thebulwark--2020-05-20--Susan Rice Email Debunks the “Obamagate” Conspiracy Theory

Well , I guess we can close the file on that one .
Yesterday the Keystone Spooks leading the Trump intelligence regime fully declassified the “ mysterious ” Susan Rice email that was at the heart of their absurd conspiracy to charge former president Obama and Vice President Biden with espionage .
The email had been written by Rice to herself to memorialize a meeting with President Obama ’ s national security team about Gen. Michael Flynn ’ s contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak .
Trump Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell had previously released a redacted email that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might have directed national security officials to refrain from sharing classified information pertaining to the Russia investigation with Flynn .
This was a dodgy supposition since ( a ) the partially redacted email included two references to Obama telling officials that the investigation should be undertaken “ by the book ” and ( b ) Flynn was a Turkish asset who took undisclosed cash payments from RT , and was having back-channel conversations with the country that had just executed a cyberattack on our elections .
It ’ s not entirely clear that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would ’ ve been inappropriate even if it did happen .
But even that turns out to be an academic question , because we now know that it didn ’ t happen .
Of course , we just found this out .
Acting director Grennell has known the whole time .
The full email was declassified on Tuesday and you will be shocked to learn that the previously redacted text completely debunks the nontroversy narrative that Grenell , the MAGA media , and the Trump campaign were trying to drive with their initial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here are the newly revealed last three sentences : So .
.
.
the note that had been used to advance the idea that Obama was hiding info from—and even spying on !
—Flynn has a line in it that indicates specifically that the president did not want to change how his administration shared classified information with the incoming administration unless something were to change , at which point he would want another briefing .
And there is no evidence that another such briefing took place .
In summary here is what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : • He had a meeting with his intelligence team where he was briefed about Gen. Flynn ’ s back-channel conversations with a country that had committed an attack on our elections during his watch .
• At the meeting he is told that some of Flynn ’ s conversations with Russia are unusual , but none of them include the sharing of any classified intelligence .
• Obama says that the investigation should be done “ by the book ” unless new information comes to light at which point he should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warns President-elect Trump about Flynn in one of their only conversations .
What we have here my friends is By-The-Book-Gate !
Only the producers of The Trump Show could come up with a fake conspiracy this morbidly thin .
The Rice email is such a massive nothing burger that it exists as a nothing burger continent on which all other nothing burgers rest .
And yet .
.
.
that isn ’ t stopping the shills .
The same people who tried to help the administration fabricate this scandal in the first place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ email release debunks their own conspiracy theory .
Instead , they ’ re steaming full speed ahead as if nothing had happened .
For instance , the Federalist summarizes the email as proof that Flynn was “ personally targeted ” in the meeting .
That ’ s a tough case to make , since the email shows the opposite .
So Federalist piece references neither Obama requesting the investigation be done “ by the book ” nor the sentence where Obama specifically suggests that nothing should change unless he is briefed again .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ran with it , tweeting that the leak proves that there was “ ongoing spying ” of the incoming POTUS directed by President Obama .
Even though there is no discussion of spying in the email .
Or even in the Federalist article .
A twitter troll helpfully translated for me what Cruz was probably alleging here : It turns out some people are under the impression that intelligence officials listening to a call with a Russian agent is “ spying.
” You know whose calls to Russian agents are spied on , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on our elections ?
Everyone ’ s !
It doesn ’ t matter your politics , race , or creed .
Surely you would imagine someone who used to be .
.
.
checks notes .
.
.
director of the Defense Intelligence Agency for Barack Obama would be aware that these calls may be monitored !
Meanwhile Lyin ’ Ted is trying to stay on his bully ’ s good side by pretending that this SOP email is akin to Obama planting bugs in Flynn ’ s shoe like he ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s complete bullshit and Ted knows it .
But this way he gets a presidential pat on the head , and Trump can use him to advance the perverse lie he is fabricating to try to rectify his flagging political fortunes .
So what we have here is further confirmation that there is a real scandal related to # Obamagate and the scandal is the Trump administration trying to weaponize America ’ s foreign policy and intelligence agencies to gain advantage in a presidential election…again .
The only encouraging bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the best these gubers have got , then it turns out that they ’ re as incompetent as they are corrupt .

Well, I guess we can close the file on that one.
Yesterday the Keystone Spooks leading the Trump intelligence regime fully declassified the “mysterious” Susan Rice email that was at the heart of their absurd conspiracy to charge former president Obama and Vice President Biden with espionage. The email had been written by Rice to herself to memorialize a meeting with President Obama’s national security team about Gen. Michael Flynn’s contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.
Trump Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell had previously released a redacted email that left dangling the possibility that President Obama might have directed national security officials to refrain from sharing classified information pertaining to the Russia investigation with Flynn.
This was a dodgy supposition since (a) the partially redacted email included two references to Obama telling officials that the investigation should be undertaken “by the book” and (b) Flynn was a Turkish asset who took undisclosed cash payments from RT, and was having back-channel conversations with the country that had just executed a cyberattack on our elections. It’s not entirely clear that withholding information from him about said country would’ve been inappropriate even if it did happen.
But even that turns out to be an academic question, because we now know that it didn’t happen.
Of course, we just found this out. Acting director Grennell has known the whole time.
Just interesting.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
The full email was declassified on Tuesday and you will be shocked to learn that the previously redacted text completely debunks the nontroversy narrative that Grenell, the MAGA media, and the Trump campaign were trying to drive with their initial leak.
Lets go to the text. Here are the newly revealed last three sentences:
[Comey] added that he has no indication thus far that Flynn has passed classified information to Kislyak, but he noted that ‘the level of communication is unusual.’ The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would.
So . . . the note that had been used to advance the idea that Obama was hiding info from—and even spying on!—Flynn has a line in it that indicates specifically that the president did not want to change how his administration shared classified information with the incoming administration unless something were to change, at which point he would want another briefing. And there is no evidence that another such briefing took place.
In summary here is what we know about Obama’s actions:
He had a meeting with his intelligence team where he was briefed about Gen. Flynn’s back-channel conversations with a country that had committed an attack on our elections during his watch. At the meeting he is told that some of Flynn’s conversations with Russia are unusual, but none of them include the sharing of any classified intelligence. Obama says that the investigation should be done “by the book” unless new information comes to light at which point he should be briefed again. President Obama privately warns President-elect Trump about Flynn in one of their only conversations.
What we have here my friends is By-The-Book-Gate!
Only the producers of The Trump Show could come up with a fake conspiracy this morbidly thin. The Rice email is such a massive nothing burger that it exists as a nothing burger continent on which all other nothing burgers rest.
And yet . . . that isn’t stopping the shills.
The same people who tried to help the administration fabricate this scandal in the first place remain undaunted by the fact that the email release debunks their own conspiracy theory. Instead, they’re steaming full speed ahead as if nothing had happened. For instance, the Federalist summarizes the email as proof that Flynn was “personally targeted” in the meeting. That’s a tough case to make, since the email shows the opposite. So the Federalist piece references neither Obama requesting the investigation be done “by the book” nor the sentence where Obama specifically suggests that nothing should change unless he is briefed again.
Ted Cruz took the Federalist article and ran with it, tweeting that the leak proves that there was “ongoing spying” of the incoming POTUS directed by President Obama. Even though there is no discussion of spying in the email. Or even in the Federalist article.
It’s like a game of Infowars telephone.
A twitter troll helpfully translated for me what Cruz was probably alleging here: It turns out some people are under the impression that intelligence officials listening to a call with a Russian agent is “spying.” You know whose calls to Russian agents are spied on, particularly in the weeks following an attack on our elections? Everyone’s! It doesn’t matter your politics, race, or creed. Surely you would imagine someone who used to be . . . checks notes . . . director of the Defense Intelligence Agency for Barack Obama would be aware that these calls may be monitored!
Meanwhile Lyin’ Ted is trying to stay on his bully’s good side by pretending that this SOP email is akin to Obama planting bugs in Flynn’s shoe like he’s Gene Hackman in Enemy of the State. It’s complete bullshit and Ted knows it. But this way he gets a presidential pat on the head, and Trump can use him to advance the perverse lie he is fabricating to try to rectify his flagging political fortunes.
So what we have here is further confirmation that there is a real scandal related to #Obamagate and the scandal is the Trump administration trying to weaponize America’s foreign policy and intelligence agencies to gain advantage in a presidential election…again.
The only encouraging bit is the realization that if By-The-Book Gate is the best these gubers have got, then it turns out that they’re as incompetent as they are corrupt.


Sweden’s Trolley Problem

A speeding train is heading towards five people tied up further down the track .
You have the option to pull a lever , and direct the train onto a different track , and away from the five people .
The other track has one person tied to it .
Do you pull the lever ?
The Trolley problem is a well-known thought experiment highlighting the difference between two moral architectures : utilitarianism and deontology .
Does the morality of our decisions depend on outcomes or actions ?
Does our calculus of saving four lives justify our decision to actively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ track ?
This thought experiment has parallels in a real-life experiment Sweden is conducting with its 10 million citizens .
Though a majority of nations have opted to pull the lever and shift tracks to a lockdown strategy , thereby sacrificing economic growth , Sweden has continued on the same line .
Swedish primary schools , gyms , bars , malls , and restaurants remained open as the country ’ s government pursued an end goal of “ herd immunity.
” The thinking went that if enough young , healthy people—who would likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acquired immunity , they might slow transmission sufficiently to protect more vulnerable Swedes .
And thus the pool of people who could spread the disease would shrink .
Or so the theory goes .
In Sweden ’ s case , unlike the Trolley problem , there is no easy way to tabulate whether or not , in the long run , more lives are being saved , or lost , by their choice of inaction .
In part this is because we simply do not know enough about the coronavirus to even have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population would need to be exposed in order to achieve herd immunity .
Instead , the Swedish government ’ s decision not to pull the lever and pursue a low-death approach has taken them into a tunnel .
From inside this tunnel we do not know how many people are now tied to the track .
We do not know how far the line runs .
Or even what the final destination looks like .
Sweden ’ s strategic inaction was predicated on the hope that they might save lives in future by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s a large gamble based on very little scientific understanding .
Contrary to the popular understanding , Sweden has not done nothing .
Social distancing is in place , people are to work from home where possible and to isolate when even mildly symptomatic .
Steps have been taken to shield vulnerable citizens—though with deaths soaring in care homes , their effectiveness has evidently been limited .
Advocates of Sweden ’ s approach claim that the average mortality across its population is lower than some countries which aggressively pursued a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Italy , the United Kingdom , Spain and the United States all have higher death rates , despite having imposed significant mitigation and suppression protocols .
These countries ground their economies to a halt and put considerable emotional and financial strain on their citizens .
Yet , by traditional metrics of deaths/capita , cases/capita , or even crude case fatality rate , they ended up seemingly in a worse position than Sweden , where bars remain open and coffee culture is booming .
But COVID-19 may be here for months or years , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on us having a solid understanding of the virus .
A strategy should be based on a broad empirically derived consensus which takes into account both what we know , and what we do not .
• We don ’ t know how many people have a strong immune response to the virus .
• We don ’ t know how long that immune response lasts .
• We don ’ t know how many people have been infected and how those infections might manifest .
• We don ’ t know how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ herd immunity .
• And we don ’ t know if immunity to the current strain would carry over to future strains .
Even more bracing : We are unlikely to find definitive answers to these questions in the near future .
One of the key perceived advantages of Sweden ’ s approach was the expected reduction in economic damage .
But Sweden ’ s economy is projected to contract by 7 percent to 10 percent of GDP this year , only slightly better than its Nordic neighbors who shut down their societies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( Finland and Denmark have less than half the crude Case Fatality Rate ( cCFR ) , between 40 percent and 65 percent of the cases detected per capita , and between 15 percent and 25 percent of the deaths per capita ) .
Swedish unemployment could reach 10 percent in the coming months .
All of that said , it is unlikely that we ’ ll be able to say definitively whether or not Sweden ’ s choice was optimal any time soon .
Even comparing key metrics like cases and deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differences in collecting data .
When we consider economic damages , long-term sequelae of infection and the differential impact across marginalized groups , direct comparisons becomes extremely challenging .
The trick of the Trolley problem , of course , is that sometimes there are no good decisions ; only less bad ones .
Sweden may be on the road to herd immunity but even if they are in fact on the path , the road is neither swift nor smooth .
And it is littered with friends and relatives .
Let ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

A speeding train is heading towards five people tied up further down the track. You have the option to pull a lever, and direct the train onto a different track, and away from the five people. The other track has one person tied to it. Do you pull the lever?
The Trolley problem is a well-known thought experiment highlighting the difference between two moral architectures: utilitarianism and deontology. Does the morality of our decisions depend on outcomes or actions? Does our calculus of saving four lives justify our decision to actively sacrifice the unfortunate individual on the other track?
This thought experiment has parallels in a real-life experiment Sweden is conducting with its 10 million citizens. Though a majority of nations have opted to pull the lever and shift tracks to a lockdown strategy, thereby sacrificing economic growth, Sweden has continued on the same line.
Swedish primary schools, gyms, bars, malls, and restaurants remained open as the country’s government pursued an end goal of “herd immunity.” The thinking went that if enough young, healthy people—who would likely shake off an infection easily—contracted COVID-19 and acquired immunity, they might slow transmission sufficiently to protect more vulnerable Swedes. And thus the pool of people who could spread the disease would shrink. Or so the theory goes.
In Sweden’s case, unlike the Trolley problem, there is no easy way to tabulate whether or not, in the long run, more lives are being saved, or lost, by their choice of inaction. In part this is because we simply do not know enough about the coronavirus to even have a sense of what percentage of the population would need to be exposed in order to achieve herd immunity. Instead, the Swedish government’s decision not to pull the lever and pursue a low-death approach has taken them into a tunnel.
From inside this tunnel we do not know how many people are now tied to the track. We do not know how far the line runs. Or even what the final destination looks like. Sweden’s strategic inaction was predicated on the hope that they might save lives in future by taking risks now and avoiding a shutdown.
That’s a large gamble based on very little scientific understanding.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Contrary to the popular understanding, Sweden has not done nothing. Social distancing is in place, people are to work from home where possible and to isolate when even mildly symptomatic. Steps have been taken to shield vulnerable citizens—though with deaths soaring in care homes, their effectiveness has evidently been limited.
Advocates of Sweden’s approach claim that the average mortality across its population is lower than some countries which aggressively pursued a lockdown strategy. WHO mortality data shows Italy, the United Kingdom, Spain and the United States all have higher death rates, despite having imposed significant mitigation and suppression protocols.
These countries ground their economies to a halt and put considerable emotional and financial strain on their citizens. Yet, by traditional metrics of deaths/capita, cases/capita, or even crude case fatality rate, they ended up seemingly in a worse position than Sweden, where bars remain open and coffee culture is booming.
But COVID-19 may be here for months or years, and the concept of herd immunity relies on us having a solid understanding of the virus. A strategy should be based on a broad empirically derived consensus which takes into account both what we know, and what we do not.
For instance:
Even more bracing: We are unlikely to find definitive answers to these questions in the near future.
One of the key perceived advantages of Sweden’s approach was the expected reduction in economic damage. But Sweden’s economy is projected to contract by 7 percent to 10 percent of GDP this year, only slightly better than its Nordic neighbors who shut down their societies and have far less morbidity and mortality (Finland and Denmark have less than half the crude Case Fatality Rate (cCFR), between 40 percent and 65 percent of the cases detected per capita, and between 15 percent and 25 percent of the deaths per capita). Swedish unemployment could reach 10 percent in the coming months.
All of that said, it is unlikely that we’ll be able to say definitively whether or not Sweden’s choice was optimal any time soon. Even comparing key metrics like cases and deaths between countries is difficult because of methodological differences in collecting data. When we consider economic damages, long-term sequelae of infection and the differential impact across marginalized groups, direct comparisons becomes extremely challenging.
The trick of the Trolley problem, of course, is that sometimes there are no good decisions; only less bad ones. Sweden may be on the road to herd immunity but even if they are in fact on the path, the road is neither swift nor smooth. And it is littered with friends and relatives.
Let’s hope their deaths were not in vain.


thebulwark--2020-05-21--What Winning the War on COVID-19 Looks Like

For the first time in four months , there is good news .
The last 16 weeks have been so relentlessly grim that some people may have forgotten what good news looks like .
But the trend on the coronavirus numbers in the United States is unambiguously good .
We can argue about how good the figures are and whether or not they ’ ll continue improving .
But for just a second , it ’ s worth pausing to be grateful that the grim tide is receding .
Some perspective , courtesy of the New York Times : The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declining .
The daily number of new deaths is declining .
This good news isn ’ t uniform—there are a few states where the virus is ramping up .
And the data isn ’ t even exactly current—because of the lag time caused by the virus ’ s incubation period , today ’ s results are really just the after-image of the world as it existed two weeks ago .
Also good is that testing capacity seems to have moved off of its April plateau and begun growing again to the point where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 400,000 a day .
This is still short of where most experts think we need to be—1 million tests per day seems to be the consensus goal .
But this trend , too , is moving in the right direction .
Now would be a good time to thank God , to mourn our dead , and to celebrate the work and sacrifice of millions of everyday Americans who got us this far .
Because what comes next may not be very nice .
What does “ winning ” look like ?
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to figure out—and the answer is likely to be : People keep dying .
The coronavirus is unlikely to go away on its own , so we need to think in terms of managing it .
And there are three pathways to managing an infectious disease : Herd immunity .
Once a certain percentage of the population has been infected and has recovered , the spread of a disease can slow or stop , since uninfected people will mostly be surrounded by people who are not and can no longer be infectious .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ herd immunity ” varies depending on the specific factors of the virus , and we don ’ t yet know what it is for COVID-19—presumably somewhere between 50 percent and 70 percent of the U.S. population would need to be exposed .
But even that is only an educated guess .
Until we can start doing random surveillance studies , we won ’ t know what percentage of America has had the coronavirus , but it is unlikely to be anywhere near that range .
Also : Since we don ’ t know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contracted this particular virus , achieving herd immunity could be harder than we ’ re assuming .
Vaccination .
Think of vaccines as creating artificial herd immunity .
They ’ ll be great—if and when we have one that is proven and being produced and distributed at scale .
This is unlikely to happen before the medium-term future , and only then if we are very lucky .
Therapeutics .
The most likely outcome for the near term is that we find ways to treat COVID-19 that dramatically lower the case fatality rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and some percentage of them would still become symptomatic—but an effective course of therapy would stack the deck in favor of patients .
If you forced me to bet $ 100 on which of these three pathways will open up for us first , my money would be on the therapeutics .
But it ’ s important to understand that at this point none of them is close to the finish line .
Which means that even as we climb down the other side of the coronavirus curve , a lot of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ?
We ’ ve got a bunch of models to give us a sense of what the numbers might look like .
( Please keep in mind the core function of models . )
Start from where we are .
We don ’ t know the true death toll from the coronavirus—we ’ ll have to wait for researchers to pore over the raw death totals and figure that out at a later date—but for right now , we have over 90,000 confirmed U.S. deaths from the disease .
FiveThirtyEight has helpfully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one place to see what their projections look like for the next four weeks .
The lower bound of the most optimistic model is 99,000 total deaths .
The median estimate puts us around 125,000 dead .
All of them see the total number of deaths continuing to increase for the next eight weeks .
The one I find most interesting comes from Youyang Gu , whose model “ COVID Projections ” is an exercise in pure data , with machine learning doing most all of the heavy lifting .
Over the course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Projections has tracked very closely with reality .
So what does the COVID Projections model see going forward ?
That is a long , ugly tail .
The confidence interval indicates that through the end of June , at best we ’ ll be seeing about 300 people die from COVID every day .
At worst , 3,300 a day .
( The mean projection is an average that ’ s a little more than 1,100 a day . )
Adding up those numbers , by August 1 , the model puts our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 120,000 to 320,000 .
I know : This is just one model .
And yes , I know : Models are not reports sent back from the future .
But the point to grok here is that just about every one of the models projects the drumbeat of daily deaths continuing all the way through the summer .
Which suggests that our new reality isn ’ t going to look like the world as it was in January .
It ’ s going to be a world where people are dying from this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to worry about localized outbreaks to keep the numbers even at a “ manageable ” level .
And this manageable level is going to be so high that COVID-19 is likely to be—all on its own—the third-leading cause of death in America this year .
Imagine taking the list of ten leading causes of deaths in the United States and just adding—overnight—an entirely new one .
Bigger than suicide .
Bigger than traffic accidents .
Bigger than Alzheimer ’ s .
Because that ’ s the future we ’ re looking at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heart disease or cancer , COVID-19 is infectious and has the capability of scaling up rapidly should we get unlucky again .
Right now we ’ re winning .
But victory against COVID-19 won ’ t look like the world we used to know .

For the first time in four months, there is good news.
The last 16 weeks have been so relentlessly grim that some people may have forgotten what good news looks like. But the trend on the coronavirus numbers in the United States is unambiguously good.
We can argue about how good the figures are and whether or not they’ll continue improving. But for just a second, it’s worth pausing to be grateful that the grim tide is receding.
Some perspective, courtesy of the New York Times:
The daily number of new cases is clearly declining. The daily number of new deaths is declining. This good news isn’t uniform—there are a few states where the virus is ramping up. And the data isn’t even exactly current—because of the lag time caused by the virus’s incubation period, today’s results are really just the after-image of the world as it existed two weeks ago.
But it’s still good.
Also good is that testing capacity seems to have moved off of its April plateau and begun growing again to the point where we’re now closing in on 400,000 a day.
This is still short of where most experts think we need to be—1 million tests per day seems to be the consensus goal. But this trend, too, is moving in the right direction.
Now would be a good time to thank God, to mourn our dead, and to celebrate the work and sacrifice of millions of everyday Americans who got us this far.
Because what comes next may not be very nice.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
What does “winning” look like? That’s what the modelers are trying to figure out—and the answer is likely to be: People keep dying.
The coronavirus is unlikely to go away on its own, so we need to think in terms of managing it. And there are three pathways to managing an infectious disease:
Herd immunity
Vaccination
Therapeutic treatments
Herd immunity. Once a certain percentage of the population has been infected and has recovered, the spread of a disease can slow or stop, since uninfected people will mostly be surrounded by people who are not and can no longer be infectious. The threshold required to reach such “herd immunity” varies depending on the specific factors of the virus, and we don’t yet know what it is for COVID-19—presumably somewhere between 50 percent and 70 percent of the U.S. population would need to be exposed. But even that is only an educated guess.
Until we can start doing random surveillance studies, we won’t know what percentage of America has had the coronavirus, but it is unlikely to be anywhere near that range.
Also: Since we don’t know how long immunity lasts after someone has contracted this particular virus, achieving herd immunity could be harder than we’re assuming.
Vaccination. Think of vaccines as creating artificial herd immunity. They’ll be great—if and when we have one that is proven and being produced and distributed at scale. This is unlikely to happen before the medium-term future, and only then if we are very lucky.
Therapeutics. The most likely outcome for the near term is that we find ways to treat COVID-19 that dramatically lower the case fatality rate. People would still catch the bug and some percentage of them would still become symptomatic—but an effective course of therapy would stack the deck in favor of patients.
If you forced me to bet $100 on which of these three pathways will open up for us first, my money would be on the therapeutics. But it’s important to understand that at this point none of them is close to the finish line.
Which means that even as we climb down the other side of the coronavirus curve, a lot of people are going to die.
How many people? We’ve got a bunch of models to give us a sense of what the numbers might look like. (Please keep in mind the core function of models.)
Start from where we are. We don’t know the true death toll from the coronavirus—we’ll have to wait for researchers to pore over the raw death totals and figure that out at a later date—but for right now, we have over 90,000 confirmed U.S. deaths from the disease.
FiveThirtyEight has helpfully stacked a bunch of the models in one place to see what their projections look like for the next four weeks. The lower bound of the most optimistic model is 99,000 total deaths. The median estimate puts us around 125,000 dead. All of them see the total number of deaths continuing to increase for the next eight weeks.
The one I find most interesting comes from Youyang Gu, whose model “COVID Projections” is an exercise in pure data, with machine learning doing most all of the heavy lifting. Over the course of the last few months, COVID Projections has tracked very closely with reality.
So what does the COVID Projections model see going forward?
That is a long, ugly tail. The confidence interval indicates that through the end of June, at best we’ll be seeing about 300 people die from COVID every day. At worst, 3,300 a day. (The mean projection is an average that’s a little more than 1,100 a day.)
Adding up those numbers, by August 1, the model puts our official COVID death toll at anywhere from 120,000 to 320,000.
I know: That’s a big range.
I know: This is just one model.
And yes, I know: Models are not reports sent back from the future.
But the point to grok here is that just about every one of the models projects the drumbeat of daily deaths continuing all the way through the summer.
Which suggests that our new reality isn’t going to look like the world as it was in January. It’s going to be a world where people are dying from this virus every day. Where we constantly have to worry about localized outbreaks to keep the numbers even at a “manageable” level. And this manageable level is going to be so high that COVID-19 is likely to be—all on its own—the third-leading cause of death in America this year.
Imagine taking the list of ten leading causes of deaths in the United States and just adding—overnight—an entirely new one. Bigger than suicide. Bigger than traffic accidents. Bigger than Alzheimer’s. Because that’s the future we’re looking at.
With one key difference: Unlike heart disease or cancer, COVID-19 is infectious and has the capability of scaling up rapidly should we get unlucky again.
So that’s the bad news.
Right now we’re winning. But victory against COVID-19 won’t look like the world we used to know.


thebulwark--2020-05-21--You Will Never Be #MAGA Enough

You Will Never Be #MAGA Enough

It is pretty obvious that Fox News has done more to boost Donald Trump and carry water for him than any other institution .
But that isn ’ t enough to save them .
Only the most unblinkingly slavish devotion , with never a hint of even accidental criticism , will do .
And so the president has been preparing to put the skids under his previous favorite media organization .
No , scratch that , his second favorite media organization .
His favorite is and always will be Twitter , which is the platform he used to slide the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declaring , “ Fox News is no longer the same .
We miss the great Roger Ailes .
You have more anti-Trump people , by far , than ever before .
Looking for a new outlet !
” He said this in response to a random Twitter fan who complained to Laura Ingraham , “ Your colleagues at @ FoxNews might as well be on @ cnn because all they do is spew # FakeNews.
” It turns out that , just as you will never be woke enough , you will never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ wokeness ” is exact .
The left ’ s standard for politically correct thinking is a series of artificial tests that are so arbitrary and unpredictable that one can not always figure out ahead of time how to respond to them .
Say a female artist creates a shirt adorned with busty female sci-fi warrior women .
Is this an exercise in “ female empowerment ” or a perpetuation of the patriarchy ?
I ’ m afraid you can ’ t know the answer until the woke Twitter mob decides .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ groupthink , but unlike the woke set , it has a single final arbiter : Donald Trump .
The artificial test , in this case , is hydroxychloroquine , a repurposed malaria drug that Trump has fixated on as a miracle cure for COVID-19 .
Whether HCQ is a safe and effective treatment for coronavirus is an open question that is in the process of being settled by clinical trials and scientific evidence .
But it has also been seized upon as a test of one ’ s # MAGAness .
At least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When President Trump announced that he is taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventative—there is no evidence that it prevents infection—Fox ’ s Neil Cavuto felt the need to add a strong disclaimer , warning viewers that there ’ s a possibility the drug could kill you .
This is true .
Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA for use in treating several diseases , but that doesn ’ t mean that it is safe for everyone or that you have “ nothing to lose ” by taking it , as Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s dangers are already known and documented , and some people who take it experience serious and even deadly side effects , such as heart arrhythmias .
Cavuto ’ s own history of health problems presumably makes him sensitive to these risks .
So given the spike in people requesting hydroxychloroquine prescriptions because of the president ’ s recommendations , it was responsible for Cavuto to admonish his viewers that “ This is a leap that should not be taken casually by those watching at home , or assuming , well , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s okay .
.
.
.
Be very , very careful.
” But buried in this public service warning was an implicit criticism of Trump for the recklessness of his own communications with the public about coronavirus .
Hence the # MAGA backlash against Cavuto .
But what is more interesting is the backlash against Fox News as a whole—and Trump ’ s search for “ another outlet.
” This is the second time Trump has blown up against Fox .
About a month ago , Trump vented , “ What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s a whole new ballgame over there !
” He then followed up by declaring that Fox was “ on a bad path.
” The crime then was Fox host Chris Wallace interviewing Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and—I guess ?
—not being critical enough of her .
It was all a little vague .
This is how narrow a path has been laid down for those who want to remain on the # MAGA bandwagon .
Fox News can have a full line-up of pro-Trump hacks : Jeanine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Tucker Carlson , and so on .
But the residual presence of any semi-critical voices is enough to taint them all with the sin of doubt .
As for Trump ’ s search for another news outlet that will be even more uncritical of him , we already know where he ’ s looking : One America News Network .
Indeed , he has already transferred his allegiance by tweet : “ Watching @ FoxNews on weekend afternoons is a total waste of time .
We now have some great alternatives , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2013 to compete with Fox and originally pitched itself as centrist and unbiased .
( I remember getting that sales pitch when I was invited to appear on their shows .
At the time , their mission seemed too vague , their operation too amateurish , and their audience far too small to be worth the drive into DC . )
But then in 2016 , the network ’ s owner saw Trump as a ticket to the big time and devoted the network fully to his support , to the point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that appeared to be unfavorable to Trump .
And that ’ s exactly the kind of unwavering sycophancy this president is looking for .
But there ’ s something more that makes OANN the perfect Trump vehicle : its weakness for conspiracy theories , which has come to the fore particularly during the coronavirus crisis .
It ’ s not that Trump is attracted by or committed to any particular conspiracy theory .
It ’ s the habit of mind involved , the kind of mental flexibility required .
To entertain a conspiracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rework evidence to fit a desired outcome—which , by coincidence , is exactly the mode required for people to make excuses for a political leader , then remake them when he changes course .
Charlie Sykes describes this as Trumpian “ doublethink , ” the cultivated ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time , such as COVID-19 being both a hoax and a deadly disease that requires a preventive miracle cure .
But I wonder if this doesn ’ t quite get the mindset right , because the key to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of broad and general principles that might overlap and need to be held in one ’ s mind at the same time .
No , the key is to think only in terms of concrete loyalty tests : to praise the miracle cure at one moment and to dismiss the epidemiological warnings of the “ so-called experts ” the next , and never to connect the two .
This view takes its philosophical cue from the “ woke ” left , which never wonders whether a claim is factually correct but only whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ swaps out “ is this politically correct ” and substitutes “ is this helpful to the immediate political needs of Donald Trump.
” It sounds simple , but in practice it ’ s not easy .
There ’ s a reason revolutions always eat their young .
If you stay on the Trump Train long enough you will discover—as Fox News has and OANN eventually will—that you will find that the demands for conformity are endless , capricious , and unforgiving .
No matter how much you might want to , you can @ @ @ @ @ @

It is pretty obvious that Fox News has done more to boost Donald Trump and carry water for him than any other institution. But that isn’t enough to save them. Only the most unblinkingly slavish devotion, with never a hint of even accidental criticism, will do. And so the president has been preparing to put the skids under his previous favorite media organization.
No, scratch that, his second favorite media organization. His favorite is and always will be Twitter, which is the platform he used to slide the knife between Fox’s ribs, declaring, “Fox News is no longer the same. We miss the great Roger Ailes. You have more anti-Trump people, by far, than ever before. Looking for a new outlet!”
He said this in response to a random Twitter fan who complained to Laura Ingraham, “Your colleagues at @FoxNews might as well be on @cnn because all they do is spew #FakeNews.”
Ah, the rewards of Trump sycophancy.
It turns out that, just as you will never be woke enough, you will never be #MAGA enough.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
The parallel to “wokeness” is exact. The left’s standard for politically correct thinking is a series of artificial tests that are so arbitrary and unpredictable that one cannot always figure out ahead of time how to respond to them. Say a female artist creates a shirt adorned with busty female sci-fi warrior women. Is this an exercise in “female empowerment” or a perpetuation of the patriarchy? I’m afraid you can’t know the answer until the woke Twitter mob decides.
The #MAGA mob has its own groupthink, but unlike the woke set, it has a single final arbiter: Donald Trump.
The artificial test, in this case, is hydroxychloroquine, a repurposed malaria drug that Trump has fixated on as a miracle cure for COVID-19. Whether HCQ is a safe and effective treatment for coronavirus is an open question that is in the process of being settled by clinical trials and scientific evidence.
But it has also been seized upon as a test of one’s #MAGAness.
At least one Fox News host failed that test. When President Trump announced that he is taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventative—there is no evidence that it prevents infection—Fox’s Neil Cavuto felt the need to add a strong disclaimer, warning viewers that there’s a possibility the drug could kill you.
This is true. Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA for use in treating several diseases, but that doesn’t mean that it is safe for everyone or that you have “nothing to lose” by taking it, as Trump has insisted. It means that the drug’s dangers are already known and documented, and some people who take it experience serious and even deadly side effects, such as heart arrhythmias.
Cavuto’s own history of health problems presumably makes him sensitive to these risks. So given the spike in people requesting hydroxychloroquine prescriptions because of the president’s recommendations, it was responsible for Cavuto to admonish his viewers that “This is a leap that should not be taken casually by those watching at home, or assuming, well, the president of the United States says it’s okay. . . . Be very, very careful.”
But buried in this public service warning was an implicit criticism of Trump for the recklessness of his own communications with the public about coronavirus.
Hence the #MAGA backlash against Cavuto.
But what is more interesting is the backlash against Fox News as a whole—and Trump’s search for “another outlet.”
This is the second time Trump has blown up against Fox. About a month ago, Trump vented, “What the hell is happening to @FoxNews. It’s a whole new ballgame over there!” He then followed up by declaring that Fox was “on a bad path.”
The crime then was Fox host Chris Wallace interviewing Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and—I guess?—not being critical enough of her. It was all a little vague. This is how narrow a path has been laid down for those who want to remain on the #MAGA bandwagon. Fox News can have a full line-up of pro-Trump hacks: Jeanine Pirro, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and so on. But the residual presence of any semi-critical voices is enough to taint them all with the sin of doubt.
As for Trump’s search for another news outlet that will be even more uncritical of him, we already know where he’s looking: One America News Network. Indeed, he has already transferred his allegiance by tweet: “Watching @FoxNews on weekend afternoons is a total waste of time. We now have some great alternatives, like @OANN.”
OANN was started in 2013 to compete with Fox and originally pitched itself as centrist and unbiased. (I remember getting that sales pitch when I was invited to appear on their shows. At the time, their mission seemed too vague, their operation too amateurish, and their audience far too small to be worth the drive into DC.) But then in 2016, the network’s owner saw Trump as a ticket to the big time and devoted the network fully to his support, to the point of ordering reporters not to mention polls that appeared to be unfavorable to Trump.
And that’s exactly the kind of unwavering sycophancy this president is looking for.
But there’s something more that makes OANN the perfect Trump vehicle: its weakness for conspiracy theories, which has come to the fore particularly during the coronavirus crisis.
It’s not that Trump is attracted by or committed to any particular conspiracy theory. It’s the habit of mind involved, the kind of mental flexibility required. To entertain a conspiracy theory requires a willingness to bend and rework evidence to fit a desired outcome—which, by coincidence, is exactly the mode required for people to make excuses for a political leader, then remake them when he changes course.
Charlie Sykes describes this as Trumpian “doublethink,” the cultivated ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time, such as COVID-19 being both a hoax and a deadly disease that requires a preventive miracle cure. But I wonder if this doesn’t quite get the mindset right, because the key to doublethink is never to think in terms of broad and general principles that might overlap and need to be held in one’s mind at the same time.
No, the key is to think only in terms of concrete loyalty tests: to praise the miracle cure at one moment and to dismiss the epidemiological warnings of the “so-called experts” the next, and never to connect the two.
This view takes its philosophical cue from the “woke” left, which never wonders whether a claim is factually correct but only whether it is politically correct. It just swaps out “is this politically correct” and substitutes “is this helpful to the immediate political needs of Donald Trump.”
It sounds simple, but in practice it’s not easy. There’s a reason revolutions always eat their young. If you stay on the Trump Train long enough you will discover—as Fox News has and OANN eventually will—that you will find that the demands for conformity are endless, capricious, and unforgiving.
No matter how much you might want to, you can never be #MAGA enough.


Liberate Naturalization Ceremonies!

Immigrants have been playing an essential role in keeping America fed and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic , so shouldn ’ t we be saying thank you by allowing those who are eligible and have gone through all the necessary steps to become citizens ?
The naturalization process isn ’ t easy—indeed , most Americans would likely fail the test administered to naturalization applicants according to the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation .
Nonetheless , about 800,000 immigrants each year secure the right to naturalize .
But the pandemic has put a halt to the last step in the process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Until they take the oath , immigrants are still just residents , not citizens , with none of the rights or obligations citizens undertake .
Thousands of immigrants are currently waiting to take the oath after U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services shut their offices in March .
While it is understandable that CIS has put on hold the large swearing-in ceremonies , often presided over by dignitaries from judges to the vice president , the oath could be administered in other ways , as could the penultimate step of personal interviews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to expedite naturalization if “ sufficient cause ” exists to dispense with an in-person ceremony .
If a pandemic that has killed nearly 100,000 Americans and afflicted more than 1.5 million others is not sufficient cause , I can not imagine what is .
Congress , media , public companies , state and local governments , schools and universities , non-profit organizations , even doctors and private citizens have all adapted to the challenges of maintaining social distance by using technology to bring people together when necessary .
So why not allow immigrants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take their oath of citizenship remotely ?
By not moving ahead to make the process more accessible , CIS will exacerbate an already scandalous backlog on their books .
Some 126,000 persons are waiting to be sworn in , according to the advocacy group Boundless .
Unless these individuals can take the oath remotely , they likely will not be sworn in any time soon—which will prevent them from voting in 2020 .
Given President Trump ’ s paranoia about the upcoming election , it ’ s easy to worry that the administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many new voters participating , especially those who may hail from countries the president has denigrated repeatedly .
But this should not be a partisan issue , and some on Capitol Hill are working to ensure it not become one by circulating a Dear Colleague letter to urge CIS to bypass in-person swearing in ceremonies .
Rep. John Katko ( R-NY ) , who participated in citizenship ceremonies last year , is reportedly leading the effort on the Republican side of the aisle .
For most of us , even those whose immigrant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the symbol of what makes America great , as Ronald Reagan noted in a Labor Day speech in 1980 .
We ought to be welcoming those who have done the hard work to become American—leaving their home , learning a new language , contributing to our economy , adopting the civic values of our great country—not discouraging them from participating fully in our political life .
If the Boundless estimates are correct , continued delays in swearing in new citizens will prevent 2,100 persons each day from naturalization , blocking as many as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the November election .
It would be a shame to ask immigrants to continue to staff hospitals as doctors , nurses , and other medical personnel , deliver necessary goods to businesses and individuals , clean public spaces so that we can return to work , and pick the fruit and vegetables and process the meat and dairy products that feed us—yet refuse those who ’ ve earned the right to become citizens to do so .

Immigrants have been playing an essential role in keeping America fed and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic, so shouldn’t we be saying thank you by allowing those who are eligible and have gone through all the necessary steps to become citizens?
The naturalization process isn’t easy—indeed, most Americans would likely fail the test administered to naturalization applicants according to the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. Nonetheless, about 800,000 immigrants each year secure the right to naturalize. But the pandemic has put a halt to the last step in the process: being sworn in as new Americans. Until they take the oath, immigrants are still just residents, not citizens, with none of the rights or obligations citizens undertake. Thousands of immigrants are currently waiting to take the oath after U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services shut their offices in March. While it is understandable that CIS has put on hold the large swearing-in ceremonies, often presided over by dignitaries from judges to the vice president, the oath could be administered in other ways, as could the penultimate step of personal interviews.
Congress has authorized the attorney general to expedite naturalization if “sufficient cause” exists to dispense with an in-person ceremony. If a pandemic that has killed nearly 100,000 Americans and afflicted more than 1.5 million others is not sufficient cause, I cannot imagine what is. Congress, media, public companies, state and local governments, schools and universities, non-profit organizations, even doctors and private citizens have all adapted to the challenges of maintaining social distance by using technology to bring people together when necessary. So why not allow immigrants awaiting naturalization to complete their interviews and take their oath of citizenship remotely?
By not moving ahead to make the process more accessible, CIS will exacerbate an already scandalous backlog on their books. Some 126,000 persons are waiting to be sworn in, according to the advocacy group Boundless. Unless these individuals can take the oath remotely, they likely will not be sworn in any time soon—which will prevent them from voting in 2020. Given President Trump’s paranoia about the upcoming election, it’s easy to worry that the administration may not be anxious to see so many new voters participating, especially those who may hail from countries the president has denigrated repeatedly.
But this should not be a partisan issue, and some on Capitol Hill are working to ensure it not become one by circulating a Dear Colleague letter to urge CIS to bypass in-person swearing in ceremonies. Rep. John Katko (R-NY), who participated in citizenship ceremonies last year, is reportedly leading the effort on the Republican side of the aisle.
For most of us, even those whose immigrant forebears came generations ago, immigrants are the symbol of what makes America great, as Ronald Reagan noted in a Labor Day speech in 1980. We ought to be welcoming those who have done the hard work to become American—leaving their home, learning a new language, contributing to our economy, adopting the civic values of our great country—not discouraging them from participating fully in our political life.
If the Boundless estimates are correct, continued delays in swearing in new citizens will prevent 2,100 persons each day from naturalization, blocking as many as 441,000 people from being eligible to vote in the November election. It would be a shame to ask immigrants to continue to staff hospitals as doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel, deliver necessary goods to businesses and individuals, clean public spaces so that we can return to work, and pick the fruit and vegetables and process the meat and dairy products that feed us—yet refuse those who’ve earned the right to become citizens to do so.


Coronavirus Summer

We ’ ve all gone a little stir crazy during COVID-19 , if we ’ re being honest .
Some people I know have decamped from their cramped urban dwellings to return to their native homesteads in places like rural Maine and small-town Ohio .
That ’ s understandable .
Our bigger cities were not designed for people to live at home twenty-plus hours a day .
When I graduated from college a dozen years ago and was hired as a Senate staffer , I rented a basement apartment .
It had its own bathroom and a makeshift kitchen ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or refrigeration devices ) .
I paid $ 800 a month for that 600-square-foot space , and would not want to live there today in these days of social distancing .
But check out these ten cities , any of which I ’ d absolutely live in , where you can today find entire homes with monthly mortgage costs around or under $ 800 .
We should all be cautiously optimistic about the fact that , at the national level , the rate of new COVID-19 cases is slowing .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the champagne and fancy cheese platters , if that ’ s more your style—since the national trends can change and since local and regional outbreaks could still get worse even if the national figures continue to go down .
Businesses that were closed for a month or two may now be unlocking their doors and turning their lights back on , and some governors may be encouraging their states ’ citizens to resume old routines .
But anyone who expects the old normal to return anytime soon should give up on that notion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abnormal the next several months will be is to consider the activities that will likely be available for families with children this summer .
The decisions these families make will have ripple effects throughout the economy .
Working parents who were counting on summer camp , vacation Bible school , or similar activities—either to edify their kids or just keep them occupied—will probably need other plans : Cancellations are rampant .
Parades or concerts for Memorial Day ?
Many across the country have been canceled or scaled way back .
And even though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , many cities have already canceled their July 4 parades and fireworks shows .
Want to visit a museum or a kid-friendly science center ?
The Smithsonian museums in Washington are closed .
So is the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia .
So is the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City .
So is the wonderfully geeky Museum of Mathematics in New York .
The list goes on and on .
Some of these places may start to reopen in the weeks ahead , perhaps by offering timed tickets to help ensure that groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one another—arrangements that will require staff retraining .
But as of now , you can ’ t count on it .
Public libraries are slowly starting to reopen across the country , but with social-distancing guidelines in place many kid-friendly activities are canceled .
Zoos may start to reopen—officials at the St. Louis Zoo , for instance , said this week that it will open in June , using timed tickets—although most haven ’ t made announcements yet .
Aquariums , too , would presumably need to impose strict attendance limits : Anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a too-crowded aquarium will not want to repeat that experience in these days of COVID-claustrophobia .
Many public playgrounds are closed indefinitely ( although it ’ s not unusual to see parents and kids walking right past the “ Closed ” signs to have some fun ) .
Amusement parks , including the big ones like the Disney parks , are still figuring out what to do .
Many of them will have to thoroughly reconfigure their operations in order to function profitably .
What about touring carnival companies ?
The industry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this directory to see all the cancellations and tentative reschedulings—which makes sense : The economics of this kind of entertainment requires really packing people in .
It ’ s hard to imagine many parents this summer risking crowds just for the pleasure of Ferris wheels , bumper cars , tilt-a-whirls , teacup rides , midway games , and funnel cake .
Beaches and boardwalks are starting to reopen , as are national parks , which makes sense : Social distancing is easier outdoors .
( It ’ s fascinating to read the account @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been like at Yellowstone since it reopened . )
What about movie theaters ?
The math doesn ’ t look good for them : If your average theater can seat 200-300 people per screen , it ’ s just not going to be profitable to cut that number by at least 40 percent so that moviegoers can comply with social-distancing guidelines ( even though , yes , those guidelines will vary wildly by jurisdiction ) .
That doesn ’ t even take into account the added operational costs of stepped-up cleaning and protective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is even assuming that customers will want to return to movie theaters under present conditions .
Many movies have had their openings postponed or have shifted over to digital releases , and some of the kid-friendly movies with stream-for-pay releases have reportedly done well .
( For grownup movies , the canary in the coal mine—the one big theatrical release expected between now and mid-July—has been Tenet , the mysterious-looking new film from Christopher Nolan .
But when the latest trailer for Tenet dropped last night , the planned release date of July @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that long ago , some movie execs were suggesting that if Tenet fails or is moved back , there will be no theatrical releases until Christmas . )
It ’ s worth taking a moment to look closely at another staple of summer fun : local pools .
Where I used to live in Alexandria , Virginia , we had a humble 3.5-foot pool for our 400-unit high-rise .
My former neighbors told me recently that they saw the pool getting filled and were hopeful they would soon have a chance to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up some sun .
Alas , that pool is not likely to reopen .
If you live in an area with any urban density , and your local pool ’ s owners ( or your homeowners ’ association or local health department or other relevant decision-makers ) are any bit responsible , you ’ re probably not going to do much swimming in the near future .
Yes , the pool itself , treated with chlorine , is likely to be safe .
But once you get out of the water ?
Local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ common areas—like changing rooms and poolside furniture—be subject to regular deep cleanings .
There will likely also be rules about distancing , with limits on changing-room occupancy and furniture physically spaced out , both of which would reduce the number of people who could use the pool at any given time .
The lifeguard can ’ t watch the pool and do a deep clean of common areas .
Pool operators would have to hire more staffers , or they might even have to find a cleaning company willing to accept potential liability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prescribed .
Maybe every few hours .
Speaking of lifeguards : Many lifeguards in big cities are foreigners here on a visa .
( This is so common that the website of the State Department ’ s Summer Work Travel Program is illustrated with a photo of a lifeguard . )
But visa services have largely been suspended .
A logical response is , Well , since local kids already are out of school , we can just have our neighborhood kids step up , right ?
Not so fast .
No reputable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ throw jobs at untrained kids , assuming they ’ d work for the same price as those here on a visa .
Liability is a major factor and , thus , training is the big concern .
And lifeguard training under COVID-19 conditions can be tricky , as a park official in Springfield , Missouri explained : “ We ’ re not able to provide training because it does require contact in the pools .
.
.
.
It ’ s not realistic for lifeguard training to not touch each other .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a body.
” Besides , will parents allow their kids to become lifeguards during a pandemic ?
If a lifeguard is wearing a mask , how would he or she blow a whistle or yell at kids who are running ?
( More superficially , will American teenagers want the mask equivalent of a farmer ’ s tan on their faces ?
How will they Instagram or TikTok ?
Has SkyMall made a tan-thru mask yet ?
Do teens even know what SkyMall is ? )
We should want a science-informed balance of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But when it comes to the economics , people will vote with their feet .
They may complain about things like pool closures , but one can hope they ’ ll consider the figure they ’ re paying in HOA dues for a pool in maintenance mode a steal compared to the much costlier reality of what it ’ d take to reopen it and comply in a safe way with state and local health directives .

We’ve all gone a little stir crazy during COVID-19, if we’re being honest. Some people I know have decamped from their cramped urban dwellings to return to their native homesteads in places like rural Maine and small-town Ohio.
That’s understandable. Our bigger cities were not designed for people to live at home twenty-plus hours a day. When I graduated from college a dozen years ago and was hired as a Senate staffer, I rented a basement apartment. It had its own bathroom and a makeshift kitchen (albeit one in without any built-in cooking or refrigeration devices). I paid $800 a month for that 600-square-foot space, and would not want to live there today in these days of social distancing. But check out these ten cities, any of which I’d absolutely live in, where you can today find entire homes with monthly mortgage costs around or under $800.
We should all be cautiously optimistic about the fact that, at the national level, the rate of new COVID-19 cases is slowing. It’s too early to break out the firecrackers—or the champagne and fancy cheese platters, if that’s more your style—since the national trends can change and since local and regional outbreaks could still get worse even if the national figures continue to go down.
Businesses that were closed for a month or two may now be unlocking their doors and turning their lights back on, and some governors may be encouraging their states’ citizens to resume old routines. But anyone who expects the old normal to return anytime soon should give up on that notion.
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
One way to think about how abnormal the next several months will be is to consider the activities that will likely be available for families with children this summer. The decisions these families make will have ripple effects throughout the economy.
Working parents who were counting on summer camp, vacation Bible school, or similar activities—either to edify their kids or just keep them occupied—will probably need other plans: Cancellations are rampant.
Parades or concerts for Memorial Day? Many across the country have been canceled or scaled way back. And even though Independence Day is still six weeks away, many cities have already canceled their July 4 parades and fireworks shows.
Want to visit a museum or a kid-friendly science center? The Smithsonian museums in Washington are closed. So is the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia. So is the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City. So is the wonderfully geeky Museum of Mathematics in New York. The list goes on and on. Some of these places may start to reopen in the weeks ahead, perhaps by offering timed tickets to help ensure that groups of visitors can keep physical distance between one another—arrangements that will require staff retraining. But as of now, you can’t count on it.
Public libraries are slowly starting to reopen across the country, but with social-distancing guidelines in place many kid-friendly activities are canceled.
Zoos may start to reopen—officials at the St. Louis Zoo, for instance, said this week that it will open in June, using timed tickets—although most haven’t made announcements yet. Aquariums, too, would presumably need to impose strict attendance limits: Anyone who has ever milled around the tanks in a too-crowded aquarium will not want to repeat that experience in these days of COVID-claustrophobia.
Many public playgrounds are closed indefinitely (although it’s not unusual to see parents and kids walking right past the “Closed” signs to have some fun).
Amusement parks, including the big ones like the Disney parks, are still figuring out what to do. Many of them will have to thoroughly reconfigure their operations in order to function profitably.
What about touring carnival companies? The industry has been thrown into utter chaos—poke around this directory to see all the cancellations and tentative reschedulings—which makes sense: The economics of this kind of entertainment requires really packing people in. It’s hard to imagine many parents this summer risking crowds just for the pleasure of Ferris wheels, bumper cars, tilt-a-whirls, teacup rides, midway games, and funnel cake.
Beaches and boardwalks are starting to reopen, as are national parks, which makes sense: Social distancing is easier outdoors. (It’s fascinating to read the account of what the first few days have been like at Yellowstone since it reopened.)
What about movie theaters? The math doesn’t look good for them: If your average theater can seat 200-300 people per screen, it’s just not going to be profitable to cut that number by at least 40 percent so that moviegoers can comply with social-distancing guidelines (even though, yes, those guidelines will vary wildly by jurisdiction). That doesn’t even take into account the added operational costs of stepped-up cleaning and protective equipment for theater employees. And that is even assuming that customers will want to return to movie theaters under present conditions.
Many movies have had their openings postponed or have shifted over to digital releases, and some of the kid-friendly movies with stream-for-pay releases have reportedly done well. (For grownup movies, the canary in the coal mine—the one big theatrical release expected between now and mid-July—has been Tenet, the mysterious-looking new film from Christopher Nolan. But when the latest trailer for Tenet dropped last night, the planned release date of July 17 was noticeably not mentioned. Not that long ago, some movie execs were suggesting that if Tenet fails or is moved back, there will be no theatrical releases until Christmas.)
It’s worth taking a moment to look closely at another staple of summer fun: local pools. Where I used to live in Alexandria, Virginia, we had a humble 3.5-foot pool for our 400-unit high-rise. My former neighbors told me recently that they saw the pool getting filled and were hopeful they would soon have a chance to get outside of their shoebox condos and soak up some sun.
Alas, that pool is not likely to reopen. If you live in an area with any urban density, and your local pool’s owners (or your homeowners’ association or local health department or other relevant decision-makers) are any bit responsible, you’re probably not going to do much swimming in the near future.
Yes, the pool itself, treated with chlorine, is likely to be safe. But once you get out of the water? Local guidelines will likely require that pools’ common areas—like changing rooms and poolside furniture—be subject to regular deep cleanings. There will likely also be rules about distancing, with limits on changing-room occupancy and furniture physically spaced out, both of which would reduce the number of people who could use the pool at any given time.
The lifeguard can’t watch the pool and do a deep clean of common areas. Pool operators would have to hire more staffers, or they might even have to find a cleaning company willing to accept potential liability and able to perform the work as prescribed. Maybe every few hours.
Speaking of lifeguards: Many lifeguards in big cities are foreigners here on a visa. (This is so common that the website of the State Department’s Summer Work Travel Program is illustrated with a photo of a lifeguard.) But visa services have largely been suspended.
A logical response is, Well, since local kids already are out of school, we can just have our neighborhood kids step up, right?
Not so fast. No reputable pool management firm is going to just throw jobs at untrained kids, assuming they’d work for the same price as those here on a visa. Liability is a major factor and, thus, training is the big concern. And lifeguard training under COVID-19 conditions can be tricky, as a park official in Springfield, Missouri explained: “We’re not able to provide training because it does require contact in the pools. . . . It’s not realistic for lifeguard training to not touch each other. You have to prove you can pull out a body.”
Besides, will parents allow their kids to become lifeguards during a pandemic? If a lifeguard is wearing a mask, how would he or she blow a whistle or yell at kids who are running? (More superficially, will American teenagers want the mask equivalent of a farmer’s tan on their faces? How will they Instagram or TikTok? Has SkyMall made a tan-thru mask yet? Do teens even know what SkyMall is?)
We should want a science-informed balance of reopening the economy and protecting the vulnerable. But when it comes to the economics, people will vote with their feet. They may complain about things like pool closures, but one can hope they’ll consider the figure they’re paying in HOA dues for a pool in maintenance mode a steal compared to the much costlier reality of what it’d take to reopen it and comply in a safe way with state and local health directives.


thebulwark--2020-05-22--When the Kids are the Henchmen

When the Kids are the Henchmen

Political hatchet men are a staple of American campaigns .
Richard Nixon had Chuck Colson .
George H.W .
Bush had Lee Atwater and Roger Ailes .
Donald Trump has , well , his adult children .
Most campaigns outsource the nasty work of attacking their opponents to operatives who keep a low profile to maintain distance from the candidate .
Even in 2016 , Trump kept most of his smear merchants , such as the now-convicted felon Roger Stone , behind the scenes .
But 2020 is different .
This time , President Trump ’ s adult children have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their father ’ s dirtiest work .
For the last three years , Donald Trump Jr. has made a habit of saying provocative things to stoke reaction—it ’ s literally his brand .
Over the weekend he posted a meme calling Joe Biden a “ pedophile.
” After which he claimed he was .
.
.
just kidding !
Because calling men pedophiles is how people josh around in hardball politics these days .
Or something .
On the same day , Trump ’ s other grown son , Eric , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ deprive ” his father of his rallies .
The next day Don Jr. , Eric , and Ivanka each pushed the alt-right ’ s “ red pill ” meme on Twitter .
All in a day ’ s work for the Trump family business !
Cynical politicos might say these are hit jobs that someone has to do to take down an opponent and dog-whistle the hounds to victory .
And , maybe good help is hard to find these days .
After all , Trump ’ s old bagmen Stone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are all in lockup .
And while Nikki Haley and Ron Johnson are willing to do a lot for Donald Trump , calling Biden a pedophile is—at least for now—a bridge too far for them .
Even Trump ’ s daughter-in-law , Lara , is in on the game .
She hosts a campaign show on YouTube that exists primarily to deride Biden .
At a Women for Trump event she mocked Biden ’ s childhood stutter : “ I ’ m like , Joe , can you get it out , let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joe.
” She was so callous that Captain “ Sully ” Sullenberger , a former stutterer , stepped out to condemn the “ culture of cruelty ” she was perpetuating and ask that she “ Stop .
Grow up .
Show some decency.
” Regretfully , I must inform you , Dear Reader , that Lara Trump and the other members of her family have not .
As the old saying goes , the family that slays together , stays together .
On one level , it ’ s worth wondering why the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and privilege , are willing to throw themselves in the gutter on behalf of their father .
But , there ’ s not enough time in the world to psychoanalyze the dysfunction that has led Trump to put his kids in these roles and for the kids to accept them .
Let ’ s just agree it ’ s highly abnormal .
Most candidates would do anything to protect their children from the perils of campaigning .
Yet , here we have President Trump giving his kids the dirtiest jobs in the entire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the alt-right .
Maybe Trump does it because his die-hard supporters eat it up .
They see a loyal , tight-knit family who has selflessly sacrificed their glitzy , jet-set lifestyle to help dear old dad # MAGA .
For those of us outside of the Trump bubble ?
Eeessshh .
Ixnay on the idskay .
No politician has ever sicced their kids on their opponents , which helps them get away with it .
It ’ s not like kids don ’ t have a place on the campaign trail , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be useful surrogates , providing voters with warm , if sometimes awkward , glimpses into the candidate ’ s personal lives .
( Who can forget Alexandra Kerry ’ s story about her father , John Kerry , giving their drowning family hamster mouth-to-mouth CPR and bringing it back to life .
I , for one , have been trying to get that image out of my head for years . )
There ’ s a big difference , however , between a candidate ’ s child smiling sweetly during a convention speech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the greatest dad ever ” and pounding out tweets that his opponent “ sounds like a total clown every time he opens his mouth ” ( as Eric did on Sunday ) .
In the end , people who are uncomfortable treating the president ’ s children the same way they would any other campaign operative wind up trying to rationalize the Trumps ’ behavior .
They pretend the offensive statements blasted out of Don Jr. ’ s Twitter account are part of his act .
They nod along when he says he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calling Biden a pedophile , saying Kamala Harris isn ’ t authentically black , or comparing Syrian refugees to a bowl of Skittles .
Don Jr. gets treated not like Mike Cernovich with some money , but like an edgy , stealth , right-wing superweapon .
They say Ivanka probably doesn ’ t even understand what the “ red pill ” meme means—that she ’ s likely trying to appeal to Elon Musk ’ s Twitter followers .
They say that poor Eric is just the “ dumb one ” who takes his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confronting the truth about this family and what they do to themselves , to others , and to our political system is too depressing .

Political hatchet men are a staple of American campaigns. Richard Nixon had Chuck Colson. George H.W. Bush had Lee Atwater and Roger Ailes.
Donald Trump has, well, his adult children.
Most campaigns outsource the nasty work of attacking their opponents to operatives who keep a low profile to maintain distance from the candidate. Even in 2016, Trump kept most of his smear merchants, such as the now-convicted felon Roger Stone, behind the scenes. But 2020 is different. This time, President Trump’s adult children have rolled up their sleeves and are taking on their father’s dirtiest work.
For the last three years, Donald Trump Jr. has made a habit of saying provocative things to stoke reaction—it’s literally his brand. Over the weekend he posted a meme calling Joe Biden a “pedophile.” After which he claimed he was . . . just kidding! Because calling men pedophiles is how people josh around in hardball politics these days. Or something.
On the same day, Trump’s other grown son, Eric, said Democrats were “milking” the coronavirus to “deprive” his father of his rallies. The next day Don Jr., Eric, and Ivanka each pushed the alt-right’s “red pill” meme on Twitter.
All in a day’s work for the Trump family business!
Podcast · August 15 2023 A.B. Stoddard: All the Ex-President’s Conspirators Donald Trump has been a low-rent mobster for his entire career, and now he’s getting…
Cynical politicos might say these are hit jobs that someone has to do to take down an opponent and dog-whistle the hounds to victory. And, maybe good help is hard to find these days. After all, Trump’s old bagmen Stone, Michael Cohen, and Paul Manafort are all in lockup. And while Nikki Haley and Ron Johnson are willing to do a lot for Donald Trump, calling Biden a pedophile is—at least for now—a bridge too far for them.
Even Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara, is in on the game. She hosts a campaign show on YouTube that exists primarily to deride Biden. At a Women for Trump event she mocked Biden’s childhood stutter: “I’m like, Joe, can you get it out, let’s get the words out, Joe.” She was so callous that Captain “Sully” Sullenberger, a former stutterer, stepped out to condemn the “culture of cruelty” she was perpetuating and ask that she “Stop. Grow up. Show some decency.”
Regretfully, I must inform you, Dear Reader, that Lara Trump and the other members of her family have not. As the old saying goes, the family that slays together, stays together.
On one level, it’s worth wondering why the Trump progeny, with all their wealth and privilege, are willing to throw themselves in the gutter on behalf of their father. But, there’s not enough time in the world to psychoanalyze the dysfunction that has led Trump to put his kids in these roles and for the kids to accept them. Let’s just agree it’s highly abnormal. Most candidates would do anything to protect their children from the perils of campaigning.
Yet, here we have President Trump giving his kids the dirtiest jobs in the entire campaign: smearing Joe Biden and courting the alt-right.
Maybe Trump does it because his die-hard supporters eat it up. They see a loyal, tight-knit family who has selflessly sacrificed their glitzy, jet-set lifestyle to help dear old dad #MAGA. For those of us outside of the Trump bubble? Eeessshh. Ixnay on the idskay. No politician has ever sicced their kids on their opponents, which helps them get away with it.
It’s not like kids don’t have a place on the campaign trail, though. Generally speaking, adult children can be useful surrogates, providing voters with warm, if sometimes awkward, glimpses into the candidate’s personal lives. (Who can forget Alexandra Kerry’s story about her father, John Kerry, giving their drowning family hamster mouth-to-mouth CPR and bringing it back to life. I, for one, have been trying to get that image out of my head for years.)
There’s a big difference, however, between a candidate’s child smiling sweetly during a convention speech and saying, “My dad is the greatest dad ever” and pounding out tweets that his opponent “sounds like a total clown every time he opens his mouth” (as Eric did on Sunday).
In the end, people who are uncomfortable treating the president’s children the same way they would any other campaign operative wind up trying to rationalize the Trumps’ behavior. They pretend the offensive statements blasted out of Don Jr.’s Twitter account are part of his act. They nod along when he says he’s “just joking” about calling Biden a pedophile, saying Kamala Harris isn’t authentically black, or comparing Syrian refugees to a bowl of Skittles. Don Jr. gets treated not like Mike Cernovich with some money, but like an edgy, stealth, right-wing superweapon.
They say Ivanka probably doesn’t even understand what the “red pill” meme means—that she’s likely trying to appeal to Elon Musk’s Twitter followers. They say that poor Eric is just the “dumb one” who takes his cues from the other two.
Because confronting the truth about this family and what they do to themselves, to others, and to our political system is too depressing.