terribly absent in Trump ’ s remarks : “ the language of transcendence , what we have in common.
” Then it ’ s time for questions .
Ideally , the questions would come not just from the political reporters who make up the White House press corps , but by phone or video from medical and science reporters , from local reporters , maybe even from public interest groups or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a daily FAQ .
After a response to a question , the person who asked it could be asked if they feel they got an actual answer , and should be given a chance to follow up .
There should be no room for politics .
No room for insults .
No us vs. them .
No bragging .
No victimization .
No attacking the questioner .
And no endless repetition of ridiculous talking points .
What that all adds up to , of course , is that there should be no Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who should lead the daily pandemic briefing ?
Historically , such briefings have been the domain of the CDC , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
It ’ s been sidelined this time around , and the one person speaking on its behalf – the director , Robert Redfield — is a Trump appointee and a hardcore right-winger who initially downplayed the crisis and has parroted his patron since .
Is there someone besides Redfield at the CDC – someone not complicit in the center ’ s early testing failure – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shouldn ’ t be a political appointee .
Maybe it ’ s Anthony Fauci , from NIH ’ s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases .
Or what about Nancy Messonnier ?
The then-director for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the CDC gave briefings on Feb. 14 , 21 , 25 , 28 and 29 , as well as March 3 – until Trump pulled the plug because Messonnier had acknowledged that community spread of the virus in the U.S. was an inevitability , back when he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself .
Possible role models include California Gov .
Gavin Newsom , New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo , Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau , and New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern .
Washington Post columnist E.J .
Dionne Jr. has an intriguing suggestion : “ let ’ s have a bipartisan coalition of responsible governors pick one of their own to lead a daily briefing aimed at the whole country.
” What ’ s it in for Trump ?
Why would Trump even consider allowing such a thing to take place ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Realistically , he ’ ll never give up the limelight — the visual cues that suggest he is actually in control .
But it ’ s not like he ’ s doing any of the real work now anyway .
Trump would still need to sign off on major initiatives , presumably .
So he could still maybe give a weekly address to take credit for things when the real team takes a day off – call it six no Trump .
And he would arguably be the single greatest beneficiary of increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ handled competently by qualified officials with expertise and the greater public interest at heart .
His approval ratings certainly wouldn ’ t go down .
Trump ’ s consistent yearning throughout this crisis has been an easy , quick fix .
Outside of fantasy solutions , putting someone else in charge is the closest thing there is to putting it behind him .

Every day, more Americans are getting sick, more Americans are dying, and all over the country, people are staying in their homes, fearful and uncertain, hoping that things will be better soon.
At a time like this, we need information – daily. We need updates, and explanations, and reassurance. We need to know the plan. We need to know the future.
We get none of that from Donald Trump. Instead, we get endless hours of lies, hyperbole, insults, self-praise, all endlessly repeated, all entirely lacking in credibility.
The “most recurring utterances from Mr. Trump in the briefings are self-congratulations,” writes the New York Times. “The president has offered little in the way of accurate medical information or empathy for coronavirus victims, instead focusing on attacking his enemies and lauding himself and his allies,” notes the Washington Post.
The briefings are now in limbo. Rumors swirled over the weekend that Trump had finally sworn them off. But he was back in full force on Monday, lying and spewing as many canards as ever. On Tuesday, he offered a condensed version of his greatest misinformation hits. The rest of the week is up in the air.
But we need a daily briefing. The right kind of daily briefing.
What we need to know
Here is what we need to know.
We need to know the latest numbers. How many new cases have there been? How many ER visits, hospitalizations, ICU beds filled? How many more people have died?
And what do these latest numbers indicate? Are they moving in the right direction? Are they moving fast? Are there big regional and demographic differences? Where are there signs of hope? Where is the data discouraging?
What’s not going well? What is troubling the officials and experts charged with monitoring the nation’s progress through this crisis? What is making them happy?
What has the government done today to try to make things better? And what is the context for those achievements? Tell us what’s been achieved, yes, but also what we still need. Numbers out of context are meaningless.
The briefer, who should attend the task force meetings, should also be prepared to discuss what else came up today, and to address any previous misstatement that need to be corrected.
There should be reports from any related groups – most particularly from whatever group is charged with managing and dramatically increasing the supply chain for testing. How adequate are supplies? What are the roadblocks? What is being done to overcome them?
What are the latest medical findings? Do we know anything new about how the virus works, or what treatments might help?
There should be a daily reminder of the plan — the roadmap, the goals, whatever you want to call it — and of how far along we are. What do we still need to do?
How will we know when it’s safe to come out again?
There should be a clear and detailed delineation of the federal government’s responsibilities. And a reminder of what’s next.
And what of the rest of the world? What are we doing for them? What are they doing for us?
That’s the hard-data part.
The human part
There also ought to be a human part.
The briefing should include a solemn recognition of the incredible losses being experienced by the American family. There should be expressions of empathy and sorrow. Maybe even a few stories about the people who have passed.
And there should also be words of hope, and inspiration: exhortation and appreciations of shared sacrifices, maybe the recounting of selfless acts taken by the too-often unsung heroes of this pandemic.
The message should be inclusive, and generous, and forgiving: We are all in this together. It should include what one critic noted is so terribly absent in Trump’s remarks: “the language of transcendence, what we have in common.”
Questions
Then it’s time for questions. Ideally, the questions would come not just from the political reporters who make up the White House press corps, but by phone or video from medical and science reporters, from local reporters, maybe even from public interest groups or the public directly. There could be a daily FAQ.
After a response to a question, the person who asked it could be asked if they feel they got an actual answer, and should be given a chance to follow up.
There should be no room for politics. No room for insults. No us vs. them. No bragging. No victimization. No attacking the questioner. And no endless repetition of ridiculous talking points.
What that all adds up to, of course, is that there should be no Trump.
Who does it then?
We could just take Trump and Pence out of the mix. But who would lead the briefing?
Historically, such briefings have been the domain of the CDC, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It’s been sidelined this time around, and the one person speaking on its behalf – the director, Robert Redfield — is a Trump appointee and a hardcore right-winger who initially downplayed the crisis and has parroted his patron since.
Is there someone besides Redfield at the CDC – someone not complicit in the center’s early testing failure – who could step up?
It certainly shouldn’t be a political appointee.
Maybe it’s Anthony Fauci, from NIH’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases.
Or what about Nancy Messonnier? The then-director for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the CDC gave briefings on Feb. 14, 21, 25, 28 and 29, as well as March 3 – until Trump pulled the plug because Messonnier had acknowledged that community spread of the virus in the U.S. was an inevitability, back when he was still predicting it would go away by itself.
Possible role models include California Gov. Gavin Newsom, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.
Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. has an intriguing suggestion: “let’s have a bipartisan coalition of responsible governors pick one of their own to lead a daily briefing aimed at the whole country.”
What’s it in for Trump?
Why would Trump even consider allowing such a thing to take place? What’s the political advantage?
Realistically, he’ll never give up the limelight — the visual cues that suggest he is actually in control.
But it’s not like he’s doing any of the real work now anyway.
Trump would still need to sign off on major initiatives, presumably. So he could still maybe give a weekly address to take credit for things when the real team takes a day off – call it six no Trump.
He would still be handling all the economic news, which is really what matters to him the most.
And he would arguably be the single greatest beneficiary of increased public confidence that the crisis was being handled competently by qualified officials with expertise and the greater public interest at heart.
His approval ratings certainly wouldn’t go down.
Trump’s consistent yearning throughout this crisis has been an easy, quick fix. Outside of fantasy solutions, putting someone else in charge is the closest thing there is to putting it behind him.


presswatchers--2020-04-30--Trump’s outrageous new campaign to demonize China is another ploy to change the subject

In a transparent attempt to distract from his continuing failure to lead an effective response to a disastrous public-health crisis , the great showrunner in the White House is in the process of introducing a new story arc : An epic battle with an evil China .
It involves blaming China for a virus that was most likely uncontainable , making insinuations and demanding that his intelligence services find grist for anti-Chinese conspiracy theories , and threatening massive economic retaliation , apparently even to the point of defaulting on U.S. debt .
Nothing will come of this .
He is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation desperately needs it – almost no action .
But it will inevitably spark a wave of hostility toward China , the Chinese , and anyone who Trump-addled yahoos think even looks Chinese .
It could further destabilize the world economy .
And it will almost certainly damage the global coordination needed to recover from the virus .
It ’ s hard to imagine the press not jumping on this new shiny object with enthusiasm , but reporters and editors need to remind the public at every opportunity what Trump ’ s obvious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to change the subject from his own incompetence , shift blame , and further inflame his base with nationalistic fury .
There also may be a more subtle , psychological objective to the move : It meets his need to be seen as both personally victimized and enormously heroic at the same time .
And while the Chinese government ’ s conduct has not been entirely exemplary , responsible news organizations should oppose and resist the demonization of the Chinese .
Even if reporters can ’ t turn to the opposition party for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least , the Democrats seem to be engaging Republicans in a battle over who can hate China more , not less – they should give voice to knowledgeable , mainstream thinkers who can put Trump ’ s xenophobic , destructive , vindictive and personal approach to handling U.S. foreign policy in its proper context .
It may be up to the press to prevent a new Red Scare .
Out to get him ?
The flat-out lunacy — indeed , paranoia — of Trump ’ s views regarding China was fully on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday .
Steve Holland wrote that “ Trump said he believes China ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic is proof that Beijing ‘ will do anything they can ’ to make him lose his re-election bid in November.
” The direct quotes seemed a bit more ambiguous to me as to whether Trump was directly attributing the Chinese government ’ s virus response to its views of him personally .
( I ’ d like to see a full transcript ! )
But Trump apparently did say , at least somewhat in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will do anything they can to have me lose this race.
” Holland writes that Trump also said “ he believes Beijing wants his Democratic opponent , Joe Biden , to win the election to ease the pressure Trump has placed on China over trade and other issues.
” Trump floated the idea that China was backing Trump in a tweet on April 18 : But of course not one penny of those tariffs has actually been paid by China ; tariffs are paid by U.S. importers , and increased costs get passed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prices .
And another reality check : Anna Fifield reported for the Washington Post in November that Chinese government officials are rooting from Trump — because they prefer his transactional approach over one that is principle-driven .
Trump repeated these assertion Thursday evening during a Q & A after remarks about the elderly .
“ China doesn ’ t want to see me reelected and the reason is we are getting billions and billions of dollar — many billions of dollars a month — from China.
” And , he said , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any dispersions [ sic ] , just that China would like to see sleepy Joe Biden .
They would take this country for a ride like you ’ ve never seen before.
” New York Times reporters Mark Mazzetti , Julian E. Barnes , Edward Wong and Adam Goldman disclosed on Thursday that Trump officials “ have pushed American spy agencies to hunt for evidence to support an unsubstantiated theory that a government laboratory in Wuhan , China , was the origin of the coronavirus outbreak.
” The next sentence ( hooray !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump escalates a public campaign to blame China for the pandemic.
” And the article made it clear that some people inside the intelligence community believe Trump is trying to use it as a political weapon : Then , on Thursday evening , Trump fueled those conspiracy theories .
Asked if he had seen anything that gave him “ a high degree of confidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the origin of this virus , ” Trump answered “ Yes , I have .
Yes , I have.
” Asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ view , he replied : “ I can ’ t tell you that .
I ’ m not allowed to tell you that.
” Vague insinuations could end up being his tactic of choice .
Asked Thursday if he was saying the Chinese government had let the virus spread intentionally , he said : “ One of two things happened .
They didn ’ t do it and they couldn ’ t do it , from a competence standpoint .
Or they let it spread .
I would say probably it got out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Whether they made a mistake , or whether it started off as a mistake , and then they mad another one , or did somebody did something on purpose ?
” Jeff Stein , Carol D. Leonnig , Josh Dawsey and Gerry Shih reported in the Washington Post that the White House is exploring “ proposals for punishing or demanding financial compensation from China for its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
” They quoted one senior adviser saying : “ Punishing China is definitely where the president ’ s head is at right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way up high that “ The move could splinter already strained relations between the two superpowers at a perilous moment for the global economy.
” They could , however , also have noted that threats emerging from Trump ’ s White House rarely materialize .
And they could have been a lot more assertive about pointing out the absurdity of the specific ideas floated by the Trump officials .
One idea involves “ stripping China of its ‘ sovereign immunity , ’ aiming to enable the U.S. government or victims to sue China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explained that “ Legal experts say an attempt to limit China ’ s sovereign immunity would be extremely difficult to accomplish and may require congressional legislation.
” But the second , even crazier idea , is apparently to have the U.S. “ cancel part of its debt obligations to China.
” This elicited a quick denial from two “ senior White House economic officials , ” which was then inserted into the story .
But financial reporters from across the Internet responded with the incredulity that was missing from the story .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll never do it .
In fact , by Thursday evening , he was already backtracking .
Asked if was really considering not paying U.S. debt obligations to China , Trump said : “ I can do it differently , but even for more money , just by putting on tariffs .
So I don ’ t have to do that .
It ’ s approximately a trillion dollars… But we could do that , probably , in a little bit more of a forthright manner.
” Eric Levitz published a marvelous interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the great historian and author Mike Davis .
One of the questions was about China .
Davis acknowledged that there was undeniably an initial attempt by the local government in Wuhan to cover up the extent of the outbreak .
I found what he had to say next eye-opening : But as far as the allegation that Beijing did not inform the international community in a timely manner , this seems to be an entirely different story .
China detected the first unusual pneumonia outbreaks at the beginning of December .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a little more than a week .
They sequenced the whole genome of the virus .
The WHO was informed about this almost immediately .
Trump doesn ’ t seem to understand the number of Americans who work for the WHO and who were in almost instant contact .
The “ smoking gun ” that ’ s usually brought in evidence against the Chinese was a false social-media message that denied the existence of human-to-human spread .
But the Chinese government immediately followed that with an official statement that said yes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m very confused about that .
I don ’ t see the evidence that the Chinese scientific community or the WHO covered that up… .
But by playing the “ yellow fear , ” Trump is destroying the alliance — the medical and scientific alliance — that is absolutely most important , and that ’ s the cooperation between the scientific communities of the United States and China .
That ’ s where most of the cutting-edge research is going to be done .
And the research community has probably broken all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The U.S. foreign policy establishment strongly supports cooperation with China .
Kurt M. Campbell and Rush Doshi — a top Asia policy official in the Obama administration , and a Brookings Institution China expert , respectively – wrote for Foreign Policy in March that the coronavirus crisis requires “ strong leadership ” by the U.S. of “ a coordinated global response.
” They advised against “ getting consumed by a war of narratives about who responded better ” : Not with this president .
Trump ’ s new righteous fury toward China @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that delights reality TV audiences .
Throughout January and February , Trump “ touted China ’ s government for its transparency and hard work to defeat the coronavirus that causes the illness , ” as Politico ’ s Myah Ward explained .
Ward “ compiled a list of 15 times the president hailed China for its push to prevent a pandemic in the early months of 2020.
” But in mid-April , Trump ’ s rhetoric took an ominous turn .
Talking about Chinese Premier Xi Jinping , Trump said on April 19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came on April 27 , in response to arguably goading and inaccurate questions from reporters for two far-right news organizations .
Trump repeated that “ we are not happy with China , ” and then insisted : Esmerelda Robinson of Newsmax then chimed in with a question based on a lie : But as FullFact and others have reported , Germany has never sent China any kind of bill .
An alleged bill , reported by the British tabloid Daily Express , was actually a fanciful illustration by Germany ’ s largest newspaper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the economic damages of the virus .
Trump , however , was happy to riff on the premise : Trump has said several times that the virus could and should have been stopped – clearly with the intent of blaming China .
One statement he made to that effect , however , was interpreted by some particularly cynical observers as more appropriately referring to himself — and his refusal to acknowledge the possibility of the virus ’ s spread in the U.S. , and his continued resistance to widespread testing , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been stopped and it could have been stopped short , ” Trump said on April 27 .
“ But somebody a long time ago , it seems , decided not to do it that way .
”

In a transparent attempt to distract from his continuing failure to lead an effective response to a disastrous public health crisis, the great showrunner in the White House is in the process of introducing a new story arc: an epic battle with an evil China.
It involves blaming China for a virus that was most likely uncontainable, making all sorts of dark insinuations and demanding that his intelligence services find grist for anti-Chinese conspiracy theories, and threatening massive economic retaliation, apparently even to the point of defaulting on U.S. debt.
Nothing will come of this.
He is all talk and no action, even when the nation desperately needs it.
But here’s what Trump may accomplish: an ugly wave of hostility toward China, Chinese people — including immigrants and Chinese-Americans — and anyone whom Trump-addled yahoos think even looks Chinese.
It could further destabilize the world economy — and it will almost certainly damage the global coordination needed to recover from the virus.
It’s hard to imagine the press not jumping on this new shiny object with enthusiasm, but reporters and editors need to remind the public at every opportunity what Trump’s real and obvious goals are. He hopes to change the subject from his own incompetence, shift blame, and further inflame his base with nationalistic fury.
There also may be a more subtle, psychological objective to this move as well: It meets the president’s need to be seen as both personally victimized and enormously heroic at the same time.
And while the Chinese government’s conduct has not been entirely exemplary, responsible news organizations should oppose and resist the demonization of China and the Chinese people.
Even if reporters can’t turn to the opposition party for an alternate view — to this point, Democrats seem to be engaging Republicans in a battle over who can hate China more — they should give voice to knowledgeable, mainstream thinkers who can put Trump’s xenophobic, destructive, vindictive and overly personal approach to U.S. foreign policy in its proper context.
It may be up to the press to prevent a new Red Scare.
Out to get him?
The flat-out lunacy — indeed, paranoia — of Trump’s views regarding China was fully on display in a Reuters interview conducted on Wednesday.
Steve Holland wrote: “Trump said he believes China’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic is proof that Beijing ‘will do anything they can’ to make him lose his re-election bid in November.”
The direct quotes seemed ambiguous, honestly, as to whether Trump was directly connecting the Chinese government’s virus response to its views of him personally. (I’d like to see a full transcript!)
But Trump apparently did say, at least somewhat in the context of the virus: “China will do anything they can to have me lose this race.”
Holland writes that Trump also said “he believes Beijing wants his Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, to win the election to ease the pressure Trump has placed on China over trade and other issues.”
Trump has already floated the idea that China was backing Biden, in a tweet on April 18:
China wants Sleepy Joe sooo badly. They want all of those billions of dollars that they have been paying to the U.S. back, and much more. Joe is an easy mark, their DREAM CANDIDATE! https://t.co/vmvCr4SkQq — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 18, 2020
But of course not one penny of those tariffs has actually been paid by China. Tariffs are paid by U.S. importers, and increased costs are generally passed to consumers in the form of higher prices.
Here’s another reality check: Anna Fifield reported for the Washington Post in November that Chinese government officials are actually rooting for Trump in November — because they prefer his transactional approach over one that is driven by principles.
Trump repeated these assertions on Thursday evening during a Q&A session after remarks about the elderly. “China doesn’t want to see me re-elected,” he said, “and the reason is we are getting billions and billions of dollars — many billions of dollars a month — from China.”
Then he said, “I don’t want … to cast any dispersions [sic], just that China would like to see Sleepy Joe Biden. They would take this country for a ride like you’ve never seen before.”
Insinuations and conspiracy theories
New York Times reporters Mark Mazzetti, Julian E. Barnes, Edward Wong and Adam Goldman disclosed on Thursday that Trump White House officials “have pushed American spy agencies to hunt for evidence to support an unsubstantiated theory that a government laboratory in Wuhan, China, was the origin of the coronavirus outbreak.”
The next sentence (hurray!): “The effort comes as President Trump escalates a public campaign to blame China for the pandemic.”
Their article made it clear that some people inside the intelligence community believe Trump is trying to use this as a political weapon:
A former intelligence official described senior aides’ repeated emphasis of the lab theory as “conclusion shopping,” a disparaging term among analysts that has echoes of the Bush administration’s 2002 push for assessments saying that Iraq had weapons of mass of destruction and links to Al Qaeda, perhaps the most notorious example of the politicization of intelligence.
Then, on Thursday evening, Trump fueled those conspiracy theories. Asked if he had seen anything that gave him “a high degree of confidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the origin of this virus,” Trump answered “Yes, I have. Yes, I have.”
Asked what information he had to support his view, he replied: “I can’t tell you that. I’m not allowed to tell you that.”
Vague insinuations could end up being his tactic of choice. Asked Thursday if he was saying the Chinese government had let the virus spread intentionally, he said: “One of two things happened. They didn’t do it and they couldn’t do it, from a competence standpoint. Or they let it spread. I would say probably it got out of control.”
He continued: “Whether they made a mistake, or whether it started off as a mistake, and then they made another one — or did somebody do something on purpose?”
Making China pay
Jeff Stein, Carol D. Leonnig, Josh Dawsey and Gerry Shih reported in the Washington Post that the White House is exploring “proposals for punishing or demanding financial compensation from China for its handling of the coronavirus pandemic.”
They quoted one senior adviser saying: “Punishing China is definitely where the president’s head is at right now.”
The Post reporters appropriately noted way up high that “The move could splinter already strained relations between the two superpowers at a perilous moment for the global economy.”
They could, however, also have noted that threats emerging from Trump’s White House rarely materialize. And they could have been a lot more assertive about pointing out the absurdity of the specific ideas floated by the Trump officials.
One idea involves “stripping China of its ‘sovereign immunity,’ aiming to enable the U.S. government or victims to sue China for damages.” The reporters at least explained that “Legal experts say an attempt to limit China’s sovereign immunity would be extremely difficult to accomplish and may require congressional legislation.”
But the second, even crazier idea, is apparently to have the U.S. “cancel part of its debt obligations to China.”
This elicited a quick denial from two “senior White House economic officials,” which was then inserted into the story.
But financial reporters from across the Internet responded with the incredulity that was missing from the story.
Kai Ryssdal, host of NPR’s Marketplace, tweeted:
Honestly, it's tough to overstate how off the wall this is. And self-destructive. And globally destabilizing. "Some administration officials have also discussed having the U.S. cancel part of its debt obligations to China…"https://t.co/HwLY27PG2V — Kai Ryssdal (@kairyssdal) April 30, 2020
Felix Salmon, Axios financial correspondent, tweeted:
What the hell does this mean? Does the US owe bilateral debt to China??? Or are they literally talking about defaulting on US Treasury bonds? https://t.co/8vgAQ258jD pic.twitter.com/PXI4NJ1pCR — Felix Salmon (@felixsalmon) April 30, 2020
Ben White, Politico economic correspondent, tweeted:
I have no idea what they mean by "voiding" US debt obligations to China. The Chinese own $1.1 trillion in Treasury securities. Any effort to "void" that would create unfathomable market chaos. It simply cannot be done under any circumstances. https://t.co/7k5ZxV4cB8 https://t.co/AratuXueW1 — Ben White (@morningmoneyben) April 30, 2020
But not to worry, because he’ll never do it.
In fact, by Thursday evening, Trump was already backtracking. Asked if was really considering not paying U.S. debt obligations to China, Trump said: “I can do it differently, but even for more money, just by putting on tariffs. So I don’t have to do that. It’s approximately a trillion dollars… But we could do that, probably, in a little bit more of a forthright manner.”
U.S.-China relations in context
Eric Levitz published a marvelous interview in New York magazine on Thursday morning with the historian and author Mike Davis. One question was about China.
Davis acknowledged that there was undeniably an initial attempt by the local government in Wuhan to cover up the extent of the outbreak. I found what he had to say next eye-opening:
But as far as the allegation that Beijing did not inform the international community in a timely manner, this seems to be an entirely different story. China detected the first unusual pneumonia outbreaks at the beginning of December. They announced that an unknown virus was responsible in a little more than a week. They sequenced the whole genome of the virus. The WHO was informed about this almost immediately. Trump doesn’t seem to understand the number of Americans who work for the WHO and who were in almost instant contact. The “smoking gun” that’s usually brought in evidence against the Chinese was a false social-media message that denied the existence of human-to-human spread. But the Chinese government immediately followed that with an official statement that said yes, there is human-to-human spread. So I’m very confused about that. I don’t see the evidence that the Chinese scientific community or the WHO covered that up…. But by playing the “yellow fear,” Trump is destroying the alliance — the medical and scientific alliance — that is absolutely most important, and that’s the cooperation between the scientific communities of the United States and China. That’s where most of the cutting-edge research is going to be done. And the research community has probably broken all records for cooperation since the pandemic began.
The U.S. foreign policy establishment strongly supports cooperation with China. Kurt M. Campbell and Rush Doshi — a top Asia policy official in the Obama administration, and a Brookings Institution China expert, respectively – wrote for Foreign Policy in March that the coronavirus crisis requires “strong leadership” by the U.S. of “a coordinated global response.”
They advised against “getting consumed by a war of narratives about who responded better”:
Little is gained by repeatedly emphasizing the origins of the coronavirus — which are already widely known despite China’s propaganda — or engaging in petty tit-for-tat rhetorical exchanges with Beijing. As Chinese officials accuse the U.S. military of spreading the virus and lambaste U.S. efforts, Washington should respond when necessary but generally resist the temptation to put China at the center of its coronavirus messaging.
Not with this president.
Campbell and Dosh continued:
[T]here is much Washington and Beijing could do together for the world’s benefit: coordinating vaccine research and clinical trials as well as fiscal stimulus; sharing information; cooperating on industrial mobilization (on machines for producing critical respirator components or ventilator parts, for instance); and offering joint assistance to others.
Trump’s ever-changing China rhetoric
Trump’s newfound righteous fury toward China is precisely the kind of plot twist that delights reality TV audiences.
Throughout January and February, Trump “touted China’s government for its transparency and hard work to defeat the coronavirus that causes the illness,” as Politico’s Myah Ward explained. Ward “compiled a list of 15 times the president hailed China for its push to prevent a pandemic in the early months of 2020.”
CNN counted 12.
But in mid-April, Trump’s rhetoric took an ominous turn. Talking about Chinese President Xi Jinping, Trump said on April 19:
I’m not happy. And I let him know I’m not happy. So, you know, we had a great relationship with — we had a very bad relationship with China. Then we had a good relationship, because we made a great deal. But we’re not happy. This is not a good thing that happened. It came out of China, so we’re not — we’re not in a position where we’re going to say much yet.
Trump’s most aggressive comments came on April 27, in response to goading, arguably inaccurate questions from reporters for two far-right news organizations.
First, Charlie Spiering of Breitbart News asked:
[A] majority of polls show that Americans blame China for the spread of the coronavirus, and yet they’re taking advantage of the crisis to make the world more dependent on their supply chains. How do you get — how do you hold China accountable and how do you keep our country — how do you incentivize our businesses?
(Judging from this Breitbart article, the question was not based on a “majority” of polls, but on one, from Harris.)
Trump repeated that “we are not happy with China,” and then insisted:
We are not happy with that whole situation because we believe it could have been stopped at the source, it could have been stopped quickly, and it wouldn’t have spread all over the world. And we think that should have happened. So we’ll let you know at the appropriate time, but we are doing serious investigations.
Esmerelda Robinson of Newsmax then chimed in with a question based on a lie:
Following up on Charlie’s question on making China — holding them responsible — Germany sent a bill to China for $130 billion in — excuse me, 130 billion euros — for the damages caused by the coronavirus. Would your administration look at doing the same?
But as FullFact and others have reported, Germany has never sent China any kind of bill. An alleged bill, reported by the British tabloid Daily Express, was actually a fanciful illustration by Germany’s largest newspaper, Bild, for an article speculating on the economic damages of the virus.
Trump, however, was happy to riff on the premise:
Well, we can do something much easier than that. We have ways of doing things a lot easier than that. But Germany is looking at things and we’re looking at things. And we’re talking about a lot more money than Germany is talking about…. We haven’t determined the final amount yet … it’s very substantial.
Trump has said several times that the virus could and should have been stopped — clearly with the intent of blaming China for not doing so.
One statement he made to that effect, however, was interpreted by some cynical observers as more appropriately referring to himself — to his refusal to acknowledge the likelihood that the virus would spread in the U.S., his continued resistance to widespread testing and so on.
“It could have been stopped and it could have been stopped short,” Trump said on April 27. “But somebody a long time ago, it seems, decided not to do it that way.”


presswatchers--2020-05-01--New press secretary: Who you gonna trust, me or your lying ears?

“ I will never lie to you , ” new White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters at her inaugural press briefing on Friday – the first such briefing in 417 days .
But her 32-minute performance was thick with misrepresentations and misinformation , from her bald attempt to rewrite what Donald Trump said a day earlier about the origins of the novel coronavirus , to her wildly dishonest quoting from FBI notes .
There was much more , but I ’ ll just stick with those two for now .
On the matter of the origins of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York Times on Thursday reported that White House officials have been leaning on intelligence agencies to find evidence that it originated in a government laboratory in Wuhan , China .
Experts generally consider that unlikely at best , a conspiracy theory at worst .
( See Vox , NPR and the Washington Post for more on that . )
But hours after that story came out , Trump unilaterally announced that the lab was in fact the source .
Asked if he had seen anything that gave him “ a high degree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Virology was the origin of this virus , ” Trump answered “ Yes , I have .
Yes , I have.
” Asked what information he had to support his view , he replied : “ I can ’ t tell you that .
I ’ m not allowed to tell you that.
” It was only a matter of time before someone had to walk that whopper back — and McEnany did it by simply denying that it ever happened .
Kudos to NBC ’ s Kristen Welker for bringing it up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : The president said yesterday that he has a high degree of confidence that the coronavirus originated in a lab in Wuhan , China , and yet his own intelligence agencies say they are still investigating .
So , does the president have information — and has he drawn a conclusion — that the intelligence community has not yet ?
McEnany : [ Reading from notes . ]
Well , the president ’ s statement is consistent with the other intelligence assessments .
While we continue to have very limited and dubious data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump ’ s statement is consistent with what some analysts believe is the epicenter of where the virus began .
And I would note the intelligent statement you are referring to makes two points .
One , that this virus originated in China ; and two , that it began through contact with infected animals or was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan .
So , I consider that consistent with what the president said , that he has seen intelligence suggesting it could be in a Wuhan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump said yes ; the intelligence report ( itself , arguably written under political pressure ) said maybe ; but they ’ re consistent !
Welker tried to follow up , but to no avail .
McEnany was ready with a memorable if meaningless bit of word salad : Welker : He seems to lean into the idea that this started in a laboratory , where the statement we saw from the DNI says we ’ re still investigating those two options you just laid out .
Is the president in any way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re still investigating .
McEnany : No , you know let me remind everyone : Intelligence is just an estimate , essentially , and it is up to policymakers to decide what to do with that intelligence .
In this case , the policymaker is the president of the Unite States and he ’ ll make that decision at the right time .
Without even waiting for a question , McEnany brought up the case of Trump ’ s former national security adviser Michael Flynn , who pleaded guilty in 2017 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ documents have been aggressively misinterpreted by Flynn ’ s supporters – including Trump himself – to suggest that he was railroaded , or maybe even innocent .
McEnany twice mischaracterized notes taken by Bill Priestap , the former head of the FBI ’ s counterintelligence division , before an interview with Flynn .
The FBI by that point already knew that Flynn had spoken by phone to a Russian diplomat and had lied about it , potentially opening him up to Russian blackmail .
Priestap wrote : “ What ’ s our goal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lie , so we can prosecute him or get him fired ?
” As former Obama ethics czar Norman L. Eisen wrote in a New York Times opinion piece on Friday : “ Given the gravity of the situation , it would have been malpractice not to at least ask those questions as they prepared.
” But McEnany mischaracterized the FBI note to suggest that it was evidence that Flynn was being set up .
“ We have a handwritten FBI note that says , quote , we need to get Flynn to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fired , ” she said .
Eisen , for his part , noted on Twitter that he was fully expecting this kind of dishonesty from the White House : How will it be reported ?
Despite her long history of bullshit and lies , McEnany was the subject of a glowing profile in the New York Times last week .
And the press corps on Friday certainly didn ’ t take advantage of the opportunity to ask McEnany about any of her previous statements , like this Feb. 25 doozy : So it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington reporters will focus on McEnany ’ s deceit and cluelessness , as they should , or simply serve up her quotes without context .
The initial signs are not good .
Some reporters on Friday tweeted McEnany ’ s comments stenographically .
Jill Colvin and Deb Riechmann of the Associated Press reported on McEnany ’ s vow not to lie unironically .
And NBC ’ s Chuck Todd came on the air when it was over and said McEnany “ for the most part , I think gave a very… normal White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defined by what we were used to with White House press briefings that sort of go back over the last decade if you will.
” If you go back to Sean Spicer ’ s first briefing , sure .
But no further .
There has always been some lying at White House press briefings .
But not nonstop .
Not so bold .
Not in such blatant contradiction to what we can see with our own eyes and hear with our own ears .
There ’ s been an ongoing debate about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ briefings .
( For a long time I thought they were worth broadcasting live — as long as they were accompanied by running commentary — and worth attending , so reporters could confront Trump with reality .
Now I think they ’ re too dangerously stupid for the media to do either . )
But however you feel about them , they do on occasion have some news value in there somewhere .
By contrast , I am at a loss to come up with a single question that McEnany would conceivably answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true or useful to the information ecosystem .
The only value I see is to illustrate the bottomless duplicity of this administration .

“I will never lie to you,” new White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters at her inaugural press briefing on Friday – the first such briefing in 417 days.
But her 32-minute performance was thick with misrepresentations and misinformation, from her bald attempt to rewrite what Donald Trump said a day earlier about the origins of the novel coronavirus, to her wildly dishonest quoting from FBI notes.
There was much more, but I’ll just stick with those two for now.
Going viral
On the matter of the origins of the virus, a little background: The New York Times on Thursday reported that White House officials have been leaning on intelligence agencies to find evidence that it originated in a government laboratory in Wuhan, China. Experts generally consider that unlikely at best, a conspiracy theory at worst. (See Vox, NPR and the Washington Post for more on that.)
But hours after that story came out, Trump unilaterally announced that the lab was in fact the source.
Asked if he had seen anything that gave him “a high degree of confidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the origin of this virus,” Trump answered “Yes, I have. Yes, I have.”
Asked what information he had to support his view, he replied: “I can’t tell you that. I’m not allowed to tell you that.”
It was only a matter of time before someone had to walk that whopper back — and McEnany did it by simply denying that it ever happened.
Kudos to NBC’s Kristen Welker for bringing it up, and sticking with it:
Welker: The president said yesterday that he has a high degree of confidence that the coronavirus originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, and yet his own intelligence agencies say they are still investigating. So, does the president have information — and has he drawn a conclusion — that the intelligence community has not yet? McEnany: [Reading from notes.] Well, the president’s statement is consistent with the other intelligence assessments. While we continue to have very limited and dubious data from China, current assessments indicated that President Trump’s statement is consistent with what some analysts believe is the epicenter of where the virus began. And I would note the intelligent statement you are referring to makes two points. One, that this virus originated in China; and two, that it began through contact with infected animals or was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan. So, I consider that consistent with what the president said, that he has seen intelligence suggesting it could be in a Wuhan laboratory.
Let’s review: Trump said yes; the intelligence report (itself, arguably written under political pressure) said maybe; but they’re consistent!
Welker tried to follow up, but to no avail. McEnany was ready with a memorable if meaningless bit of word salad:
Welker: He seems to lean into the idea that this started in a laboratory, where the statement we saw from the DNI says we’re still investigating those two options you just laid out. Is the president in any way creating mixed messages by not saying we’re still investigating. McEnany: No, you know let me remind everyone: Intelligence is just an estimate, essentially, and it is up to policymakers to decide what to do with that intelligence. In this case, the policymaker is the president of the Unite States and he’ll make that decision at the right time.
The Flynn lie
Without even waiting for a question, McEnany brought up the case of Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to federal investigators.
Newly unsealed documents have been aggressively misinterpreted by Flynn’s supporters – including Trump himself – to suggest that he was railroaded, or maybe even innocent.
McEnany twice mischaracterized notes taken by Bill Priestap, the former head of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, before an interview with Flynn.
The FBI by that point already knew that Flynn had spoken by phone to a Russian diplomat and had lied about it, potentially opening him up to Russian blackmail.
Priestap wrote: “What’s our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”
As former Obama ethics czar Norman L. Eisen wrote in a New York Times opinion piece on Friday: “Given the gravity of the situation, it would have been malpractice not to at least ask those questions as they prepared.”
But McEnany mischaracterized the FBI note to suggest that it was evidence that Flynn was being set up.
“We have a handwritten FBI note that says, quote, we need to get Flynn to lie, quote, and get him fired,” she said.
Eisen, for his part, noted on Twitter that he was fully expecting this kind of dishonesty from the White House:
I could feel more WH lies were coming about the new Flynn evidence, which is why I stayed up way too late writing my @nytopinion piece demolishing them https://t.co/nMp4Rj8b9O https://t.co/2NsU51sbrG — Norm Eisen (@NormEisen) May 1, 2020
How will it be reported?
Despite her long history of bullshit and lies, McEnany was the subject of a glowing profile in the New York Times last week.
And the press corps on Friday certainly didn’t take advantage of the opportunity to ask McEnany about any of her previous statements, like this Feb. 25 doozy:
On the same day Larry Kudlow said coronavirus was “contained” on Feb. 25th, Trump’s campaign spox made an even more bold claim. “We will not see diseases like the coronavirus come here..and isn't it refreshing when contrasting it with the awful presidency of President Obama." pic.twitter.com/O0DDH3Rvkw — andrew kaczynski???? (@KFILE) April 4, 2020
So it’s not at all clear whether Washington reporters will focus on McEnany’s deceit and cluelessness, as they should, or simply serve up her quotes without context.
The initial signs are not good. Some reporters on Friday tweeted McEnany’s comments stenographically.
Jill Colvin and Deb Riechmann of the Associated Press reported on McEnany’s vow not to lie unironically.
And NBC’s Chuck Todd came on the air when it was over and said McEnany “for the most part, I think gave a very… normal White House press briefing — if normal is defined by what we were used to with White House press briefings that sort of go back over the last decade if you will.”
If you go back to Sean Spicer’s first briefing, sure. But no further.
There has always been some lying at White House press briefings. But not nonstop. Not so bold. Not in such blatant contradiction to what we can see with our own eyes and hear with our own ears.
There’s been an ongoing debate about the value of Trump’s coronavirus press briefings. (For a long time I thought they were worth broadcasting live — as long as they were accompanied by running commentary — and worth attending, so reporters could confront Trump with reality. Now I think they’re too dangerously stupid for the media to do either.)
But however you feel about them, they do on occasion have some news value in there somewhere.
By contrast, I am at a loss to come up with a single question that McEnany would conceivably answer in a way that would add anything true or useful to the information ecosystem.
The only value I see is to illustrate the bottomless duplicity of this administration.


presswatchers--2020-05-05--Ring the alarm bells! The media needs to respond to Trump’s calamitous failure with urgency and acti

Ring the alarm bells! The media needs to respond to Trump’s calamitous failure with urgency and activism

New projections of mass death in the United States should be prompting the country ’ s major news organizations to abandon any complacency in their government coverage and instead use every opportunity to sound the alarm about the extraordinary threat to the nation posed by Donald Trump ’ s continued failure to effectively respond to the coronavirus pandemic .
Public-health officials are clear that there is a way forward that minimizes the toll of the virus , but it depends on forceful federal action to supercharge the supply chain for testing , massively increase the daily number of tests , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set up facilities for infected people to self-isolate .
Trump is doing none of this .
None .
As a result , all the sacrifices caused by social distancing and shutting down broad swaths of the economy – sacrifices that were intended to buy time — are being squandered .
Every single day that Trump is allowed to drag his feet is another wasted day , another lost day , another day of hiding and death and horror .
And now he ’ s even talking about winding down his task force ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ treating this with the urgency that befits an ongoing national disaster .
They should be treating it like a hurricane bearing down on a city .
Or like they do when the debt ceiling is about to expire , or the government ’ s about to shut down or the election results are delayed .
Or there ’ s a war on .
We are heading straight into a calamity of epic proportions , holding our course , and the Washington press corps is taking notes instead of screaming bloody murder ( or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Every reporter every day in Washington should be demanding answers .
Every news organization every day should be reporting and telling the public about what we are failing to do , and what people who could do something about it are or aren ’ t saying about it .
Every day that Trump fails to put credible , competent people in charge of the testing supply chain – and that Congress does nothing about it – that should be the lead story , because it ’ s an outrage .
Every day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hiring and training a legion of contact-tracers is more dead Americans .
The Washington Post , the New York Times , and other major news organizations have done a really quite remarkable job of chronicling how the federal government under Trump has failed over the past several months .
They ’ re good at the past .
But the political press is not nearly as good at looking at the present moment or the future , and saying : “ Whoa !
This makes no sense .
This has to stop .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needs to happen now .
The whole point of social distancing was that once the number of infected people declined and the government response geared up , we could begin to respond to outbreaks on a case by case basis : finding the sick through testing , tracking the infected , and isolating them .
Once the sick are isolated , it ’ s safe to start letting people out of their homes .
After that , there will inevitably be new outbreaks , but in theory the government now has the resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , isolate , and repeat .
Reopening before we ’ re ready means we are going to restart the whole cycle again and tens of thousands , if not hundreds of thousands of Americans , will die unnecessarily .
Trump keeps on saying things are getting better – and the media broadcasts his quotes .
But things aren ’ t getting better .
They may soon be getting much worse .
And then there are the things that haven ’ t changed .
I ’ ve written a lot about Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is what has been clear all along : He has no real plan to restore the country to health other than to peddle false hope , predict a quick end , adopt fake deadlines and shift the blame to others .
The most urgent need is to test , test , test .
and either he doesn ’ t get it or he doesn ’ t want to know the results .
The media has blown its coverage of the federal response by letting political reporters lead instead of health reporters .
Political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whatever Trump says , such that whatever it is makes headlines .
They let Trump set the agenda instead of letting knowledgeable people do it .
Political reporters also give Trump way too much credit for trying , when he ’ s not really .
They cover up for his incoherence , ignorance , cluelessness , gaslighting , and yes , just plain stupidity .
And they generally fail to properly exploit their rare access to him by confronting him with facts and piercing his bubble .
Finally , they fail to grasp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s just not a plan to return the country to health .
It ’ s a plan to get reelected .
It ’ s a plan to dump his responsibilities on the states , and when all hell breaks loose blame the governors and sow confusion .
NYU journalism professor Jay Rosen just explained that brilliantly on his blog , Pressthink : The plan is to have no plan , to let daily deaths between one and three thousand become a normal thing , and then to create massive confusion about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ re in charge without doing what only the federal government can do , by fighting with the press when it shows up to be briefed , by fixing blame for the virus on China or some other foreign element , and by “ flooding the zone with shit , ” Steve Bannon ’ s phrase for overwhelming the system with disinformation , distraction , and denial , which boosts what economists call “ search costs ” for reliable intelligence .
Stated another way , the plan is to default on public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public from understanding the consequences of that default .
To succeed this will require one of the biggest propaganda and freedom of information fights in U.S. history , the execution of which will , I think , consume the president ’ s re-election campaign .
And yes , there ’ s something the media can do about that : Fight the propaganda .
Refute the misinformation .
Bring clarity .
Speak for the living , and the dead .
The New York Times did the nation a great service on Monday , publishing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ various agencies , including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , which forecasts about 200,000 new cases each day by the end of May , up from about 30,000 cases now .
It also estimates about 3,000 deaths per day , which is about twice the current rate .
Do the math : That ’ s a rate of 90,000 deaths per month as of June 1 , considerably more in a month than the approximately 63,000 total U.S. deaths thus far .
The Times led its Tuesday editions with the somewhat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Quietly Fears Virus ’ s Daily Toll Will Soon Double .
Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Eileen Sullivan noted that another model favored by the White House more than doubled its previous fatality projection on Monday .
Then they wrote , evocatively : The Times on Tuesday also published this excellent and quite alarming where-things-stand overview by Julie Bosman , Mitch Smith and Amy Harmon , who wrote : Over at the Washington Post , however , it just seemed like another ordinary news day .
In the lead story , headlined Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Toluse Olorunnipa , Griff Witte and Lenny Bernstein wrote about Trump cheering even as states that failed to achieve his ostensible guidelines are reopening .
So how should reporters react to the new numbers ?
Maybe more like David Dayen , at the American Prospect .
He wrote : If you really play out what the CDC model is showing , it gets you to half a million deaths by the end of the summer .
You have to conclude , because what ’ s happening is so obvious , that this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president and his staff .
They are fine with mass death in America .
They have always been fine with mass death in America ; we let mass murderers get guns , after all .
They would rather have mass death than pay for unemployment benefits for too long .
Their entire strategy throughout April was to figure out the best way to allow mass death , in service to the economy .
This was a false choice , incidentally ; we will have mass death and an obliterated economy .
And when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to grasp will be the culture war .
Our top news organizations have firmly established that time has been wasted .
The Washington Post published yet another look-back at Trump ’ s absolutely disastrous response over the weekend , this one focusing on the 34 days of “ desperation and dysfunction ” between March 29 , “ when Trump agreed to extend strict social-distancing guidelines , and this past week , when he celebrated the reopening of some states as a harbinger of economic revival.
” This comes after a March 14 Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and missteps , and a slow recognition of the danger up to that point ; a March 28 New York Times article on The Lost Month : How a Failure to Test Blinded the U.S. to Covid-19 ; an April 4 Washington Post article about how “ Warnings were sounded , including at the highest levels of government , but the president was deaf to them until the enemy had already struck ” ; and an April 11 New York Times story which reported that Trump “ was slow to absorb the scale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , focusing instead on controlling the message , protecting gains in the economy and batting away warnings from senior officials.
” What we are not hearing loudly enough , however , is that the time is still being wasted .
Every single day .
It has to change .
We need to raise up expert voices .
Here ’ s Ashish K. Jha , M.D.
, the director of the Harvard Global Health Institute on Twitter : This , from activist Bree Newsome , is the reasonable , human response to what is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflected in news stories : And finally , here is New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo in his briefing on Tuesday : Cuomo then added : “ That ’ s not hyperbolic and that ’ s not overly dramatic .
That is just the fact .
”

New projections of mass death in the United States should be prompting the country’s major news organizations to abandon any complacency in their government coverage and instead use every opportunity to sound the alarm about the extraordinary threat to the nation posed by Donald Trump’s continued failure to effectively respond to the coronavirus pandemic.
Public-health officials are clear that there is a way forward that minimizes the toll of the virus, but it depends on forceful federal action to supercharge the supply chain for testing, massively increase the daily number of tests, mobilize a nationwide contact-tracing program, and set up facilities for infected people to self-isolate.
Trump is doing none of this. None.
As a result, all the sacrifices caused by social distancing and shutting down broad swaths of the economy – sacrifices that were intended to buy time — are being squandered.
Every single day that Trump is allowed to drag his feet is another wasted day, another lost day, another day of hiding and death and horror.
And now he’s even talking about winding down his task force??
Our top news organizations should be treating this with the urgency that befits an ongoing national disaster. They should be treating it like a hurricane bearing down on a city. Or like they do when the debt ceiling is about to expire, or the government’s about to shut down or the election results are delayed. Or there’s a war on.
We are heading straight into a calamity of epic proportions, holding our course, and the Washington press corps is taking notes instead of screaming bloody murder (or, more appropriately, negligent homicide).
Every reporter every day in Washington should be demanding answers. Every news organization every day should be reporting and telling the public about what we are failing to do, and what people who could do something about it are or aren’t saying about it.
Every day that Trump fails to put credible, competent people in charge of the testing supply chain – and that Congress does nothing about it – that should be the lead story, because it’s an outrage.
Every day we don’t get closer to hiring and training a legion of contact-tracers is more dead Americans.
The Washington Post, the New York Times, and other major news organizations have done a really quite remarkable job of chronicling how the federal government under Trump has failed over the past several months. They’re good at the past.
But the political press is not nearly as good at looking at the present moment or the future, and saying: “Whoa! This makes no sense. This has to stop. This is madness.”
That is exactly what needs to happen now.
The whole point of social distancing was that once the number of infected people declined and the government response geared up, we could begin to respond to outbreaks on a case by case basis: finding the sick through testing, tracking the infected, and isolating them. Once the sick are isolated, it’s safe to start letting people out of their homes. After that, there will inevitably be new outbreaks, but in theory the government now has the resources to swoop in, test, trace, isolate, and repeat.
Reopening before we’re ready means we are going to restart the whole cycle again and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of Americans, will die unnecessarily.
Trump keeps on saying things are getting better – and the media broadcasts his quotes. But things aren’t getting better. They may soon be getting much worse.
And then there are the things that haven’t changed. I’ve written a lot about Trump’s response to the pandemic, and here is what has been clear all along:
He has no real plan to restore the country to health other than to peddle false hope, predict a quick end, adopt fake deadlines and shift the blame to others.
The most urgent need is to test, test, test. and either he doesn’t get it or he doesn’t want to know the results.
The media has blown its coverage of the federal response by letting political reporters lead instead of health reporters. Political reporters pay way too much attention to whatever Trump says, such that whatever it is makes headlines. They let Trump set the agenda instead of letting knowledgeable people do it.
Political reporters also give Trump way too much credit for trying, when he’s not really. They cover up for his incoherence, ignorance, cluelessness, gaslighting, and yes, just plain stupidity. And they generally fail to properly exploit their rare access to him by confronting him with facts and piercing his bubble.
Finally, they fail to grasp that he does have a plan, it’s just not a plan to return the country to health. It’s a plan to get reelected. It’s a plan to dump his responsibilities on the states, and when all hell breaks loose blame the governors and sow confusion.
NYU journalism professor Jay Rosen just explained that brilliantly on his blog, Pressthink:
The plan is to have no plan, to let daily deaths between one and three thousand become a normal thing, and then to create massive confusion about who is responsible— by telling the governors they’re in charge without doing what only the federal government can do, by fighting with the press when it shows up to be briefed, by fixing blame for the virus on China or some other foreign element, and by “flooding the zone with shit,” Steve Bannon’s phrase for overwhelming the system with disinformation, distraction, and denial, which boosts what economists call “search costs” for reliable intelligence. Stated another way, the plan is to default on public problem solving, and then prevent the public from understanding the consequences of that default. To succeed this will require one of the biggest propaganda and freedom of information fights in U.S. history, the execution of which will, I think, consume the president’s re-election campaign.
And yes, there’s something the media can do about that: Fight the propaganda. Refute the misinformation. Bring clarity. Speak for the living, and the dead.
Dead Man’s Curve
The New York Times did the nation a great service on Monday, publishing an internal document showing data collected by various agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which forecasts about 200,000 new cases each day by the end of May, up from about 30,000 cases now. It also estimates about 3,000 deaths per day, which is about twice the current rate.
Do the math: That’s a rate of 90,000 deaths per month as of June 1, considerably more in a month than the approximately 63,000 total U.S. deaths thus far.
The Times led its Tuesday editions with the somewhat but not sufficiently alarmist headline: U.S. Quietly Fears Virus’s Daily Toll Will Soon Double. Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Eileen Sullivan noted that another model favored by the White House more than doubled its previous fatality projection on Monday. Then they wrote, evocatively:
The numbers underscore a sobering reality: While the United States has been hunkered down for the past seven weeks, the prognosis has not markedly improved. As states reopen — many without meeting White House guidelines that call for a steady decline in coronavirus cases or in the number of people testing positive over a 14-day period — the cost of the shift is likely to be tallied in funerals…. The projections amplify the primary fear of public health experts: that a reopening of the economy will put the nation right back where it was in mid-March, when cases were rising so rapidly in some parts of the country that patients were dying on gurneys in hospital hallways amid overloaded health systems.
The Times on Tuesday also published this excellent and quite alarming where-things-stand overview by Julie Bosman, Mitch Smith and Amy Harmon, who wrote:
The country is still in the firm grip of a pandemic with little hope of release. For every indication of improvement in controlling the virus, new outbreaks have emerged elsewhere, leaving the nation stuck in a steady, unrelenting march of deaths and infections. As states continue to lift restrictions meant to stop the virus, impatient Americans are freely returning to shopping, lingering in restaurants and gathering in parks. Regular new flare-ups and super-spreader events are expected to be close behind. Any notion that the coronavirus threat is fading away appears to be magical thinking, at odds with what the latest numbers show.
Over at the Washington Post, however, it just seemed like another ordinary news day. In the lead story, headlined Trump applauds states reopening ahead of guidance, Toluse Olorunnipa, Griff Witte and Lenny Bernstein wrote about Trump cheering even as states that failed to achieve his ostensible guidelines are reopening.
So how should reporters react to the new numbers? Maybe more like David Dayen, at the American Prospect. He wrote:
If you really play out what the CDC model is showing, it gets you to half a million deaths by the end of the summer. You have to conclude, because what’s happening is so obvious, that this is an acceptable level of death to the president and his staff. They are fine with mass death in America. They have always been fine with mass death in America; we let mass murderers get guns, after all. They would rather have mass death than pay for unemployment benefits for too long. Their entire strategy throughout April was to figure out the best way to allow mass death, in service to the economy. This was a false choice, incidentally; we will have mass death and an obliterated economy. And when that happens, the only straw left to grasp will be the culture war.
Times a’wasting
Our top news organizations have firmly established that time has been wasted.
The Washington Post published yet another look-back at Trump’s absolutely disastrous response over the weekend, this one focusing on the 34 days of “desperation and dysfunction” between March 29, “when Trump agreed to extend strict social-distancing guidelines, and this past week, when he celebrated the reopening of some states as a harbinger of economic revival.”
This comes after a March 14 Washington Post analysis that described blame-shifting, misinformation and missteps, and a slow recognition of the danger up to that point; a March 28 New York Times article on The Lost Month: How a Failure to Test Blinded the U.S. to Covid-19; an April 4 Washington Post article about how “Warnings were sounded, including at the highest levels of government, but the president was deaf to them until the enemy had already struck”; and an April 11 New York Times story which reported that Trump “was slow to absorb the scale of the risk and to act accordingly, focusing instead on controlling the message, protecting gains in the economy and batting away warnings from senior officials.”
What we are not hearing loudly enough, however, is that the time is still being wasted. Every single day. It has to change.
We need to raise up expert voices. Here’s Ashish K. Jha, M.D., the director of the Harvard Global Health Institute on Twitter:
Excited to be on with @chrislhayes Talking about the latest projections — a lot more cases, a lot more suffering ahead. Ugh. Can't believe we wasted April without getting testing and tracing to where it needs to be. Instead, we argued about hydroxychloroquine, lysol, etc https://t.co/d3XMVVfqeo — Ashish "I want our CDC back" Jha (@ashishkjha) May 5, 2020
This, from activist Bree Newsome, is the reasonable, human response to what is going on that you see so infrequently reflected in news stories:
Do folk understand that all we’ve done is slow the RATE of infection? That the gov’t hasn’t done nearly the amount of testing or tracing that should be happening during this shelter-in-place period? That states “reopening” now will put us right back on track for mass death??? pic.twitter.com/8JwCZd5x8X — Bree Newsome Bass (@BreeNewsome) May 5, 2020
And finally, here is New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in his briefing on Tuesday:
Government on all levels has to work. The federal government has to work, and it has to work now better than it has worked in the past. All the craziness that we’ve watched in Washington, all the politics that we’ve seen in Washington, all the dysfunction that we’ve seen in Washington. Now it is unacceptable, because what government does today will literally determine how many people live and how many die.
Cuomo then added: “That’s not hyperbolic and that’s not overly dramatic. That is just the fact.”


presswatchers--2020-05-07--Trump blocks desperately needed national testing program, says tests make things “look bad”

The single most disastrous element of the failed federal response to the Covid-19 pandemic is Donald Trump ’ s continued refusal to launch a massive federal effort to develop the capacity to test more Americans for the virus .
Without magnitudes more testing , public health experts agree , reopening the country is a death sentence for countless Americans , particularly the less affluent .
And only the federal government is capable of what ’ s required .
On Wednesday , Trump explained himself with an extraordinarily revealing quote – one that included both a lie and a confession .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ all this testing we make ourselves look bad , ” Trump told reporters on Wednesday , It was a lie because the number of tests administered in the U.S. – currently about 7 million – is tiny compared to the actual need .
And it was a confession because Trump was acknowledging that he sees testing as a matter of his own political health rather than the public ’ s .
The context of his comment was also revealing , because he was speaking entirely about the public perception of the problem rather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off by ascribing ill intent to the media for accurately reporting its extent .
“ So the media likes to say we have the most cases , but we do , by far , the most testing , ” he said .
“ If we did very little testing , we wouldn ’ t have the most cases .
So , in a way , by doing all of this testing , we make ourselves look bad… .
Otherwise , you don ’ t know if you have a case .
I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To Trump , knowing you have a case – which , of course , allows people to get proper treatment , and to isolate themselves so they don ’ t infect others – has no positive value .
It ’ s just bad optics Trump also repeated one of his most flagrant lies about testing , saying “ We ’ ve done more testing than every other country combined , wouldn ’ t you think ?
” This is something he ’ s asserted at least four other times as well , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quick look at the stats shows that Russia , Germany and Italy combined have done more testing than the U.S. , and a little number crunching shows the U.S. has done less than a fifth of the total tests worldwide .
What Trump was really telling us is that he has no idea what he ’ s talking about , he has no interest in understanding it , he has no interest in actually solving the problem , and the only thing he cares about is how it makes him look .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obvious to some observers : At the same time , CNN ’ s Jake Tapper was reporting that “ some on the task force and in the administration have been urging President Trump to take the lead on an ambitious national testing program ” that would include forcing companies to manufacture tests and reagents and mandating that labs expand their ability to test .
“ But President Trump so far has rebuffed those suggestions , ” Tapper said .
Our major news organizations should have been all over Trump ’ s revealing comment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been the news peg for angry lead stories about Trump ’ s ongoing , calamitous failure to save American lives : The man is blocking desperately needed testing and he blames the testing we have for making things “ look bad ” .
That ’ s a solid news story .
Washington Post reporter Philip Bump , in a story that was largely about press secretary Kayleigh McEnany ’ s hypocritical straw-man argument against universal testing , only eventually took note of Trump ’ s comment , writing that it offered “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reticent to embrace widespread testing.
” Bump wrote that Trump saying testing leads to reported cases is “ true in the same way that a city that never arrests anyone will have a very low number of recorded crimes .
It offers a solution if your concern is the metric , but not if your concern is the actual amount of crime that ’ s occurring.
” And , as Bump noted : “ This would not be the first time Trump has indicated that the number of cases is of more concern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In early March , he said he didn ’ t want to transfer potentially infected passengers off a cruise ship for treatment because he worried it would spike the number of recorded cases in the United States.
” In their daily White House newsletter for Newsday , William Goldschlag and Dan Janison hit it on the head , writing : But over at the New York Times , Peter Baker focused mostly on Trump ’ s use of the war analogy , and only briefly noted Trump ’ s comment .
As for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Washington Post opinion writer Greg Sargent was there to provide the clarity that so often eludes his news-side colleagues .
“ President Trump is prioritizing his efforts to create the illusion that the country is returning to normalcy over taking concrete steps that might make that actually happen safely , ” Sargent wrote on Thursday .
The real job of being president is just way beyond him , and every serious reporter in Washington knows that .

The single most disastrous element of the failed federal response to the Covid-19 pandemic is Donald Trump’s continued refusal to launch a massive federal effort to develop the capacity to test more Americans for the virus.
Without magnitudes more testing, public health experts agree, reopening the country is a death sentence for countless Americans, particularly the less affluent. And only the federal government is capable of what’s required.
On Wednesday, Trump explained himself with an extraordinarily revealing quote – one that included both a lie and a confession.
“In a way, by doing all this testing we make ourselves look bad,” Trump told reporters.
It was a lie because the number of tests administered in the U.S. – currently about 7 million – is tiny compared to the actual need.
And it was a confession because Trump was acknowledging that he sees testing as a matter of his own political health rather than the public’s.
The context of his comment was also revealing, because he was speaking entirely about the public perception of the problem rather than the problem itself — and started off by ascribing ill intent to the media for accurately reporting its extent.
“So the media likes to say we have the most cases, but we do, by far, the most testing,” he said. “If we did very little testing, we wouldn’t have the most cases. So, in a way, by doing all of this testing, we make ourselves look bad…. Otherwise, you don’t know if you have a case. I think that’s a correct statement.”
To Trump, knowing you have a case – which, of course, allows people to get proper treatment, and to isolate themselves so they don’t infect others – has no positive value. It’s just bad optics
Trump also repeated one of his most flagrant lies about testing, saying “We’ve done more testing than every other country combined, wouldn’t you think?” This is something he’s asserted at least four other times as well, and it’s pure lunacy. A quick look at the stats shows that Russia, Germany and Italy combined have done more testing than the U.S., and a little number crunching shows the U.S. has done less than a fifth of the total tests worldwide.
What Trump was really telling us is that he has no idea what he’s talking about, he has no interest in understanding it, he has no interest in actually solving the problem, and the only thing he cares about is how it makes him look.
The significance of what Trump was saying was obvious to some observers:
If you want to know why we have no national testing program, you just need to listen to what Trump said yesterday: “By doing all this testing,” Trump said, “we make ourselves look bad.” The lack of tests isn’t accidental. It’s by design. — Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) May 7, 2020
Trump: “In a way, by doing all this testing we make ourselves look bad.”
This is pretty stunning. The key is that we—i.e., Trump—not look bad. Trump’s basically saying that his political health is more important than our public health. https://t.co/pKDbLoDJEE — Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) May 7, 2020
At the same time, CNN’s Jake Tapper was reporting that “some on the task force and in the administration have been urging President Trump to take the lead on an ambitious national testing program” that would include forcing companies to manufacture tests and reagents and mandating that labs expand their ability to test.
“But President Trump so far has rebuffed those suggestions,” Tapper said.
Some in the Trump administration are urging the President to take the lead on a national testing program and invoke the Defense Production Act to help build the infrastructure for it. “Pres. Trump, so far, has rebuffed those suggestions,” @jaketapper reports. (corrects spelling) pic.twitter.com/AAvo9FFZ5a — The Lead CNN (@TheLeadCNN) May 6, 2020
Our major news organizations should have been all over Trump’s revealing comment, and its context. It should have been the news peg for angry lead stories about Trump’s ongoing, calamitous failure to save American lives: The man is blocking desperately needed testing and he blames the testing we have for making things “look bad”. That’s a solid news story.
And yet…
Washington Post reporter Philip Bump, in a story that was largely about press secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s hypocritical straw-man argument against universal testing, only eventually took note of Trump’s comment, writing that it offered “insight” into “why he is reticent to embrace widespread testing.”
Bump wrote that Trump saying testing leads to reported cases is “true in the same way that a city that never arrests anyone will have a very low number of recorded crimes. It offers a solution if your concern is the metric, but not if your concern is the actual amount of crime that’s occurring.”
And, as Bump noted: “This would not be the first time Trump has indicated that the number of cases is of more concern to him than the affected individuals. In early March, he said he didn’t want to transfer potentially infected passengers off a cruise ship for treatment because he worried it would spike the number of recorded cases in the United States.”
In their daily White House newsletter for Newsday, William Goldschlag and Dan Janison hit it on the head, writing:
Trump resists making testing even more prevalent, and he gave a clue about the reason in remarks on Wednesday: He seems worried about how the numbers look and how they might reflect on him…. The purpose of testing, of course, is not just to confirm the illness in people showing symptoms but to prevent those who are feeling fine — yet carrying coronavirus — from spreading it to others who could get sicker or die.
But over at the New York Times, Peter Baker focused mostly on Trump’s use of the war analogy, and only briefly noted Trump’s comment.
(If you want to read about Trump’s war rhetoric, read Los Angeles Times reporter Chris Megerian instead. Megerian points out how a bunch of non-volunteers are being sent into battle without a strategy and without the necessary equipment. He also quotes Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, as saying: “People who are dying of this virus are not dying to protect the American way of life. They’re dying because their government has had a completely ineffective response to this infectious disease.” Great stuff!)
As for covering Trump’s confession, luckily, Washington Post opinion writer Greg Sargent was there to provide the clarity that so often eludes his news-side colleagues. “President Trump is prioritizing his efforts to create the illusion that the country is returning to normalcy over taking concrete steps that might make that actually happen safely,” Sargent wrote on Thursday.
The real job of being president is just way beyond him, and every serious reporter in Washington knows that.
UPDATE at 7 pm ET:
CNN’s Tapper led his broadcast on Thursday with a report on testing. He quoted Trump’s comment about tests looking bad, then adding: “We should clarify: That’s testing for you, he’s talking about. The White House tests its officials and visitors regularly.”