csmonitor--2020-05-21--As all 50 states reopen, leaders weigh tough questions

Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other .
The two are inextricably connected and support each other , they say .
“ The question should be : How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything , period , ” says Benjamin Miller , chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust .
At the same time , isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them , mental health , children ’ s welfare , and financial ruin .
Unemployment stands at 14.7 % , the highest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “ deaths of despair , ” according to Well Being Trust .
This week , COVID-19 deaths topped 93,000 in the United States , far more than the 58,000-plus Americans who died in the Vietnam War .
Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt .
In California and across the country , pressure is on to reopen , expressed in lawsuits and protests .
Over it all looms an election in November .
No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ churches , businesses , and even a bride to be .
Michael Flood feels for America ’ s government leaders .
They have difficult choices to make in deciding how quickly to reopen economies .
As president of the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank , he ’ s seeing both sides of human hurt in the coronavirus pandemic .
On one hand , a lockdown to prevent spread of the virus has caused great economic and mental stress , illustrated in the skyrocketing demand for food pantries in Los Angeles County , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The food bank ’ s distribution has surged 80 % since the beginning of March – nearly twice the increase during the Great Recession .
Several times a week , upward of a thousand cars line up at parking lots for drive-through groceries .
At the same time , two people who worked at the food bank ’ s partners have died from the virus .
Los Angeles County is the epicenter for the outbreak in California , with about 2,000 deaths so far .
The disease “ feels like a personal threat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr .
Flood .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , all our coronavirus coverage is free .
No paywall .
“ We ’ re seeing on both ends , people who have died from COVID and this huge impact .
I really struggle with this .
It ’ s so hard to figure out.
” It is no wonder that Mr .
Flood is wrestling with trade-offs in the reopening .
Much of the country is entering a “ gray space , ” as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flinging open the doors and cautionary measures to prevent a virus resurgence .
It includes ethical dimensions as governors and local officials make life-altering choices , while those unhappy with the decisions push back in the courts and on the street .
Americans need to have a national conversation about these choices and their consequences , say social scientists .
But it ’ s a tough subject .
As New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo recently put it , “ How much is a human life worth ?
That is the real discussion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or freely.
” The national narrative on choices surrounding the pandemic is evolving , says Anita Chandra , director of the Rand Corp. ’ s research on social and economic well-being .
It started with “ we ’ re all in this together ” and “ sheltering in place ” to save lives and not overwhelm hospitals .
Now , with the curve flattening in states like California , Washington , and New York , some people are saying that their personal liberty and other aspects of their well-being are more important .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and be more directly addressed , says Dr. Chandra .
She puts it plainly , “ How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other ?
” It ’ s an “ uncomfortable ” question , she says , but necessary , because it forces moral questions about American values and prepares the country to deal with a possible resurgence of the virus – and learn from it .
For instance , what choices will government leaders make if the nation muddles through a summer of retail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an uptick in the economy – and then faces a spike of infections ?
Many people will want to keep the economic vitality going , while others will worry about contracting the virus .
“ There ’ s a lot of fear .
Even as we reopen , a lot of people say to me , ‘ Don ’ t reopen .
I don ’ t want to work .
It ’ s not safe , ’ ” says Dr. Barbara Ferrer , director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 93,000 in the United States , far more than the 58,000 Americans who died in the Vietnam War .
Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt .
At the same time , isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them , mental health , children ’ s welfare , and financial ruin .
Unemployment stands at 14.7 % , the highest rate since the Great Depression .
The pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “ deaths of despair ” resulting from drug or alcohol abuse and suicide , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wellness foundation .
In trying to prevent COVID deaths , the medical profession is doing exactly what you would expect them to – save lives , says Dr. Chandra .
But that needs to be “ balanced against all these other aspects of well-being.
” Governments do have a mathematical way to figure a cost-benefit analysis for policies as they relate to risk of a lost life .
It ’ s called the value of a statistical life , or VSL , and it ’ s based on how much individuals themselves are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of death .
Right now , VSLs range between $ 9 million and $ 11 million per life and are used to determine , for instance , the cost of environmental regulations or road improvements .
But some say that ’ s too blunt of an instrument to use – or at least use by itself – because it ’ s rooted in narrow trade-offs that don ’ t fit a broad condition like a pandemic .
Questions about American values also have to be considered , says Dr. Chandra : “ What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of movement ?
What are the ethics around whose life is worth more ?
And what are the ethics around protecting the most vulnerable ?
” Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other .
The two are actually inextricably connected and support each other , they say .
“ The question should be : How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything , period , ” says Benjamin Miller , chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presented is between saving grandma and saving the economy , and the way we look at it is if we ’ re not careful , we ’ re going to kill grandma and kill the economy , ” says Alex Tabarrok , director of the Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University in Fairfax , Virginia .
“ These two things are not in opposition to one another.
” He co-authored an Op-Ed in The Washington Post arguing that quick , congressional funding of sufficient testing , contact tracing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety needed to open up businesses and bring people back to work .
This should be combined with “ zones ” that open at different paces , recognizing that the virus has not hit all regions equally .
Others see more federal spending as the way to protect against harm from disease and a decimated economy , pointing to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell ’ s remarks that Congress may need to do more in the way of fiscal support .
The House passed a $ 3 trillion stimulus bill that would aid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uncertain future in the Senate .
On the other hand , President Donald Trump is pushing for a speedy reopening , as is his treasury secretary , Steve Mnuchin .
And then there are those who point to American creativity as a bridge to carry the country forward .
A case in point : Didi Hirsch Mental Health Services , which provides free mental health , substance abuse , and suicide prevention help .
The group completely reoriented its work from on-site only to allow people to work remotely .
In a herculean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 215 volunteers with laptops and headsets , trained them , and changed the setup for callers to the crisis line .
The inflow of calls related to COVID-19 has been huge , and for the first time , caller and counselor have been experiencing many of the same things .
The nonprofit had to contend with virus exposure , quarantining staff .
Some staff have lost family members , says Carolyn Levitan , the crisis line director .
On the other hand , the forced reorientation has opened a whole new way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It ’ s a huge eye-opener .
I ’ m really excited about it , ” she says .
It turns out not everyone wants to endure Los Angeles traffic to volunteer in person , and people have other reasons for wanting to work from home .
No matter what state and county officials decide about the pace of reopening , though , her group will take a “ thoughtful ” approach .
“ It ’ s going to be a very slow return for us , ” in part because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though the center has put social distancing and extra hygiene measures in place .
County leaders are now hoping to open up more fully by July 4 , but they still want to keep a lid on hospitalizations .
“ We do acknowledge there are trade-offs , ” says Paul Simon , chief science officer for LA County ’ s Department of Public Health .
Early on , everyone was focused on locking down the disease , but now health officials are looking closely at other indicators such as suicides ( a lagging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We ’ re in a tough situation with this pandemic and hard choices are going to have to be made , but I think they can be made in a thoughtful way.
” In California and across the country , pressure is on to reopen , expressed in lawsuits and protests .
Over it all looms an election in November .
No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov .
Gavin Newsom by gun shops , churches , businesses , and even a bride to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court overturned the state ’ s “ safer at home ” order , saying it needed approval in the Legislature .
Eugene Volokh , who teaches at the University of California Los Angeles law school , says it is unlikely that it will be the courts that push reopening .
Governments have “ extremely broad authority ” in a pandemic , especially over everyday business , he explains , citing the 1905 Supreme Court smallpox case , Jacobson v. Massachusetts .
It may be a little different where some specific individual rights are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guns .
Stay-at-home orders also may violate some state constitutions .
But it is economic pressure that will do the pushing , he says .
“ Long before the courts accept any of these business claims , many states are going to recognize that at some point , the shutdown causes more harm than good.
” Governors don ’ t want to be seen as causing more deaths than the pandemic , he says , and at the same time , they need revenues to implement their programs and balance their budgets .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interests of citizens , and the interests of government officials , while not completely aligned , will be largely aligned in favor of opening things up as long as it is seen as marginally safe.
” Indeed , with decreased hospitalizations , Governor Newsom this week relaxed criteria for counties to move further along the road to reopening .
LA County officials , too , feel a sense of urgency from businesses to open or risk permanent job loss .
“ Time is of the essence , ” said Kathryn Barger , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Supervisors after meeting with business leaders this week .
“ Now it is time to begin to move from safer at home , to safer at work , and safer in our communities.
” Editor ’ s note : As a public service , all our coronavirus coverage is free .
No paywall .

Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other. The two are inextricably connected and support each other, they say. “The question should be: How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything, period,” says Benjamin Miller, chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust.
At the same time, isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them, mental health, children’s welfare, and financial ruin. Unemployment stands at 14.7%, the highest rate since the Great Depression. The pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “deaths of despair,” according to Well Being Trust.
“How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other?” As all 50 states begin reopening this week, that’s a question leaders are weighing – one that forces moral questions about American values.
This week, COVID-19 deaths topped 93,000 in the United States, far more than the 58,000-plus Americans who died in the Vietnam War. Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt.
In California and across the country, pressure is on to reopen, expressed in lawsuits and protests. Over it all looms an election in November. No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov. Gavin Newsom by gun shops, churches, businesses, and even a bride to be.
Michael Flood feels for America’s government leaders. They have difficult choices to make in deciding how quickly to reopen economies. As president of the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, he’s seeing both sides of human hurt in the coronavirus pandemic.
On one hand, a lockdown to prevent spread of the virus has caused great economic and mental stress, illustrated in the skyrocketing demand for food pantries in Los Angeles County, the most populous county in the nation. The food bank’s distribution has surged 80% since the beginning of March – nearly twice the increase during the Great Recession. Several times a week, upward of a thousand cars line up at parking lots for drive-through groceries.
At the same time, two people who worked at the food bank’s partners have died from the virus. Los Angeles County is the epicenter for the outbreak in California, with about 2,000 deaths so far. The disease “feels like a personal threat to all of us,” explains Mr. Flood.
Why We Wrote This “How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other?” As all 50 states begin reopening this week, that’s a question leaders are weighing – one that forces moral questions about American values.
Editor’s note: As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.
“We’re seeing on both ends, people who have died from COVID and this huge impact. I really struggle with this. It’s so hard to figure out.”
It is no wonder that Mr. Flood is wrestling with trade-offs in the reopening. Much of the country is entering a “gray space,” as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti puts it. That space lies between flinging open the doors and cautionary measures to prevent a virus resurgence. It includes ethical dimensions as governors and local officials make life-altering choices, while those unhappy with the decisions push back in the courts and on the street. Americans need to have a national conversation about these choices and their consequences, say social scientists. But it’s a tough subject.
Hans Gutknecht/The Orange County Register/AP View caption Hide caption Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, shown at a press conference in Reseda, Calif., May 19, 2020, says the country is entering a “gray space” when it comes to decisionmaking around the coronavirus outbreak.
As New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently put it, “How much is a human life worth? That is the real discussion that no one is admitting, openly or freely.”
The national narrative on choices surrounding the pandemic is evolving, says Anita Chandra, director of the Rand Corp.’s research on social and economic well-being. It started with “we’re all in this together” and “sheltering in place” to save lives and not overwhelm hospitals. Now, with the curve flattening in states like California, Washington, and New York, some people are saying that their personal liberty and other aspects of their well-being are more important.
The bottom-line question
But the conversation needs to advance further, and be more directly addressed, says Dr. Chandra. She puts it plainly, “How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other?” It’s an “uncomfortable” question, she says, but necessary, because it forces moral questions about American values and prepares the country to deal with a possible resurgence of the virus – and learn from it.
For instance, what choices will government leaders make if the nation muddles through a summer of retail and restaurants at half capacity and sees an uptick in the economy – and then faces a spike of infections? Many people will want to keep the economic vitality going, while others will worry about contracting the virus.
“There’s a lot of fear. Even as we reopen, a lot of people say to me, ‘Don’t reopen. I don’t want to work. It’s not safe,’” says Dr. Barbara Ferrer, director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
Weighing the costs
This week, COVID-19 deaths topped 93,000 in the United States, far more than the 58,000 Americans who died in the Vietnam War. Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt.
At the same time, isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them, mental health, children’s welfare, and financial ruin. Unemployment stands at 14.7%, the highest rate since the Great Depression. The pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “deaths of despair” resulting from drug or alcohol abuse and suicide, according to the Well Being Trust, a national wellness foundation.
In trying to prevent COVID deaths, the medical profession is doing exactly what you would expect them to – save lives, says Dr. Chandra. But that needs to be “balanced against all these other aspects of well-being.”
Governments do have a mathematical way to figure a cost-benefit analysis for policies as they relate to risk of a lost life. It’s called the value of a statistical life, or VSL, and it’s based on how much individuals themselves are willing to pay to reduce the risk of death. Right now, VSLs range between $9 million and $11 million per life and are used to determine, for instance, the cost of environmental regulations or road improvements.
But some say that’s too blunt of an instrument to use – or at least use by itself – because it’s rooted in narrow trade-offs that don’t fit a broad condition like a pandemic. Questions about American values also have to be considered, says Dr. Chandra: “What are the ethics around liberty and freedom of movement? What are the ethics around whose life is worth more? And what are the ethics around protecting the most vulnerable?”
Not a dichotomy
Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other. The two are actually inextricably connected and support each other, they say. “The question should be: How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything, period,” says Benjamin Miller, chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust.
Gregory Bull/AP View caption Hide caption Workers at Pigment prepare floral arrangements for curbside service May 19, 2020, in San Diego. With encouraging results in their fight against the coronavirus, San Diego County supervisors voted Tuesday to ask the state to be a test case for whether more rapid reopening can safely occur.
“I think the way the choice is being presented is between saving grandma and saving the economy, and the way we look at it is if we’re not careful, we’re going to kill grandma and kill the economy,” says Alex Tabarrok, director of the Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. “These two things are not in opposition to one another.”
He co-authored an Op-Ed in The Washington Post arguing that quick, congressional funding of sufficient testing, contact tracing, and quarantining would provide the confidence and safety needed to open up businesses and bring people back to work. This should be combined with “zones” that open at different paces, recognizing that the virus has not hit all regions equally.
Others see more federal spending as the way to protect against harm from disease and a decimated economy, pointing to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s remarks that Congress may need to do more in the way of fiscal support. The House passed a $3 trillion stimulus bill that would aid state and local governments that faces an uncertain future in the Senate. On the other hand, President Donald Trump is pushing for a speedy reopening, as is his treasury secretary, Steve Mnuchin.
Can ingenuity provide a bridge?
And then there are those who point to American creativity as a bridge to carry the country forward. A case in point: Didi Hirsch Mental Health Services, which provides free mental health, substance abuse, and suicide prevention help.
The group completely reoriented its work from on-site only to allow people to work remotely. In a herculean effort, it outfitted its 80 staff and 215 volunteers with laptops and headsets, trained them, and changed the setup for callers to the crisis line.
The inflow of calls related to COVID-19 has been huge, and for the first time, caller and counselor have been experiencing many of the same things. The nonprofit had to contend with virus exposure, quarantining staff. Some staff have lost family members, says Carolyn Levitan, the crisis line director.
On the other hand, the forced reorientation has opened a whole new way of operating, says Ms. Levitan. “It’s a huge eye-opener. I’m really excited about it,” she says. It turns out not everyone wants to endure Los Angeles traffic to volunteer in person, and people have other reasons for wanting to work from home.
No matter what state and county officials decide about the pace of reopening, though, her group will take a “thoughtful” approach. “It’s going to be a very slow return for us,” in part because of people’s fears about safety, though the center has put social distancing and extra hygiene measures in place.
County leaders are now hoping to open up more fully by July 4, but they still want to keep a lid on hospitalizations.
“We do acknowledge there are trade-offs,” says Paul Simon, chief science officer for LA County’s Department of Public Health. Early on, everyone was focused on locking down the disease, but now health officials are looking closely at other indicators such as suicides (a lagging indicator that has actually decreased slightly).
“We’re in a tough situation with this pandemic and hard choices are going to have to be made, but I think they can be made in a thoughtful way.”
Forcing their hand
In California and across the country, pressure is on to reopen, expressed in lawsuits and protests. Over it all looms an election in November. No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov. Gavin Newsom by gun shops, churches, businesses, and even a bride to be. Last week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturned the state’s “safer at home” order, saying it needed approval in the Legislature.
Eugene Volokh, who teaches at the University of California Los Angeles law school, says it is unlikely that it will be the courts that push reopening. Governments have “extremely broad authority” in a pandemic, especially over everyday business, he explains, citing the 1905 Supreme Court smallpox case, Jacobson v. Massachusetts. It may be a little different where some specific individual rights are involved – such as with churches or guns. Stay-at-home orders also may violate some state constitutions.
But it is economic pressure that will do the pushing, he says. “Long before the courts accept any of these business claims, many states are going to recognize that at some point, the shutdown causes more harm than good.” Governors don’t want to be seen as causing more deaths than the pandemic, he says, and at the same time, they need revenues to implement their programs and balance their budgets.
“The interests of business, and the interests of citizens, and the interests of government officials, while not completely aligned, will be largely aligned in favor of opening things up as long as it is seen as marginally safe.”
Indeed, with decreased hospitalizations, Governor Newsom this week relaxed criteria for counties to move further along the road to reopening. LA County officials, too, feel a sense of urgency from businesses to open or risk permanent job loss.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“Time is of the essence,” said Kathryn Barger, chair of the county’s Board of Supervisors after meeting with business leaders this week. “Now it is time to begin to move from safer at home, to safer at work, and safer in our communities.”
Editor’s note: As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.


csmonitor--2020-05-26--Atlanta leads with two female contenders for Biden's VP

Neither public rivals nor personal friends , Keisha Lance Bottoms and Stacey Abrams spent years climbing parallel ladders at Atlanta City Hall and the Georgia Capitol .
They are now Georgia 's most influential African American women .
Ms .
Bottoms , the Atlanta mayor , is a top surrogate for Joe Biden , the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee .
Ms. Abrams is the voting rights activist who nearly became the first black female governor in American history .
Now , the pair occupy the same political intersection : Mr. Biden 's list of potential running mates .
That potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two lawyers-turned-politicians .
Ms. Abrams embraces the possibility of the vice presidency and , already having acknowledged her own presidential aspirations , openly touts how she 'd help Mr. Biden win and govern .
Ms .
Bottoms , while not sidestepping the talk , plays the more traditional role of loyal party lieutenant .
While the possibility of being up for the same job could stoke conflict , Ms. Abrams , Ms .
Bottoms , and their associates instead frame their national profiles as a boost for black women .
`` I see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the positions they hold , and I adore them both , '' said state party chairwoman Nikema Williams .
It 's `` inspiring '' to watch `` two black women from the South be elevated . ''
Beyond Ms. Abrams and Ms .
Bottoms , Mr. Biden is believed to be considering other women of color as his running mate , including California Sen. Kamala Harris and Rep. Val Demings of Florida .
In separate Associated Press interviews , Mr. Abrams declared Ms .
Bottoms an `` extraordinary '' mayor and called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizen under her leadership , '' while the mayor praised Ms. Abrams ' `` authentic leadership , '' especially on behalf of underrepresented voters .
`` I ca n't say we 're close personal friends , '' Ms .
Bottoms said , adding that she sees their roles as outgrowths of the civil rights history that surrounds them in Martin Luther King Jr. 's hometown .
`` Atlanta has always been a special place where people of color are able to break traditional molds and change the landscape of who we are as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ widely known of the two , Ms. Abrams was floated as a presidential candidate herself after her unsuccessful 2018 governor 's bid .
She parlayed that narrow loss into an invitation to deliver the 2019 response to President Donald Trump 's State of the Union address .
Throughout 2019 , she was a regular stop on Democratic contenders ' visits to Georgia .
In recognition of Mr. Biden 's stature as former vice president , Ms. Abrams visited him in Washington last year , but she did n't endorse until May 12 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presumptive nominee .
Before that , she willingly fielded questions about joining him on the ticket .
`` As a young black girl growing up in Mississippi , I learned that if I did n't speak up for myself , no one else would , '' Ms. Abrams said recently on NBC 's `` Meet the Press . ''
She told the AP days before her endorsement that she 'd `` put my resume against anyone else 's . ''
She noted her state legislative work included international relations and highlighted her 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new voters to the polls .
Ms .
Bottoms , meanwhile , was among Mr. Biden 's earliest endorsers .
She recalled writing in a leather-bound campaign journal , `` I feel vulnerable , '' having declared loyalties among such a crowded field .
That should n't be confused with regret , she said , citing Mr. Biden 's `` experience and the goodness of who he is . ''
The mayor was a precinct captain in overwhelmingly white Iowa , where Mr. Biden finished an embarrassing fourth , before going on to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` She did n't run away when he was down , '' said Tharon Johnson , a Bottoms confidant .
Asked what she 'd bring to the ticket , Ms .
Bottoms , a former judge and city councilor , noted that she 's served in each branch of government , with her executive tenure overlapping with a massive cyberattack on city government 's technology infrastructure and now the COVID-19 pandemic .
`` You 've got to have proven leadership that 's been tested in the midst of crisis , '' she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favorite of many progressive activists , Ms .
Bottoms has gotten a prominent mention from influential black leaders like House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn , who is close to Mr. Biden , and Biden campaign co-chairman Cedric Richmond .
The different approaches reflect how Ms .
Bottoms has operated mostly within existing political machinery while Ms. Abrams has sought to build her own .
Three years ago , Ms. Abrams was the Georgia House minority leader building her 2018 campaign for governor ; Ms .
Bottoms was a city councilor running for mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but faced such skepticism as a statewide candidate that many older , white Democratic power brokers backed a white state representative from the Atlanta suburbs .
Ms .
Bottoms , conversely , had the backing of outgoing Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed , himself once viewed as a potential governor .
Ms. Abrams ' primary opponent – not an Atlanta resident – endorsed Ms .
Bottoms , while Ms. Abrams stayed on the sidelines .
Ms .
Bottoms , in turn , did n't wade into the governor 's primary , but campaigned for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` They 've just operated in different spaces , '' said Ms. Williams , the state party chairwoman .
Both politicians have shown signs of practicality .
Ms .
Bottoms benefited from Mr. Reed 's help in 2017 , but she 's since distanced herself from her predecessor , whose administration has been the subject of a federal criminal probe .
She was among the big-city mayors to blast Mr. Trump 's immigration policies , and she ended the city jail 's contract with federal immigration enforcement .
She 's leading the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the census and housing policy .
And while Ms. Abrams calls for significant changes in U.S. social and political structures , she spent her tenure at the Capitol as an unapologetic pragmatist cutting deals with Republican Gov .
Nathan Deal and GOP House leadership .
For her part , Ms .
Bottoms says she has `` a good working relationship '' with Mr. Kemp , who defeated Ms. Abrams .
And while her style is more low-key , Ms .
Bottoms makes clear that she has no problem with Ms. Abrams ' direct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ n't think there 's ever anything wrong with touting and highlighting your work , '' she said .
`` What I do on my day-to-day work hopefully shows the type of leader I am . ''
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

Neither public rivals nor personal friends, Keisha Lance Bottoms and Stacey Abrams spent years climbing parallel ladders at Atlanta City Hall and the Georgia Capitol.
They are now Georgia's most influential African American women.
Ms. Bottoms, the Atlanta mayor, is a top surrogate for Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.
Ms. Abrams is the voting rights activist who nearly became the first black female governor in American history. Now, the pair occupy the same political intersection: Mr. Biden's list of potential running mates.
That potential has highlighted the different styles of the two lawyers-turned-politicians. Ms. Abrams embraces the possibility of the vice presidency and, already having acknowledged her own presidential aspirations, openly touts how she'd help Mr. Biden win and govern. Ms. Bottoms, while not sidestepping the talk, plays the more traditional role of loyal party lieutenant.
While the possibility of being up for the same job could stoke conflict, Ms. Abrams, Ms. Bottoms, and their associates instead frame their national profiles as a boost for black women.
"I see them leading in very different ways because of the positions they hold, and I adore them both," said state party chairwoman Nikema Williams. It's "inspiring" to watch "two black women from the South be elevated."
Beyond Ms. Abrams and Ms. Bottoms, Mr. Biden is believed to be considering other women of color as his running mate, including California Sen. Kamala Harris and Rep. Val Demings of Florida.
In separate Associated Press interviews, Mr. Abrams declared Ms. Bottoms an "extraordinary" mayor and called herself "proud to be an Atlanta citizen under her leadership," while the mayor praised Ms. Abrams' "authentic leadership," especially on behalf of underrepresented voters.
"I can't say we're close personal friends," Ms. Bottoms said, adding that she sees their roles as outgrowths of the civil rights history that surrounds them in Martin Luther King Jr.'s hometown. "Atlanta has always been a special place where people of color are able to break traditional molds and change the landscape of who we are as a country."
Unquestionably the more widely known of the two, Ms. Abrams was floated as a presidential candidate herself after her unsuccessful 2018 governor's bid. She parlayed that narrow loss into an invitation to deliver the 2019 response to President Donald Trump's State of the Union address. Throughout 2019, she was a regular stop on Democratic contenders' visits to Georgia.
In recognition of Mr. Biden's stature as former vice president, Ms. Abrams visited him in Washington last year, but she didn't endorse until May 12, well after Mr. Biden emerged as the presumptive nominee. Before that, she willingly fielded questions about joining him on the ticket.
"As a young black girl growing up in Mississippi, I learned that if I didn't speak up for myself, no one else would," Ms. Abrams said recently on NBC's "Meet the Press."
She told the AP days before her endorsement that she'd "put my resume against anyone else's." She noted her state legislative work included international relations and highlighted her 2018 success in drawing hundreds of thousands of new voters to the polls.
Ms. Bottoms, meanwhile, was among Mr. Biden's earliest endorsers. She recalled writing in a leather-bound campaign journal, "I feel vulnerable," having declared loyalties among such a crowded field. That shouldn't be confused with regret, she said, citing Mr. Biden's "experience and the goodness of who he is."
The mayor was a precinct captain in overwhelmingly white Iowa, where Mr. Biden finished an embarrassing fourth, before going on to the Southern states that reversed his fortunes.
"She didn't run away when he was down," said Tharon Johnson, a Bottoms confidant.
Asked what she'd bring to the ticket, Ms. Bottoms, a former judge and city councilor, noted that she's served in each branch of government, with her executive tenure overlapping with a massive cyberattack on city government's technology infrastructure and now the COVID-19 pandemic.
"You've got to have proven leadership that's been tested in the midst of crisis," she said.
As Ms. Abrams remains a favorite of many progressive activists, Ms. Bottoms has gotten a prominent mention from influential black leaders like House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, who is close to Mr. Biden, and Biden campaign co-chairman Cedric Richmond.
The different approaches reflect how Ms. Bottoms has operated mostly within existing political machinery while Ms. Abrams has sought to build her own.
Three years ago, Ms. Abrams was the Georgia House minority leader building her 2018 campaign for governor; Ms. Bottoms was a city councilor running for mayor. Ms. Abrams had impressed Capitol circles but faced such skepticism as a statewide candidate that many older, white Democratic power brokers backed a white state representative from the Atlanta suburbs.
Ms. Bottoms, conversely, had the backing of outgoing Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, himself once viewed as a potential governor.
Ms. Abrams' primary opponent – not an Atlanta resident – endorsed Ms. Bottoms, while Ms. Abrams stayed on the sidelines. Ms. Bottoms, in turn, didn't wade into the governor's primary, but campaigned for Ms. Abrams later against Republican Brian Kemp.
"They've just operated in different spaces," said Ms. Williams, the state party chairwoman.
Both politicians have shown signs of practicality.
Ms. Bottoms benefited from Mr. Reed's help in 2017, but she's since distanced herself from her predecessor, whose administration has been the subject of a federal criminal probe. She was among the big-city mayors to blast Mr. Trump's immigration policies, and she ended the city jail's contract with federal immigration enforcement. She's leading the U.S. Conference of Mayors' efforts on the census and housing policy.
And while Ms. Abrams calls for significant changes in U.S. social and political structures, she spent her tenure at the Capitol as an unapologetic pragmatist cutting deals with Republican Gov. Nathan Deal and GOP House leadership.
For her part, Ms. Bottoms says she has "a good working relationship" with Mr. Kemp, who defeated Ms. Abrams.
And while her style is more low-key, Ms. Bottoms makes clear that she has no problem with Ms. Abrams' direct approach to ambition.
"I don't think there's ever anything wrong with touting and highlighting your work," she said. "What I do on my day-to-day work hopefully shows the type of leader I am."
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-05-26--Lessons from 2008: How far should federal aid go?

Congress is at a crossroads in the coronavirus crisis , wrestling over whether to `` go big , '' as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants for the next relief bill , or hit `` pause , '' as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell insists .
It 's a defining moment for the political parties heading toward the election and one that will affect the livelihoods of countless Americans suddenly dependent on the federal government .
Billions of dollars in state aid , jobless benefits , and health resources are at stake .
As questions mount over Washington 's proper role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Donald Trump and Congress to do the right thing .
`` These are the eternal debates in American history , '' said Richard Sylla , a professor emeritus of economic and financial history at New York University .
`` It 's a bit like what Andrew Hamilton was facing in 1790 , '' he said , describing the plan to have the new federal government assume the Revolutionary War debts of the states , despite protests of a bailout .
It was , he said , as Mr. Hamilton framed it , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As negotiations develop on Capitol Hill , the coronavirus response offers Congress an opportunity to shape the country 's post-pandemic future but also carries the risk of repeating mistakes of past crises , including the 2008-09 recession , that history does not easily forget .
Mr. Trump and Mr. McConnell huddled late last week on next steps after rejecting Ms. Pelosi 's plan .
The Democratic speaker set the table with passage of the sweeping $ 3 trillion coronavirus relief bill , which includes $ 1 trillion to shore up states and cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stipends to Americans , and other aid .
`` We could have done bigger , '' Ms. Pelosi told The Associated Press in a recent interview .
With more than 38 million unemployment claims , the Republican response centers on kick-starting the economy to reduce the need for more federal intervention .
Republican priorities are to wean Americans off unemployment benefits to nudge people back to work and provide liability protections for businesses that reopen .
Republicans want to eliminate the $ 600 weekly unemployment benefit boost , arguing it `` handcuffs '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earn at their jobs .
Mr. McConnell also wants to protect doctors , schools , and others from COVID-19-related lawsuits – a `` red line , '' he says , for any deal .
`` There 's a high likelihood we will do another rescue package , '' Mr. McConnell said on Fox News .
`` We need to work smart here . ''
The political and economic debate stretches beyond the halls of Congress as wary Americans await Washington 's next move .
It was Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ low interest rates to `` go big , '' while Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned of `` permanent damage '' to the economy unless businesses reopen .
Washington has been here before .
Staring down the 2008-09 financial crisis forced the House and Senate into a historic debate over the size and scope of government that still resonates today .
Then , like now , countless Americans fell swiftly into the ranks of the newly unemployed , while the very foundations of the American dream – home ownership then , health now – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ banks needed a federal lifeline ; today , businesses look to Washington for help .
Ms. Pelosi told the AP the biggest lesson learned was to be `` very prescriptive '' in how the money would be spent after facing a backlash that the rescue benefited Wall Street over Main Street .
But perhaps another lesson from the earlier crisis was the voter revolt against big government .
The bank bailout and recovery act sparked the rise of the tea party wing of the GOP .
Ms. Pelosi lost her gavel in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the House .
Many of the same tea party forces – including the deep-pocketed Koch network – are aligned with Mr. Trump 's push to prevent state aid , reopen the country , and get people back to work .
`` The American people need to understand the choices they have , '' said North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis , one of the most endangered Republicans seeking reelection in the fall , during an online forum with the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity .
Mr. Tillis opposes Ms. Pelosi 's `` manifesto '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ act before July .
He said of the GOP-held Senate , `` We 're a bulkhead against bad happening . ''
Despite rare bipartisan support for earlier aid , the $ 2 trillion bill approved in March , neither side was particularly pleased with the outcome , the largest federal intervention in U.S. history .
Polling , however , shows Americans favoring the federal response , even as they have some concerns about spending .
An AP-NORC poll conducted in late March found that elements of the stimulus package were widely popular .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10 Americans favored the federal government providing funding to small businesses and hospitals .
About 8 in 10 said they were in favor of suspending evictions and foreclosures , giving lump-sum payments to Americans , increased unemployment benefits , and suspended student loan payment .
A mid-April NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed registered voters somewhat more likely to say they were concerned about the federal government spending too much on economic stimulus and driving up the budget deficit than they were worried that too little money would be spent , lengthening the recession @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The remaining 12 % said they did n't know .
But she said on her drive home to hard-hit Michigan , `` The cost of inaction will be much higher . ''
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
AP Director of Public Opinion Research Emily Swanson contributed to this report .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

Congress is at a crossroads in the coronavirus crisis, wrestling over whether to "go big," as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants for the next relief bill, or hit "pause," as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell insists.
It's a defining moment for the political parties heading toward the election and one that will affect the livelihoods of countless Americans suddenly dependent on the federal government. Billions of dollars in state aid, jobless benefits, and health resources are at stake. As questions mount over Washington's proper role, it's testing the ability of President Donald Trump and Congress to do the right thing.
"These are the eternal debates in American history," said Richard Sylla, a professor emeritus of economic and financial history at New York University.
"It's a bit like what Andrew Hamilton was facing in 1790," he said, describing the plan to have the new federal government assume the Revolutionary War debts of the states, despite protests of a bailout. It was, he said, as Mr. Hamilton framed it, "the price of liberty."
As negotiations develop on Capitol Hill, the coronavirus response offers Congress an opportunity to shape the country's post-pandemic future but also carries the risk of repeating mistakes of past crises, including the 2008-09 recession, that history does not easily forget.
Mr. Trump and Mr. McConnell huddled late last week on next steps after rejecting Ms. Pelosi's plan. The Democratic speaker set the table with passage of the sweeping $3 trillion coronavirus relief bill, which includes $1 trillion to shore up states and cities to avert municipal layoffs, $1,200 stipends to Americans, and other aid.
"We could have done bigger," Ms. Pelosi told The Associated Press in a recent interview.
With more than 38 million unemployment claims, the Republican response centers on kick-starting the economy to reduce the need for more federal intervention.
Republican priorities are to wean Americans off unemployment benefits to nudge people back to work and provide liability protections for businesses that reopen.
Republicans want to eliminate the $600 weekly unemployment benefit boost, arguing it "handcuffs" some employees with higher pay than they earn at their jobs. Mr. McConnell also wants to protect doctors, schools, and others from COVID-19-related lawsuits – a "red line," he says, for any deal.
"There's a high likelihood we will do another rescue package," Mr. McConnell said on Fox News. "We need to work smart here."
The political and economic debate stretches beyond the halls of Congress as wary Americans await Washington's next move.
It was Federal Reserve Board Chairman Jerome Powell who counseled Ms. Pelosi to rely on historically low interest rates to "go big," while Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned of "permanent damage" to the economy unless businesses reopen.
Washington has been here before. Staring down the 2008-09 financial crisis forced the House and Senate into a historic debate over the size and scope of government that still resonates today.
Then, like now, countless Americans fell swiftly into the ranks of the newly unemployed, while the very foundations of the American dream – home ownership then, health now – hung in the balance. Then, banks needed a federal lifeline; today, businesses look to Washington for help.
Ms. Pelosi told the AP the biggest lesson learned was to be "very prescriptive" in how the money would be spent after facing a backlash that the rescue benefited Wall Street over Main Street.
But perhaps another lesson from the earlier crisis was the voter revolt against big government. The bank bailout and recovery act sparked the rise of the tea party wing of the GOP. Ms. Pelosi lost her gavel in the 2010 election, and Republicans took control of the House.
Many of the same tea party forces – including the deep-pocketed Koch network – are aligned with Mr. Trump's push to prevent state aid, reopen the country, and get people back to work.
"The American people need to understand the choices they have," said North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, one of the most endangered Republicans seeking reelection in the fall, during an online forum with the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity.
Mr. Tillis opposes Ms. Pelosi's "manifesto" and doesn't expect the Senate to act before July. He said of the GOP-held Senate, "We're a bulkhead against bad happening."
Despite rare bipartisan support for earlier aid, the $2 trillion bill approved in March, neither side was particularly pleased with the outcome, the largest federal intervention in U.S. history.
Polling, however, shows Americans favoring the federal response, even as they have some concerns about spending.
An AP-NORC poll conducted in late March found that elements of the stimulus package were widely popular. The poll found that about 9 in 10 Americans favored the federal government providing funding to small businesses and hospitals.
About 8 in 10 said they were in favor of suspending evictions and foreclosures, giving lump-sum payments to Americans, increased unemployment benefits, and suspended student loan payment.
A mid-April NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed registered voters somewhat more likely to say they were concerned about the federal government spending too much on economic stimulus and driving up the budget deficit than they were worried that too little money would be spent, lengthening the recession, 48% to 40%. The remaining 12% said they didn't know.
Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow acknowledged the $3 trillion proposal is a "big number."
But she said on her drive home to hard-hit Michigan, "The cost of inaction will be much higher."
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP Director of Public Opinion Research Emily Swanson contributed to this report.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.


csmonitor--2020-05-28--Trump, Flynn, and flipping the script on Russia

“ [ Mr. Trump ] wants to turn the scandal against the accusers .
...
Translate this into his being the victim , not the villain , ” says Princeton University professor of political history Julian Zelizer in an email .
To his supporters , Mr. Flynn is a good American who was treated badly by powerful , overzealous federal prosecutors .
To critics , his actions raised obvious national security concerns , and the lies he told about them had serious consequences .
Under Attorney General Bill Barr , the Department of Justice recently announced it wants to drop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extraordinary move considering that his prosecution is essentially over .
President Trump ’ s repeated tweets about “ Obamagate ” – a vague , unfounded charge that his predecessor orchestrated a spying conspiracy – are part of this effort .
Central to its narrative is the saga of Michael Flynn , the Trump national security adviser who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during the Mueller investigation .
With the Mueller report over a year old and the 2020 presidential election looming , President Donald Trump appears to have launched a concerted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia probe and cement in history an alternative vision of the investigation as a long , underhanded strike against his presidency .
From the outset , Donald Trump viewed the Russia affair as an attack aimed at him .
In December 2016 , when then-President Barack Obama expelled Russian diplomats in response to Moscow ’ s meddling in the United States election , President-elect Trump felt personally slighted , according to his first chief of staff , Reince Priebus .
“ The President-elect viewed the sanctions as an attempt by the Obama Administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Mr. Priebus told investigators for special counsel Robert Mueller , according to Mr. Mueller ’ s final report .
Now , with the Mueller report over a year old and another election looming , President Trump appears to have launched a concerted attempt to undermine the foundation of the Russia probe and cement in history his vision of the investigation as a long , underhanded strike against his presidency .
President Trump ’ s repeated tweets about “ Obamagate ” – a vague , unfounded charge that his predecessor orchestrated a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effort .
Central to its narrative is the saga of Michael Flynn , the Trump national security adviser who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during the Mueller investigation .
Under Attorney General Bill Barr , the Department of Justice recently announced it wants to drop its case against Mr. Flynn , an extraordinary move considering that his prosecution is essentially over .
The president has hailed the decision as “ justice ” and proof that the entire Russia investigation was thin as tissue , nothing but a scheme of the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn the scandal against the accusers .
...
Translate this into his being the victim , not the villain , ” says Princeton University professor of political history Julian Zelizer in an email .
In recent months , President Trump seems to have turned up the volume on the subject of Russia .
Critics say it is an effort to distract attention from his administration ’ s handling of the coronavirus epidemic .
Before 8:45 a.m. on Wednesday , for instance , the president tweeted eight times about “ Obamagate- ” and five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only once about a COVID-19 related subject .
Mr. Mueller ’ s final report , issued in March 2019 , concluded that the Russian government believed it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome .
Investigators did not establish that Trump campaign members conspired or coordinated with Russia in the effort .
In addition , Mueller investigators said that given the facts and applicable legal standards , they could not say that President Trump did not commit obstruction of justice during their probe .
“ While this report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a crime , it also does not exonerate him , ” the Mueller report says .
In the months following the report ’ s release , President Trump insisted that it amounted to a complete exoneration .
More recently , he has pushed the idea that the real criminal conspiracy was among the investigators .
As support , he has pointed to revelations about problems in the first days of the FBI ’ s Russia probe , including serious errors and omissions in secret applications to surveil a former Trump campaign aide .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Attorney General Barr has been especially supportive .
“ I think the president has every right to be frustrated , because I think what happened to him was one of the greatest travesties in American history , ” Mr. Barr said in an April interview with Fox News .
In April 2019 , Mr. Barr tapped U.S. Attorney John Durham to examine the early days of the Russia probe , and in particular , whether there was any impropriety in the investigation .
Mr. Durham ’ s investigation has largely proceeded in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Mr. Barr said he did not expect the Justice Department would open criminal investigations into President Obama or former Vice President Joe Biden on this matter .
Some critics interpreted this statement as an implicit rebuke of President Trump and his “ Obamagate !
” tweets .
The president himself said he “ was surprised ” by Mr. Barr ’ s remark .
But Mr. Durham might yet bring a criminal indictment of some sort related to the opening of the FBI ’ s “ Crossfire Hurricane ” probe into the Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a former Department of Defense counsel , in a Just Security piece on May 15 .
In particular , it ’ s possible he could identify a former senior official who leaked to a Washington Post reporter the classified intercept of a Dec. 29 , 2016 , phone call between Mr. Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak .
The leak was serious disclosure of classified material , revealing details of a phone call at the heart of the case against Mr. Flynn , and Trump critics would have a hard time criticizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , why now ?
“ Even if there were criminal misconduct involving the leak to the media over three years ago , ask yourself why the investigation just so happens to be heating up now as we enter the general election ?
” writes Mr. Goodman .
Whatever the Durham investigation produces , events dealing with Mr. Flynn and his legal case could well keep the Mueller probe , Russia , and President Trump ’ s attempts to flip the narrative in headlines for weeks to come .
To his supporters , Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treated badly by powerful , overzealous federal prosecutors .
To critics , his actions raised obvious , serious national security concerns , and the lies he told about them had serious consequences .
Mr. Flynn , a former Army lieutenant general , was an early and enthusiastic supporter of Mr. Trump ’ s presidential campaign , and was rewarded with the plum job of national security adviser .
He only lasted 24 days , a record for shortest tenure in the job .
President Trump fired him following revelations that he had misled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials about the nature of his communications during the presidential transition with Russian Ambassador Kislyak .
In December 2017 , he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI and agreed to cooperate with Mr. Mueller ’ s investigation .
Asked by agents whether he had talked about U.S. sanctions with Ambassador Kislyak and urged restraint , Mr. Flynn said no .
But the agents knew better , as they had transcripts of FBI wiretaps of the Flynn-Kislyak conversations .
Mr. Flynn reiterated his guilty plea before a federal judge in December @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he asked to withdraw it , alleging among other things that he had been “ duped ” into admitting wrongdoing .
Earlier this month , the Department of Justice abruptly reversed course , and filed a motion to dismiss the case with federal Judge Emmet Sullivan .
In essence , prosecutors said that in terms of the FBI ’ s investigation into Mr. Flynn ’ s activities , his lies didn ’ t matter .
Agent questioning “ was untethered to , and unjustified by , the FBI ’ s counterintelligence investigation into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , acting U.S. attorney in Washington , in the motion to dismiss the charges .
But Judge Sullivan appears to be in no hurry to do that .
He has asked for outside groups to file friend-of-the-court legal briefs about the case for his consideration , and appointed retired U.S. District Judge John Gleeson to present arguments against the motion to dismiss .
In response , Mr. Flynn ’ s lawyers went over Judge Sullivan ’ s head .
They asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. to order the case dismissed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ordered Judge Sullivan to explain himself within 10 days .
Judge Sullivan has hired his own lawyer to guide him through the legal morass .
Is this a mess ?
Yes – but it ’ s a mess with important and complicated separation-of-powers implications , says Barbara McQuade , a former U.S. attorney and University of Michigan law professor .
“ Usually it is the executive branch that gets to decide whether to bring prosecutions , and the court plays a very limited role , ” says Ms. McQuade .
“ But here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the merits of a motion to dismiss , the district judge quite properly wants to make sure that he is not a party to corruption.
” Critics of the attempt to dismiss the Flynn case say the Justice Department has long known the details surrounding the FBI interview in question , and the only thing that has changed since Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty is the leadership of the Justice Department .
In addition , Mr. Flynn has long been a figure of personal concern for President Trump , they point out .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Flynn ’ s dismissal , the president cleared the Oval Office to have a one-on-one talk with then-FBI Director James Comey .
“ I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go , to letting Flynn go .
He is a good guy , ” President Trump said to the FBI chief , according to the Mueller report .
Later that month , President Trump asked his chief of staff , Mr. Priebus , to reach out to Mr. Flynn and let him know that the president still cared about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and said he was just checking in , and that Mr. Flynn was an “ American hero.
” “ Priebus thought the President did not want Flynn saying bad things about him , ” the Mueller report says .

“[Mr. Trump] wants to turn the scandal against the accusers. ... Translate this into his being the victim, not the villain,” says Princeton University professor of political history Julian Zelizer in an email.
To his supporters, Mr. Flynn is a good American who was treated badly by powerful, overzealous federal prosecutors. To critics, his actions raised obvious national security concerns, and the lies he told about them had serious consequences.
Under Attorney General Bill Barr, the Department of Justice recently announced it wants to drop its case against Mr. Flynn, an extraordinary move considering that his prosecution is essentially over.
Controlling the narrative has been a hallmark of President Trump. His handling of the Michael Flynn saga fits that mold as part of a broader attempt to paint the Mueller investigation as a personal attack.
President Trump’s repeated tweets about “Obamagate” – a vague, unfounded charge that his predecessor orchestrated a spying conspiracy – are part of this effort. Central to its narrative is the saga of Michael Flynn, the Trump national security adviser who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during the Mueller investigation.
With the Mueller report over a year old and the 2020 presidential election looming, President Donald Trump appears to have launched a concerted attempt to undermine the foundation of the Russia probe and cement in history an alternative vision of the investigation as a long, underhanded strike against his presidency.
From the outset, Donald Trump viewed the Russia affair as an attack aimed at him.
In December 2016, when then-President Barack Obama expelled Russian diplomats in response to Moscow’s meddling in the United States election, President-elect Trump felt personally slighted, according to his first chief of staff, Reince Priebus.
“The President-elect viewed the sanctions as an attempt by the Obama Administration to embarrass him by delegitimizing his election,” Mr. Priebus told investigators for special counsel Robert Mueller, according to Mr. Mueller’s final report.
Why We Wrote This Controlling the narrative has been a hallmark of President Trump. His handling of the Michael Flynn saga fits that mold as part of a broader attempt to paint the Mueller investigation as a personal attack.
Now, with the Mueller report over a year old and another election looming, President Trump appears to have launched a concerted attempt to undermine the foundation of the Russia probe and cement in history his vision of the investigation as a long, underhanded strike against his presidency.
President Trump’s repeated tweets about “Obamagate” – a vague, unfounded charge that his predecessor orchestrated a spying conspiracy – are part of this effort. Central to its narrative is the saga of Michael Flynn, the Trump national security adviser who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during the Mueller investigation.
Under Attorney General Bill Barr, the Department of Justice recently announced it wants to drop its case against Mr. Flynn, an extraordinary move considering that his prosecution is essentially over. The president has hailed the decision as “justice” and proof that the entire Russia investigation was thin as tissue, nothing but a scheme of the “deep state.”
“He wants to turn the scandal against the accusers. ... Translate this into his being the victim, not the villain,” says Princeton University professor of political history Julian Zelizer in an email.
The Muller report, a year later
In recent months, President Trump seems to have turned up the volume on the subject of Russia. Critics say it is an effort to distract attention from his administration’s handling of the coronavirus epidemic. Before 8:45 a.m. on Wednesday, for instance, the president tweeted eight times about “Obamagate-” and five times about Michael Flynn. He tweeted only once about a COVID-19 related subject.
Mr. Mueller’s final report, issued in March 2019, concluded that the Russian government believed it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome. Investigators did not establish that Trump campaign members conspired or coordinated with Russia in the effort.
In addition, Mueller investigators said that given the facts and applicable legal standards, they could not say that President Trump did not commit obstruction of justice during their probe.
“While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” the Mueller report says.
In the months following the report’s release, President Trump insisted that it amounted to a complete exoneration. More recently, he has pushed the idea that the real criminal conspiracy was among the investigators. As support, he has pointed to revelations about problems in the first days of the FBI’s Russia probe, including serious errors and omissions in secret applications to surveil a former Trump campaign aide.
Top administration officials have echoed his concerns. Attorney General Barr has been especially supportive.
“I think the president has every right to be frustrated, because I think what happened to him was one of the greatest travesties in American history,” Mr. Barr said in an April interview with Fox News.
In April 2019, Mr. Barr tapped U.S. Attorney John Durham to examine the early days of the Russia probe, and in particular, whether there was any impropriety in the investigation. Mr. Durham’s investigation has largely proceeded in secret.
In April of this year, Mr. Barr said he did not expect the Justice Department would open criminal investigations into President Obama or former Vice President Joe Biden on this matter. Some critics interpreted this statement as an implicit rebuke of President Trump and his “Obamagate!” tweets. The president himself said he “was surprised” by Mr. Barr’s remark.
But Mr. Durham might yet bring a criminal indictment of some sort related to the opening of the FBI’s “Crossfire Hurricane” probe into the Trump campaign and Russia, noted Ryan Goodman, a former Department of Defense counsel, in a Just Security piece on May 15.
In particular, it’s possible he could identify a former senior official who leaked to a Washington Post reporter the classified intercept of a Dec. 29, 2016, phone call between Mr. Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.
The leak was serious disclosure of classified material, revealing details of a phone call at the heart of the case against Mr. Flynn, and Trump critics would have a hard time criticizing an indictment. At the same time, why now?
“Even if there were criminal misconduct involving the leak to the media over three years ago, ask yourself why the investigation just so happens to be heating up now as we enter the general election?” writes Mr. Goodman.
The Flynn saga
Whatever the Durham investigation produces, events dealing with Mr. Flynn and his legal case could well keep the Mueller probe, Russia, and President Trump’s attempts to flip the narrative in headlines for weeks to come.
Carolyn Kaster/AP/File View caption Hide caption Michael Flynn, then national security adviser, speaks during the daily news briefing at the White House in Washington, Feb. 1, 2017.
To his supporters, Mr. Flynn is a good American who was treated badly by powerful, overzealous federal prosecutors. To critics, his actions raised obvious, serious national security concerns, and the lies he told about them had serious consequences.
Mr. Flynn, a former Army lieutenant general, was an early and enthusiastic supporter of Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign, and was rewarded with the plum job of national security adviser.
He only lasted 24 days, a record for shortest tenure in the job. President Trump fired him following revelations that he had misled Vice President Mike Pence and other top officials about the nature of his communications during the presidential transition with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.
In December 2017, he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI and agreed to cooperate with Mr. Mueller’s investigation. Asked by agents whether he had talked about U.S. sanctions with Ambassador Kislyak and urged restraint, Mr. Flynn said no. But the agents knew better, as they had transcripts of FBI wiretaps of the Flynn-Kislyak conversations.
Mr. Flynn reiterated his guilty plea before a federal judge in December 2018. Then in January 2020, he asked to withdraw it, alleging among other things that he had been “duped” into admitting wrongdoing.
Earlier this month, the Department of Justice abruptly reversed course, and filed a motion to dismiss the case with federal Judge Emmet Sullivan. In essence, prosecutors said that in terms of the FBI’s investigation into Mr. Flynn’s activities, his lies didn’t matter.
Agent questioning “was untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn,” wrote Timothy Shea, acting U.S. attorney in Washington, in the motion to dismiss the charges.
But Judge Sullivan appears to be in no hurry to do that. He has asked for outside groups to file friend-of-the-court legal briefs about the case for his consideration, and appointed retired U.S. District Judge John Gleeson to present arguments against the motion to dismiss.
In response, Mr. Flynn’s lawyers went over Judge Sullivan’s head. They asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. to order the case dismissed. Instead, an appeals court panel ordered Judge Sullivan to explain himself within 10 days. Judge Sullivan has hired his own lawyer to guide him through the legal morass.
Is this a mess? Yes – but it’s a mess with important and complicated separation-of-powers implications, says Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney and University of Michigan law professor.
“Usually it is the executive branch that gets to decide whether to bring prosecutions, and the court plays a very limited role,” says Ms. McQuade. “But here, where there is some concern about the merits of a motion to dismiss, the district judge quite properly wants to make sure that he is not a party to corruption.”
Of personal concern
Critics of the attempt to dismiss the Flynn case say the Justice Department has long known the details surrounding the FBI interview in question, and the only thing that has changed since Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty is the leadership of the Justice Department.
In addition, Mr. Flynn has long been a figure of personal concern for President Trump, they point out.
In early February 2017, shortly after Mr. Flynn’s dismissal, the president cleared the Oval Office to have a one-on-one talk with then-FBI Director James Comey.
“I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy,” President Trump said to the FBI chief, according to the Mueller report.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Later that month, President Trump asked his chief of staff, Mr. Priebus, to reach out to Mr. Flynn and let him know that the president still cared about him. Mr. Priebus called Mr. Flynn and said he was just checking in, and that Mr. Flynn was an “American hero.”
“Priebus thought the President did not want Flynn saying bad things about him,” the Mueller report says.


csmonitor--2020-05-28--Mail-in voting could turn Election Day into a long week

A shift to mail voting is increasing the chances that Americans will not know the winner of November 's presidential race on election night , a scenario that is fueling worries about whether President Donald Trump will use the delay to sow doubts about the results .
State election officials in some key battleground states have recently warned that it may take days to count what they expect will be a surge of ballots sent by mail out of concern for safety amid the pandemic .
In an election as close as 2016 's , a delayed tally in key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a winner .
`` It may be several days before we know the outcome of the election , '' Jocelyn Benson , Michigan 's Democratic secretary of state , said in an interview .
`` We have to prepare for that now and accept that reality . ''
Ohio 's Republican secretary of state , Frank LaRose , pleaded for `` patience '' from the public .
`` We 've gotten accustomed to this idea that by the middle of the evening of election night , we 're going to know all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday at a forum on voting hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center .
`` Election night reporting may take a little longer '' this year , he warned .
Delayed results are common in a few states where elections are already conducted largely by mail .
But a presidential election has n't been left in limbo since 2000 , when ballot irregularities in Florida led to weeks of chaos and court fights .
For some election experts and Democrats , the prospect of similar uncertainty is especially worrisome this year , as Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has claimed without evidence that widespread mail balloting will lead to a `` rigged '' election .
`` It 's very problematic , '' said Rick Hasen , a University of California-Irvine law professor .
`` There is already so much anxiety about this election because of the high levels of polarization and misinformation . ''
Mr. Hasen is among the experts who have been studying the strains on the U.S. electoral system during the pandemic .
He recently convened a bipartisan group of academics to recommend safeguards for a disputed election .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ like state legislatures or governors refusing to seat electors , or a candidate refusing to cede power .
Meanwhile , some Democratic operatives , lawyers , and even the presumptive presidential nominee have grown increasingly vocal with their concerns that Mr. Trump will try to meddle in the election .
Joe Biden recently said he thinks Mr. Trump may use his office to intervene : `` Mark my words , I think he is going to try to kick back the election somehow , come up with some rationale why it ca n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ken Farnaso called the accusation `` another unsubstantiated creation of the liberal conspiracy theory machine . ''
Mr. Trump said last year in an interview that he would accept the results of the 2020 election .
Since then , however , the coronavirus has dramatically changed how Americans vote .
As voters look for a safer alternative to in-person voting , election officials from both parties have promoted mail-in and absentee voting options , and requests for mail ballots have surged in the primaries .
Many states expect to be scrambling to process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state runs its own process , those mail ballots can take longer to count .
In some states , the ballots can be accepted several days after Election Day , as long as they are postmarked before polls closed .
And while some states count the ballots as they come in , others – notably the critical battlegrounds of Michigan and Pennsylvania – have laws that forbid processing mail ballots until Election Day , guaranteeing the count will extend well past that night .
That does n't mean The Associated Press and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The AP regularly calls races before the official vote count is complete , using models based on partial results , past races , and extensive polling .
But in particularly tight contests , the AP and other news organizations may hold off on declaring a winner .
That could lead to a national roller coaster ride of shifting results .
In Arizona in 2018 , for example , Republican Martha McSally was narrowly winning the initial tally of in-person votes and mail ballots that had arrived days before Election Day .
More @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials were able to tally all the mail votes that arrived on Election Day , Democrat Kyrsten Sinema won the senatorial race by more than 2 percentage points .
Arizona changed its procedures to try to speed up the vote count this year .
In Michigan and Pennsylvania , two states that helped hand Mr. Trump his 2016 victory , Democrats have pushed to relax the laws forbidding them from processing ballots before Election Day but faced GOP resistance .
In Michigan , GOP leaders had argued it would be improper to handle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday , the state 's GOP-controlled Senate signaled a shift , advancing a bill that would allow the processing of absentee ballots the day before Election Day .
Ms. Benson said even if the bill passes , she expects a slow count in November .
`` It 's certainly going to be a challenge , '' Ms. Benson said .
In Pennsylvania , only 4.6 % of the state 's voters voted either early or by mail in 2016 .
But now both parties are urging voters to send in mail ballots for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials are overwhelmed by absentee ballot requests .
Philadelphia says it wo n't even begin to count mail ballots until after the end of primary day , June 2 .
Forrest K. Lehman , elections director in Lycoming County in central Pennsylvania , warned : `` In terms of November , if they do n't let us start canvassing sooner than the day of the election , there 's no way anyone can responsibly call Pennsylvania on election night . ''
Another factor that could delay the count is Democrats ' push to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Election Day .
Democrats have filed more than a dozen lawsuits demanding that standard and note that the U.S. Supreme Court required it for Wisconsin 's April 7 election .
But , because of that requirement , Wisconsin could n't release results from its election until April 13 .
This story was reported by The Associated Press .
AP writers David Eggert in Lansing , Mich. , and Marc Levy in Harrisburg , Pa. , contributed to this report .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , the Monitor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus coverage .
It ’ s free .

A shift to mail voting is increasing the chances that Americans will not know the winner of November's presidential race on election night, a scenario that is fueling worries about whether President Donald Trump will use the delay to sow doubts about the results.
State election officials in some key battleground states have recently warned that it may take days to count what they expect will be a surge of ballots sent by mail out of concern for safety amid the pandemic. In an election as close as 2016's, a delayed tally in key states could keep news organizations from calling a winner.
"It may be several days before we know the outcome of the election," Jocelyn Benson, Michigan's Democratic secretary of state, said in an interview. "We have to prepare for that now and accept that reality."
Ohio's Republican secretary of state, Frank LaRose, pleaded for "patience" from the public. "We've gotten accustomed to this idea that by the middle of the evening of election night, we're going to know all the results," Mr. LaRose said on Wednesday at a forum on voting hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center. "Election night reporting may take a little longer" this year, he warned.
Delayed results are common in a few states where elections are already conducted largely by mail. But a presidential election hasn't been left in limbo since 2000, when ballot irregularities in Florida led to weeks of chaos and court fights.
For some election experts and Democrats, the prospect of similar uncertainty is especially worrisome this year, as Mr. Trump disparages mail-in voting as fraudulent and has claimed without evidence that widespread mail balloting will lead to a "rigged" election.
"It's very problematic," said Rick Hasen, a University of California-Irvine law professor. "There is already so much anxiety about this election because of the high levels of polarization and misinformation."
Mr. Hasen is among the experts who have been studying the strains on the U.S. electoral system during the pandemic. He recently convened a bipartisan group of academics to recommend safeguards for a disputed election. Some members have gamed out dramatic scenarios like state legislatures or governors refusing to seat electors, or a candidate refusing to cede power.
Meanwhile, some Democratic operatives, lawyers, and even the presumptive presidential nominee have grown increasingly vocal with their concerns that Mr. Trump will try to meddle in the election. Joe Biden recently said he thinks Mr. Trump may use his office to intervene: "Mark my words, I think he is going to try to kick back the election somehow, come up with some rationale why it can't be held."
Trump campaign spokesman Ken Farnaso called the accusation "another unsubstantiated creation of the liberal conspiracy theory machine."
Mr. Trump said last year in an interview that he would accept the results of the 2020 election. Since then, however, the coronavirus has dramatically changed how Americans vote.
As voters look for a safer alternative to in-person voting, election officials from both parties have promoted mail-in and absentee voting options, and requests for mail ballots have surged in the primaries. Many states expect to be scrambling to process millions more in November.
While each state runs its own process, those mail ballots can take longer to count. In some states, the ballots can be accepted several days after Election Day, as long as they are postmarked before polls closed. And while some states count the ballots as they come in, others – notably the critical battlegrounds of Michigan and Pennsylvania – have laws that forbid processing mail ballots until Election Day, guaranteeing the count will extend well past that night.
That doesn't mean The Associated Press and other news organizations won't call a winner. The AP regularly calls races before the official vote count is complete, using models based on partial results, past races, and extensive polling.
But in particularly tight contests, the AP and other news organizations may hold off on declaring a winner. That could lead to a national roller coaster ride of shifting results.
In Arizona in 2018, for example, Republican Martha McSally was narrowly winning the initial tally of in-person votes and mail ballots that had arrived days before Election Day. More than a week later, after election officials were able to tally all the mail votes that arrived on Election Day, Democrat Kyrsten Sinema won the senatorial race by more than 2 percentage points. Arizona changed its procedures to try to speed up the vote count this year.
In Michigan and Pennsylvania, two states that helped hand Mr. Trump his 2016 victory, Democrats have pushed to relax the laws forbidding them from processing ballots before Election Day but faced GOP resistance.
In Michigan, GOP leaders had argued it would be improper to handle ballots before Election Day. But on Wednesday, the state's GOP-controlled Senate signaled a shift, advancing a bill that would allow the processing of absentee ballots the day before Election Day.
Ms. Benson said even if the bill passes, she expects a slow count in November.
"It's certainly going to be a challenge," Ms. Benson said.
In Pennsylvania, only 4.6% of the state's voters voted either early or by mail in 2016. But now both parties are urging voters to send in mail ballots for next week's primary elections, and officials are overwhelmed by absentee ballot requests.
Philadelphia says it won't even begin to count mail ballots until after the end of primary day, June 2. Forrest K. Lehman, elections director in Lycoming County in central Pennsylvania, warned: "In terms of November, if they don't let us start canvassing sooner than the day of the election, there's no way anyone can responsibly call Pennsylvania on election night."
Another factor that could delay the count is Democrats' push to require states to accept mail ballots postmarked on Election Day. Democrats have filed more than a dozen lawsuits demanding that standard and note that the U.S. Supreme Court required it for Wisconsin's April 7 election.
But, because of that requirement, Wisconsin couldn't release results from its election until April 13.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
This story was reported by The Associated Press. AP writers David Eggert in Lansing, Mich., and Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pa., contributed to this report.
Editor’s note: As a public service, the Monitor has removed the paywall for all our coronavirus coverage. It’s free.