westernjournal--2020-04-01--Trump Cuts Through More Obama Red Tape, Rolls Back Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Regulations

It ’ s rare that Barack Obama tweets a direct criticism at the Trump administration .
However , on Tuesday , the former president laid into a decision from Trump ’ s Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency to roll back Obama-era federal vehicle fuel efficiency standards , comparing it — sigh — to coronavirus .
“ We ’ ve seen all too terribly the consequences of those who denied warnings of a pandemic , ” Obama tweeted after the new standards were announced on Tuesday .
“ We can ’ t afford any more consequences of climate denial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , have to demand better of our government at every level and vote this fall.
” TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill It ’ s good to see the former president is staying limber with his attacks .
In under 280 characters , he managed to not only trash Trump on coronavirus but also fuel efficiency standards as well .
Yes he can .
However , it ’ s probably worth looking at the rule in question — which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually deals with fuel economy and not emissions , although the two are closely related .
According to Fox News , the new regulations , which will be effective from model years 2021 through 2026 , will only require automakers to increase their fleet fuel efficiency by 1.5 percent a year .
Under previous regulations , in effect from 2012 , automakers needed to improve their fuel economy by 5 percent each year .
That was “ unrealistic , ” officials said .
“ This strikes the right balance between environmental considerations , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler told reporters during a call .
“ This rule reflects the Department ’ s No .
1 priority — safety — by making newer , safer , cleaner vehicles more accessible for Americans who are , on average , driving 12-year-old cars .
By making newer , safer , and cleaner vehicles more accessible for American families , more lives will be saved and more jobs will be created , ” Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao said .
The old regulations would have meant that fleet fuel economy — defined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all vehicles an automaker sells — would have been 55 miles per gallon in 2026 .
The new regulations will mean the fleet fuel economy will only have to be slightly above 40 miles per gallon by 2026 .
RELATED : Trump Cut Funding to EPA Center , Report Confirms It 's Full of 'Junk Science ' Anyway According to The Hill , that ’ s a number the manufacturers think they can meet .
In fact , they already estimate they can make a 2.4 percent yearly fuel economy increase without regulation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : cheaper cars , more flexibility for automakers and more room for innovation .
But what about the costs ?
After all , you ’ ll be spending more at the pump , to say nothing of the externalities affecting the environment .
David Friedman , vice president for advocacy with Consumer Reports , probably synthesized the argument against rolling back the standards as well as anyone : “ Unemployment claims skyrocketed to more than 3 million last week , so millions of Americans are now going without a paycheck , and our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of the COVID crisis , ” he told reporters .
“ So it ’ s absolutely stunning the administration would finalize a plan that will cost drivers more money at the pump for years to come .
Consumers , workers , small business owners are the engine of America ’ s economy .
And the last thing they need is to get stuck spending more on gas.
” However , what that discounts is the fact that the average car on the road now is older than it ’ s ever been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a reason for that .
“ The current standards have been a factor in the rising cost of new automobiles to an average of $ 35,000 or more — out of reach for many American families , the agencies said , ” IndustryWeek reported in 2018 .
“ Compared to the preferred alternative in the proposal , keeping in place the standards finalized in 2012 would add $ 2,340 to the cost of owning a new car , and impose more than $ 500 billion in societal costs on the U.S. economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Chao says , represents an opportunity to get consumers into newer cars — ones that are more environmentally friendly as well as safer .
“ It will make newer vehicles more affordable to consumers , safer for passengers and cleaner for the environment , ” Chao said .
“ It ’ s a win-win-win solution.
” Furthermore , there ’ s nothing to say car buyers don ’ t value fuel economy .
From a 2016 study in the Journal of Public Economics : “ By seeing how price differences across high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economies change in response to shocks to the price of gasoline , we estimate the relationship between vehicle prices and future fuel costs .
Our data suggest that used automobile prices move one for one with changes in present discounted future fuel costs , which implies that consumers fully value fuel economy.
” The rule will be subject to court challenges , especially given tougher regulations that were drafted by California and enacted by a number of other states .
It ’ ll also be subject to rhetoric like the former president ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , either .
California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris also somehow found a way to incorporate coronavirus-related politicking into her response .
“ Hospitals are in desperate need of ventilators for people with respiratory illnesses , millions have applied for unemployment , and families across the nation are struggling to make ends meet , ” she said in a statement .
“ This administration ’ s own analysis has shown this is a bad deal for Americans .
During this time of crisis , we should have every federal policy — including bold clean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our air clean , create jobs , and save consumers money.
” Aside from Obamacare , this is one of the most prominent vestiges of the Obama years — and one that doesn ’ t take legislation to ditch .
At the point where we don ’ t get new cars out on the road , we don ’ t actually get any benefit from increased fuel economy standards .
The Trump administration has estimated that there ’ ll be an estimated savings of $ 1,400 per vehicle and 2.7 million new cars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ materializes is another question entirely , but it doesn ’ t take a rocket scientist — or auto engineer , for that matter — to see that this will get newer cars out on the streets .
It may not be making news , but it ’ s undoubtedly a big step in the right direction .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It’s rare that Barack Obama tweets a direct criticism at the Trump administration.
However, on Tuesday, the former president laid into a decision from Trump’s Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency to roll back Obama-era federal vehicle fuel efficiency standards, comparing it — sigh — to coronavirus.
“We’ve seen all too terribly the consequences of those who denied warnings of a pandemic,” Obama tweeted after the new standards were announced on Tuesday.
“We can’t afford any more consequences of climate denial. All of us, especially young people, have to demand better of our government at every level and vote this fall.”
We’ve seen all too terribly the consequences of those who denied warnings of a pandemic. We can’t afford any more consequences of climate denial. All of us, especially young people, have to demand better of our government at every level and vote this fall. https://t.co/K8Ucu7iVDK — Barack Obama (@BarackObama) March 31, 2020
It’s good to see the former president is staying limber with his attacks. In under 280 characters, he managed to not only trash Trump on coronavirus but also fuel efficiency standards as well. Yes he can.
However, it’s probably worth looking at the rule in question — which, if you were paying attention, actually deals with fuel economy and not emissions, although the two are closely related.
According to Fox News, the new regulations, which will be effective from model years 2021 through 2026, will only require automakers to increase their fleet fuel efficiency by 1.5 percent a year.
Do you support lowering fuel economy standards? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 86% (551 Votes) No: 14% (87 Votes)
Under previous regulations, in effect from 2012, automakers needed to improve their fuel economy by 5 percent each year.
That was “unrealistic,” officials said.
“This strikes the right balance between environmental considerations, health considerations and economic considerations,” EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler told reporters during a call.
“This rule reflects the Department’s No. 1 priority — safety — by making newer, safer, cleaner vehicles more accessible for Americans who are, on average, driving 12-year-old cars. By making newer, safer, and cleaner vehicles more accessible for American families, more lives will be saved and more jobs will be created,” Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao said.
The old regulations would have meant that fleet fuel economy — defined as the average in fuel economy across all vehicles an automaker sells — would have been 55 miles per gallon in 2026. The new regulations will mean the fleet fuel economy will only have to be slightly above 40 miles per gallon by 2026.
According to The Hill, that’s a number the manufacturers think they can meet. In fact, they already estimate they can make a 2.4 percent yearly fuel economy increase without regulation.
You can guess the advantages here: cheaper cars, more flexibility for automakers and more room for innovation.
But what about the costs? After all, you’ll be spending more at the pump, to say nothing of the externalities affecting the environment.
David Friedman, vice president for advocacy with Consumer Reports, probably synthesized the argument against rolling back the standards as well as anyone: “Unemployment claims skyrocketed to more than 3 million last week, so millions of Americans are now going without a paycheck, and our nation is at risk of a recession because of the COVID crisis,” he told reporters.
“So it’s absolutely stunning the administration would finalize a plan that will cost drivers more money at the pump for years to come. Consumers, workers, small business owners are the engine of America’s economy. And the last thing they need is to get stuck spending more on gas.”
However, what that discounts is the fact that the average car on the road now is older than it’s ever been: 12 years. And there’s a reason for that.
“The current standards have been a factor in the rising cost of new automobiles to an average of $35,000 or more — out of reach for many American families, the agencies said,” IndustryWeek reported in 2018.
“Compared to the preferred alternative in the proposal, keeping in place the standards finalized in 2012 would add $2,340 to the cost of owning a new car, and impose more than $500 billion in societal costs on the U.S. economy over the next 50 years.”
That, Chao says, represents an opportunity to get consumers into newer cars — ones that are more environmentally friendly as well as safer.
“It will make newer vehicles more affordable to consumers, safer for passengers and cleaner for the environment,” Chao said. “It’s a win-win-win solution.”
Furthermore, there’s nothing to say car buyers don’t value fuel economy.
From a 2016 study in the Journal of Public Economics: “By seeing how price differences across high and low mileage vehicles of different fuel economies change in response to shocks to the price of gasoline, we estimate the relationship between vehicle prices and future fuel costs. Our data suggest that used automobile prices move one for one with changes in present discounted future fuel costs, which implies that consumers fully value fuel economy.”
The rule will be subject to court challenges, especially given tougher regulations that were drafted by California and enacted by a number of other states.
It’ll also be subject to rhetoric like the former president’s. He’s not alone, either. California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris also somehow found a way to incorporate coronavirus-related politicking into her response.
“Hospitals are in desperate need of ventilators for people with respiratory illnesses, millions have applied for unemployment, and families across the nation are struggling to make ends meet,” she said in a statement. “This administration’s own analysis has shown this is a bad deal for Americans. During this time of crisis, we should have every federal policy — including bold clean car standards — in place to make our air clean, create jobs, and save consumers money.”
Aside from Obamacare, this is one of the most prominent vestiges of the Obama years — and one that doesn’t take legislation to ditch.
At the point where we don’t get new cars out on the road, we don’t actually get any benefit from increased fuel economy standards.
The Trump administration has estimated that there’ll be an estimated savings of $1,400 per vehicle and 2.7 million new cars out on the road.
Whether that materializes is another question entirely, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist — or auto engineer, for that matter — to see that this will get newer cars out on the streets.
It may not be making news, but it’s undoubtedly a big step in the right direction.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--Pro-Life Win: Federal Court Upholds Temporary Ban on Abortions as ‘Not Medically Necessary’

Republican Gov .
Greg Abbott issued an executive order March 22 to halt all “ surgeries and procedures that are not medically necessary , ” including abortions .
After a district court blocked enforcement of the order , the 5th U.S .
Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary stay on the ruling , allowing the ban to go into effect .
The district court had ruled that the “ attorney general ’ s interpretation of the Executive Order prevents Texas women from exercising what the Supreme Court has declared is their fundamental constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ General Ken Paxton filed an appeal , and a panel of three appellate judges overturned the district court ’ s decision .
TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill “ IT IS ORDERED that the district court ’ s order of March 30 , 2020 ( Dkt .
No .
40 ) is TEMPORARILY STAYED until further order of this court to allow this court sufficient time to consider petitioners ’ emergency motion for stay and petition for writ of mandamus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their ruling .
Abbott ’ s ban on nonessential medical procedures is meant to ensure that enough hospital resources remain available for the inevitable influx of COVID-19 patients .
Paxton had criticized abortion providers for failing to abide by the governor ’ s order in a tweet prior to the ruling .
“ Abortion providers who refuse to follow state law are demonstrating a clear disregard for Texans suffering from this medical crisis , ” he wrote .
“ For years , abortion has been touted as a ‘ choice ’ by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an essential procedure.
” Upon learning of the federal court ’ s ruling , Paxton added a triumphant declaration to his tweet .
RELATED : Franklin Graham Calls Out the Hypocrisy of Andrew Cuomo Saying Human Life is 'Not Expendable' While the order is upheld for now , Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers and advocates are working hard to overturn it .
“ Abortion care is time-sensitive and essential health care that has a profound impact on a person ’ s health and life , which is why it is protected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Northup , president and chief executive officer of the Center for Reproductive Rights , told CBS News .
If they are successful , ending the lives of unborn children and saving the lives of COVID-19 patients will again be treated as equally “ essential.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Texas pro-lifers scored a massive victory on Tuesday.
Republican Gov. Greg Abbott issued an executive order March 22 to halt all “surgeries and procedures that are not medically necessary,” including abortions.
After a district court blocked enforcement of the order, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a temporary stay on the ruling, allowing the ban to go into effect.
The district court had ruled that the “attorney general’s interpretation of the Executive Order prevents Texas women from exercising what the Supreme Court has declared is their fundamental constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy before a fetus is viable.”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed an appeal, and a panel of three appellate judges overturned the district court’s decision.
“IT IS ORDERED that the district court’s order of March 30, 2020 (Dkt. No. 40) is TEMPORARILY STAYED until further order of this court to allow this court sufficient time to consider petitioners’ emergency motion for stay and petition for writ of mandamus,” the federal judges said in their ruling.
Abbott’s ban on nonessential medical procedures is meant to ensure that enough hospital resources remain available for the inevitable influx of COVID-19 patients.
Paxton had criticized abortion providers for failing to abide by the governor’s order in a tweet prior to the ruling.
Are abortions 'medically necessary'? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 1% (4 Votes) No: 99% (275 Votes)
“Abortion providers who refuse to follow state law are demonstrating a clear disregard for Texans suffering from this medical crisis,” he wrote.
“For years, abortion has been touted as a ‘choice’ by the same groups now attempting to claim it is an essential procedure.”
Abortion providers who refuse to follow state law are demonstrating a clear disregard for Texans suffering from this medical crisis. For years, abortion has been touted as a ‘choice’ by the same groups now attempting to claim it is an essential procedure.https://t.co/Q0WFl2U3Rl — Texas Attorney General (@TXAG) March 31, 2020
Upon learning of the federal court’s ruling, Paxton added a triumphant declaration to his tweet.
“UPDATE: Victory at 5th Circuit – Abortion ruling stayed!” Paxton wrote.
UPDATE: Victory at 5th Circuit – Abortion ruling stayed! https://t.co/vmpyXsje0B — Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) March 31, 2020
While the order is upheld for now, Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers and advocates are working hard to overturn it.
“Abortion care is time-sensitive and essential health care that has a profound impact on a person’s health and life, which is why it is protected as a constitutional right,” Nancy Northup, president and chief executive officer of the Center for Reproductive Rights, told CBS News.
If they are successful, ending the lives of unborn children and saving the lives of COVID-19 patients will again be treated as equally “essential.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--Watch NBC’s Seth Meyers Practically Beg Bernie To Politicize COVID-19 Crisis

One of the vaguely surreal things things about life in the time of COVID-19 is seeing late-night TV hosts ’ work environment resembling mine .
Everyone now realizes the monkey ’ s-paw nature of the desire to work from home every day , including very rich comedians who tell dad jokes about Donald Trump .
It ’ s not living the dream like you thought it would be , is it , Seth Meyers ?
One difference between Meyers and myself is that I don ’ t do my work with a conspicuously packed bookshelf 18 inches behind me , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that repeats itself on most of these ersatz “ sets.
” Another difference is that Meyers gives softball interviews to politicians like Bernie Sanders , whereas I take them apart .
Sanders appeared on “ Late Night with Seth Meyers ” in an interview recorded on Monday , according to the Media Resource Center .
If you expected anything adversarial — or even probing — you tuned into the wrong show , people .
This was like one of those town hall-style meetings candidates have with their own supporters , except it was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kinda-sorta presidential candidate ( let ’ s face it , it ’ s over ) to politicize the COVID-19 crisis .
So there was the usual opening banter about how Sanders was balancing his Senate work and his candidacy .
That lasted maybe , oh , a minute .
Then we jumped right into batting practice .
TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill “ One of the moments , or one of the unique things about this moment , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of people reevaluate the current system in health care , ” Meyers said .
“ Could you just speak to how this moment would be different if we had a system like ‘ Medicare for all ’ and the shortcomings of the current system we ’ re living with ?
” If there was someone from the Sanders campaign , off-camera , pointing a gun at Meyers ’ head , he certainly didn ’ t let it show .
Sanders ’ answer was , well , predictable : “ Thank you for asking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think the answer is fairly obvious .
Right now , as we speak , millions of people are losing their jobs .
And some 87 million people already did not have any health insurance or are underinsured .
“ So , people are sitting home right now , scared to death that somebody in their family is going to come down with the virus .
They don ’ t know how they will even pay for the treatment that they receive , let alone any other health care problems their families have.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a noob when it comes to late-night interviews with Democratic politicians .
These things are usually pitched at the level of campaign commercials , and dumb ones at that .
What made the Sanders-Meyers interview special , however , was how hard Meyers wanted Sanders to politicize the pandemic .
The next question had to do with Sanders ’ time on the Senate floor during the debate over the coronavirus bill , in which , as Meyers put it , Bernie had sarcastically said “ that some across the aisle felt that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less fortunate , to poorer Americans ” over unemployment benefits .
“ In those moments of sarcasm , is that – is that just masking a simmering rage you feel when your colleagues react like that ?
” RELATED : Sex Assault Scandal Leaves Dems Turning on Biden En Masse : Here Are Some of the Most Brutal Comments “ Absolutely , ” Sanders said .
“ Look , you have folks in the Senate , my Republican colleagues , who voted for a trillion dollars in tax breaks for the 1 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this stimulus package … what we said is , over a four-month period , in this terrible time where people are so worried about how they ’ re going to feed their families … that for four months we ’ re going to add $ 600 to what you would normally get from an unemployment check .
“ We had some of my Republican colleagues say , ‘ Imagine , there will be some low-income workers who would actually earn more from their unemployment check than they previously did when they made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We can ’ t allow that to happen !
’ And to me , that is so ugly , so grotesque , so immoral that I felt compelled to speak out about it.
” And no , there wasn ’ t a whole lot of challenge from Meyers about whether or not this would incentivize people to remain on unemployment .
Instead , we have the politics of demonization from Sanders : “ So ugly , so grotesque , so immoral.
” A pretty nasty political commercial , this .
Going further , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the other things that ’ s always been a criticism about the sort of health care that you ’ ve proposed is people will say , ‘ Oh , there ’ s going to be rationed care , there ’ s going to be long lines , there ’ s going to be death panels.
’ And yet , it does seem like now there is – certain people on the right make the argument that , ‘ Hey , this is just how it goes during a pandemic .
Some people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to sort of make an economic decision about how – what value to put on their lives.
’ Is that stunning to you , when you hear that ?
” “ Of course it is stunning , ” Sanders said .
“ It is stunning and it speaks to the hypocrisy of these folks.
” So , several things .
First , I thought these sorts of videos were supposed to be preceded by : “ I ’ m Bernie Sanders , and I approve this message.
” Is this a Federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just admitting Sanders doesn ’ t have much of a candidacy to return to when this is all over ?
Also , Meyers is an inexpert softball-tosser .
One thing I ’ ve learned about these interviews is that they go so much better if you ask a question that makes it at least look like you ’ re trying .
Anything about Italy ’ s socialized health care system ?
What about how we ’ re going to pay for everything Sanders is proposing ?
You could even go with that question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Rest assured that Sanders has answers for these .
Not good ones , at least by my standards , but they ’ re answers nonetheless .
I know this because I know every candidate has canned answers for the campaign trail .
Just go with one of those .
Let him tee off .
The alternative was so blatantly obvious that it was painful .
Most importantly , however : At a time like this , is politicizing COVID-19 on late-night TV really what we need ?
This was a chance to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a campaign surrogate for a hopelessly far-left candidate telling conservatives how immoral and grotesque their impulses are .
Wanted some distraction ?
Chances are no matter where you fell on the political spectrum , you ended up with a blood pressure spike from Monday ’ s interview .
I thought we were supposed to be avoiding those .
Well , that ’ s just one interview .
I hope you tuned in Tuesday , when the marquee guest was Sen. Elizabeth Warren .
No , seriously .
He asked why she hasn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

One of the vaguely surreal things things about life in the time of COVID-19 is seeing late-night TV hosts’ work environment resembling mine.
Everyone now realizes the monkey’s-paw nature of the desire to work from home every day, including very rich comedians who tell dad jokes about Donald Trump. It’s not living the dream like you thought it would be, is it, Seth Meyers?
One difference between Meyers and myself is that I don’t do my work with a conspicuously packed bookshelf 18 inches behind me, which I find to be a motif that repeats itself on most of these ersatz “sets.” Another difference is that Meyers gives softball interviews to politicians like Bernie Sanders, whereas I take them apart.
Sanders appeared on “Late Night with Seth Meyers” in an interview recorded on Monday, according to the Media Resource Center. If you expected anything adversarial — or even probing — you tuned into the wrong show, people. This was like one of those town hall-style meetings candidates have with their own supporters, except it was with one supporter who was begging the kinda-sorta presidential candidate (let’s face it, it’s over) to politicize the COVID-19 crisis.
So there was the usual opening banter about how Sanders was balancing his Senate work and his candidacy. That lasted maybe, oh, a minute. Then we jumped right into batting practice.
“One of the moments, or one of the unique things about this moment, is how it’s making a lot of people reevaluate the current system in health care,” Meyers said.
“Could you just speak to how this moment would be different if we had a system like ‘Medicare for all’ and the shortcomings of the current system we’re living with?”
If there was someone from the Sanders campaign, off-camera, pointing a gun at Meyers’ head, he certainly didn’t let it show.
Sanders’ answer was, well, predictable: “Thank you for asking that question, Seth, and I think the answer is fairly obvious. Right now, as we speak, millions of people are losing their jobs. And some 87 million people already did not have any health insurance or are underinsured.
Was Bernie Sanders politicizing the coronavirus crisis? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (273 Votes) No: 1% (4 Votes)
“So, people are sitting home right now, scared to death that somebody in their family is going to come down with the virus. They don’t know how they will even pay for the treatment that they receive, let alone any other health care problems their families have.”
Now, I’m not exactly a noob when it comes to late-night interviews with Democratic politicians. These things are usually pitched at the level of campaign commercials, and dumb ones at that. What made the Sanders-Meyers interview special, however, was how hard Meyers wanted Sanders to politicize the pandemic.
The next question had to do with Sanders’ time on the Senate floor during the debate over the coronavirus bill, in which, as Meyers put it, Bernie had sarcastically said “that some across the aisle felt that the bill was being too generous to the less fortunate, to poorer Americans” over unemployment benefits.
“In those moments of sarcasm, is that – is that just masking a simmering rage you feel when your colleagues react like that?”
“Absolutely,” Sanders said. “Look, you have folks in the Senate, my Republican colleagues, who voted for a trillion dollars in tax breaks for the 1 percent and large corporations, and yet, in this stimulus package … what we said is, over a four-month period, in this terrible time where people are so worried about how they’re going to feed their families … that for four months we’re going to add $600 to what you would normally get from an unemployment check.
“We had some of my Republican colleagues say, ‘Imagine, there will be some low-income workers who would actually earn more from their unemployment check than they previously did when they made 10, 12 bucks an hour. We can’t allow that to happen!’ And to me, that is so ugly, so grotesque, so immoral that I felt compelled to speak out about it.”
And no, there wasn’t a whole lot of challenge from Meyers about whether or not this would incentivize people to remain on unemployment. Instead, we have the politics of demonization from Sanders: “So ugly, so grotesque, so immoral.” A pretty nasty political commercial, this.
Going further, here’s Meyers: “One of the other things that’s always been a criticism about the sort of health care that you’ve proposed is people will say, ‘Oh, there’s going to be rationed care, there’s going to be long lines, there’s going to be death panels.’ And yet, it does seem like now there is – certain people on the right make the argument that, ‘Hey, this is just how it goes during a pandemic. Some people who are most at risk, you have to sort of make an economic decision about how – what value to put on their lives.’ Is that stunning to you, when you hear that?”
“Of course it is stunning,” Sanders said. “It is stunning and it speaks to the hypocrisy of these folks.”
So, several things. First, I thought these sorts of videos were supposed to be preceded by: “I’m Bernie Sanders, and I approve this message.” Is this a Federal Election Commission violation? Or are we just admitting Sanders doesn’t have much of a candidacy to return to when this is all over?
Also, Meyers is an inexpert softball-tosser. One thing I’ve learned about these interviews is that they go so much better if you ask a question that makes it at least look like you’re trying. Anything about Italy’s socialized health care system? What about how we’re going to pay for everything Sanders is proposing? You could even go with that question about how conservatives worry about incentivizing unemployment.
Rest assured that Sanders has answers for these. Not good ones, at least by my standards, but they’re answers nonetheless. I know this because I know every candidate has canned answers for the campaign trail. Just go with one of those. Let him tee off. The alternative was so blatantly obvious that it was painful.
Most importantly, however: At a time like this, is politicizing COVID-19 on late-night TV really what we need?
This was a chance to bring us together, not to act as a campaign surrogate for a hopelessly far-left candidate telling conservatives how immoral and grotesque their impulses are. Wanted some distraction? Chances are no matter where you fell on the political spectrum, you ended up with a blood pressure spike from Monday’s interview. I thought we were supposed to be avoiding those.
Well, that’s just one interview. I hope you tuned in Tuesday, when the marquee guest was Sen. Elizabeth Warren. No, seriously. He asked why she hasn’t endorsed Sanders for president yet.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


Fake-News-O-Matic

For more A.F .
Branco cartoons , go to WesternJournal.com/opinion/cartoons .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all @ @ @ @ @ our editorial standards .

Bradley Cooper's latest role has not gone down well with everyone, particularly with regard to his use of a prosthetic nose.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--Soros-Funded Outlet: COVID-19 Crisis Is Perfect Time To ‘Abolish the Family’

The wackjobs working at openDemocracy , a George Soros-funded non-profit in the U.K. , are using the coronavirus pandemic to push their anti-family agenda .
Now , when I say “ anti-family ” agenda , I literally mean the group is calling for an end to the family unit .
In an article last week titled , “ The coronavirus crisis shows it ’ s time to abolish the family , ” a mentally deranged woman named Sophie Lewis — yes , I did just assume her gender — tries to convince her readers that the COVID-19 pandemic is precisely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the nuclear household.
” Why does poor Sophie believe this ?
Well , because in most home environments today , she writes , there exists “ the mystification of the couple-form ; the romanticisation of kinship ; and the sanitization of the fundamentally unsafe space that is private property.
” Wait , what ?
Private property is “ unsafe ” ?
“ Romanticizing ” kinship ( that means loving your family , right ? )
is problematic ?
TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too many homes today are “ defined by the power asymmetries of housework ” and that land ownership , mortgage payments , and “ patriarchal parenting ” are bad for our health .
How any of that is at all inter-related is beyond me .
Nevertheless , Lewis goes on to claim that “ Queer and feminized people , especially very old and very young ones are definitionally not safe ” in such “ capitalist home ” situations .
There are a myriad of other bizarre arguments made in Lewis ’ article .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ communist critiques about how the male-headed family is oppressive and that we need a complete overhaul of how we think about economics and the family .
Standard stuff for the left , in other words : In socialism , the state always comes before the family .
And a look at the funders of openDemocracy , provided by the organization itself , shows Soros ’ leftist Open Society Foundations among the top givers , along with other outfits that fund progressive causes like the Ford Foundation .
Perhaps the most ridiculous claim marshaled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ we deserve better than the family .
And the time of corona is an excellent time to practice abolishing it.
” What this Marxist wing-nut at openDemocracy has in mind to replace the family unit isn ’ t spelled out in any detail , but she does use a lot of impressive-sounding words in explaining what should come next .
“ Far from a time to acquiesce to ‘ family values ’ ideology , then , the pandemic is an acutely important time to provision , evacuate and generally empower survivors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nuclear household , ” she writes .
From what I can gather , Lewis seems to want taxpayers to provide blankets and subsidized housing to gender non-conforming trans teens who ran away from home so they can have a judgment-free safe space to hide out at .
Or something .
RELATED : Calif. Gov .
Newsom Commutes Sentences of Two Child Killers , Nine Other Convicted Murderers In any case , Lewis complains that “ the private family qua mode of social reproduction still , frankly , sucks.
” Why does it suck @ @ @ @ @ @ @ races us .
It norms us for productive work .
It makes us believe we are ‘ individuals.
’ It minimizes costs for capital while maximizing human beings ’ life-making labor… ” and on and on and on .
It ’ s good to know that this wholly unhinged way of thinking won ’ t be gaining ground anytime soon .
Men and women are hard hard-wired by God to find a spouse , start a family , and raise children .
In fact , there is anecdotal evidence that suggests the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that communal bonds are strengthening at this time .
I can only imagine the examples of love and charity taking place right now are giving folks like Sophie Lewis a massive headache .
And that ’ s a good thing .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The wackjobs working at openDemocracy, a George Soros-funded non-profit in the U.K., are using the coronavirus pandemic to push their anti-family agenda.
Now, when I say “anti-family” agenda, I literally mean the group is calling for an end to the family unit.
In an article last week titled, “The coronavirus crisis shows it’s time to abolish the family,” a mentally deranged woman named Sophie Lewis — yes, I did just assume her gender — tries to convince her readers that the COVID-19 pandemic is precisely the time to liberate themselves from “the nuclear household.”
Why does poor Sophie believe this? Well, because in most home environments today, she writes, there exists “the mystification of the couple-form; the romanticisation of kinship; and the sanitization of the fundamentally unsafe space that is private property.”
Wait, what? Private property is “unsafe”? “Romanticizing” kinship (that means loving your family, right?) is problematic?
Lewis claims that too many homes today are “defined by the power asymmetries of housework” and that land ownership, mortgage payments, and “patriarchal parenting” are bad for our health.
How any of that is at all inter-related is beyond me.
Nevertheless, Lewis goes on to claim that “Queer and feminized people, especially very old and very young ones are definitionally not safe” in such “capitalist home” situations.
There are a myriad of other bizarre arguments made in Lewis’ article. Most of them are basically feminist and communist critiques about how the male-headed family is oppressive and that we need a complete overhaul of how we think about economics and the family.
Are leftists trying to take advantage of the coronavirus pandemic? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (1417 Votes) No: 0% (4 Votes)
Standard stuff for the left, in other words: In socialism, the state always comes before the family. And a look at the funders of openDemocracy, provided by the organization itself, shows Soros’ leftist Open Society Foundations among the top givers, along with other outfits that fund progressive causes like the Ford Foundation.
Perhaps the most ridiculous claim marshaled in the essay is when Lewis says, “we deserve better than the family. And the time of corona is an excellent time to practice abolishing it.”
What this Marxist wing-nut at openDemocracy has in mind to replace the family unit isn’t spelled out in any detail, but she does use a lot of impressive-sounding words in explaining what should come next.
“Far from a time to acquiesce to ‘family values’ ideology, then, the pandemic is an acutely important time to provision, evacuate and generally empower survivors of – and refugees from – the nuclear household,” she writes.
From what I can gather, Lewis seems to want taxpayers to provide blankets and subsidized housing to gender non-conforming trans teens who ran away from home so they can have a judgment-free safe space to hide out at. Or something.
In any case, Lewis complains that “the private family qua mode of social reproduction still, frankly, sucks.”
Why does it suck?
“It genders, nationalizes and races us. It norms us for productive work. It makes us believe we are ‘individuals.’ It minimizes costs for capital while maximizing human beings’ life-making labor…” and on and on and on.
Give me a break.
It’s good to know that this wholly unhinged way of thinking won’t be gaining ground anytime soon. Men and women are hard hard-wired by God to find a spouse, start a family, and raise children.
In fact, there is anecdotal evidence that suggests the coronavirus is actually bringing families closer together and that communal bonds are strengthening at this time.
I can only imagine the examples of love and charity taking place right now are giving folks like Sophie Lewis a massive headache. And that’s a good thing.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--Compare the Media’s Hard Questions for Trump to This Fawning Question for Obama

There are times when the phrase “ media bias ” just won ’ t cut it because what is happening is so egregious and so blatantly antithetical to standards of journalistic integrity that calling it bias is a profound understatement .
Even a casual observer watching the way the establishment media is treating President Donald Trump during the coronavirus pandemic can pick up on their combative tone and obvious disdain , which seeps into even the most innocuous exchanges .
This double standard was highlighted recently by a pair of tweets that juxtapose two noteworthy video clips .
The first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jeremy Diamond this week on his fake news reporting of a statement made by the president .
The second is a video posted in one of the first tweet ’ s replies which shows former President Barack Obama being questioned in 2009 about his first 100 days in office by Jeff Zeleny , then of The New York Times , though he ’ s since moved over to CNN .
TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill In the first clip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president sparred about the establishment media ’ s spin of a previous statement from the president .
The media had tried to spin those remarks to make it sound as though Trump said that if he wasn ’ t appreciated by state governors , he would not work with them .
“ Your statement and your response and your answer is a lie , ” Trump told Diamond as he attempted to talk over the president .
The reporter then read aloud Trump ’ s original statement : “ I want them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t want them to say things that aren ’ t true .
I want them to be appreciative .
We ’ ve done a great job .
And I ’ m not talking about me .
I ’ m talking about Mike Pence , the task force , I ’ m talking about FEMA , the Army Corps of Engineers.
” Trump said “ thank you ” while Diamond was mid-sentence because the reporter had inadvertently proved the president ’ s point .
The clip continued with Trump hammering CNN and Diamond over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that with the 11-year-old clip of Zeleny asking Obama about his first 100 days in office .
The exchange went like this : Zeleny : “ Thank you , Mr. President , ” he began .
“ During these first 100 days , what has surprised you the most about this office ?
Enchanted you the most about serving in this office ?
Humbled you the most ?
And troubled you the most ?
” Obama : “ Now let me write this down.
” The room full of objective journalists erupted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began writing while repeating the question so that he could reply to every sycophantic , pandering , saccharine line .
As an aside , if that question was written by a middle school student , his teacher would indeed be so proud , but this was a reporter from The New York Times , which used to be the paper of record for “ all the news that ’ s fit to print ” back when it was still a serious news organization .
After Obama milked it for all its worth , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thank you , sir.
” During the entire Obama administration , the media fell all over themselves to stroke Obama ’ s ego .
Even after he left office , his administration was declared scandal-free , save for the time he wore a tan suit .
( A controversy that The Washington Post was still reporting on just last year , though only so it could contrast him to Trump . )
While the media behaved more like Giuliana Rancic than Woodward and Bernstein , commenting only on the hubbub about his suit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the administration .
This viral meme from 2018 lays out all of the many scandals that the mainstream media somehow forgot about , including Benghazi , Fast and Furious , Obama ’ s dismissal of the Islamic State group as the Taliban ’ s “ JV team , ” and so on : Meanwhile , despite the media and the Democrats having crafted both the Russia and Ukraine scandals from scratch and used them as an excuse to go on a mining expedition into the president ’ s past , somehow Trump has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clean as a whistle .
In the past , a Republican president would just grin and bear all the criticism in an attempt to rise above it , but as evidenced in the exchange with the CNN reporter , at least Trump is not taking any of this lying down .
The most frustrating part about all of this is that these reporters are professionals who have clawed their way to the top of the media food chain to get access to the president , but only use their unique position to scrutinize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These are the journalists who fancy themselves free speech warriors , and yet they are seemingly blind to their own glaring bias .
It ’ s no wonder , then , that the media has a majority disapproval rating in recent Gallup poll .
Trusting the mainstream media to accurately report anything about President Trump is like asking a new mother to comment on whether her baby is adorable — it ’ s really a toss-up as to who would be able to offer a more objective opinion .
We are committed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

There are times when the phrase “media bias” just won’t cut it because what is happening is so egregious and so blatantly antithetical to standards of journalistic integrity that calling it bias is a profound understatement.
Even a casual observer watching the way the establishment media is treating President Donald Trump during the coronavirus pandemic can pick up on their combative tone and obvious disdain, which seeps into even the most innocuous exchanges.
This double standard was highlighted recently by a pair of tweets that juxtapose two noteworthy video clips.
The first is of Trump confronting CNN’s Jeremy Diamond this week on his fake news reporting of a statement made by the president.
The second is a video posted in one of the first tweet’s replies which shows former President Barack Obama being questioned in 2009 about his first 100 days in office by Jeff Zeleny, then of The New York Times, though he’s since moved over to CNN.
In the first clip of Trump, the CNN reporter and the president sparred about the establishment media’s spin of a previous statement from the president. The media had tried to spin those remarks to make it sound as though Trump said that if he wasn’t appreciated by state governors, he would not work with them.
“Your statement and your response and your answer is a lie,” Trump told Diamond as he attempted to talk over the president.
The reporter then read aloud Trump’s original statement: “I want them to be appreciative. I don’t want them to say things that aren’t true. I want them to be appreciative. We’ve done a great job. And I’m not talking about me. I’m talking about Mike Pence, the task force, I’m talking about FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers.”
Trump said “thank you” while Diamond was mid-sentence because the reporter had inadvertently proved the president’s point.
The clip continued with Trump hammering CNN and Diamond over their persistent fake news reporting.
Contrast that with the 11-year-old clip of Zeleny asking Obama about his first 100 days in office.
The exchange went like this:
Zeleny: “Thank you, Mr. President,” he began. “During these first 100 days, what has surprised you the most about this office? Enchanted you the most about serving in this office? Humbled you the most? And troubled you the most?”
Obama: “Now let me write this down.” The room full of objective journalists erupted in laughter.
Obama hammed it up and began writing while repeating the question so that he could reply to every sycophantic, pandering, saccharine line.
Just for a second, everyone imagine what these pressers would be like if the President on that podium was a democrat….
oh wait: pic.twitter.com/sFLqmxbMnm — RAC_USA (@rac_usa) March 30, 2020
As an aside, if that question was written by a middle school student, his teacher would indeed be so proud, but this was a reporter from The New York Times, which used to be the paper of record for “all the news that’s fit to print” back when it was still a serious news organization.
After Obama milked it for all its worth, Zeleny concluded by respectfully saying, “Thank you, sir.”
During the entire Obama administration, the media fell all over themselves to stroke Obama’s ego.
Do you think the juxtaposition of these video clips proves the media is biased against Trump? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (306 Votes) No: 0% (0 Votes)
Even after he left office, his administration was declared scandal-free, save for the time he wore a tan suit. (A controversy that The Washington Post was still reporting on just last year, though only so it could contrast him to Trump.)
While the media behaved more like Giuliana Rancic than Woodward and Bernstein, commenting only on the hubbub about his suit, they ignored real scandals that plagued the administration.
This viral meme from 2018 lays out all of the many scandals that the mainstream media somehow forgot about, including Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Obama’s dismissal of the Islamic State group as the Taliban’s “JV team,” and so on:
Meanwhile, despite the media and the Democrats having crafted both the Russia and Ukraine scandals from scratch and used them as an excuse to go on a mining expedition into the president’s past, somehow Trump has come out on the other side looking clean as a whistle.
In the past, a Republican president would just grin and bear all the criticism in an attempt to rise above it, but as evidenced in the exchange with the CNN reporter, at least Trump is not taking any of this lying down.
The most frustrating part about all of this is that these reporters are professionals who have clawed their way to the top of the media food chain to get access to the president, but only use their unique position to scrutinize Republican officials while fawning over Democrats.
These are the journalists who fancy themselves free speech warriors, and yet they are seemingly blind to their own glaring bias.
It’s no wonder, then, that the media has a majority disapproval rating in recent Gallup poll. Trusting the mainstream media to accurately report anything about President Trump is like asking a new mother to comment on whether her baby is adorable — it’s really a toss-up as to who would be able to offer a more objective opinion.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--Dr. Fauci Gives Sliver of Good News: Mitigation Efforts Are Having ‘Dampening Effect’ on Coronavirus

While girding Americans for the possibility of a spike in COVID-19 deaths , Dr. Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , also held out some hope on Tuesday .
During an appearance on CNN , Fauci called the next two weeks “ a critical time.
” Noting that Americans have been largely adhering to the administration ’ s policy of social distancing to slow the spread of the virus , Fauci said the strategy could be working .
“ We have very intensive mitigation … with the physical separation .
If you look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see glimmers that that is actually having some dampening effect , ” Fauci said , while making clear that the numbers of Americans infected and dying remains at a serious level .
“ We clearly are seeing cases going up .
The people in New York are in a difficult situation , ” he said .
TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill “ We are still in a very difficult situation , ” Fauci added .
“ We hope , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we may start seeing a turnaround .
But we haven ’ t seen it yet .
We ’ re just pushing on the mitigation to hope that we do see that turnaround.
” The doctor explained that the both the number of new cases and the rate of increase are key measures .
He went on to say that cases will rise at an exponential rate until the peak of the epidemic is reached .
“ Once you start to level off , then you ’ re going to have less people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intensive care , ” Fauci said .
“ And then later on , later on , because it always lags , you ’ ll see a decrease in deaths.
” “ What we ’ re starting to see right now is just the inklings .
And I don ’ t want to put too much stock on it , because you don ’ t want to get overconfident , you just want to keep pushing at what you ’ re doing , ” he continued .
“ You ’ re starting to see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that steep incline , they ’ re starting to be able to possibly flatten out.
” In an interview with Vanity Fair published Tuesday , Fauci repeated that hope , but added a caution .
“ We hope — we don ’ t know for sure — that we ’ re starting to see the leveling off of new admissions to hospitals .
That ’ s the first sign that we may be making some headway with our mitigation strategies , ” he told the outlet .
“ But multiple cities are at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We have New Orleans now , we have a situation in Detroit and Chicago .
So you will see different waves of increases , sharp inflections , peaks and then turnarounds .
I think the most important thing that we need to do as a nation is to very aggressively implement the mitigation strategies.
” RELATED : Trump Warns Iran Is 'Planning a Sneak Attack on US Troops , ' Issues Threat Fauci was also asked about his relationship with President Donald Trump .
“ I take the tack that I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whatever happens , happens .
As a matter of fact , in fairness to him , the president has listened very carefully to what I ’ ve said , ” the doctor replied .
“ He ’ s taken my recommendations almost invariably , and he has never really contradicted things that I have recommended to him .
He listens .
I mean , there ’ s a lot out there in the press about conflict between the both of us .
There ’ s absolutely none .
There really isn ’ t. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ second wave ” of COVID-19 , Fauci said the virus is not going away .
“ I feel that it is highly likely that we will have — I don ’ t know whether you want to call it a second wave — but we will have a return of infections as we get into the next season , ” he said .
But Fauci also voiced optimism regarding the scope of the virus ’ potential return .
“ I believe given the fact that we ’ ll be much , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a number of people who have already been infected so that they will be immune , ” he said .
“ The second iteration of this will very likely be much less severe .
That ’ s for a number of reasons .
So I don ’ t see this coming back and hitting us the way it hit us the first time around.
” As of Tuesday , the United States had 189,510 confirmed coronavirus cases , according to Johns Hopkins .
Over four thousand have died and roughly seven thousand have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s coronavirus task force briefing that difficult days are coming .
“ I want every American to be prepared for the hard days that lie ahead .
We ’ re going to go through a very tough two weeks , ” the president said .
Although Trump expressed confidence that America will “ start seeing some real light at the end of the tunnel , ” he also did not mince words about the state of the pandemic .
“ This is going to be a very painful , very , very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

While girding Americans for the possibility of a spike in COVID-19 deaths, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, also held out some hope on Tuesday.
During an appearance on CNN, Fauci called the next two weeks “a critical time.”
Noting that Americans have been largely adhering to the administration’s policy of social distancing to slow the spread of the virus, Fauci said the strategy could be working.
“We have very intensive mitigation … with the physical separation. If you look now, we’re starting to see glimmers that that is actually having some dampening effect,” Fauci said, while making clear that the numbers of Americans infected and dying remains at a serious level.
“We clearly are seeing cases going up. The people in New York are in a difficult situation,” he said.
“We are still in a very difficult situation,” Fauci added. “We hope, and I believe it will happen, that we may start seeing a turnaround. But we haven’t seen it yet. We’re just pushing on the mitigation to hope that we do see that turnaround.”
The doctor explained that the both the number of new cases and the rate of increase are key measures. He went on to say that cases will rise at an exponential rate until the peak of the epidemic is reached.
“Once you start to level off, then you’re going to have less people who are going to be going into intensive care,” Fauci said. “And then later on, later on, because it always lags, you’ll see a decrease in deaths.”
Are you encouraged by Dr. Fauci's comments? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 93% (258 Votes) No: 7% (19 Votes)
“What we’re starting to see right now is just the inklings. And I don’t want to put too much stock on it, because you don’t want to get overconfident, you just want to keep pushing at what you’re doing,” he continued.
“You’re starting to see that the daily increases are not in that steep incline, they’re starting to be able to possibly flatten out.”
In an interview with Vanity Fair published Tuesday, Fauci repeated that hope, but added a caution.
“We hope — we don’t know for sure — that we’re starting to see the leveling off of new admissions to hospitals. That’s the first sign that we may be making some headway with our mitigation strategies,” he told the outlet. “But multiple cities are at different timing of what their problem is.
“We have New Orleans now, we have a situation in Detroit and Chicago. So you will see different waves of increases, sharp inflections, peaks and then turnarounds. I think the most important thing that we need to do as a nation is to very aggressively implement the mitigation strategies.”
Fauci was also asked about his relationship with President Donald Trump.
“I take the tack that I will say what’s true and whatever happens, happens. As a matter of fact, in fairness to him, the president has listened very carefully to what I’ve said,” the doctor replied.
“He’s taken my recommendations almost invariably, and he has never really contradicted things that I have recommended to him. He listens. I mean, there’s a lot out there in the press about conflict between the both of us. There’s absolutely none. There really isn’t.”
When asked about the possibility of a “second wave” of COVID-19, Fauci said the virus is not going away.
“I feel that it is highly likely that we will have — I don’t know whether you want to call it a second wave — but we will have a return of infections as we get into the next season,” he said.
But Fauci also voiced optimism regarding the scope of the virus’ potential return.
“I believe given the fact that we’ll be much, much better prepared, there will be a number of people who have already been infected so that they will be immune,” he said.
“The second iteration of this will very likely be much less severe. That’s for a number of reasons. So I don’t see this coming back and hitting us the way it hit us the first time around.”
As of Tuesday, the United States had 189,510 confirmed coronavirus cases, according to Johns Hopkins. Over four thousand have died and roughly seven thousand have recovered.
Trump himself said at Tuesday’s coronavirus task force briefing that difficult days are coming.
“I want every American to be prepared for the hard days that lie ahead. We’re going to go through a very tough two weeks,” the president said.
Although Trump expressed confidence that America will “start seeing some real light at the end of the tunnel,” he also did not mince words about the state of the pandemic.
“This is going to be a very painful, very, very painful two weeks,” he said.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--CNN Slammed Trump for His COVID Death Rate Estimate – But 4 Weeks Later They’re Making the Same Clai

CNN Slammed Trump for His COVID Death Rate Estimate – But 4 Weeks Later They’re Making the Same Claim

A study published Monday from The Lancet Infectious Diseases , a medical journal in the United Kingdom , found that the death rate for COVID-19 was significantly less than the 3.4 percent originally predicted by the World Health Organization .
The news wasn ’ t particularly surprising .
The Lancet study put the death rate at 0.66 percent — higher than the seasonal flu , which kills 0.1 percent of people who get it , but still a lot less than what we had feared .
The writing had been on the wall for weeks , as various studies had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of coronavirus infection were taken into account , the death rate could be well south of 1 percent .
This is cold comfort , given the fact the United States is expecting upward of 100,000 deaths , but it gives us a better idea of what we ’ re dealing with .
On Tuesday , CNN reported on it — and why wouldn ’ t they ?
“ Coronavirus death rate is lower than previously reported , study says , but it ’ s still deadlier than seasonal flu , ” the article @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shan ’ t go into the particulars here , but suffice it to say that the title basically says what you need to know .
TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill This is interesting inasmuch as it stood in stark contrast to what Brian Stelter — professional fulminator and/or host of CNN ’ s “ Reliable Sources ” — was saying at the beginning of the month , when he slammed President Donald Trump for even suggesting that the death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ estimate .
Stelter ’ s rant — titled “ Trump makes spurious claims about coronavirus in phone call with Sean Hannity ” — came after Trump phoned into Sean Hannity ’ s show on March 4 and said he thought “ 3.4 percent is really a false number.
” “ Now , this is just my hunch , ” Trump said , “ based on a lot of conversations with a lot of people that do this , because a lot of people will have this , and it ’ s very mild @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rapidly , they don ’ t even see a doctor , they don ’ t even call a doctor — you never hear about those people , so you can ’ t put them down in the category of the overall population , in terms of this corona flu , and/or virus .
So you just can ’ t do that.
” “ If we have thousands or hundreds of thousands of people that get better , just by , you know , sitting around and even going to work , some of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get better , and then when you do have a death , like you ’ ve had in the state of Washington , like you had one in California , I believe you had one in New York .
“ You know , ” he continued , “ all of a sudden it seems like 3 or 4 percent , which is a very high number , as opposed to a fraction of 1 percent .
But again , they don ’ t know about the easy cases because the easy cases don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They don ’ t report to doctors or the hospital in many cases .
So I think that that number is very high .
I think the number , personally , I would say the number is way under 1 percent.
” Stelter ’ s screed after the appearance was meant to give the impression of a man shaking with vehement rage in front of his MacBook .
“ I hesitate to even print the United States president ’ s words here , because they ’ re so at odds with what health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ But the president ’ s statements to Sean Hannity are significant because millions of people were watching live.
” RELATED : Calif. Gov .
Newsom Commutes Sentences of Two Child Killers , Nine Other Convicted Murderers Stelter went on to say that “ Hannity televised Trump ’ s irresponsible ‘ hunch ’ to the world ” and was yet another person to spread the lie that Trump was “ discarding his own administration ’ s advice to stay home if you ’ re feeling sick.
” ( He very clearly said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knowing they had coronavirus , not that people should go to work if they didn ’ t know they had coronavirus ; if you heard something different , you wanted to hear something different . )
It ’ s been a long month , I know .
What we know about coronavirus has significantly changed over the past four weeks .
I don ’ t think there ’ s anyone covering this or writing about it that didn ’ t have their preconceptions changed .
That said , there ’ s a certain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s difficult to take anyone seriously if they view President Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus with unmixed delight .
Those who view it with unmixed rage , however , should be similarly discounted — and that ’ s pretty much what Stelter has done since the moment the current president took office .
Here ’ s a recent set of Stelter headlines which require no further context from the article itself to tell you where this guy ’ s head is at right now : March 30 : “ Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox News.
” March 30 : “ As coronavirus death toll rises , Trump focuses on a different set of numbers : TV ratings.
” Politicizing a health crisis , completely unlike what ’ s going on at CNN .
So the facts may change , but the Stelterian outlook never does .
All right , you ’ re saying , but can you hold Stelter and CNN accountable for what they said when the death rate was , as Donald Rumsfeld might have put it , a known unknown ?
Yes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ attack was a question of asymmetric information .
Bluntly put : The president knew more about the virus than he did .
I know , this probably comes as a shock to Stelter , a man who seems to view the president as an adult infant with a television tuned to Fox News and a cell phone with the Twitter app permanently open .
However , Stelter kept sticking on the fact that Trump said the word “ hunch ” What he probably should have looked harder at was the part where Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot of conversations with a lot of people that do this.
” Not the most elegant language , I admit , but this was something the president was being briefed on .
When this is all done , I would be surprised to find out he didn ’ t have some idea of the limits of testing as well as the limits of the WHO ’ s model .
There ’ s also the area of common sense : If testing is limited and there ’ s a cohort of people who have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only goes to reason that the WHO ’ s 3.4 percent number was too high .
This is just common sense .
As for why Trump said what he did on “ Hannity , ” I have to admit that I don ’ t know the chain of events that led to it .
It ’ s basically an a priori hunch .
Then again , what Brian Stelter had was a hunch , too .
It turned out to be wrong .
A little less than four weeks later , his network @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s hunch was correct .
I ’ m just letting you know , since I don ’ t think you ’ re going to hear about it on “ Reliable Sources ” anytime soon .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A study published Monday from The Lancet Infectious Diseases, a medical journal in the United Kingdom, found that the death rate for COVID-19 was significantly less than the 3.4 percent originally predicted by the World Health Organization.
The news wasn’t particularly surprising. The Lancet study put the death rate at 0.66 percent — higher than the seasonal flu, which kills 0.1 percent of people who get it, but still a lot less than what we had feared.
The writing had been on the wall for weeks, as various studies had concluded that when mild or asymptomatic cases of coronavirus infection were taken into account, the death rate could be well south of 1 percent. This is cold comfort, given the fact the United States is expecting upward of 100,000 deaths, but it gives us a better idea of what we’re dealing with.
On Tuesday, CNN reported on it — and why wouldn’t they?
“Coronavirus death rate is lower than previously reported, study says, but it’s still deadlier than seasonal flu,” the article by Arman Azad was titled. I shan’t go into the particulars here, but suffice it to say that the title basically says what you need to know.
This is interesting inasmuch as it stood in stark contrast to what Brian Stelter — professional fulminator and/or host of CNN’s “Reliable Sources” — was saying at the beginning of the month, when he slammed President Donald Trump for even suggesting that the death rate might come in under the WHO estimate.
Stelter’s rant — titled “Trump makes spurious claims about coronavirus in phone call with Sean Hannity” — came after Trump phoned into Sean Hannity’s show on March 4 and said he thought “3.4 percent is really a false number.”
“Now, this is just my hunch,” Trump said, “based on a lot of conversations with a lot of people that do this, because a lot of people will have this, and it’s very mild — they’ll get better very rapidly, they don’t even see a doctor, they don’t even call a doctor — you never hear about those people, so you can’t put them down in the category of the overall population, in terms of this corona flu, and/or virus. So you just can’t do that.”
“If we have thousands or hundreds of thousands of people that get better, just by, you know, sitting around and even going to work, some of them go to work, but they get better, and then when you do have a death, like you’ve had in the state of Washington, like you had one in California, I believe you had one in New York.
Do you approve of the job President Trump has been doing on coronavirus? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (1030 Votes) No: 1% (11 Votes)
“You know,” he continued, “all of a sudden it seems like 3 or 4 percent, which is a very high number, as opposed to a fraction of 1 percent. But again, they don’t know about the easy cases because the easy cases don’t go to the hospital. They don’t report to doctors or the hospital in many cases. So I think that that number is very high. I think the number, personally, I would say the number is way under 1 percent.”
Trump to Hannity on WHO saying coronavirus death rate is 3.4%: “I think the 3.4% number is really a false number. Now this is just my hunch, but based on a lot of conversations … personally, I’d say the number is way under 1%.” Astoundingly irresponsible. pic.twitter.com/uC9c03zX31 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 5, 2020
Stelter’s screed after the appearance was meant to give the impression of a man shaking with vehement rage in front of his MacBook.
“I hesitate to even print the United States president’s words here, because they’re so at odds with what health experts are saying,” Stelter wrote. “But the president’s statements to Sean Hannity are significant because millions of people were watching live.”
Stelter went on to say that “Hannity televised Trump’s irresponsible ‘hunch’ to the world” and was yet another person to spread the lie that Trump was “discarding his own administration’s advice to stay home if you’re feeling sick.” (He very clearly said that people were going to work without knowing they had coronavirus, not that people should go to work if they didn’t know they had coronavirus; if you heard something different, you wanted to hear something different.)
It’s been a long month, I know. What we know about coronavirus has significantly changed over the past four weeks. I don’t think there’s anyone covering this or writing about it that didn’t have their preconceptions changed.
That said, there’s a certain consistency to the Stelterian worldview. It’s difficult to take anyone seriously if they view President Trump’s handling of the coronavirus with unmixed delight. Those who view it with unmixed rage, however, should be similarly discounted — and that’s pretty much what Stelter has done since the moment the current president took office.
Here’s a recent set of Stelter headlines which require no further context from the article itself to tell you where this guy’s head is at right now:
April 1: “Journalists challenge Trump’s ‘revisionist history’ regarding coronavirus response.”
March 30: “Trump is self-isolating at his safe space: Fox News.”
March 30: “As coronavirus death toll rises, Trump focuses on a different set of numbers: TV ratings.”
March 25: “How the Fox News presidency has politicized a national health crisis.”
Politicizing a health crisis, completely unlike what’s going on at CNN.
So the facts may change, but the Stelterian outlook never does. All right, you’re saying, but can you hold Stelter and CNN accountable for what they said when the death rate was, as Donald Rumsfeld might have put it, a known unknown?
Yes. The problem with Stelter’s original attack was a question of asymmetric information. Bluntly put: The president knew more about the virus than he did.
I know, this probably comes as a shock to Stelter, a man who seems to view the president as an adult infant with a television tuned to Fox News and a cell phone with the Twitter app permanently open.
However, Stelter kept sticking on the fact that Trump said the word “hunch” What he probably should have looked harder at was the part where Trump said this was “based on a lot of conversations with a lot of people that do this.”
Not the most elegant language, I admit, but this was something the president was being briefed on.
When this is all done, I would be surprised to find out he didn’t have some idea of the limits of testing as well as the limits of the WHO’s model.
There’s also the area of common sense: If testing is limited and there’s a cohort of people who have mild symptoms or are asymptomatic, it only goes to reason that the WHO’s 3.4 percent number was too high. This is just common sense.
As for why Trump said what he did on “Hannity,” I have to admit that I don’t know the chain of events that led to it. It’s basically an a priori hunch.
Then again, what Brian Stelter had was a hunch, too. It turned out to be wrong.
A little less than four weeks later, his network published a story that proved Trump’s hunch was correct.
I’m just letting you know, since I don’t think you’re going to hear about it on “Reliable Sources” anytime soon.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--Trump Administration To Send Troops to the Southern Border as Part of Coronavirus Fight

As Americans endure restrictions on their lives as part of the nation ’ s effort to fight the coronavirus , the Trump administration is acting to further ensure the disease can not slip across America ’ s southern border .
The Defense Department has agreed to a request from the Department of Homeland Security that it send 540 personnel to support Customs and Border Protection activities along the border , according to Fox News .
“ At a time when Americans face a profound public health and national security threat posed by the COVID-19 pandemic , it is imperative that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the support they need to prevent public health threats from entering the country through our borders , ” a DHS official told Fox News .
The U.S. already has 5,000 troops along the border , according to Reuters .
Military personnel do not apprehend illegal immigrants but provide support services to assist agents in their work .
Fox reported the DHS made the request “ because of the extra strain that conducting additional health and security measures places on CBP in its border security efforts.
” TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill President Donald Trump ’ s efforts to seal off the border with Mexico to help prevent individuals with the coronavirus from entering the U.S. took on new meaning Monday when Mexico declared a health emergency and issued new rules to contain the spread of the virus there .
According to Johns Hopkins , Mexico has 1,215 confirmed cases of coronavirus and 29 deaths as of Wednesday morning .
The efforts to make the border stronger might be in for a test soon .
Judicial Watch has reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 500 illegal immigrants was heading to the United States from Central America .
The caravan began its trek through Honduras to enter Guatemala and then press on to Mexico , the report said .
“ Earlier this month a Guatemalan newspaper reported that , despite the global Coronavirus pandemic , cross border travel between Mexico and Guatemala continues full throttle without any sort of health screenings .
It is very unlikely the new group of illegal immigrants will be monitored for health issues as it makes its way north , ” Judicial Watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mexico and Canada last month but rejected proposals to put troops at the northern border .
The administration also enacted a policy to turn illegal immigrants back to Mexico without detaining them in a center where they could potentially spread the coronavirus .
That policy has led to illegal immigrants being sent back to Mexico in an average of 96 minutes , according to The Washington Post .
RELATED : Trump Warns Iran Is 'Planning a Sneak Attack on US Troops , ' Issues Threat The Post said illegal immigrants who are apprehended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then driven back to the border .
“ The goal is to minimize the exposure to the alien , agent and our country , ” a CBP official was quoted as saying .
The Post reported that since the tough policy took effect on March 21 , illegal border crossings have dropped from more than 1,000 per day to fewer than 600 per day .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

As Americans endure restrictions on their lives as part of the nation’s effort to fight the coronavirus, the Trump administration is acting to further ensure the disease cannot slip across America’s southern border.
The Defense Department has agreed to a request from the Department of Homeland Security that it send 540 personnel to support Customs and Border Protection activities along the border, according to Fox News.
“At a time when Americans face a profound public health and national security threat posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is imperative that the men and women of law enforcement have the support they need to prevent public health threats from entering the country through our borders,” a DHS official told Fox News.
The U.S. already has 5,000 troops along the border, according to Reuters. Military personnel do not apprehend illegal immigrants but provide support services to assist agents in their work.
Fox reported the DHS made the request “because of the extra strain that conducting additional health and security measures places on CBP in its border security efforts.”
President Donald Trump’s efforts to seal off the border with Mexico to help prevent individuals with the coronavirus from entering the U.S. took on new meaning Monday when Mexico declared a health emergency and issued new rules to contain the spread of the virus there.
According to Johns Hopkins, Mexico has 1,215 confirmed cases of coronavirus and 29 deaths as of Wednesday morning.
The efforts to make the border stronger might be in for a test soon.
Judicial Watch has reported March 17 that a caravan of about 500 illegal immigrants was heading to the United States from Central America.
Do you approve of sending troops to assist at the border? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (114 Votes) No: 0% (0 Votes)
The caravan began its trek through Honduras to enter Guatemala and then press on to Mexico, the report said.
“Earlier this month a Guatemalan newspaper reported that, despite the global Coronavirus pandemic, cross border travel between Mexico and Guatemala continues full throttle without any sort of health screenings. It is very unlikely the new group of illegal immigrants will be monitored for health issues as it makes its way north,” Judicial Watch reported.
Trump closed the borders with Mexico and Canada last month but rejected proposals to put troops at the northern border.
The administration also enacted a policy to turn illegal immigrants back to Mexico without detaining them in a center where they could potentially spread the coronavirus.
That policy has led to illegal immigrants being sent back to Mexico in an average of 96 minutes, according to The Washington Post.
The Post said illegal immigrants who are apprehended are processed “in the field” and then driven back to the border.
“The goal is to minimize the exposure to the alien, agent and our country,” a CBP official was quoted as saying.
The Post reported that since the tough policy took effect on March 21, illegal border crossings have dropped from more than 1,000 per day to fewer than 600 per day.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-01--GOP Sen Calls for Investigation into WHO’s Relationship with China in Wake of Coronavirus ‘Cover Up’

As the United States prepares to carry out another 30 days of “ social distancing ” to combat the Wuhan coronavirus , one Republican senator intends to make sure that those responsible for the severity of the pandemic are held accountable .
Sen. Rick Scott of Florida wants a congressional investigation into the World Health Organization .
“ The @ WHO receives millions of dollars in US taxpayer $ $ and helped the Chinese Communist Party cover up a global pandemic , ” he wrote Monday on Twitter .
“ Today , I ’ m calling for a Congressional investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they knew it .
Read more : http : //bit.ly/SRS_WHO ” TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill Scott said in a statement that WHO officials “ need to be held accountable for their role in promoting misinformation and helping Communist China cover up a global pandemic .
We know Communist China is lying about how many cases and deaths they have , what they knew and when they knew it — and the WHO never bothered to investigate further .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ soon as Congress is back in session , there should be a hearing , along with a full investigation , to review whether American taxpayers should continue to spend millions of dollars every year to fund an organization that willfully parroted propaganda from the Chinese Communist Party.
” According to a WHO invoice posted on its website , the United States was assessed roughly $ 331.6 million for 2020 and 2021 , half payable in U.S. dollars , the other half in Swiss francs .
There is considerable evidence that the organization parroted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Jan. 14 tweet that claimed there was “ no clear evidence ” of humans infecting other humans with the virus .
National Review noted that the tweet from the WHO came less than two weeks after several doctors were either reprimanded or arrested for trying to warn about COVID-19 on the Chinese social media platform WeChat .
In addition , Taiwan says it warned the WHO in December , according to the Financial Times .
When asked about Taiwan ’ s warning , Bruce Aylward , a senior adviser to WHO Director-General @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a journalist .
Scott ’ s news release said the senator “ is gravely concerned about China ’ s efforts to isolate Taiwan when it comes global health and the WHO ’ s continued refusal to include Taiwan in its membership , meetings , and information , especially in the face of the Coronavirus.
” RELATED : China Tacitly Admits It 's Been Underreporting Coronavirus Cases All Along Numerous conservative leaders have also called for an investigation into China ’ s apparent cover-up of the initial outbreak .
Such an investigation is very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 189,633 Americans have tested positive for COVID-19 , and 4,081 have died , according to Johns Hopkins .
The apparent malfeasance of China ’ s communist government and the World Health Organization has resulted in a death toll of Americans that already has far exceeded that of 9/11 .
China has been trying to use propaganda to distract from the credible allegations of a cover-up .
This clearly warrants not just an investigation but action if that malfeasance is proven , given the lives that have been lost and the economic damage done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

As the United States prepares to carry out another 30 days of “social distancing” to combat the Wuhan coronavirus, one Republican senator intends to make sure that those responsible for the severity of the pandemic are held accountable.
Sen. Rick Scott of Florida wants a congressional investigation into the World Health Organization.
“The @WHO receives millions of dollars in US taxpayer $$ and helped the Chinese Communist Party cover up a global pandemic,” he wrote Monday on Twitter. “Today, I’m calling for a Congressional investigation into what the WHO knew and when they knew it. Read more: http://bit.ly/SRS_WHO”
The @WHO receives millions of dollars in US taxpayer $$ and helped the Chinese Communist Party cover up a global pandemic. Today, I’m calling for a Congressional investigation into what the WHO knew and when they knew it. Read more: https://t.co/PnfWOz7EK1 — Rick Scott (@SenRickScott) March 31, 2020
Scott said in a statement that WHO officials “need to be held accountable for their role in promoting misinformation and helping Communist China cover up a global pandemic. We know Communist China is lying about how many cases and deaths they have, what they knew and when they knew it — and the WHO never bothered to investigate further. Their inaction cost lives.
“As soon as Congress is back in session, there should be a hearing, along with a full investigation, to review whether American taxpayers should continue to spend millions of dollars every year to fund an organization that willfully parroted propaganda from the Chinese Communist Party.”
According to a WHO invoice posted on its website, the United States was assessed roughly $331.6 million for 2020 and 2021, half payable in U.S. dollars, the other half in Swiss francs.
There is considerable evidence that the organization parroted lies by the Chinese government, including a Jan. 14 tweet that claimed there was “no clear evidence” of humans infecting other humans with the virus.
Should Congress investigate the WHO's apparent complicity in the Chinese government's cover-up of the COVID-19 pandemic? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (113 Votes) No: 0% (0 Votes)
National Review noted that the tweet from the WHO came less than two weeks after several doctors were either reprimanded or arrested for trying to warn about COVID-19 on the Chinese social media platform WeChat.
In addition, Taiwan says it warned the WHO in December, according to the Financial Times.
When asked about Taiwan’s warning, Bruce Aylward, a senior adviser to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, hung up on a journalist.
Scott’s news release said the senator “is gravely concerned about China’s efforts to isolate Taiwan when it comes global health and the WHO’s continued refusal to include Taiwan in its membership, meetings, and information, especially in the face of the Coronavirus.”
Numerous conservative leaders have also called for an investigation into China’s apparent cover-up of the initial outbreak.
Such an investigation is very necessary.
As of Wednesday morning, 189,633 Americans have tested positive for COVID-19, and 4,081 have died, according to Johns Hopkins.
The apparent malfeasance of China’s communist government and the World Health Organization has resulted in a death toll of Americans that already has far exceeded that of 9/11.
China has been trying to use propaganda to distract from the credible allegations of a cover-up.
This clearly warrants not just an investigation but action if that malfeasance is proven, given the lives that have been lost and the economic damage done to this country.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-04-02--Mayor Calls on Citizens To Fly American Flag During April as Show of Unity in Coronavirus Fight

The mayor of Prescott Valley , Arizona , is calling on the city ’ s residents to fly the American flag during the month of April as a show of unity and support for health care workers and employees of other essential businesses throughout the community .
“ During these times it ’ s important to remember that we ’ re Americans and we have that American spirit which has overcome many adversities in the past , and this is no different , ” Mayor Kell Palguta wrote in a Tuesday Facebook post .
“ Flying our flags this month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that we can make it through anything , as long as we do it together , ” he added .
On Monday , President Donald Trump extended the coronavirus safety guidelines through the month of April in an effort to mitigate the effects of the pandemic outbreak .
TRENDING : House Republicans Push Bill To Take Back the $ 25 Million Kennedy Center Received in Coronavirus Bill “ I adorned my front yard with multiple flags as soon as I heard about the proclamation .
We shall over come !
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to it !
Already been flying old glory to show how much I love my country and stand behind our President during this time in our nation !
Praying for our country !
” another wrote .
Palguta told The Western Journal that the flag “ gives more of a sense of community that , ‘ hey , we ’ re with you . '
” The mayor has been encouraged by the positive attitude he has seen from residents in his city of 45,000 , which is located approximately 90 miles north @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still smiling in the grocery store .
They ’ re still saying , ‘ Hi . '
” Keeping their social distancing , but still moving on every day.
” He also noted that many are going above and beyond the call of duty .
“ We still have some grocery managers who are delivering food themselves to residents in Prescott Valley , which is incredible , ” Palguta said .
RELATED : Churches Nationwide Find New Ways To Keep Congregations Connected During Coronavirus As a top local government official , the mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steady hand ” of leadership and making sure accurate information is communicated to the public .
“ I think getting that information out is key , because the scariest part of something like this is not knowing , ” he said .
Palguta said in the absence of correct information , people will make things up , and then rumors start to spread .
One he recently had to quell is that Prescott Valley police would be pulling people over to check if they were on the roads as essential workers .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issued a stay-at-home order for the entire state .
The order specifically provides that those who do not work for essential businesses can leave their homes to exercise and buy needed items , among other reasons .
According to the data from Johns Hopkins , there were just over 1,500 known coronavirus cases in the state as of Wednesday , with the vast majority located in Maricopa County , which encompasses the Phoenix metropolitan area .
Yavapai County , where Prescott Valley is located , had 24 cases of the virus .
Palguta @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of his resident ’ s rights to fly a “ Trump 2020 ” flag .
His office had received complaints that flying the flag violated city ordinances , and the resident had been served notice of potential fines to follow if the flag continued to fly .
The mayor pledged to work with the city council to have the law changed to make clear that flying such a flag was permissible .
“ I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution , ” Palguta said at the time .
“ And the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ above the town code of Prescott Valley.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

The mayor of Prescott Valley, Arizona, is calling on the city’s residents to fly the American flag during the month of April as a show of unity and support for health care workers and employees of other essential businesses throughout the community.
“During these times it’s important to remember that we’re Americans and we have that American spirit which has overcome many adversities in the past, and this is no different,” Mayor Kell Palguta wrote in a Tuesday Facebook post.
“Flying our flags this month will represent what that American spirit is, and that we can make it through anything, as long as we do it together,” he added.
On Monday, President Donald Trump extended the coronavirus safety guidelines through the month of April in an effort to mitigate the effects of the pandemic outbreak.
Several people responded positively to Palguta’s Facebook post.
“I adorned my front yard with multiple flags as soon as I heard about the proclamation. We shall over come!” one person commented.
“Beat you to it! Already been flying old glory to show how much I love my country and stand behind our President during this time in our nation! Praying for our country!” another wrote.
Palguta told The Western Journal that the flag “gives more of a sense of community that, ‘hey, we’re with you.'”
Do you support the mayor's call to fly the American flag? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (36 Votes) No: 0% (0 Votes)
The mayor has been encouraged by the positive attitude he has seen from residents in his city of 45,000, which is located approximately 90 miles north of Phoenix.
“They have patience,” Palguta said.
“They’re still smiling in the grocery store. They’re still saying, ‘Hi.'” Keeping their social distancing, but still moving on every day.”
He also noted that many are going above and beyond the call of duty.
“We still have some grocery managers who are delivering food themselves to residents in Prescott Valley, which is incredible,” Palguta said.
As a top local government official, the mayor sees his role as providing a “steady hand” of leadership and making sure accurate information is communicated to the public.
“I think getting that information out is key, because the scariest part of something like this is not knowing,” he said.
I signed a Proclamation making April “Fly Your Flag Month” the flag is a symbol of the fighting spirit all Americans have had through history. @PrescottVly citizens and Arizonans are no different. We will get through this.@dougducey @DrPaulGosar @SenMcSallyAZ @kyrstensinema pic.twitter.com/FJ9ScgV1rD — Mayor Kell Palguta (@KPalguta) April 1, 2020
Palguta said in the absence of correct information, people will make things up, and then rumors start to spread.
One he recently had to quell is that Prescott Valley police would be pulling people over to check if they were on the roads as essential workers.
On Monday, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey issued a stay-at-home order for the entire state.
Thank you for staying home and acting responsibly. Stay home. Stay healthy. Stay connected. pic.twitter.com/9BSU3QD4re — Doug Ducey (@dougducey) April 1, 2020
The order specifically provides that those who do not work for essential businesses can leave their homes to exercise and buy needed items, among other reasons.
According to the data from Johns Hopkins, there were just over 1,500 known coronavirus cases in the state as of Wednesday, with the vast majority located in Maricopa County, which encompasses the Phoenix metropolitan area.
Yavapai County, where Prescott Valley is located, had 24 cases of the virus.
Palguta made headlines in January when he supported one of his resident’s rights to fly a “Trump 2020” flag.
His office had received complaints that flying the flag violated city ordinances, and the resident had been served notice of potential fines to follow if the flag continued to fly.
The mayor pledged to work with the city council to have the law changed to make clear that flying such a flag was permissible.
“I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution,” Palguta said at the time.
“And the last time I checked the Constitution goes above the town code of Prescott Valley.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.