The Useful Idiot

The following is excerpted from “The Useful Idiot: How Donald Trump Killed the Republican Party with Racism and the Rest of Us with Coronavirus,” by S.V. Dáte.
A pandemic never occurred to them. The idea that Donald Trump would ever be required to sit still, pay attention and make rational decisions that would determine whether hundreds of thousands of Americans would live or die not once crossed the minds of those who put him into the Oval Office.
Advertisement
Oh, they all had their various reasons for wanting him there. For white evangelical Christians, he had explicitly promised to appoint the federal judges they had so longed for to turn back the nation’s cultural clock. For Mitch McConnell, a Trump win — as unlikely as it seemed — was the only real path to making sure Republicans retained control of the Senate and he himself remained majority leader. And for Vladimir Putin, having Trump in the White House — as unlikely as it seemed — would be a dream come true, an opportunity to wreak havoc on his longtime adversary and weaken its historic alliance with Western Europe.
Russia’s dictator, of course, was not remotely interested in what Trump’s ascension might mean for Americans in the event of an actual calamity. If they were dumb enough to vote for him, well, they deserved whatever they got. In any event, it was not his problem.
As for Trump’s American supporters, perhaps so much time had passed since Sept. 11, 2001, that the idea of a genuine national emergency was but a faded memory. Perhaps the quiet competence that President Barack Obama’s team had employed with the 2009 flu pandemic and later with the 2014 West African Ebola outbreak had diminished the perceived threat that a simple virus could present.
For whatever reason, even as they watched the noise and chaos and nonsense generated by candidate Trump for a full year and a half, the consequences of a real crisis requiring real leadership actually happening on the watch of a President Trump had never really dawned on them.
Advertisement
True, there existed then — and continues to exist today — a significant cadre of Republican voters who genuinely believed that the Trump they watched on “The Apprentice” was the real Donald Trump. That he was a real billionaire, based on his own efforts and smarts. That he was capable of making rational, quality decisions based on the facts presented to him.
That excuse, though, does not work for those Republicans from McConnell on down to the congressional candidates who had occasion to speak with Trump in person. As one top Republican National Committee member told me after his first face-to-face encounter with Trump two months before the 2016 election: “OK. Our guy is insane.”
Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/HuffPost; Photos: Getty
His was not a minority view, by the way. Trump’s incoherence, his temper, his impulsiveness, his breathtaking ignorance — all of it was well-known among the top tiers of the Republican machinery. But for them, it was simply a challenge to overcome, another hurdle that fate had placed between them and their holy grail of judges and tax cuts and regulatory rollbacks. Not once did I ever hear any concern that just maybe they were working to install a useful idiot who truly was an idiot, with absolutely zero leadership qualities one ordinarily looks for in someone aspiring to become the chief executive of the world’s remaining superpower.
It was an abject failure of the Republican Party’s responsibility to the country. In our two-party system, both have a duty to weed out candidates who fail the threshold test of commander-in-chief and, relatedly, emergency-manager-in-chief. Through the summer and fall of 2015 and then the early nominating contests of 2016, it was clear as day that Trump was not credible in those roles, and yet neither the remaining candidates nor the party leadership made a serious effort to ensure his defeat.
Advertisement
True, there were some who voiced warnings. Jeb Bush called Trump a “chaos candidate” who would bring us a “chaos presidency.” But there was also Ted Cruz, who literally praised Trump for the better part of a year, refusing to criticize him in the hopes of one day inheriting his voters. By the time Cruz did unload on him, it was seen as sour grapes. Such was the cynicism and game-playing that put us where we are.
“Trump’s incoherence, his temper, his impulsiveness, his breathtaking ignorance — all of it was well-known among the top tiers of the Republican machinery. ... Not once did I ever hear any concern that just maybe they were working to install a useful idiot who truly was an idiot.”
Republicans will pay a price for that negligence. This already became apparent in the off-year elections, with Democrats winning back the House in 2018 and scoring wins in such unlikely races as a special election for an Alabama Senate seat in 2017 and the Kentucky governorship in 2019. Whether Republicans suffer a complete presidential year wipeout in the autumn of 2020 or four years later is debatable, but that it will happen is not. Trump is betting not just his own future, but that of the party he hijacked on the dwindling demographic of angry white men without college degrees, disproportionately in the South. This is not a winning bet.
Separate from the Republican Party’s failure to safeguard the country, though, is the failure of ordinary Americans. Trump did not elect himself. And while he had the direct help of Russia and the unintended help of the FBI director, it was, in the end, actual Americans who cast their ballots for him.
In a representative democracy, the buck ultimately stops with the voters. So, yes, the president failed us miserably in his handling of the pandemic. From pretending he had stopped the virus from entering the country to claiming it wasn’t so bad to wishing that it would just go away to nonsensically hyping an unproven treatment to discouraging the use of masks to eventually just getting bored with it and moving on, the president could not have handled this more poorly had he been actively trying to fail us.
Advertisement
This is on him — the many hundreds of thousands, even millions, of serious illnesses that might not have happened with a competent response. The 150,000 deaths, at least, that could have been avoided. But it’s also on us.
When the coronavirus reckoning is complete, when all the numbers are eventually tallied, here’s one more that should be included: the 62,984,828 who enabled it to happen back on Nov. 8, 2016.
In truth, no one should have been surprised by Trump’s ruinous handling of a real disaster when it arrived in January 2020. He himself had given us all a clear warning just a few months earlier when he ginned up a fake one for no good reason at all.
In late summer 2019, Trump wreaked chaos and confusion upon Americans trying to plan for the possible arrival of a massive hurricane along the Southeast coast. As residents of Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas anxiously tracked Dorian’s projected path, Trump tossed out his own forecast on Twitter, adding a new state into the mix:
Advertisement
“In addition to Florida - South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, will most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated. Looking like one of the largest hurricanes ever. Already category 5. BE CAREFUL! GOD BLESS EVERYONE!”
Almost immediately, the phones lit up at the National Weather Service office in Birmingham as panicked residents called to ask if it was true: that Dorian was going to cross Florida and hit them. This led to a tweet from the meteorologists in that office — who at the time did not know where the misinformation was coming from — stating that Alabama was not, repeat, not in Dorian’s path and everyone should calm down.
And that, in turn, spawned a weekslong imbroglio, with the White House and Trump’s various apologists on one side insisting that Trump had been right and Alabama had been in danger at the time Trump posted his tweet, versus the meteorologists and tropical storm experts at the National Hurricane Center who pointed out that the consensus forecast was already calling for the storm to parallel the East Coast and then head off to sea. Front and center was a week-old tracking map onto which Trump had, with a black Sharpie, apparently drawn a semicircle to include Alabama.
The defenses of him afterward were largely along the lines of, well, that’s just Trump being Trump. Which was both true and — although this went underappreciated at the time — downright horrifying.
It was an open rejection of expertise in a life-and-death field. What Trump was saying was that because he was the president of the United States, his opinion of where the storm would head and whose lives were in imminent danger was every bit as valid as the opinions of those who had devoted their adult lives to the study of Atlantic cyclones. It was beyond parody.
Advertisement
In the Oval Office of the White House, President Donald Trump holds a chart showing the original projected track of Hurricane Dorian that appears to have been extended with a black line to include parts of the Florida panhandle and Alabama on Sept. 4, 2019. Jonathan Ernst / Reuters
Most stunning of all was the view within his senior staff that it was no big deal. One aide even kept on his desk a printout of the tracking chart in question, kind of as a souvenir from what he considered a ridiculous kerfuffle in which Trump had, yet again, owned the press.
That, right there, should have been a bright red flashing warning sign. Because a hurricane is a slow-moving menace that is observable through publicly available images from weather satellites and other data. What’s more, the National Hurricane Center and the National Weather Service continued to do their jobs, notwithstanding the president’s meddling. What Trump did was inexcusably dangerous — but only those foolish enough to still be listening to the man, given the track record of his first two and a half years in office, were going to be negatively affected. Everyone else would listen to the Hurricane Center and local emergency management officials and act accordingly.
No, the bigger risk that became obvious with the hurricane map stunt was the possibility of a threat that truly required a competent presidential response. Trump could not even properly manage the approach of a hurricane — something that typically happens several times every single year — and then tried to coerce his executive branch agencies into revising history in an attempt to back up his silly tweet.
How would he manage a threat that a president, and only the president, was in a position to deal with?
Advertisement
I actually mentioned that in a long piece about Trump’s endless dishonesty, and even posited the threat of a deadly disease. That article published on Jan. 15, 2020.
Unfortunately, it was only a week later that America started to get the answer to that question.
It’s easy now as the pandemic drags on and the American death toll climbs toward 200,000 to put all the blame on Trump. He did, after all, make bad decision after bad decision in the crucial early weeks of the outbreak, from ignoring intelligence community warnings to downplaying the threat to avoiding taking steps that would anger China’s dictator and endanger the all-important trade agreement he believed he needed in order to win a second term. He even called concerns about the pandemic “a hoax” at one of his campaign rallies, sending a signal to his voting base that public health officials have had an impossible time countering ever since.
That mishandling of the disease, in turn, wrecked the strong economy that for three years Trump had been claiming as his own. In truth, he had inherited it from Obama, with employment and gross domestic product numbers largely similar to those under his predecessor’s second term. The resulting crisis is rivaling the Great Depression in job losses. With a competent response to the pandemic, much of the related economic catastrophe might have been avoided, as well.
And yet, again, Trump did not anoint himself president. That was the work of those 63 million Americans who walked into their polling places and decided to put a cartoonishly unserious person into the most serious job in the country.
Advertisement
There were a number of factors that led to this. Putin decided that the best way to weaken America in 2016 was by hurting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries and boosting a “reality” game show host in the Republican contests. How could he know that the then-162-year-old party that once prided itself on its hard-headed realism would fail to do all in its power to stop him?
FBI Director James Comey, for what he thought was the good of his institution, decided in late October to reopen an investigation into Clinton’s misuse of a private email server. How was he to know that state polling was off and that Clinton’s expected easy win was a chimera, and that his two letters to Congress would put the election on a knife’s edge?
In retrospect, it seems quaint — adorable, almost — how much time and energy and hand-wringing went into investigating Clinton’s emails, given the loud and proud corruption Trump has carried out these past three years: the funneling of millions of both campaign as well as taxpayer dollars into his own cash registers, the installation of his own daughter and son-in-law into White House positions, the use of his office and his attorney general to squash investigations into himself and his companies, the attempted extortion of a foreign leader into hurting the political rival he feared most, the begging of a dictator for a favorable trade deal to help him win reelection, the open use of his office and White House staff to stage de facto campaign rallies, and on and on and on and on.
That he would behave this way was not surprising in the least. He had lived his entire adult life in this manner, and the evidence was right out in the open, from his business dealings with the mob to the way he treated his “charity” as a personal slush fund, using it for everything from buying a $12,000 football helmet autographed by Tim Tebow to paying his son’s $7 Boy Scout dues. Sixty-three million Americans knew this, or actively chose not to know this, and decided they were fine with it.
One such voter, in fact, worked with Trump for years and knew full well about his dishonesty and treachery. He told me he didn’t care. That the system needed shaking up, and that he wanted Trump to go in and be a bull in a china shop and smash things.
Advertisement
That person is now a senior official in the administration.
President Donald Trump participates in a tour of a Honeywell International plant that manufactures personal protective equipment on May 5, 2020, in Phoenix. AP Photo/Evan Vucci
Trump’s handling of the pandemic, also, was entirely predictable.
For starters, he only occasionally takes intelligence briefings. Both George W. Bush and Obama began their days with one. Trump spends the first several hours of his day watching television and tweeting about what he has just seen. In 2020, he has been taking between just one and two briefings each week.
Meaning that when the experts were trying to tell him that something bad was happening in China and that we needed to prepare, Trump could not be bothered to listen. His top health officials were getting alarming news over the New Year’s holiday about a pneumonia-like outbreak in Wuhan. Trump was golfing. When his health and human services secretary finally got him on the phone nearly three weeks later to talk about the virus, Trump yelled at him instead about a backlash to vaping regulations that was going to hurt Trump with vapers.
Indeed, Trump’s singular focus was then, and remains today, his own reelection. Nothing else matters, and that is now why well over a hundred thousand people in America killed by the coronavirus would still be alive if just about any other adult human being had been president instead of Trump.
Advertisement
In January, winning a second term meant getting his “trade deal” with China signed. Not a harsh word could be spoken about the country or its dictator. Never mind that it wasn’t really a free trade agreement, just a partial unwinding of the trade war he had started. For Trump, it was everything. He repeatedly praised China and Xi Jinping for their “transparency” about the virus when the opposite was true.
In February, trade deal signed, Trump saw increasing concerns about the virus as a direct assault on his reelection bid. He refused to take the pandemic seriously, even as it ravaged Italy and Iran. When a top CDC official warned that people’s lives were about to change dramatically, Trump was enraged because of the stock market sell-off this triggered. He told Americans via Twitter that thousands die from the flu every year and encouraged them to buy stocks. From the White House briefing room, he claimed he had done a fantastic job and that the 15 diagnosed cases to date would soon drop to zero. At one of his rallies, he even claimed that the virus had become his critics’ latest “hoax” and lumped it into the category that included his acceptance of Russian help to win the 2016 election (which was, by the way, true; he had, in fact, done that) and his impeachment over his extortion of Ukraine for help to win the 2020 election (which was also true; he actually did that as well).
After seeming to take the threat seriously for a couple of weeks in the second half of March, Trump quickly grew bored of it and began demanding that states “reopen” their economies so he could go back to the campaign strategy that he had been planning: that is, taking credit for the economy Obama had left him.
Numerous times, Trump repeated in remarks what he had tweeted on March 22, in all capitals: “WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF.”
Advertisement
Indeed, just reading back through his various statements through the course of the pandemic is an exercise in shock and awe. “The coronavirus is very much under control in the USA.” “This is a flu. This is like a flu.” “I think that we’re doing a great job.” “It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.” “Just stay calm. It will go away.” “Slow the testing down, please.”
And, of course, the statement that could easily wind up the epitaph of his presidency: “I don’t take responsibility at all.”
If evil scientists had conspired to concoct a worse president for our country in a time of crisis, they would have been hard-pressed to outdo Trump. His ignorance, mendacity and stubbornness are a toxic mix in the best of times. Many of the adults in both parties assumed that eventually, when it was finally over, his most egregious messes in the area of trade policy, the NATO alliance, climate change and the environment could, with some work, be cleaned up.
The same cannot be said for all the Americans who will have died unnecessarily because one of the worst human beings in public life — a man who has shown time and time again that his lack of humanity is matched only by his open corruption — happened to become our president.
Advertisement
Perhaps something good can come of this, in the end. Maybe this hard lesson will bring back the idea that the presidency is not a game. That the judgment and the maturity and the smarts of the person behind that desk matter — and not in the way that most people think.
There is a segment of the population that insists a president be “relatable,” to be someone they’d want to have a beer with. Others demand that a candidate match up completely with their preferred vision of the future, of the policies they want to see enacted, and failing such a person’s presence on the ballot, they will not vote at all. Still others — disproportionately, younger voters — believe they have a fundamental right to demand that a candidate inspire them, and failing such inspiration, they also will not bother voting.
Maybe, perhaps, the election of a shameless, cheerfully corrupt con man whose selfishness and ignorance led to the sickness and death of so many of their fellow Americans will help these people grow the hell up.
“Trump did not anoint himself president. That was the work of those 63 million Americans who walked into their polling places and decided to put a cartoonishly unserious person into the most serious job in the country.”
We don’t choose a heart surgeon or a tax accountant or an airline pilot using those criteria, and their jobs are not nearly as critical for the common good as the presidency of the United States. Sure, it would be nice for a president to be interesting and down-to-earth enough to seem relatable — but that’s not nearly as important as competence. There’s nothing wrong with supporting a candidate who shares your ideas and ideals. But making big changes takes time, and, in a crisis, an ideologue can be the worst personality to have in charge. You need someone willing to understand the world as it is, not insist on seeing the world as they feel it ought to be.
Advertisement
As for inspiration — we do not pick the surgeon who is funnier or the accountant who spins out the most engaging anecdotes. Why do we conflate those traits with leadership?
This is not new, by the way. People did not vote for John F. Kennedy because they believed he would bring thoughtful wisdom to the Oval Office. Ronald Reagan’s people learned from that and made his entire campaign — indeed, much of his presidency — a movie production. George H.W. Bush had, hands down, the most relevant experience of any president, and had governed with a low-key self-assuredness. Bill Clinton beat him by seeming more empathetic.
In all three of those cases, though, the winning candidate exhibited an interest in a serious approach to the job during his campaign, and all three wound up demonstrating that in office. In contrast, Trump during his campaign showed he had little knowledge of how the world worked and made it clear he had no interest in learning. His view was that it was all easy and that any idiot could do it. Well, clearly, he was wrong.
Forget all the insane promises he made that were not possibly deliverable. The only real promise that the biggest slice of his base wanted was to make America like it was in the 1950s, which even they knew was not possible. They didn’t care. They liked that he was willing to promise it to them and that he was willing to smash things and make “the establishment” mad.
It is true that Trump did not even receive a plurality of the votes cast, and almost certainly would not have won without the combination of both Russian help and the Comey letters reopening and then reclosing his Clinton investigation in the campaign’s final days. Yet the fact remains that 46% of Americans casting ballots in the 2016 election did so for someone who was not remotely qualified for the job. This, nearly four years later, remains astounding.
Advertisement
A significant percentage of them were perhaps not the most informed or sophisticated of voters and believed Trump really was the savvy and smart businessman he played on television. But what about the rest? They could see what he was all about but voted for him anyway. What does that say about their view of the importance of the job?
Maybe the coronavirus pandemic can impart the lesson that, first and foremost, the person elected to the Oval Office has to be capable of handling the really bad things, the things you did not or even could not anticipate. Airlines don’t pay pilots $200,000 a year to set planes down on clear sunny days with little wind. They get paid well for their years of experience, for all the training they’ve had and the training they continue to undergo for the day the hydraulics fail and they lose an engine to a bird strike on final approach during a thunderstorm, with a bad crosswind. On a related note, nobody asks as they climb aboard whether the pilot is someone they’d like to have a beer with later, or what her views are on “Medicare for All.”
Leadership matters, as has now been made abundantly clear.
There was a terrific skit by “Saturday Night Live” in the late 1980s that portrayed Ronald Reagan as a doddering, increasingly detached granddad smiling and mouthing meaningless clichés to the news cameras as they demanded answers about the Iran-Contra scandal … and then, behind closed doors, transforming into a cunning mastermind who had personally directed every detail.
This, roughly, was how Trump’s defenders in the Republican Party portrayed him during the 2016 election after they were stuck with him as their nominee. It was all an act, they promised. The unhinged rants, the constant tweeting, the outlandish lies — it was all performance art, they claimed, to appeal to a segment of the population that has long been disaffected with traditional Republican politics. Behind closed doors, they promised, he was a different person. A thoughtful and reasonable grown-up who sought divergent viewpoints before making decisions. This would be revealed in the off chance that he somehow won the election, particularly as the weight of the office burdened his shoulders.
Advertisement
These claims, obviously, were lies — or, in the case of those who did not really know Trump very well, wishful thinking.
There is no doubt that Trump can, on occasion, behave like a grown-up. But as insider account after insider account confirms the evidence of our own eyes and ears, it is this occasional grown-up behavior that is the act, the performance art.
The real Trump is the one who bellows angrily at his critics and opponents, the one who posts absurd conspiracy theories on Twitter, who manically calls his safe circle of fawning sycophants for advice, who openly admires authoritarians around the world while attacking and insulting democratically elected leaders, who refuses to take responsibility for any of his failings and who is willing to do anything — extorting a foreign country, begging China’s dictator, egging on open racists, delegitimizing our own coming election — to hold on to power.
The burdens of office have not weighed down on him a single bit. Compare photos of Bill Clinton, either of the Bushes or Obama before they took office and four years in. Note the graying hair, the worry wrinkles and weariness. Now, look at Trump before and today. More bloat, perhaps, but a face otherwise unchanged.
Advertisement
He is now, and for decades has been, a middle school bully with the impulse control of a toddler. The only thing Donald J. Trump cared about before he took office was Donald J. Trump. That has not changed in these three and a half years.
What’s remarkably missing in my multi-year exploration of Trump’s universe is a full-throated, or frankly, even half-hearted defense of any sort of basic, human decency in him. People defend his “economic” nationalism. They shrug and point out the judges he has appointed and the regulations he has rolled back. Others point to the tax cut and how he has helped their personal bank accounts. One White House aide told me that no other Republican elected in 2016 would have produced as many conservative policies as Trump has.
Not one bothers to sell the idea that he is misunderstood and is, at heart, a good human being. Not one.
This view is not restricted to those who work with him. Over the past four years, I have done countless interviews with Republican supporters who, after rattling off judges and tax cuts and deregulation, nevertheless concede in the end that they wish he would keep his mouth shut more and tweet less or even not at all. Which is about as open an admission of what they think of him as a person as is possible.
Advertisement
His off-the-cuff remarks and his tweets — not the prepared speeches people write for him to read — are the most honest reflection of his true self. When his supporters say they wish he would hide that truth, it is because they understand precisely what kind of human being he is and how that is perceived by normal people with basic standards of conduct.
Amazingly, that so often gets glossed over in all the talk about him. Sixty-three million Americans, and the quirks of the Electoral College, put into the most powerful office in the world a truly despicable person. Trump does not treat people well. He would cheat you as soon as look at you. He is spiteful and mean while also venal and ignorant. And none of this was hidden from view. Not a single bit of it. Yet people voted for him anyway.
That says a lot about us. None of it good.
. Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/HuffPost; Photos: Getty
Democracy is not easy.
If there’s one lesson that needs to be learned from the Trump years, it is that one. Democracy is not easy, because for many, many people on this planet and in this country, freedom is not easy. For folks who more or less have it together, that may be hard to understand.
Advertisement
While those who live and work in the world of ideas have the time and the inclination to ponder grand concepts and endless possibilities, a great many of our brothers and sisters struggle just to get through each day. As in, literally wonder how they will manage to make it until bedtime. Whether it’s anxiety or depression or the drugs and the alcohol with which they are often intertwined, so, so many people just want someone to tell them what to do and to take care of them.
It’s no wonder that religions with strict rules on how to live one’s life hold such appeal and are growing so rapidly. The more rules, the better.
This is the key to “populists,” who understand that a substantial number of people are perfectly fine with a strong leader who promises order in a universe that appears not to have any. In his 2016 run, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum understood this even as most in his party did not. The vast majority of people are not entrepreneurs who dream of starting their own businesses. Most people just want a steady job that will be there next year and in five years and in 20 years so they can buy a house and raise children and do all the things they’re supposed to do the way their parents did.
Small wonder that a craven demagogue like Trump could take advantage of those insecurities and tell those people exactly what they wanted to hear.
This has always been the inherent danger in the American experiment: Self-governance requires active engagement by the citizenry. Because things rarely work out as planned, the drafters of the Constitution came up with federalism and checks and balances. On top of all that, this country has been blessed by its massive size and its attendant bureaucracy. It’s hard to institute large-scale change of any kind, in any direction. People demanding action on the climate can attest to this. People pushing for universal health care can attest to this —indeed, have been attesting to this, for decades.
Advertisement
Despite this, the fact remains that breaking things is easier than fixing them, as Trump has repeatedly demonstrated. With a 30% plurality of the populace interested in maintaining its cultural supremacy solidly behind him and a large enough slice of the Republican establishment willing to accept a Faustian bargain for the sake of its own agenda, he has gotten away with it.
We can already see what this has done to our country after three and a half years. What happens if that three and a half becomes eight?


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-06--Smile... With Your Eyes. How Face Masks Made Us Rethink Communication.

HuffPost is part of Verizon Media .
We and our partners will store and/or access information on your device through @ @ @ @ @ similar technologies , to display personalised ads and content , for ad and content measurement @ @ @ @ @ development .
Your personal data that may be used • Information about your device and @ @ @ @ @ IP address • Browsing and search activity while using Verizon Media websites and apps Find @ @ @ @ @ use your information in our Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy .
To enable Verizon Media @ @ @ @ @ your personal data select ' I agree ' , or select 'Manage settings ' for @ @ @ @ @ your choices .
You can change your choices at any time by visiting Your Privacy @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
We’re here to guide you through the coronavirus pandemic. Sign up to the Life newsletter for daily tips, advice, how-tos and escapism.
The eyes are the window to the soul, as the old saying goes – and with mask-wearing now the norm in most indoor public settings, our eyes are having to do an awful lot of the legwork when it comes to communicating with others.
Advertisement
Where once you could smile at a neighbour you passed in the street, it now becomes an awkward affair if you’re both wearing masks. Are they squinting, frowning, or are those creases around their eyes a sign they’re smiling back?
Some people choose to wave instead, or give a thumbs up. Others opt for a friendly nod, salute or – God forbid – finger guns. All of a sudden, we’re having to get creative with how we acknowledge others. Not only that, we’re also working harder to decode what people are trying to convey to us.
“Typically, it’s the combination of our facial features coupled with speech and other non-verbal gestures that helps us communicate with others,” says Dr Charlotte Hilton, a psychologist and British Psychological Society member.
One of the biggest issues with mask-wearing, then, is that we don’t pick up all the facial cues we normally would, says Professor Steven Taylor, a clinical psychologist at the University of British Columbia and author of The Psychology of Pandemics. This makes communication challenging.
Advertisement
iprogressman via Getty Images
What are the challenges? Well, the nose and mouth, alongside the eyes, give people the full picture of the emotions we experience and convey visually – happiness, sadness, disgust, anger. Take that away and you might struggle to work out how the person you’re talking to really feels. If they say, “you’re an idiot,” the meaning will vary greatly depending on their facial expression while they say it. And then, miscommunication arises.
Another issue is that we rely heavily on mouths for lip-reading. If we don’t hear what a person says, we often fill in the gaps by looking at the shapes their lips make as they speak. This is even more important for those who are deaf, which is a whole issue in itself. Masks also make it harder to hear what people are saying as their voices might be muffled. This poses additional challenges to those with hearing loss, prompting the design and manufacture of transparent masks to tackle this.
“We're learning to adapt to mask-wearing.” - Dr Charlotte Hilton, a psychologist and British Psychological Society member
While there are limited studies on face mask-wearing and the impact on our communication, one study in a hospital setting did find patients perceived doctors who wore face masks in appointments to be less empathetic. Not great news for building trust and rapport.
Advertisement
But despite these challenges, we’re learning to adapt, says Dr Hilton. Wearing a mask removes the lips, nose and mouth from the equation, but we still have our speech and other gestures to rely on.
“It’s not like we’ve gone blind and are having to learn how to use a cane,” says Prof Taylor, “we’ve lost some sensory input and we’re learning how to use other cues. Just like people who are losing their hearing will start to rely more on lip-reading, now people are relying more on facial cues and voice intonations.”
You might not be able to see a person’s mouth, but you can often hear it in their voice, for example. If they’re happy, the tone might be light, almost musical, whereas if they’re sad, they might speak more slowly or at a deeper pitch.
“People are looking more for cues,” says Prof Taylor, “and because people are having trouble being heard when they’re using masks, they’re speaking up more. And, it’s just anecdotal observation, but people are using voice cues more to communicate emotion to people.”
Will our communication change completely as a result, then? “We might adapt the way we communicate with others while wearing masks, but we also have time communicating with others in situations where we’re not wearing one,” Dr Hilton points out. “It’s likely, over time, we’ll learn to adapt our communication style while mask-wearing, but retain our ability to communicate in the same way we did prior to having our mouth and nose covered.”
Advertisement
Potentially, we’ll learn to alternate between those two modes of communication. It may not be easy, though. “Whilst humans have the capacity to be adaptable, it can take time to become more familiar with new things, such as wearing and seeing others wear a mask,” says Dr Hilton.
“We’ve heard the phrase ’new normal’ used extensively during the pandemic and this is perhaps because we tend to feel more comfortable and safe with things, people and environments that are familiar to us.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-05--10 Of The Wildest And Wackiest Conspiracies Trump Pushed This Week

LOADING ERROR LOADING
He’s also refused to reject the far-right QAnon movement, calling supporters of the outlandish conspiracy theory “people who love our country.”
Advertisement
But Trump appears to have outdone himself this week, publicly parroting multiple conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated claims in recent days. Here are 10 egregious examples:
At a Monday press conference, Trump defended Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old Trump supporter who fatally shot two people in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Trump defends Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old supporter of his who is charged with murdering two protesters in Kenosha pic.twitter.com/KdfkdTPRVG — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 31, 2020
The president said, without evidence, that Rittenhouse had acted in self-defence when he opened fire at a Black Lives Matter protest, killing two people and wounding another. The demonstration had been organised in response to the police shooting of Jacob Blake, an unarmed Black man.
Advertisement
Trump blamed the unrest on “left-wing political violence” and claimed Rittenhouse had been “trying to get away” from protesters who then “violently attacked him” when the shooting occurred.
Also on Monday, Trump touted several conspiracy theories in an interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham, including the claim that there had been a plane full of “thugs” who attempted to disrupt the GOP convention.
"We had somebody get on a plane from a certain city this weekend, and in the plane it was almost completely loaded with thugs, wearing these dark uniforms, black uniforms, with gear and this and that. They're on a plane."
Trump says this is "under investigation right now." pic.twitter.com/UjBBvsBaU3 — Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) September 1, 2020
Trump told Ingraham during the interview – which was broadcast in two parts on Monday and Tuesday – that “somebody” had seen the planeload of “thugs, wearing these dark uniforms... with gear and this and that” traveling from an unknown city to wreak havoc at the Republican National Convention, which was largely held remotely this year using pre-taped videos amid the coronavirus pandemic.
Trump has offered zero evidence to back up this wild claim.
Trump suggested that “some very stupid rich people” are bankrolling violent protesters involved in anti-racism demonstrations across the US.
The president has similarly not provided any evidence to support this conspiracy theory.
He also claimed that Portland, Oregon, where protests against racism and police violence have raged for three months, has been burning for decades
Portland fire officials were quick to push back against this claim.
“We are not on fire. We have not been on fire,” Lt. Rich Chatman, a spokesperson for Portland Fire & Rescue, said this week.
Trump told Ingraham that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden appears to be hopped up on some sort of drug.
the Biden Is Roiding thing rules pic.twitter.com/bOn7mcsQrv — Brendan Karet 🚮 (@bad_takes) September 2, 2020
“He’s on some kind of an enhancement, in my opinion,” Trump said, adding that both he and Biden should take a drug test to check.
Advertisement
Back in 2016, Trump made similar allegations about his Democratic rival, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton.
Trump claimed that “people that are in the dark shadows” are controlling Biden.
“People that you’ve never heard of” are controlling Biden, the president told Ingraham, prompting her to question whether Trump was touting a “conspiracy theory.”
He continued to push a false claim that Covid-19 isn’t as deadly as health agencies have reported.
Trump retweeted a post on Sunday, since deleted, that erroneously claimed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had “quietly” updated its numbers “to admit that only 6%” of people who died of the coronavirus had “actually” died of the virus since “the other 94% had 2-3 other serious illnesses.”
Trump repeated this claim in his interview with Ingraham – despite its inaccuracy.
While the CDC has said that 6% of Covid-19 victims’ death certificates list the coronavirus as the sole of death, officials have made it clear that the listing of co-morbidities – including chronic conditions such as hypertension and diabetes – doesn’t mean the person did not die of Covid-19.
“A small number of people have Covid ascribed as the sole cause of death. It may be they had no co-morbidities or they were just not noted,” Dr Myron Cohen, director of the Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, told Politifact of the data. “However, it is also clear that advanced age and several other underlying diseases lead to bad outcomes with Covid infections. The people dying were not going to die but for the acquisition of Covid.”
Advertisement
Dr Anthony Fauci, the country’s top infectious disease expert, also contradicted Trump’s claim.
Over the weekend, the President retweeted misinformation on the coronavirus death toll, claiming it's much lower due to comorbidities. Dr. Anthony Fauci responded this morning on ABC: “The numbers that you’ve been hearing, the 180,000-plus deaths, are real deaths from Covid-19." — Betsy Klein (@betsy_klein) September 1, 2020
Trump insisted he won the 2016 popular vote, which he lost by nearly 3 million ballots to Hillary Clinton.
The president told Ingraham that he actually won the popular vote “in a true sense” because the votes of a libertarian candidate should have counted for him.
Trump also suggested, without evidence, that there was “tremendous” voter fraud in California, New York and “other places.”
"I think I did win the popular vote, in a true sense. I think there was tremendous cheating" -- Trump claims falsely that he actually won the popular vote in 2016 pic.twitter.com/CUa7rv63Ow — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 2, 2020
Advertisement
Trump repeated the claim that the November election will be “rigged” because of postal voting.
Trump has, in recent weeks, repeatedly sought to undermine public confidence in mail-in voting – even as he and first lady Melania Trump have requested mail-in ballots themselves – by pushing baseless conspiracy theories about potential voter fraud.
He did this again on Wednesday, retweeting an article published by the right-wing website The National Pulse about how Trump may appear to win by a landslide on Election Day because mail-in votes won’t all have been counted yet.
The Pulse article is based on an interview aired on “Axios on HBO.” According to Axios, far more Democrats are expected to vote by mail in November than Republicans. Since those votes may not be counted for days or weeks after Election Day, Trump may appear to have won at first – even if he ultimately loses the vote.
“Rigged Election?” Trump tweeted in response to this possibility.
On two consecutive days, he appeared to encourage voters to cast their votes twice.
For 2nd straight day, Trump suggests his supporters in some cases should vote twice, which is illegal: "Sign your mail-in ballot, okay? You sign it & you send it in & then you have to follow it. And if, on Election Day or early voting, it's not tabulated and counted, you go vote" pic.twitter.com/ZhrF2rdGPb — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 4, 2020
Advertisement
While Trump warned, baselessly, of potential voter fraud on the one hand, he also appeared to encourage his supporters to commit voter fraud themselves by voting twice.
Speaking at a Pennsylvania rally on Thursday, Trump said mail-in ballots “are a disgrace” and urged voters to send in their absentee ballots before voting again in person.
“What you have to do is send in your early ballot and then go and make sure that ballot is tabulated or counted, and if it’s not counted, vote,” he said. “And then they have the job, if it comes in late, or if it’s not too late, they have the job of making sure that it’s not counted.”
The president had made a similar suggestion on Wednesday to supporters in North Carolina.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Will Boris Johnson’s No-Deal Brexit Gamble Hurt Keir Starmer More Than The PM?

LOADING ERROR LOADING
You’re reading The Waugh Zone, our daily politics briefing. Sign up now to get it by email in the evening.
Bluff cove?
Brexit’s back and in some ways it feels like it never went away. Boris Johnson threatening to walk away, Brussels talking about peace in Northern Ireland, MEPs accusing London of behaving irresponsibly.
Advertisement
There’s more than a little Groundhog Day feel to it all. So much so that one Labour source told me: “I woke up sweating this morning with post-traumatic stress syndrome, just because I heard Katya Adler talking on the radio about Brexit negotiations. Here we go again...” Instead of hearing ‘I Got You Babe’ as the alarm clock hit 6am, what they got was ‘I Got EU, Babe’.
For those who don’t follow every twist and turn of life at Westminster, the sudden re-emergence of the B-word was sparked by two events: the PM putting out a statement that leaving the EU without a trade deal would be a “good outcome” for the UK; plus the FT leak that legislation this week will radically reverse key elements of the withdrawal agreement on Northern Ireland.
There are plenty inside and outside the Tory party who think this is all a bluff, yet more brinkmanship to create the impression that the UK is forcing a change in the pace of talks, when in fact it is preparing for both sides to make pragmatic concessions. The PM talks about 36 days left to sort it, but that’s in fact the EU’s own deadline, it appears.
The idea that this is all theatrics is backed up by some government sources who claim that Brexit negotiator Sir David Frost recently confided to colleagues: “We need to have a bust-up with the EU, then get a deal”. The fact that the FT’s story was not subject to any fire and brimstone from No.10 also fuelled suspicions that it was planted in some way or other.
Advertisement
On the other hand, there’s genuine anger within No.10 at Brussels’ refusal to engage in talks on state aid and other areas. Cabinet minister George Eustice captured that frustration when he said this morning “they are in denial about what it means to be an independent country”. Some close to the PM point out his Greenwich speech way back in February explicitly raised the prospect of the UK “prospering” with an “Australia” deal (ie no deal).
Genuine too is Dominic Cummings’ belief that UK freedom on state aid is needed for investment in hi-tech industries and artificial intelligence. Don’t forget that early on in his job, the PM’s chief of staff told bemused spads that the government could be remembered more for “radical science” than for Brexit itself. State aid allows him to align his twin interests.
One Brexiteer former cabinet minister told me recently: “Singapore-on-Thames was all [Phillip] Hammond. In reality, we may need more state aid, not less, in some areas.” If the UK got its way it could indeed look like Berlin-on-Thames, given that Germany spends much more of its GDP on state aid than even France (and certainly more than the UK has).
Then again, despite Cummings’ lofty ambitions for a new British Apple or Tesla, some in Whitehall believe the real agenda is about paving the way to prop up ailing firms in the Midlands and north. Which brings us to the raw politics and for some in government the extra byproduct of all this Brexit chat: forcing Keir Starmer’s Labour to break its Trappist silence on matters Europe.
With even new Lib Dem leader Ed Davey saying the idea of his party campaigning at the next election to take the UK back into the EU is “for the birds”, some senior Tories are determined to hammer Starmer on just what he would do if he was PM right now. In a nutshell, what’s his message to the ex-Labour voters who are now the mortar in the Blue Wall?
Advertisement
Conservatives thought it significant that the person who spoke for Labour overnight and through today was not Starmer, not Rachel Reeves (who shadows Michael Gove, himself the Brexit secretary in all but name), but shadow Northern Ireland secretary Louise Haigh.
None will say it publicly, but some Tories think that most Brexit voters simply don’t care much about the Irish question, or the peace process, and have no real clue about the “NI protocol”, just as long as the UK got the heck out of the EU.
PA
Similarly on ‘no deal’, these Tories think Brexit voters see things very simply: if the EU won’t play ball, then sod ’em. Moreover, the two CCHQ attack lines against Starmer are that he’s both too “lawyerly” (code for lacks passion, is too finickity, is a London liberal) and an entrenched “Remainer” who had the gall to ask them to vote again. Even some on the Left of Labour have suggested Starmer formally “apologise” to Red Wall voters for backing a second referendum so enthusiastically.
Labour’s line overnight, that tearing up the Withdrawal Agreement would mean reneging on “the UK’s legal obligations” internationally, is seen by some Tories as further proof of the lawyerly approach. They think the politics on Brexit instead often comes down to not laws but gut dividing lines: ‘whose side are you on, ours or Brussels’?’
Advertisement
So, what will Starmer do? And is this the one ‘culture war’ issue on which he can be finally nailed by Johnson? Well, I’m told he intends to stick to what’s defined his leadership so far, combining strategic patience and a focus on the next election with a determination to fight battles on his own terms, not those laid as a trap for him.
Earlier this summer, Starmer repeatedly avoided answering whether he would back an extension to Brexit rather than ‘no deal’. His line was that the government has a majority of 80 and the country’s fate is in Johnson’s hands, not his. Expect more of that. Just as he hasn’t come up with an alternative roadmap on coronavirus, he won’t be coming up with his blueprint for UK-EU relations this far out from a general election.
But Starmer also knows that some Tory MPs in Red Wall areas fear that no-deal Brexit will hit their constituents hardest. Manufacturing, including carmaking, will be hit hard just when it’s on its back from Covid. Eustice was candid enough to admit today that no-deal would mean huge tariffs on our farming exports.
“He does things on his own terms, that’s his style of leadership, and it’ll be the same on this” one key ally says. During the Labour leadership, the trans issue was a case in point, when he had his own line that “trans rights are human rights” rather than endorse a list of others’ demands. A snap YouGov poll tonight suggested that among Tory voters and Leave voters overall, only 50% backed no deal.
Add in the inevitable Starmer charge that no-deal will expose Johnson’s untruths about an “oven ready deal” in the last election, and there’s a distinct sang froid among the Labour leader’s team. The focus is on the next election, and on making sure there’s no Groundhog Day of 2019.
Advertisement
Quote Of The Day
“I will not back down”
Boris Johnson, on the prospect of ‘no-deal’ in EU trade talks, in an email to Tory party members
Monday Cheat Sheet
For the second day running, the UK saw nearly 3,000 recorded cases of Covid-19.
Richer young people are one of the biggest drivers of the recent spike in coronavirus, Matt Hancock said, as he urged people “don’t kill your gran”. But some experts believe stats for young people were massively underestimated earlier in the pandemic.
People arriving in England from seven Greek islands will have to quarantine for 14 days, transport secretary Grant Shapps announced. He also suggested he was looking at cutting the two-week quarantine period to around 8 days with new testing regimes.
No 10 confirmed the new UK Internal Market Bill will be published on Wednesday but denied it would tear up the Withdrawal Agreement and featured “minor clarifications in extremely specific areas”.
As home office minister Kit Malthouse floated tougher laws for Extinction Rebellion protestors who blocked newspaper printing presses, Lib Dem Alistair Carmichael wondered if the doughty fight for free speech would see ministers on “Good Morning Britain anytime soon?”
Foreign secretary Dominic Raab summoned the Russian ambassador to register the UK’s “deep concern” over “the poisoning of Alexey Navalny with a chemical nerve agent from the Novichok group”.
Advertisement
What I’m Reading
Got A Tip?
Send tips, stories, quotes, pics, plugs or gossip to waugh.zone@huffpost.com.
Subscribe To Commons People


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Coronavirus Surge Shows 'People Have Relaxed Too Much', Jonathan Van-Tam Warns

Deputy chief medical officer Jonathan Van-Tam. Victoria Jones - PA Images via Getty Images
The spike in UK coronavirus cases shows the public has “relaxed too much” over the summer, a senior health official has warned.
Professor Jonathan Van-Tam, the deputy chief medical officer for England, said coronavirus must be taken very seriously again or the UK will face “a bumpy ride over the next few months” after a “big change” in infections.
Advertisement
The blunt warning was issued as Caerphilly in south Wales prepared to be placed under local lockdown and stricter measures were extended in Scotland.
There were a further 2,948 lab-confirmed cases of coronavirus in the UK as of 9am on Monday, following the 2,988 reported on Sunday, which was the largest daily figure since May.
In an interview with journalists, Prof Van-Tam said: “This is a big change.
“It’s now consistent over two days and it’s of great concern at this point.
“We’ve been able to relax a bit over the summer, the disease levels have been really quite low in the UK through the summer but these latest figures really show us that much as people might like to say ‘oh well it’s gone away’ – this hasn’t gone away.
“And if we’re not careful, if we don’t take this incredibly seriously from this point in we’re going to have a bumpy ride over the next few months.”
Advertisement
He said that the rise is “much more marked” in the 17-21 age group, but noted there is a “more general and creeping geographic trend” across the UK.
“People have relaxed too much,” Prof Van-Tam said. “Now is the time for us to re-engage and realise that this is a continuing threat to us.”
He urged politicians and public health officials to think how to manage the crisis not in the short term but through “the next six months and how we get through this until the spring”.
The professor added that it was “clear” that the level of compliance with restrictions “is very variable indeed”.
Earlier in the day, health secretary Matt Hancock said the recent increase in cases was “concerning” and said that “nobody wants to see a second wave”.
Advertisement
As the UK continued attempts to quell regional outbreaks, people were told they cannot enter or leave Caerphilly without a reasonable excuse when new restrictions are imposed at 6pm on Tuesday.
Meetings with other people indoors will be banned and everyone over 11 will have to wear masks in shops, the first time the measure has been made mandatory in Wales.
The South Wales borough has seen 133 new Covid-19 cases over the past seven days, equivalent to a rate of 55.4 cases per 100,000 population, giving it one of the highest rates in the UK.
Meanwhile, restrictions on household visits across western parts of Scotland were extended for a further week and expanded to also include East Dunbartonshire and Renfrewshire.
The developments came as:
– The total number of confirmed cases in the UK passed 350,100.
– The seven-day rate of new UK cases has risen to 21.3 per 100,000 people, just above the threshold of 20 cases per 100,000 at which the Government considers imposing quarantine conditions on people travelling to the UK, if recorded in other countries.
Advertisement
– Train services across England and Wales were increased to about 90% of pre-pandemic levels on Monday, with operators telling commuters they can “travel with confidence”.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Piers Corbyn Charged After Illegal Gathering In Sheffield

Piers Corbyn addresses an anti-mask protest at Trafalger Square in August. NurPhoto via Getty Images
The brother of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been charged in connection to a pre-planned illegal gathering in Sheffield city centre at the weekend.
Piers Corbyn, 73, of East Street, London, has been charged with three offences under the Health Protection (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020, South Yorkshire Police said.
Advertisement
It is alleged that Corbyn arranged and facilitated, then participated in, a gathering of more than 30 people on Saturday.
He is also accused of failing to wear a face covering in a required area.
Corbyn has been bailed to appear at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court in November.
A 44-year-old man from the Reading area who was arrested on suspicion of violent disorder at the gathering has been released on bail.
Police said Saturday’s protest led to significant disruption for shoppers and members of the public in the city centre, and four of the force’s officers were assaulted and left with minor injuries.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Is Boris Johnson Really About To Blow Up The Brexit Negotiations?

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Brexit negotiations have exploded into life after Boris Johnson set a new deadline and declared he would be happy to walk away with no trade deal if the EU does not give ground.
The prime minister further complicated matters by apparently threatening to rip up elements of the basic withdrawal agreement that he negotiated to take the country out of the EU in the first place.
Advertisement
The EU responded by insisting that implementing the withdrawal agreement is a “precondition” for negotiations on a trade deal, declaring it a “matter of trust”.
It has left many to wonder whether, after four years, this is the end of the road for Brexit negotiations. Is the UK about to leave the EU with no trade deal and default to economically damaging World Trade Organisation terms?
HuffPost UK has spoken to insiders and experts to find out what’s really going on.
So what is going on?
EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier is in London for a crunch week of Brexit talks with his UK counterpart David Frost, with time running out to reach a deal.
The key sticking points remain state aid and fisheries, and Johnson has fired a salvo apparently designed to pressure the EU into giving ground on UK demands for sovereignty.
Advertisement
The PM set a new deadline of October 15, declaring it will be time to “move on” if agreement can’t be reached and describing no deal as a “good outcome” for the UK.
The whole thing has been further complicated by a leak of the government’s Internal Market Bill to be published on Wednesday, which some experts see as ripping up the withdrawal agreement signed earlier this year and risking the collapse of talks.
Frost and Barnier during Brexit negotiations ASSOCIATED PRESS
Why are we talking about the deal already done?
There are, of course, potentially two Brexit deals.
Stay with us – last year’s withdrawal agreement (WA) triggered the current standstill transition period, during which talks are ongoing on a longer-term trade deal.
The WA also dealt with citizens’ rights, the so-called “divorce bill” and the thorny issue of Northern Ireland.
Advertisement
It is that final issue which is causing angst.
Wasn’t the withdrawal agreement ‘oven ready’ in December?
We thought so, but it turns out Johnson is unhappy with what aspects of his own deal – in particular, the so-called Northern Ireland (NI) protocol – mean for the UK.
Northern Ireland was supposed to follow EU rules on certain aspects of trade but UK rules on others, to ensure it keeps an invisible border with the Republic.
Now, however, the government has drawn up the Internal Market Bill, which appears to pick apart aspects of the NI protocol.
The problem is that the government wants to give UK ministers – and only UK ministers – the power to decide what goods are “at risk” of being sold into the EU via Northern Ireland, and must therefore comply with Brussels tariffs.
Under the Internal Market Bill, UK ministers would also have the power to decide when state aid – government support for businesses – should be notified to Brussels because it affects Northern Ireland, and by extension the EU.
Advertisement
Downing Street has stressed the moves are simply a “safety net” to ensure there is not legal confusion if the UK and EU, through the so-called “joint committee”, cannot agree how to determine these issues. (The joint committee was established under the withdrawal deal to monitor its application. Negotiations in the committee are led by Michael Gove on the UK side and Maros Sefcovic on the EU side.)
A UK official has also insisted it is “completely committed” to the withdrawal agreement, and described the legislation as “minor clarifications”.
We’ve got the deal. It’s oven ready. Vote Conservative tomorrow to get Brexit done 🇬🇧 pic.twitter.com/PI31ii5V6k — Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) December 11, 2019
So what’s the issue?
Far from simply representing “minor clarifications”, the proposals may actually breach the withdrawal agreement completely.
Anand Menon, director of the UK in a Changing Europe think-tank, believes the UK’s plan risks circumventing the European Court of Justice (ECJ) – which ultimately has power over the state aid rules under the withdrawal agreement – and EU customs laws which apply in Northern Ireland.
Advertisement
“What this inescapably is, is them [ministers] pondering the details of what they negotiated and signed last year and deciding: ‘We don’t like them,’” he says.
Menon also stresses that the UK’s plan is not simply a safety net as the government claims.
Maddy Thimont Jack, of the Institute for Government, agrees. “The way it’s drafted,” she said, “your default is full checks unless you agree otherwise.
“So, for example, the withdrawal agreement states that – if you can’t agree in the joint committee which goods are at risk and have to pay an EU tariff – then all goods count as that.”
Menon added: “If there’s any danger at all of the UK appearing to renege on its commitments under the withdrawal agreement, the EU will just say: ‘Not worth it.’”
I trust the British government to implement the Withdrawal Agreement, an obligation under international law & prerequisite for any future partnership. Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland is essential to protect peace and stability on the island & integrity of the single market. — Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen) September 7, 2020
Advertisement
But Thimont Jack believes there may be wriggle room.
“There’s a difference between giving ministers powers to do something and them actually doing that thing,” she says.
The EU also knows that the WA provides dispute resolution mechanisms that could see the UK face penalties if it actually reneges.
“The EU are staying quite measured and not getting as excited as all of us are and are basically saying: ‘Let’s wait and see what this means,’” she says.
“[The Internal Market Bill] does take you on a step towards undermining the UK’s obligations under the withdrawal agreement.”
So what is the UK up to?
The surprise move by the UK has led to a renewed bout of fevered Brexitology, which had become a bit of a dying sport as negotiations remained deadlocked around the same issues.
Advertisement
Thimont Jack suggested Johnson might be trying to apply yet more pressure to the EU, “saying: ‘If you’re not going to start playing ball in the talks, we don’t necessarily have to comply with what we’ve signed up to.’”
She goes on: “I don’t think that will work. If that’s the ploy, it’s not necessarily the best one.
“The EU will stick by the same lines they’ve said for the last year – getting an agreement on the future relationship depends on the UK implementing the withdrawal agreement fully.”
It could also be “pitch rolling” (preparing the ground), as one Tory MP says, for a compromise in the wider trade deal.
Thimont Jack agrees: “It could be about saying to backbenchers who are very unhappy with the withdrawal agreement: ‘We have got these powers,’ and that may possibly help if the UK makes a concession at a later point.
“And again that might possibly be why the EU is being a bit calmer, because they are seeing it as domestic politics and so there’s no point getting upset about it now.
Advertisement
“But if it goes further than taking powers then it will raise questions.”
Johnson on a visit to a boxing club during December's election Stefan Rousseau - PA Images via Getty Images
Menon believes the row shows where the power lies in the Conservative Party.
“They absolutely do have on eye on the Brexiteer audience here,” he says.
“The big unanswered question for me is: where are the Tory moderates? Are they going to speak up? The backlash hasn’t come yet.
“It may give more of an idea about the relative strengths of the camps in the Conservative Party – there’s only one camp doing the running at the moment and that’s the Brexit zealots camp.”
So are we heading for no deal soon?
Once again, while he might be appearing hardline, Johnson’s stance may not be as tough as it looks. His new October 15 deadline is only two weeks ahead of the October 31 cut-off previously set by Barnier.
Menon says: “Part of the politics of this is trying to put pressure on the EU. Part of it is - the more you talk about no deal, the more you look like a saviour if you get a deal.
Advertisement
“So you can ratchet up your ability as, yet again, the man who’s achieved the impossible.”
But that doesn’t mean no deal is off the table.
“It’s very finely balanced at the moment,” says Menon.
“The combination of the mood music and the substantive issues means no deal is perfectly plausible.”
But for Thimont Jack, there is no need to panic right now.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Prince Harry Pays £2.4m Frogmore Cottage Bill Thanks To Bumper Netflix Deal

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Duke of Sussex has paid back the £2.4 million of taxpayers’ money used to renovate Frogmore Cottage.
A spokesperson for Harry confirmed the duke had paid the bill in full by making a contribution to the Sovereign Grant.
Advertisement
The payment was made possible thanks to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new multi-million pound Netflix deal, a source told the PA Media news agency.
Harry’s spokesperson said: “A contribution has been made to the Sovereign Grant by the Duke of Sussex.
“This contribution as originally offered by Prince Harry has fully covered the necessary renovation costs of Frogmore Cottage, a property of Her Majesty The Queen, and will remain the UK residence of the duke and his family.”
Last year’s royal accounts showed the cost of the renovations – paid for from taxpayers’ money – was £2.4 million.
Advertisement
Harry and Meghan agreed to pay back the money as part of the plans drawn up when they quit as senior working royals in March.
Frogmore Cottage on the Home Park Estate, Windsor. PA
The couple faced a public backlash when the cost of refurbishing the Grade-II listed property close to Windsor Castle fell to the taxpayer.
The home, which is owned by the Crown Estate, was a gift from Harry’s grandmother the Queen.
Republic, which campaigns for an elected head of state, heavily criticised the amount spent at the time, and said following news of Harry’s payment that he should have paid the bill from the start.
Graham Smith of Republic said: “Harry should have paid this bill from the outset, rather than expecting the taxpayer to stump up the cash.
Advertisement
“They’ve now paid for the refurbishment while continuing to use the home whenever they stay in the UK.
“Their statement claims the cottage is the Queen’s property, which is untrue.
“It belongs to the Crown Estate, which is there to raise revenue for the Treasury, so we have a right to know what rent they are paying for the place.”
He added: “Harry and Meghan have ended their active involvement in royal duties and now live in the US, yet still expect the British taxpayer to provide them with luxury accommodation, always available for whenever they choose to visit.
“Perhaps they should get a loyalty card with Travelodge and save the taxpayer more wasted money.”
Harry and Meghan will formally stepped down as senior royals in March. zz/KGC-03/STAR MAX/IPx
The major building project at Frogmore Cottage involved turning five properties back into a single mansion.
Advertisement
All fixtures and fittings were paid for privately by the duke and duchess.
Work on the property in Berkshire overran and it was reported that Harry and Meghan made constant design changes, meaning the builders fell behind schedule.
The £2.4 million bill included structural work, rewiring and flooring, among other costs.
A source said the couple will still base themselves there with their son Archie when visiting the UK.
“It’s still the plan for Frogmore Cottage to be their main family home in the UK,” the source said.
They added that the couple would have been back to visit had it not been for the coronavirus outbreak.
Harry and former Suits actress Meghan, who have recently bought an £11 million house in Montecito, Santa Barbara, are now based in the US as they pursue a life of personal and financial freedom away from the monarchy.
The couple’s new Netflix deal to produce a range of films and series for the streaming service is reported to be worth 100 million dollars (£76 million).
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Bruce Williamson, The Temptations Singer, Has Died After Contracting Covid-19

Former The Temptations singer Bruce Williamson has died at the age of 49.
According to TMZ, Bruce died at his home in Las Vegas, Nevada on Sunday night, after a battle with Covid-19.
Paying tribute, his son wrote: “There’s no words in the world that can express how I feel right now…
“I love you Daddy thank you for being awesome thank you for being loving thank you for being Who You Are I pray to God and we will meet again. I love you Daddy [sic].”
Bruce performing at the O2 Arena in 2010 Marc Broussely via Getty Images
Advertisement
The Temptations have been performing under various changing line-ups since the 1960s, with Bruce joining the band in 2007.
The Motown band is renowned for hits including My Girl, The Way You Do The Things You Do and You’re My Everything.
As a member of The Temptations, Bruce sang on studio albums like Still Here and Back To Front, as well as performing on various tours all over the world, alongside founding member Otis Williams.
The Temptations in 2014 Andrew H. Walker via Getty Images
Advertisement
He also made a cameo with his bandmates in the film comedy Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story.
Bruce eventually stepped down from the group after eight years in 2015, and was replaced by Larry Braggs.
He was once quoted as saying he’d done “more in six months of being a Temptation than many artists have done in a lifetime”.
Prior to joining The Temptations, Bruce was the frontman of the funk cover band BlackBerry Jam, who performed in various venues on the Las Vegas strip.
It has been reported that prior to his death, he was working on a new gospel music project.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Running Mate Podcast: How The Black Lives Matter Movement Is Shaping The US Election

Running Mate is a US election podcast – just for Brits. In our third episode, we look at how the Black Lives Matter movement is shaping the election campaign in the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd and recent shooting of Jacob Blake, which has prompted protests across the world.
Host Graeme Demianyk speaks to Taryn Finley, who is HuffPost’s Black Voices Editor, and Ja’han Jones, a HuffPost reporter and creator of the Black Hair Defined project.
Advertisement
Taryn explains why policy promises to address inequality and injustice feel like “lip service” when Black communities face over-policing, de facto segregation in schools and cities such as Flint still don’t have access to clean water.
She says: “I think we’re going to see a lot of pandering. I’m really bracing myself, and I’m pretty sure a lot of Black people are bracing themselves for that. I think a big part of that is because I’m not sure if people really are listening to Black voters, because we refer to Black voters as this monolithic group. The Black vote.”
Ja’han explains Donald Trump’s not-very-subtle attempts to stop Black people from voting, including a Republican $20 million litigation budget to fight Democrats on voting issues. He says: “Trump himself said that his election hinges on the success of these lawsuits that are intended to curb access to the vote. So he’s not really being coy about what the strategy is.”
We also speak to HuffPost justice reporter, Ryan Reilly, about Trump’s efforts to portray largely peaceful protests as riots where looting is rife: “There’s all of this effort to condemn the Black Lives Matter movement when in reality it is a movement. It’s not really an organisation. No one’s directing these things to happen. There are a ton of different moving pieces and individual choices involved here. It’s not like there’s one key figure who’s saying: ‘Do this, do that, do this’.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Phillip Schofield's Face Says It All As Nudist Reveals A Little Too Much Live On This Morning

LOADING ERROR LOADING
This Morning viewers got a lot more than they bargained for when they tuned into the first show of the week, when a nudist revealed a little more than was probably intended.
During Monday’s live broadcast, roving reporter Josie Gibson paid a visit to a naturist site, interviewing various guests in a feature that was, obviously, absolutely jam-packed with innuendo.
Advertisement
Later in the show, Josie even got in on the fun, presenting a competition segment while seemingly in the buff herself.
This Morning visiting a nudist camp was always going to be a recipe for disaster, wasn't it? ITV
Unfortunately, while various items were used to protect the modesty of those around her, one chap standing behind a car door wasn’t quite positioned correctly meaning he ended up flashing his penis to the entire nation.
And as you can see, Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby’s faces as the scene unfolded pretty much said it all.
Advertisement
“That was close,” Schofe joked back in the studio, adding: “We were right on the ragged edge there.”
Holly Willoughby and Phillip Schofield on This Morning ITV
And they weren’t the only ones who picked up on the X-rated moment during the show…
Omg just looking at @Schofe & @hollywills faces on @thismorning with the nudist man behind the car door showing a bit more than he should.. 😂🙈 — Juliana Cureton (@jcureton48) September 7, 2020
Not a great cameraman on This Morning during the nudist segment pic.twitter.com/q7u3cfey3K — Kelly Stuart (@Denton83) September 7, 2020
@thismorning I just saw Penis — Ҡąէ ට’Ͳօղìç (@__Kateract) September 7, 2020
THAT WAS A PENIS @thismorning !!! 😂😂😂😂😂 — Billie-Adora x | BLM | ACAB (@Transgirlbillie) September 7, 2020
Advertisement
OMG did anyone watch @Josiestweet reporting live from a nudist colony on @thismorning 😂😂😂 One of the blokes stood behind a car they were advertising literally had his knackers completely out accidentally😂😂😂 @hollywills & @Schofe were hanging off their chairs. Go watch it😂 — Ellie Colton (@elliecolton_) September 7, 2020
Literally sat crying with laughter at @Josiestweet at the nudist resort in Liverpool 🤣😂🤣 Blates just saw that old man’s bell end live on TV 🤣 @thismorning #thismorning pic.twitter.com/xBZXC1nEcX — MART TWEEDY ✊🏾 (@MartTweedy) September 7, 2020
In recent times, Josie’s often-chaotic segments on This Morning have provided plenty of entertainment for us.
Advertisement
Josie will soon be teaming up with fellow This Morning favourite Alison Hammond for a new recurring travel feature, which will see them touring the UK to find the best spots for a staycation.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--UK Records Almost 3,000 New Coronavirus Cases For Second Day Running

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The UK has recorded almost 3,000 new coronavirus cases for the second day running amid a surge in infections.
Government data published on Monday revealed that 2,948 cases of Covid-19 had been reported in previous 24 hours, suggesting levels of infection are similar to those last seen in May.
Advertisement
The increase comes the day after the number of positive coronavirus tests in the UK jumped by 2,988 – the biggest daily rise in more than three months.
The figure includes positive results for tests carried out over the last few days.
The seven-day rate of new cases of Covid-19 in the UK has now risen above 20 cases per 100,000 people.
In the seven days to September 7, the rate stood at 21.3 cases per 100,000, up from 13.9 in the previous week.
A rate of 20 cases per 100,000 or above, if reported in other countries, is the level at which the government considers imposing quarantine conditions on people travelling to the UK.
Advertisement
A woman being tested for Covid-19 Paul Biris via Getty Images
On Sunday, health secretary Matt Hancock said he was “concerned” about the surge in cases.
He warned that affluent young people were among the biggest drivers of the recent surge in cases, saying those aged 17 to 21 accounted for a large number of positive Covid-19 tests.
Urging the public to follow social distancing rules, he told BBC Radio 1’s Newsbeat on Monday: “Don’t kill your gran by catching coronavirus and then passing it on.”
His words echoed the “Don’t Kill Granny” slogan rolled out last month by Preston City Council. Grandmothers in the city told HuffPost UK they were supportive of the catchphrase.
Want to know more? These Graphs Show How Bad Coronavirus Is In The Right Now
However, while cases of Covid-19 are on the rise, deaths from the infection remain low.
On Monday, the deaths of three people were announced, bringing the UK total to 41,554.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Thousands Of Pupils Across England And Wales Sent Home Due To Coronavirus

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Thousands of pupils across England and Wales have been sent home because of local coronavirus infections just a week into the new school year following a spate of coronavirus cases.
It comes amid a bump in Covid-19 infections in the UK, with 2,988 new coronavirus cases reported by the government on Sunday – the largest increase in more than three months.
Advertisement
Teachers told HuffPost UK at the end of August that the government’s back to school plans were “fragile” and could see entire classes, year groups or even whole schools forced back into self-isolation within days.
Unions have said disruption in schools is likely to continue over the coming months, branding it “impossible” to completely eliminate the risk of transmission in schools.
In Kent, the whole of Year 6 at St Peter’s Primary in Sittingbourne was asked to self-isolate for 14 days after a pupil tested positive for Covid-19.
All 160 Year 9 pupils at St Augustine’s Catholic College in Trowbridge, Wiltshire, are being asked to self-isolate after a student in that year group tested positive for Covid-19.
Advertisement
The Liverpool Echo reported that as many as 200 children and 21 members of staff across the city were in self-isolation following Covid-19 cases at five schools.
In Suffolk, the entire 1,276-pupil Samuel Ward Academy was closed on Monday on the advice of Public Health England after five members of teaching staff tested positive for Covid-19. Another two members of staff are still waiting for their test results.
The school in Haverhill said it had closed as a “precautionary measure” and was hoping to reopen on Tuesday.
The 800-strong JCB Academy in Rocester, Staffordshire, closed on Friday after a pupil tested positive for coronavirus. Some 100 pupils were told to self-isolate for 14 days after coming into contact with the student.
monkeybusinessimages via Getty Images
Advertisement
Old Buckenham High School in Norfolk, which has 606 pupils, was shut on Monday after a staff member tested positive for Covid-19.
Meanwhile, 90 students in Year 3 at East Park Academy in Wolverhampton are self-isolating for a fortnight after a positive case at the school, according to the Express & Star local paper.
And eight classes at the Castle Rock School in Coalville, Leicestershire, were told not to come in on Monday after a staff member tested positive for the virus.
It is a similar picture in Wales, where at least eight schools are believed to have been affected by coronavirus since reopening.
On Monday, Cardiff Council confirmed that 30 pupils at Ysgol Bro Edern, a secondary school in the city, had been asked to self-isolated after a positive case at the school the day before.
Advertisement
Headteacher Iwan Pritchard said the school had contacted all pupils within the student’s class bubble “as quickly as possible” and additional cleaning had taken place.
A class of 21 pupils at St Gwladys Primary School in Bargoed, Caerphilly, were also told to self-isolate for two weeks after a member of staff tested positive for Covid-19.
Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said it was “impossible” to eliminate entirely the risks of Covid-19 transmission in schools or the wider community.
“It is therefore likely that disruption will continue over the coming weeks and months,” he said.
“This shows the necessity for a robust contingency plan in case students are unable to take GCSE and A-level exams next summer or their preparation is significantly disrupted.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Jason Bell: From The NFL To Strictly Come Dancing, Here's Everything You Need To Know

LOADING ERROR LOADING
This year’s series of Strictly Come Dancing will be like no other due to the Covid-19 pandemic, but we should still prepare to be wowed by what looks to be an exciting and diverse celebrity line-up.
Among this year’s famous contestants are Radio 1 presenter Clara Amfo, comedian Bill Bailey, boxing champion Nicola Adams, Made In Chelsea star Jamie Laing and former National Football League player Jason Bell.
Advertisement
Since Jason is one of the lesser known stars of this year’s Strictly line up, let us bring you up to speed...
Jason began his career as an NFL player, and is now a sports commentator
Born in Long Beach, California, Jason is a 42-year-old former NFL player turned sports commentator.
Jason Bell is one of 12 celebrities competing in Strictly this year BBC
Jason is best known for being a cornerback in the National Football League, playing for teams like the Dallas Cowboys, Houston Texans and New York Giants.
He began his career in 2001 playing for Dallas Cowboys and then moved to Houston Texans in 2002, around the time he received the Ed Block Courage Award. In 2006, he transferred to the New York Giants, which was the last team he played for before retiring.
Advertisement
His NFL career came to an end after he underwent surgery
Jason ended his football career in 2008 after undergoing back surgery the previous year.
Soon after, he became a TV sports commentator and broadcaster, working for on The NFL Show for BBC Sports alongside former New York Giants player Osi Umenyiora.
Jason on the football field in 2006 Jim McIsaac via Getty Images
So how come he ended up living in the UK?
Jason began a long-term relationship with Girls Aloud’s Nadine Coyle in 2008. They were even engaged for a short period of time in 2014, but eventually called time on their on-off relationship in September 2019.
The former couple also share a six-year-old daughter, named Anaiya Bell.
Fun fact: another of Nadine Coyle’s exes, Desperate Housewives star Jesse Metcalfe, is set to be on the US version of Strictly, Dancing with the Stars.
Nadine and Jesse dated in 2006 for around a year.
Nadine Coyle and Jason Bell Dave M. Benett via Getty Images
Advertisement
But Jason was actually married once before
The former NFL player was previously married to a primary school teacher called Kimberley in 2003. They filed for divorce after two years, which was finalised in 2008.
Jason has had some personal troubles along the way
This includes in February 2005, when he assaulted a truck firm boss named Peter Marosi at the Sutra Lounge bar in Costa Messa, California. Jason smashed a bottle over Marosi’s head, leading to him needing more than a dozen stitches. Jason was sentenced to probation and 300 hours of community service.
And now we can look forward to seeing him on the Strictly dance floor
It was announced on The One Show in early September that Jason will be one of the 12 stars competing on Strictly Come Dancing this year.
Jason Bell was announced as one of this year's Strictly stars on The One Show BBC
He said he was “proud and humbled to be participating” in the 18th series of Strictly Come Dancing, saying: “Strictly was the first show I ever watched when I moved to the UK and I’m a massive fan.
Advertisement
“My 6-year-old daughter never got the chance to see me run out on the field at an NFL game but she is very excited about me taking to the dance floor. I hope I can do her proud.”


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--7 Greek Islands Added To England’s Quarantine List, Grant Shapps Announces

LOADING ERROR LOADING
People arriving in England from seven Greek islands will have to quarantine for 14 days, transport secretary Grant Shapps has announced.
They are Lesvos, Tinos, Serifos, Mykonos, Crete, Santorini and Zakynthosknown (Zante).
Travellers returning from the islands after 4am on Wednesday will need to self-isolate for two weeks to prevent the spread of coronavirus.
Advertisement
It does not apply to mainland Greece, which will remain on England’s exemption list of travel corridor destinations.
The transport secretary made the move on Monday as part of a new regional approach to quarantine, which will see islands treated separately to their mainland countries.
Shapps said: “Our top priority has always been to keep domestic infection rates down, and today we’re taking the next step in our approach.
“Through the use of enhanced data we will now be able to pinpoint risk in some of the most popular islands, providing increased flexibility to add or remove them – distinct from the mainland - as infection rates change.
Advertisement
“This development will help boost the UK’s travel industry while continuing to maintain maximum protection to public health, keeping the travelling public safe.”
Scotland has already applied self-isolation rules to anyone returning from anywhere in Greece. Wales did the same for six Greek islands, including Zante and Crete.
Shapps went on to say that his department is “working actively on the practicalities of using testing to release people from quarantine earlier than 14 days”. An option involving only a test-on-arrival “would not work”, he added.
Labour’s shadow transport secretary Jim McMahon, criticised the government’s handling of the pandemic, describing its response as “chaotic”.
“For months, even when the virus was at its peak, millions of passengers were coming from all over the world without any restrictions placed upon them at all,” he said.
Advertisement
“By the time restrictions were introduced, we were one of only a handful of countries in the world who up to that point had failed to take action in bringing restrictions in place.”
Explaining the move, the Department for Transport (DfT) said data from the Joint Biosecurity Centre and Public Health England indicated a “significant risk to UK public health” from those islands.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-07--Instagram Beauty Star Ethan Is Supreme, AKA Ethan Peters, Dies At 17

Aged 13, Ethan sold a successful Instagram meme account that he operated for $25,000, according to People.
The BBC reported that Ethan had been accused of racism and transphobia in the past. He faced criticism last year for a dismissive comment about Beyoncé and using a racial slur.
On Sunday, his friend Ava Louise defended him, citing the troubles he was facing with addiction.


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-08--Minister Admits Boris Johnson's Brexit Deal Plan Breaks The Law

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A cabinet minister has admitted Boris Johnson’s plan to change his own Brexit deal breaks international law.
Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis said the proposals to change the operation of his own withdrawal agreement (WA), which smoothed the UK’s departure from the EU in January, breaks the law in a “very specific and limited way”.
Advertisement
The plan threatens to collapse Brexit negotiations on a trade deal and have left the prime minister’s predecessor Theresa May questioning whether the UK can be “trusted” internationally.
Here it is. A British cabinet minister telling the House of Commons that the UK will break international law. pic.twitter.com/MtCTk1ro7F — Joe Miller (@JoeMillerJr) September 8, 2020
Johnson is trying to unpick key sections of the WA on trade in Northern Ireland, despite negotiating the provisions himself to make the deal initially negotiated by his predecessor May more palatable to the Conservative Party.
The prime minister’s plan would give UK ministers key powers to decide when EU rules apply to Northern Ireland, in apparent defiance of his own deal.
Advertisement
During an urgent question on the plan, veteran Tory Sir Bob Neill, who chairs the Commons justice committee, told Lewis that “adherence to the rule of law is not negotiable”.
He went on: “Against that background, will he assure us that nothing that is proposed in this legislation does or potentially might breach international legal obligations or international legal arrangements that we have entered into?”
Lewis replied: “Yes this does break international law in a very specific and limited way.”
The exchange came after the head of the government’s legal department Jonathan Jones quit, reportedly over Johnson’s plans for the WA.
Lewis refused to comment on the reasons for Jones’ resignation.
In a message to staff, Jones reportedly did not address directly address the issue but thanks the legal department for wrestling with the “unique legal and constitutional complexities of leaving the EU”.
IN DEPTH Is Boris Johnson Really About To Blow Up The Brexit Negotiations?
In the Commons, Lewis went on: “We are taking the power to disapply the EU law concept of direct effect, required by Article 4 in certain, very tightly defined circumstances.
Advertisement
“There are precedents for the UK and indeed other countries needing to consider their international obligations as circumstances change.”
Lewis said the Finance Act 2013 “contains the example of treaty override, it contains provisions that expressly disapply international tax treaties to the extent that these conflict with the general anti-abuse rule.”
The proposals drew sharp criticism from May, who has long found Johnson a thorn in her side.
Johnson quit May’s cabinet over Brexit and eventually usurped her as Tory leader and PM.
Then-PM Theresa May and her foreign secretary Boris Johnson attend a high level meeting at United Nations headquarters in 2017. ASSOCIATED PRESS
In the Commons, May said: “The United Kingdom government signed the withdrawal agreement with the Northern Ireland protocol.
“This parliament voted that withdrawal agreement into UK legislation.
“The government is now changing the operation of that agreement.
“Given that, how can the government reassure future international partners that the UK could be trusted to abide by the legal obligations of the agreements it signs?”
Advertisement
Northern Ireland was supposed to follow EU rules on certain aspects of trade but UK rules on others, to ensure it keeps an invisible border with the Republic.
But the government now wants to give UK ministers the power to decide what goods are “at risk” of being sold into the EU via Northern Ireland, and must therefore comply with Brussels tariffs.
Ministers would also have the power to decide when state aid – government support for businesses – should be notified to Brussels because it affects Northern Ireland, and by extension the EU.
It has been seen as potentially reneging on the WA’s Northern Ireland protocol.
Lewis insisted the provisions were simply a “safety net” to ensure there is no legal confusion if the UK and EU, through the so-called “joint committee” that monitors the implementation of the WA, cannot agree on Northern Ireland.
Responding to May, he said: “We have worked with the EU in the spirit of good faith and I know we continue to do that, both sides working in a spirit of good faith, to ensure we do implement arrangements which uphold the fundamental principles that lie behind the protocol.
Advertisement
“Our first priority continues to be to secure agreement on the protocol through the joint committee and the wider free trade agreement.
“But the withdrawal agreement protocol is not like any other treaty. It was written on the assumption that subsequent agreements could be reached between us and the EU on the detail.
“That is the entire purpose of the specialised joint committee.
“We continue to believe that that is possible but as a responsible government we cannot allow businesses to not have certainty for January.”
Shadow Northern Ireland secretary Louise Haigh, who asked the urgent question, said Lewis’s admission was “astonishing”
Absolutely astonishing that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has confirmed the government WILL be in breach of international law by undermining the Northern Ireland Protocol.
This seriously undermines our authority on the international stage. — Louise Haigh (@LouHaigh) September 8, 2020
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-08--Tory Local Government Minister Simon Clarke Quits

Local government minister Simon Clarke PA
Coronavirus has changed everything. Make sense of it all with the Waugh Zone, our evening politics briefing. Sign up now.
Tory MP Simon Clarke has quit as Boris Johnson’s local government minister.
The Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland MP resigned from his post on Tuesday for “personal reasons”, he said in a letter to the prime minister.
Advertisement
With regret, I have decided to stand down from the Government for personal reasons. It has been an honour and a privilege and I hope to return to serve at a future opportunity. pic.twitter.com/VzEuQLRZgB — Simon Clarke MP (@SimonClarkeMP) September 8, 2020
Clarke, who is an ardent Brexiteer, said he “had to balance my own life against the demands of office”.
It comes amid reports that the prime minister was attempting to rewrite some of the deal agreed last year with Brussels.
But Clarke added: “Whatever the future holds, you can be assured of my deepest loyalty, affection and friendship from the backbenches.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpostuk--2020-09-08--Parents, Stop Pretending Everything Is Fine. This Is Hard As Hell.

LOADING ERROR LOADING
I spent most of the summer in a state of numbness, most likely driven by a deep-seated denial that the world has irrevocably changed and nothing will ever be the same. And after a traumatic spring, life suddenly felt *kind of* normal this summer. Yes, the kids weren’t at camp, and yes, I was working at home, but we were lucky enough that everyone stayed healthy and (relatively) sane.
And then it all came crashing down. Quite suddenly, I was struck by a sense of panic ― there are certainly not enough hours in a day to get everything done ― and sadness ― my poor kids have to do this all over again, but this time for so much longer ― and exhaustion ― I’m already emotionally and mentally spent.
Advertisement
There I was, not 24 hours earlier, gliding along, unwillingly putting off the inevitable doom and gloom of what life will be like this school year. And then, in the middle of the night, I woke up thinking about all those parents whose kids have been in school for a month already and imagined them saying to me, “Ha, you newb, with all your shaded optimism and mediocre hopes. What else did you think was going to happen?”
I spent the rest of the night quite literally tossing and turning, wishing we were back in July (but not really) when we still had two months of ignorance and bliss before school started.
It would be a conceit on my part to say that, because of my job as HuffPost’s Parents editor, I have any of the answers. Our leaders certainly don’t seem to have them, either. But what I do know in this moment of fear and anticipation and grief is the same thing I knew this spring: In order to get through this moment ― however long it lasts ― we as parents need to grant not only ourselves but more importantly our children some grace. We will get through this. I’m not saying it’ll be pretty, but we will. Because we have to.
So here are a few things I’m going to try to do for myself this school year, and maybe you’ll want to try some of this, too.
Advertisement
Be compassionate. With yourself. With your kids. With your kids’ teachers. Everyone.
Take time for yourself. Yes, going to the bathroom alone while scrolling Instagram sadly counts.
Meet up with a friend or two who will let you vent and do the same for them.
Watch dumb movies. Just don’t, I beg of you, watch “Drunk Parents” on Netflix.
Take deep breaths.
Stretch when you wake up.
Be patient with and forgiving of yourself and your kids.
Laugh. Even a really low-brow laugh will do.
Make your kids feel safe and loved.