talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-05--New York State Reports More Than 1,700 Additional Deaths At Nursing Homes

ALBANY , N.Y. ( AP ) — New York state is reporting more than 1,700 previously undisclosed deaths at nursing homes and adult care facilities as the state faces scrutiny over how it ’ s protected vulnerable residents during the coronavirus pandemic .
At least 4,813 people have died from COVID-19 in the state ’ s nursing homes since March 1 , according to a tally released by Gov .
Andrew Cuomo ’ s administration late Monday that , for the first time , includes people believed to have been killed by the coronavirus before their diagnoses could be confirmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many nursing home residents have died remains uncertain despite the state ’ s latest disclosure , as the list doesn ’ t nursing home residents who were transferred to hospitals before dying .
The revised list shows that 22 nursing homes , largely in New York City and Long Island , have reported at least 40 deaths .
Parker Jewish Institute in Queens and Isabella Geriatric Center — one of New York City ’ s largest nursing homes with 705 beds — have reported the highest number of deaths : 71 and 64 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spokeswoman for Isabella Geriatric Center , said in an email last week , “ Isabella , like all other nursing homes in New York City , initially had limited access to widespread and consistent in-house testing to quickly diagnose our residents and staff .
This hampered our ability to identify those who were infected and asymptomatic , despite our efforts to swiftly separate anyone who presented symptoms.
” In many cases , the state ’ s new figures reveal many more deaths than previously reported at nursing homes : Isabella Geriatric Center had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 , and now reports the deaths of 21 patients who were confirmed to have COVID-19 along with 43 deaths of residents presumed to have COVID-19 .
And Ozanam Hall of Queens now is reporting a total of 53 deaths , up from just 10 .
Several veterans home have been especially hard-hit by the virus : The Long Island State Veterans Home has reported 53 deaths ; including 48 confirmed and five presumed COVID-19 deaths .
The New York State Veterans Home at St. Albans in Queens has reported 33 deaths while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Westchester says 22 residents have died .
Cuomo promised on March 2 , when only a handful of coronavirus cases had been reported in New York , to make a “ special effort ” for nursing homes and congregate homes housing senior citizens .
The state directed nursing homes to screen visitors and consider modifying visiting hours on March 6 , and later suspended visits to nursing homes statewide March 12 .
But the governor is facing criticism over his administration ’ s role in overseeing and supporting New York ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have struggled to treat COVID-19 patients , amass enough personal protective gear or ensure adequate staffing .
Advocacy groups for the elderly and family members of nursing home residents have called for greater transparency over COVID-19 cases at each state-regulated nursing home and criticized an April 1 state law granting some immunity to hospitals and nursing homes from civil and criminal liability .
They also questioned the state ’ s March 25 policy that says “ no resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to a nursing home solely based on a confirmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governor and his administration have defended that policy as ensuring nursing home residents aren ’ t left lingering in hospitals or without anywhere else to go .
Cuomo ’ s spokesman tweeted Monday that the policy follows federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidance .
But the federal guidance says only that a nursing home “ can accept a resident diagnosed with COVID-19 ” so long as the nursing home can follow federal guidance on transmission precautions .
Cuomo has also said the state has facilities that can house transferred COVID-19 nursing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that nursing homes that tell the state up-front that they can ’ t care for a COVID-19 patient wouldn ’ t face regulatory scrutiny .
His administration hasn ’ t responded to a request for questions on the state ’ s current capacity to care for COVID-19 nursing home residents and whether nursing homes were informed .

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — New York state is reporting more than 1,700 previously undisclosed deaths at nursing homes and adult care facilities as the state faces scrutiny over how it’s protected vulnerable residents during the coronavirus pandemic.
At least 4,813 people have died from COVID-19 in the state’s nursing homes since March 1, according to a tally released by Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration late Monday that, for the first time, includes people believed to have been killed by the coronavirus before their diagnoses could be confirmed by a lab test.
Exactly how many nursing home residents have died remains uncertain despite the state’s latest disclosure, as the list doesn’t nursing home residents who were transferred to hospitals before dying.
The revised list shows that 22 nursing homes, largely in New York City and Long Island, have reported at least 40 deaths.
Parker Jewish Institute in Queens and Isabella Geriatric Center — one of New York City’s largest nursing homes with 705 beds — have reported the highest number of deaths: 71 and 64, respectively.
Audrey Waters, a spokeswoman for Isabella Geriatric Center, said in an email last week, “Isabella, like all other nursing homes in New York City, initially had limited access to widespread and consistent in-house testing to quickly diagnose our residents and staff. This hampered our ability to identify those who were infected and asymptomatic, despite our efforts to swiftly separate anyone who presented symptoms.”
In many cases, the state’s new figures reveal many more deaths than previously reported at nursing homes: Isabella Geriatric Center had 13 COVID-19 deaths reported as of May 1, and now reports the deaths of 21 patients who were confirmed to have COVID-19 along with 43 deaths of residents presumed to have COVID-19. And Ozanam Hall of Queens now is reporting a total of 53 deaths, up from just 10.
Several veterans home have been especially hard-hit by the virus: The Long Island State Veterans Home has reported 53 deaths; including 48 confirmed and five presumed COVID-19 deaths. The New York State Veterans Home at St. Albans in Queens has reported 33 deaths while New York State Veterans Home at Montrose in Westchester says 22 residents have died.
Cuomo promised on March 2, when only a handful of coronavirus cases had been reported in New York, to make a “special effort” for nursing homes and congregate homes housing senior citizens. The state directed nursing homes to screen visitors and consider modifying visiting hours on March 6, and later suspended visits to nursing homes statewide March 12.
But the governor is facing criticism over his administration’s role in overseeing and supporting New York’s overwhelmed, state-regulated nursing homes as many have struggled to treat COVID-19 patients, amass enough personal protective gear or ensure adequate staffing.
Advocacy groups for the elderly and family members of nursing home residents have called for greater transparency over COVID-19 cases at each state-regulated nursing home and criticized an April 1 state law granting some immunity to hospitals and nursing homes from civil and criminal liability. They also questioned the state’s March 25 policy that says “no resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to a nursing home solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19.”
The governor and his administration have defended that policy as ensuring nursing home residents aren’t left lingering in hospitals or without anywhere else to go. Cuomo’s spokesman tweeted Monday that the policy follows federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidance. But the federal guidance says only that a nursing home “can accept a resident diagnosed with COVID-19” so long as the nursing home can follow federal guidance on transmission precautions.
Cuomo has also said the state has facilities that can house transferred COVID-19 nursing homes patients, and he recently said that nursing homes that tell the state up-front that they can’t care for a COVID-19 patient wouldn’t face regulatory scrutiny. His administration hasn’t responded to a request for questions on the state’s current capacity to care for COVID-19 nursing home residents and whether nursing homes were informed.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--US Now Investigating Ex-Green Beret Members Allegedly Responsible For Venezuela Raid

MIAMI ( AP ) — A former Green Beret who has claimed responsibility for an ill-fated military incursion into Venezuela is under federal investigation for arms trafficking , according to current and former U.S. law enforcement officials .
The investigation into Jordan Goudreau is in its initial stages and it ’ s unclear if it will result in charges , according to a U.S. law enforcement official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations .
The probe stems from a frenzy of contradictory comments Goudreau has made since a small cadre of volunteer combatants he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aimed at overthrowing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro .
Members of the U.S. Congress are also asking the State Department about its knowledge of Goudreau ’ s plans and raised concerns that he possibly violated arms trafficking rules .
An AP investigation published prior to the failed raid places Goudreau at the center of a plot hatched with a rebellious former Venezuelan Army Gen. , Cliver Alcalá , to secretly train dozens of Venezuelan military deserters in secret camps in Colombia to carry out a swift operation against Maduro .
The U.S. has offered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading to Maduro ’ s arrest or conviction .
He was indicted by the Trump administration in March on narcoterrorist charges .
The men were being readied for combat at three rudimentary camps in Colombia with the help of Goudreau and his Florida-based company , Silvercorp USA , multiple Maduro opponents and aspiring freedom fighters told the AP .
But the plot seemed doomed from the start because it lacked the support of the Trump administration and was infiltrated by Maduro ’ s vast , Cuban-trained intelligence network , the AP found .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s comments suggests his work on behalf of the volunteer army may have violated laws that require any U.S. company supplying weapons or military equipment , as well as military training and advice , to foreign persons to seek State Department approval .
“ Goudreau ’ s public comments alone show he was exporting his lethal expertise into a foreign country , ” said Sean McFate , a former U.S. Army paratrooper who worked as a private military contractor and is the author of a book , “ The New Rules of War @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of privatized warfare .
“ This is a serious violation.
” Goudreau declined to comment on Tuesday .
The State Department said it is restricted under law from confirming licensing activities .
The law enforcement official said Goudreau ’ s possible involvement in weapons smuggling stems from the March 23 seizure by police in Colombia of a stockpile of weapons being transported in a truck .
Alcalá claimed ownership of the cache shortly before surrendering to face U.S. narcotics charges in the same case for which Maduro was indicted .
The stockpile , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scopes , night vision goggles , two-way radios and 26 American-made assault rifles with the serial numbers rubbed off .
Fifteen brown-colored helmets seized by police were manufactured by High-End Defense Solutions , a Miami-based military equipment vendor owned by a Venezuelan immigrant family , according to Colombian police .
High-End Defense Solutions is the same company that Goudreau visited in November and December , allegedly to source weapons , according to two former Venezuelan soldiers who claim to have helped the American select the gear but later had a bitter falling out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moles for Maduro .
The AP could not independent verify their account .
Company owner Mark Von Reitzenstein has not responded to repeated email and phone requests seeking comment .
Two former law enforcement officials said an informant approached the Drug Enforcement Administration in Colombia prior to the weapons ’ seizure with an unsubstantiated tip about Goudreau ’ s alleged involvement in weapons smuggling .
The anti-narcotics agency , not knowing who Goudreau was at the time , didn ’ t open a formal probe but suspected that any weapons would ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gangs in Colombia — not a ragtag army of Venezuelan volunteers , the former officials said on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations .
One of the officials said the information was later passed on to the Department of Homeland Security .
The DEA said it does not comment on ongoing potential investigations .
Authorities in Colombia are also looking into Goudreau as part of their investigation into the seized weapons shipment , a Colombian official told the AP on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing case .
Meanwhile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concern .
Democratic congressional staff contacted the State Department multiple times on Monday seeking information about any possible contacts with Goudreau or knowledge of his activities , and whether his work may have violated International Traffic in Arms Regulations , according to a staffer on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private outreach .
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday reiterated President Donald Trump ’ s claims a day earlier that there was no direct U.S. government involvement in Goudreau ’ s brazen operation .
“ If we ’ d have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ differently , ” he joked .
“ As for who bankrolled it , we ’ re not prepared to share any more information about what we know took place .
We ’ ll unpack that at an appropriate time , we ’ ll share that information if it makes good sense.
” Goudreau , a three-time Bronze Star recipient , has insisted that his work providing only strategic advice to the combatants doesn ’ t require special licensing .
Still , he acknowledged sending into battle two special forces buddies associated with Silvercorp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the plot was foiled .
“ You ’ ve got to introduce a catalyst , ” he said in a phone interview with the AP on Monday from Florida .
“ By no means am I saying that 60 guys can come in and topple a regime .
I ’ m saying 60 guys can go in and inspire the military and police to flip and join in the liberation of their country , which deep down is what they want.
” Goudreau has said he was hired by Juan Guaidó , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recognize as Venezuela ’ s rightful leader .
To back his claim , he ’ s produced an 8-page agreement he signed with what appears to be the signature of Guaidó .
The opposition leader has refused to say whether the signature is authentic but has insisted he has no relationship with Silvercorp .
“ The dictatorship insists on lying , ” Guaidó said Tuesday in a virtual session of the opposition-controlled National Assembly , over which he presides .
“ The interim government has nothing to do with this operation.
” Contradictions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well .
In a televised interview with “ Factores de Poder , ” a Miami media outlet popular with Venezuelan exiles , he claims he never received a “ single cent ” for his work yet continued to prepare the men for battle , in the process going deep into debt .
JJ Rendon , a Miami-based adviser to Guaidó , said that he gave Goudreau $ 50,000 as requested to cover some expenses .
Goudreau acknowledged the payment to the AP and other media .
A person familiar with the situation said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another U.S.-based aide to Guaidó , lawmaker Sergio Vergara , in October .
Guaidó at one point briefly greeted Goudreau via video conference — as evidenced by an audio recording made on a hidden cellphone by Goudreau and which he shared with the Venezuelan journalist .
“ Let ’ s get to work !
” said a voice that appears to be Guaidó in the leaked recording .
He makes no mention of any military incursion .
A few days later , the team cut off contact with Goudreau , realizing he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and because they were not getting along , the person said .
An attempt to reactivate the accord fell through in November because the opposition has abandoned support for a private military incursion , the person said .
The last contact with Goudreau was a few weeks ago when a lawyer on the veteran ’ s behalf wrote Rendon seeking to collect a promised $ 1.5 million retainer .
Goudreau , through intermediaries , made it known that if they didn ’ t pay up he would release the agreement to the press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s unclear how the weapons were smuggled into Colombia .
But Silvercorp in December bought a 41-foot fiberglass boat , Florida vessel registration records show , and proceeded in February to obtain a license to install maritime navigation equipment .
On his application to the Federal Communications Commission , he said the boat , named Silverpoint and with a capacity for 10 passengers , would travel to foreign ports .
The boat next appeared in Jamaica , where Goudreau had gathered with a few of his special forces buddies looking to participate in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ familiar with the situation on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive dealings .
But as they were readying their assault , the boat broke down at sea on March 28 and an emergency position-indicating radio beacon was activated , alerting naval authorities on the Dutch Caribbean island of Curacao .
Goudreau had to return to Florida , prevented from rejoining his troops prior to the landing because of travel restrictions put in place due to the coronavirus pandemic .
“ He would have 100 % gone out in a blaze of gunfire because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” said the person .
AP Writer Scott Smith in Caracas , Venezuela , Matthew Lee in Washington and investigative researcher Randy Herschaft in New York contributed to this report .

MIAMI (AP) — A former Green Beret who has claimed responsibility for an ill-fated military incursion into Venezuela is under federal investigation for arms trafficking, according to current and former U.S. law enforcement officials.
The investigation into Jordan Goudreau is in its initial stages and it’s unclear if it will result in charges, according to a U.S. law enforcement official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The probe stems from a frenzy of contradictory comments Goudreau has made since a small cadre of volunteer combatants he was advising on Sunday launched an impossible raid aimed at overthrowing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Members of the U.S. Congress are also asking the State Department about its knowledge of Goudreau’s plans and raised concerns that he possibly violated arms trafficking rules.
An AP investigation published prior to the failed raid places Goudreau at the center of a plot hatched with a rebellious former Venezuelan Army Gen., Cliver Alcalá, to secretly train dozens of Venezuelan military deserters in secret camps in Colombia to carry out a swift operation against Maduro. The U.S. has offered a $15 million reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest or conviction. He was indicted by the Trump administration in March on narcoterrorist charges .
The men were being readied for combat at three rudimentary camps in Colombia with the help of Goudreau and his Florida-based company, Silvercorp USA, multiple Maduro opponents and aspiring freedom fighters told the AP. But the plot seemed doomed from the start because it lacked the support of the Trump administration and was infiltrated by Maduro’s vast, Cuban-trained intelligence network, the AP found.
The law enforcement official said Goudreau’s comments suggests his work on behalf of the volunteer army may have violated laws that require any U.S. company supplying weapons or military equipment, as well as military training and advice, to foreign persons to seek State Department approval.
Experts agree.
“Goudreau’s public comments alone show he was exporting his lethal expertise into a foreign country,” said Sean McFate, a former U.S. Army paratrooper who worked as a private military contractor and is the author of a book, “The New Rules of War,” on the foreign policy implications of privatized warfare. “This is a serious violation.”
Goudreau declined to comment on Tuesday. The State Department said it is restricted under law from confirming licensing activities.
The law enforcement official said Goudreau’s possible involvement in weapons smuggling stems from the March 23 seizure by police in Colombia of a stockpile of weapons being transported in a truck. Alcalá claimed ownership of the cache shortly before surrendering to face U.S. narcotics charges in the same case for which Maduro was indicted.
The stockpile, worth around $150,000, included spotting scopes, night vision goggles, two-way radios and 26 American-made assault rifles with the serial numbers rubbed off. Fifteen brown-colored helmets seized by police were manufactured by High-End Defense Solutions, a Miami-based military equipment vendor owned by a Venezuelan immigrant family, according to Colombian police.
High-End Defense Solutions is the same company that Goudreau visited in November and December, allegedly to source weapons, according to two former Venezuelan soldiers who claim to have helped the American select the gear but later had a bitter falling out with Goudreau amid accusations that they were moles for Maduro. The AP could not independent verify their account.
Company owner Mark Von Reitzenstein has not responded to repeated email and phone requests seeking comment.
Two former law enforcement officials said an informant approached the Drug Enforcement Administration in Colombia prior to the weapons’ seizure with an unsubstantiated tip about Goudreau’s alleged involvement in weapons smuggling. The anti-narcotics agency, not knowing who Goudreau was at the time, didn’t open a formal probe but suspected that any weapons would’ve been destined for leftist rebels or criminal gangs in Colombia — not a ragtag army of Venezuelan volunteers, the former officials said on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. One of the officials said the information was later passed on to the Department of Homeland Security.
The DEA said it does not comment on ongoing potential investigations.
Authorities in Colombia are also looking into Goudreau as part of their investigation into the seized weapons shipment, a Colombian official told the AP on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing case.
Meanwhile, officials in U.S. Congress are expressing concern. Democratic congressional staff contacted the State Department multiple times on Monday seeking information about any possible contacts with Goudreau or knowledge of his activities, and whether his work may have violated International Traffic in Arms Regulations, according to a staffer on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private outreach.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday reiterated President Donald Trump’s claims a day earlier that there was no direct U.S. government involvement in Goudreau’s brazen operation.
“If we’d have been involved, it would have gone differently,” he joked. “As for who bankrolled it, we’re not prepared to share any more information about what we know took place. We’ll unpack that at an appropriate time, we’ll share that information if it makes good sense.”
Goudreau, a three-time Bronze Star recipient, has insisted that his work providing only strategic advice to the combatants doesn’t require special licensing. Still, he acknowledged sending into battle two special forces buddies associated with Silvercorp and who are now in Venezuelan custody after the plot was foiled.
“You’ve got to introduce a catalyst,” he said in a phone interview with the AP on Monday from Florida. “By no means am I saying that 60 guys can come in and topple a regime. I’m saying 60 guys can go in and inspire the military and police to flip and join in the liberation of their country, which deep down is what they want.”
Goudreau has said he was hired by Juan Guaidó, who the U.S. and some 60 nations recognize as Venezuela’s rightful leader. To back his claim, he’s produced an 8-page agreement he signed with what appears to be the signature of Guaidó. The opposition leader has refused to say whether the signature is authentic but has insisted he has no relationship with Silvercorp.
“The dictatorship insists on lying,” Guaidó said Tuesday in a virtual session of the opposition-controlled National Assembly, over which he presides. “The interim government has nothing to do with this operation.”
Contradictions abound in Goudreau’s account as well. In a televised interview with “Factores de Poder,” a Miami media outlet popular with Venezuelan exiles, he claims he never received a “single cent” for his work yet continued to prepare the men for battle, in the process going deep into debt. JJ Rendon, a Miami-based adviser to Guaidó, said that he gave Goudreau $50,000 as requested to cover some expenses. Goudreau acknowledged the payment to the AP and other media.
A person familiar with the situation said the agreement was signed by Rendon and another U.S.-based aide to Guaidó, lawmaker Sergio Vergara, in October. Guaidó at one point briefly greeted Goudreau via video conference — as evidenced by an audio recording made on a hidden cellphone by Goudreau and which he shared with the Venezuelan journalist.
“Let’s get to work!” said a voice that appears to be Guaidó in the leaked recording. He makes no mention of any military incursion.
A few days later, the team cut off contact with Goudreau, realizing he was unable to deliver what he had promised and because they were not getting along, the person said. An attempt to reactivate the accord fell through in November because the opposition has abandoned support for a private military incursion, the person said. The last contact with Goudreau was a few weeks ago when a lawyer on the veteran’s behalf wrote Rendon seeking to collect a promised $1.5 million retainer. Goudreau, through intermediaries, made it known that if they didn’t pay up he would release the agreement to the press, the person said.
It’s unclear how the weapons were smuggled into Colombia. But Silvercorp in December bought a 41-foot fiberglass boat, Florida vessel registration records show, and proceeded in February to obtain a license to install maritime navigation equipment. On his application to the Federal Communications Commission, he said the boat, named Silverpoint and with a capacity for 10 passengers, would travel to foreign ports.
The boat next appeared in Jamaica, where Goudreau had gathered with a few of his special forces buddies looking to participate in the raid, according to a person familiar with the situation on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive dealings.
But as they were readying their assault, the boat broke down at sea on March 28 and an emergency position-indicating radio beacon was activated, alerting naval authorities on the Dutch Caribbean island of Curacao. Goudreau had to return to Florida, prevented from rejoining his troops prior to the landing because of travel restrictions put in place due to the coronavirus pandemic.
“He would have 100% gone out in a blaze of gunfire because that’s who he is,” said the person.
—-
AP Writer Scott Smith in Caracas, Venezuela, Matthew Lee in Washington and investigative researcher Randy Herschaft in New York contributed to this report.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--Washington Sheriff Declares He Won’t Enforce Inslee’s ‘Unconstitutional’ Order

The sheriff of Klickitat County , Washington has decided that he ’ s simply not going to enforce Governor Jay Inslee ’ s ( D ) stay-at-home order .
“ As Sheriff I will uphold our citizens Constitutional Rights and Liberties and will NOT ENFORCE Governor Inslee ’ s COVID-19 Proclamation Orders on public gatherings and non-essential businesses , ” Sheriff Bob Songer told TPM , capitalization included .
He added that the governor shuttered churches and firearms dealers in violation of the 1st and 2nd Amendments , but had “ no problem allowing Marijuana shops to stay open for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as essential workers in the state .
Inslee ’ s office seemed unimpressed by the argument .
“ Only the Washington State Supreme Court has the ability to declare something unconstitutional , ” communications director Tara Lee told TPM .
Rural Klickitat County is located in the southern part of the state and home to around 20,000 people .
This is not Songer ’ s first time defying a law he deemed unconstitutional since he ’ s been sheriff there .
In January of last year , he announced his refusal to enforce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for purchasing and owning semiautomatic weapons including AR-15s .
“ I think it ’ s a bad law and I think it violates people ’ s rights , ” he said at the time , per the Yakima Herald .
“ This law will do nothing to stop crime or do anything to make our communities safer .
But what it will do is make criminals out of our honest citizens.
” Songer isn ’ t alone in his reluctance to enforce the governor ’ s order : a couple of counties to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Raymond took a similar stand a couple of weeks ago .
In a letter he posted to Facebook , Raymond declared that he would not enforce the governor ’ s orders when they infringed on religious freedom or the operation of private businesses .
The county ’ s commissioners eagerly followed his lead , declaring local businesses open no matter what the governor said .
They backtracked hours later , after Inslee ’ s counsel sent them a letter warning that any attempt to reopen local businesses would be a violation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Washington had 15,594 confirmed cases of coronavirus and 862 deaths per the state health department .
Inslee has extended the state ’ s current stay-at-home order through May 31 , but is looking to open up some businesses in phases before then .

The sheriff of Klickitat County, Washington has decided that he’s simply not going to enforce Governor Jay Inslee’s (D) stay-at-home order.
“As Sheriff I will uphold our citizens Constitutional Rights and Liberties and will NOT ENFORCE Governor Inslee’s COVID-19 Proclamation Orders on public gatherings and non-essential businesses,” Sheriff Bob Songer told TPM, capitalization included.
He added that the governor shuttered churches and firearms dealers in violation of the 1st and 2nd Amendments, but had “no problem allowing Marijuana shops to stay open for business.” Cannabis retailers are indeed classified as essential workers in the state.
Inslee’s office seemed unimpressed by the argument.
“Only the Washington State Supreme Court has the ability to declare something unconstitutional,” communications director Tara Lee told TPM.
Rural Klickitat County is located in the southern part of the state and home to around 20,000 people.
This is not Songer’s first time defying a law he deemed unconstitutional since he’s been sheriff there.
In January of last year, he announced his refusal to enforce a state initiative that stiffened the requirements for purchasing and owning semiautomatic weapons including AR-15s.
“I think it’s a bad law and I think it violates people’s rights,” he said at the time, per the Yakima Herald. “This law will do nothing to stop crime or do anything to make our communities safer. But what it will do is make criminals out of our honest citizens.”
Songer isn’t alone in his reluctance to enforce the governor’s order: a couple of counties to the east, Franklin County Sheriff J.D. Raymond took a similar stand a couple of weeks ago.
In a letter he posted to Facebook, Raymond declared that he would not enforce the governor’s orders when they infringed on religious freedom or the operation of private businesses.
The county’s commissioners eagerly followed his lead, declaring local businesses open no matter what the governor said. They backtracked a day later, after Inslee’s counsel sent them a letter warning that any attempt to reopen local businesses would be a violation of state law.
As of Wednesday afternoon, Washington had 15,594 confirmed cases of coronavirus and 862 deaths per the state health department. Inslee has extended the state’s current stay-at-home order through May 31, but is looking to open up some businesses in phases before then.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--Report: Trump Casts Doubt On COVID-19 Death Toll, Believes True Number Could Be Lower

As the U.S. grapples with a staggering death toll from the coronavirus , which has now surpassed 70,000 , President Donald Trump reportedly has been privately questioning the number of fatalities from the virus and believes the deaths could have been over-counted .
Axios reported on Wednesday that Trump has been venting to his aides about the ever-growing calculated death toll , which is at over 72,000 according to John Hopkins University .
The President reportedly believes the figures , which have consistently surpassed his predictions of what the final death count will be , seem to be higher than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his aides believe the same .
An unnamed official told Axios that Trump is expected to start casting doubt on the death toll in public next week .
Time after time , the President has been forced to revise his optimistically low fatality predictions of the virus , which originally began at 50,000 until Trump had to begin steadily increasing the figure to keep up with the true death rate .
On Sunday , Trump said the final number could be as high as 100,000 but insisted that he had prevented “ millions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic .
The White House did not respond to request for comment .

As the U.S. grapples with a staggering death toll from the coronavirus, which has now surpassed 70,000, President Donald Trump reportedly has been privately questioning the number of fatalities from the virus and believes the deaths could have been over-counted.
Axios reported on Wednesday that Trump has been venting to his aides about the ever-growing calculated death toll, which is at over 72,000 according to John Hopkins University. The President reportedly believes the figures, which have consistently surpassed his predictions of what the final death count will be, seem to be higher than they actually are, and several of his aides believe the same.
An unnamed official told Axios that Trump is expected to start casting doubt on the death toll in public next week.
Time after time, the President has been forced to revise his optimistically low fatality predictions of the virus, which originally began at 50,000 until Trump had to begin steadily increasing the figure to keep up with the true death rate.
On Sunday, Trump said the final number could be as high as 100,000 but insisted that he had prevented “millions” of deaths early on in the pandemic.
The White House did not respond to request for comment.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--Trump Doubles Down On Plan To ‘Terminate’ Obamacare In SCOTUS Case

President Trump confirmed Wednesday that his administration was not backing down from the aggressive anti-Obamacare stance it ’ s taking in a blockbuster case in front of the Supreme Court .
After reports that even Attorney General Bill Barr was concerned about the political risks of the Justice Department ’ s posture in the case , Trump said the administration was “ staying with Texas and the group , ” referring to the red states that are arguing for a full dismantling of the Affordable Care Act .
“ Obamacare is a disaster , but we ’ ve made it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to a pool report of comments made in the Oval Office .
“ We want to terminate health care under Obamacare.
” The Supreme Court received its first round of merits briefs — filed by the House of Representatives and the blue states seeking to defend the law — on Wednesday .
If the administration was going to change its position in the case , Wednesday was also presumed to be its deadline for doing so .
Trump ’ s comments made clear that his Justice Department is holding on to its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ invalidated .
When the red states originally brought the lawsuit , the Justice Department , then under Attorney General Jeff Sessions , took on a relatively less far reaching , but still controversial position .
It argued that the law ’ s insurance market reforms — including its protections for pre-existing conditions — be thrown out , rather than the whole law .
But in 2019 , despite the reported concerns of Barr and Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar , the White House expanded its Obamacare opposition to its current posture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struck down .
The case is based on a claim that the 2017 tax reform bill made the whole Affordable Care Act unconstitutional by zeroing out Obamacare ’ s individual mandate .
Given that Democrats swept the 2018 midterms by running on Republicans ’ previous attempts to repeal Obamacare , and that the coronavirus outbreak is only further putting the issue in the spotlight , the administration ’ s arguments in the case are likely to be a major issue in the presidential campaign .
In his remarks Wednesday , Trump vowed that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that still covers pre-existing conditions — a promise that congressional Republicans found impossible to achieve when they tried in 2017 .
It is not clear yet whether the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case before the November election , and it is almost certain the case won ’ t be resolved until well after Americans vote for their next president .

No turning back now!
President Trump confirmed Wednesday that his administration was not backing down from the aggressive anti-Obamacare stance it’s taking in a blockbuster case in front of the Supreme Court.
After reports that even Attorney General Bill Barr was concerned about the political risks of the Justice Department’s posture in the case, Trump said the administration was “staying with Texas and the group,” referring to the red states that are arguing for a full dismantling of the Affordable Care Act.
“Obamacare is a disaster, but we’ve made it barely acceptable,” Trump said, according to a pool report of comments made in the Oval Office. “We want to terminate health care under Obamacare.”
The Supreme Court received its first round of merits briefs — filed by the House of Representatives and the blue states seeking to defend the law — on Wednesday. If the administration was going to change its position in the case, Wednesday was also presumed to be its deadline for doing so.
Trump’s comments made clear that his Justice Department is holding on to its arguments that the whole law should be invalidated.
When the red states originally brought the lawsuit, the Justice Department, then under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, took on a relatively less far reaching, but still controversial position. It argued that the law’s insurance market reforms — including its protections for pre-existing conditions — be thrown out, rather than the whole law.
But in 2019, despite the reported concerns of Barr and Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, the White House expanded its Obamacare opposition to its current posture: that the whole law should be struck down. The case is based on a claim that the 2017 tax reform bill made the whole Affordable Care Act unconstitutional by zeroing out Obamacare’s individual mandate.
Given that Democrats swept the 2018 midterms by running on Republicans’ previous attempts to repeal Obamacare, and that the coronavirus outbreak is only further putting the issue in the spotlight, the administration’s arguments in the case are likely to be a major issue in the presidential campaign.
In his remarks Wednesday, Trump vowed that he would replace Obamacare with something cheaper that still covers pre-existing conditions — a promise that congressional Republicans found impossible to achieve when they tried in 2017.
It is not clear yet whether the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case before the November election, and it is almost certain the case won’t be resolved until well after Americans vote for their next president.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--‘Death Is Not An Economic Motivator’: Pelosi Emphasizes Dangers Of Reopening Economy

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-CA ) argued Wednesday that reopening the economy in the middle of the COVID-19 outbreak , as President Donald Trump desperately wants , isn ’ t worth the deadly consequences .
“ The fact is if you undermine science , if you underfund testing , if you exaggerate the opportunity that is out there for the economy at the risk of people dying , that ’ s not a plan , ” Pelosi said during an interview with MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell .
“ Death is not an economic motivator , stimulus , ” she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going down that path ?
” The Democratic leader said that the government can mitigate the outbreak and thus end stay-at-home orders by “ doing things in a way that is appropriate , ” such as testing , social distancing and following health officials ’ guidelines .
“ But not cheering people on [ who are ] going with guns and swastikas to the legislature in Michigan , and saying ‘ These are really good people , ' ” she said , jabbing at Trump for actively applauding the right-wing protesters , some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and waving white nationalist flags .

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) argued Wednesday that reopening the economy in the middle of the COVID-19 outbreak, as President Donald Trump desperately wants, isn’t worth the deadly consequences.
“The fact is if you undermine science, if you underfund testing, if you exaggerate the opportunity that is out there for the economy at the risk of people dying, that’s not a plan,” Pelosi said during an interview with MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell.
“Death is not an economic motivator, stimulus,” she continued. “So why are we going down that path?”
The Democratic leader said that the government can mitigate the outbreak and thus end stay-at-home orders by “doing things in a way that is appropriate,” such as testing, social distancing and following health officials’ guidelines.
“But not cheering people on [who are] going with guns and swastikas to the legislature in Michigan, and saying ‘These are really good people,'” she said, jabbing at Trump for actively applauding the right-wing protesters, some of whom have been carrying semi-automatic weapons and waving white nationalist flags.
Watch Pelosi below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--GOP Rep: Best Way To Avoid ‘Risk’ Of COVID-19 Is To Not Be Born In The First Place

Oh , you don ’ t want to catch COVID-19 if your place of employment reopens during the outbreak ?
Well , maybe you should ’ ve thought about that before you decided to exist .
That was the odd argument that Rep. Andy Harris ( R-MD ) , who is also a doctor , made at a congressional hearing on Wednesday while dismissing health officials ’ guidelines on enacting statewide safety measures–such as contact tracing and stay-at-home orders–before the economy should reopen .
During a back-and-forth with former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) director Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though the virus is still spreading , those safety measures don ’ t eradicate the disease entirely and therefore businesses , at least those in less populous areas , ought to be allowed to reopen anyway .
“ What we can say is , you will be safer if you ’ re able to open with contact tracing in place , ” Frieden said .
“ Well , we ’ re safer if we ’ re not born .
We ’ re safer from death if we ’ re not born , right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean the bottom line is , there ’ s some element of risk.
” As such , the GOP lawmaker asserted , the guidelines were overly broad and too much of an unnecessary hindrance to reopening certain economies , like those in rural parts of his state versus more urban settings .
“ Why do we have a one-size-fits-all approached when we can be much more nuanced ?
” he asked .
Watch the exchange in a video posted by Bloomberg reporter Steven Dennis below :

Oh, you don’t want to catch COVID-19 if your place of employment reopens during the outbreak? Well, maybe you should’ve thought about that before you decided to exist.
That was the odd argument that Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), who is also a doctor, made at a congressional hearing on Wednesday while dismissing health officials’ guidelines on enacting statewide safety measures–such as contact tracing and stay-at-home orders–before the economy should reopen.
During a back-and-forth with former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) director Dr. Tom Frieden, Harris argued that even though the virus is still spreading, those safety measures don’t eradicate the disease entirely and therefore businesses, at least those in less populous areas, ought to be allowed to reopen anyway.
“What we can say is, you will be safer if you’re able to open with contact tracing in place,” Frieden said.
“Well, we’re safer if we’re not born. We’re safer from death if we’re not born, right?” Harris retorted. “I mean the bottom line is, there’s some element of risk.”
As such, the GOP lawmaker asserted, the guidelines were overly broad and too much of an unnecessary hindrance to reopening certain economies, like those in rural parts of his state versus more urban settings.
“Why do we have a one-size-fits-all approached when we can be much more nuanced?” he asked.
Watch the exchange in a video posted by Bloomberg reporter Steven Dennis below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--De Blasio: It’s ‘Astounding’ Trump Is Demonizing Blue States During Pandemic

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted President Donald Trump on Wednesday for smearing states led by Democrats and painting federal COVID-19 assistance as a “ bailout ” for those states .
“ John , it ’ s astounding that he even introduces the question of red states and blue states , ” de Blasio told CNN anchor John Berman .
“ He ’ s saying it out loud .
He is politicizing a pandemic , not being patriotic , not talking about all Americans and how to bring us all back together.
” He accused Trump of “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ Who does that ?
” de Blasio asked .
“ What kind of president in the middle of a crisis says ‘ I ’ m going to help you but I ’ m not going to help you because of what ’ s on your voter registration card ? '
” The mayor pointed out that federal assistance needs to go to all cities and states , or else “ there will not be a national economic recovery , period.
” De Blasio was responding to Trump ’ s interview with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the President said that Congress was not “ inclined to do bailouts ” for states like New York and California , which he claimed have been “ mismanaged over a long period of time.
” “ It ’ s not fair to the Republicans because all the states that need help–they ’ re run by Democrats in every case , ” Trump said while heaping praise upon GOP-led Texas and Florida for “ doing phenomenal .
”

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio blasted President Donald Trump on Wednesday for smearing states led by Democrats and painting federal COVID-19 assistance as a “bailout” for those states.
“John, it’s astounding that he even introduces the question of red states and blue states,” de Blasio told CNN anchor John Berman. “He’s saying it out loud. He is politicizing a pandemic, not being patriotic, not talking about all Americans and how to bring us all back together.”
“We’re all connected,” the mayor added.
He accused Trump of “turning his back because of partisan affiliation.”
“Who does that?” de Blasio asked. “What kind of president in the middle of a crisis says ‘I’m going to help you but I’m not going to help you because of what’s on your voter registration card?'”
The mayor pointed out that federal assistance needs to go to all cities and states, or else “there will not be a national economic recovery, period.”
De Blasio was responding to Trump’s interview with the New York Post, during which the President said that Congress was not “inclined to do bailouts” for states like New York and California, which he claimed have been “mismanaged over a long period of time.”
“It’s not fair to the Republicans because all the states that need help–they’re run by Democrats in every case,” Trump said while heaping praise upon GOP-led Texas and Florida for “doing phenomenal.”
Watch de Blasio below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--Obama Called GOP’s Bogus Biden-Ukraine Probe Part Of ‘Russian Disinformation’

The former president ’ s office sent the letter to the National Archives and Records Administration ( NARA ) in response to a November 2019 request from Sens .
Chuck Grassley ( R-IA ) and Ron Johnson ( R-WI ) for access to documents and records from the Obama administration .
“ However , the current request is not a proper use of the limited NARA exceptions , ” the letter reads .
“ It arises out of efforts by some , actively supported by Russia , to shift the blame for Russian interference in the 2016 election to Ukraine.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ heads of the Senate Finance and Homeland Security committees , have picked up the investigative slack left behind by personal attorney for President Trump Rudy Giuliani .
The investigation picked up steam in February as Biden ’ s chances of becoming the Democratic 2020 nominee surged , and has been marred by at least one GOP witness coming under suspicion of being a vehicle for Russian disinformation efforts .
The March 2020 letter to the National Archives indicated that Obama believed the GOP records request to be “ without precedent ” and lacking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regardless , Obama gave the green light for the release of the records , suggesting that the information itself would counteract the disinformation campaign .
“ Nevertheless , in the interest of countering the misinformation campaign underlying this request , we are prepared on this occasion to provide the Committees access to the records responsive to this request , ” the letter concludes .

A highly politicized GOP Senate investigation into discredited allegations against Joe Biden in Ukraine constitute efforts to boost Russia-sourced disinformation, President Obama’s office said in a March 2020 letter.
The former president’s office sent the letter to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in response to a November 2019 request from Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Ron Johnson (R-WI) for access to documents and records from the Obama administration.
“However, the current request is not a proper use of the limited NARA exceptions,” the letter reads. “It arises out of efforts by some, actively supported by Russia, to shift the blame for Russian interference in the 2016 election to Ukraine.”
Grassley and Johnson, as respective heads of the Senate Finance and Homeland Security committees, have picked up the investigative slack left behind by personal attorney for President Trump Rudy Giuliani.
The committees are probing unsubstantiated allegations that Ukrainian officials conspired with the Democratic National Committee to damage President Trump’s 2016 campaign. The committees have persevered in the probe despite overwhelming opposition from facts and reality, continuing the crucial work of building a narrative to counter evidence showing that President Trump leaned on the Ukrainian government to have Kyiv interfere in the 2020 election. For the President’s allies on Capitol Hill, the probe has an added benefit: it could be used to smear the Democratic nominee in an election year.
The investigation picked up steam in February as Biden’s chances of becoming the Democratic 2020 nominee surged, and has been marred by at least one GOP witness coming under suspicion of being a vehicle for Russian disinformation efforts.
The March 2020 letter to the National Archives indicated that Obama believed the GOP records request to be “without precedent” and lacking a “legitimate purpose.”
But, regardless, Obama gave the green light for the release of the records, suggesting that the information itself would counteract the disinformation campaign.
“Nevertheless, in the interest of countering the misinformation campaign underlying this request, we are prepared on this occasion to provide the Committees access to the records responsive to this request,” the letter concludes.
Read the letter here:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--Michigan GOP-Majority Legislature Sues Whitmer Over New Stay-At-Home Order

As promised , the Republican-controlled state legislature in Michigan sued Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer ( D ) Wednesday morning , arguing that she exceeded her authority by extending the state ’ s stay-at-home order last week .
Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey ( R ) previewed such a lawsuit Thursday , when , after the legislature allowed her order to lapse , Whitmer issued a trio of new executive orders extending it anyway .
“ The Legislature did not approve an extension of the state emergency declaration and as such we expected the declaration to end , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Instead , we saw the governor ignore the law , unilaterally extend the emergency , and write new executive orders .
If left unchecked , the governor could extend her authority indefinitely.
” Whitmer ’ s Press Secretary Tiffany Brown told TPM in a statement that the “ lawsuit is just another partisan game that won ’ t distract the governor.
” “ Moving forward , the governor will continue to listen to medical experts and put the health and safety of Michiganders first , ” Brown said .
The chambers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michigan court of claims , an immediate judgement rendering the stay-at-home orders “ invalid and unenforceable.
” They also want oral arguments to be held on the issue .
The governor insists that she does not need legislative approval to extend her order ; the legislature says she does .
The two sides cite conflicting state laws .
Whitmer has been hanging her hat on the “ Emergency Powers of Governor ” enacted in 1945 , which gives the governor broad emergency powers and few constraints .
The legislature , on the other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Emergency Management Act ” of 1976 , which grants the governor emergency powers only for 28 days before requiring a legislative extension .
In an attempt to cover her bases , Whitmer formally ended the previous emergency with her new orders , and issued new stay-at-home orders under both the 1945 and 1976 laws .
Any hope of the matter being decided without legal action was scuttled last week , as temperatures rose on both sides .
Whitmer ’ s office leaked emails with Shirkey ’ s chief of staff , revealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one- or two-week extensions on the order in exchange for Whitmer ’ s promise that she ’ d go through the legislature with future stay-at-home orders .
Whitmer shut down the compromise , saying that “ Michigan remains in a state of emergency regardless of the actions you decide to take or not take.
” Shirkey retorted that any desire within the Republican caucus to work with the governor had “ evaporated.
” Whitmer later accused Republicans of playing politics during the health crisis .
The week of tension was punctuated with armed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yelling at lawmakers while they debated the issue .
In addition to the legislature ’ s new filing in state court , an individual Republican congressman is also challenging Whitmer on the federal level .
Rep. Paul Mitchell ( R ) filed in U.S. district court Monday seeking relief from the governor ’ s emergency orders .
In his complaint , he observed that coronavirus cases in the state are flattening , yet the governor continues to enforce strict social distancing mitigation .
He called her executive orders “ unconstitutional.
” “ In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ define the limits of a State ’ s police power , ” the complaint said .
Whitmer has argued that ongoing social distancing is necessary to further flatten the curve and prevent a second spike .
As of Wednesday , the state had 44,397 confirmed cases and 4,179 deaths , per the state health department .
“ Let me be clear : I will not be making decisions based on an arbitrary timeline or political pressure , ” Whitmer wrote in a tweet when she extended the stay-at-home orders .
“ I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ My number one priority is the health & safety of Michiganders , and I will continue to work tirelessly to protect both lives & livelihoods.
” This post has been updated .

As promised, the Republican-controlled state legislature in Michigan sued Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) Wednesday morning, arguing that she exceeded her authority by extending the state’s stay-at-home order last week.
Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey (R) previewed such a lawsuit Thursday, when, after the legislature allowed her order to lapse, Whitmer issued a trio of new executive orders extending it anyway.
“The Legislature did not approve an extension of the state emergency declaration and as such we expected the declaration to end,” he said in a statement accompanying the suit. “Instead, we saw the governor ignore the law, unilaterally extend the emergency, and write new executive orders. If left unchecked, the governor could extend her authority indefinitely.”
Whitmer’s Press Secretary Tiffany Brown told TPM in a statement that the “lawsuit is just another partisan game that won’t distract the governor.”
“Moving forward, the governor will continue to listen to medical experts and put the health and safety of Michiganders first,” Brown said.
The chambers of the legislature are seeking, in the Michigan court of claims, an immediate judgement rendering the stay-at-home orders “invalid and unenforceable.” They also want oral arguments to be held on the issue.
The governor insists that she does not need legislative approval to extend her order; the legislature says she does. The two sides cite conflicting state laws.
Whitmer has been hanging her hat on the “Emergency Powers of Governor” enacted in 1945, which gives the governor broad emergency powers and few constraints.
The legislature, on the other hand, has been pointing to the “Emergency Management Act” of 1976, which grants the governor emergency powers only for 28 days before requiring a legislative extension.
In an attempt to cover her bases, Whitmer formally ended the previous emergency with her new orders, and issued new stay-at-home orders under both the 1945 and 1976 laws.
Any hope of the matter being decided without legal action was scuttled last week, as temperatures rose on both sides.
Whitmer’s office leaked emails with Shirkey’s chief of staff, revealing that the Republican had tried to barter one- or two-week extensions on the order in exchange for Whitmer’s promise that she’d go through the legislature with future stay-at-home orders.
Whitmer shut down the compromise, saying that “Michigan remains in a state of emergency regardless of the actions you decide to take or not take.”
Shirkey retorted that any desire within the Republican caucus to work with the governor had “evaporated.”
Whitmer later accused Republicans of playing politics during the health crisis.
The week of tension was punctuated with armed protesters entering the capitol building Friday and yelling at lawmakers while they debated the issue.
In addition to the legislature’s new filing in state court, an individual Republican congressman is also challenging Whitmer on the federal level. Rep. Paul Mitchell (R) filed in U.S. district court Monday seeking relief from the governor’s emergency orders.
In his complaint, he observed that coronavirus cases in the state are flattening, yet the governor continues to enforce strict social distancing mitigation. He called her executive orders “unconstitutional.”
“In short, Mitchell brings this lawsuit to define the limits of a State’s police power,” the complaint said.
Whitmer has argued that ongoing social distancing is necessary to further flatten the curve and prevent a second spike. As of Wednesday, the state had 44,397 confirmed cases and 4,179 deaths, per the state health department.
“Let me be clear: I will not be making decisions based on an arbitrary timeline or political pressure,” Whitmer wrote in a tweet when she extended the stay-at-home orders. “I’m not here to play games. My number one priority is the health & safety of Michiganders, and I will continue to work tirelessly to protect both lives & livelihoods.”
Read the legislature’s complaint here:
This post has been updated.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-06--Trump’s DOJ Finds An ‘Ironic’ Hook For Its Pandemic Anti-Lockdown Crusade

The law , inserted into the 1994 crime bill after the Rodney King beating , had empowered past administrations to investigate police brutality and racial profiling .
Trump ’ s first attorney general , Jeff Sessions , persistently bashed those efforts , and he sought to curb the consent decrees that kept police department ’ s feet to the fire .
In the last three years , Justice Department action on systemic police misconduct has been sparse .
But the pandemic — and Attorney General Bill Barr ’ s stated eagerness to go after lockdown ordinances he believes are unconstitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to invoke the law .
The Justice Department has cited it in recent filings to back churches that had gone to court to fight local and state public health orders that curtailed their services .
So far , the Justice Department has only invoked the law to explain to courts why it was weighing in on lawsuits brought by private challengers .
But the citations also seem in line with the more proactive approach Barr has hinted he ’ d like the Justice Department to take , as the law allows the department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The fact that they ’ re citing it , they seem to be laying a marker that they could say some of these police departments are systematically discriminating against religious institutions , ” said Sasha Samberg-Champion , a former DOJ civil rights attorney .
“ They at least seem to be grasping some sort of authority that would allow them to do something on their own.
” The Justice Department did not respond to TPM ’ s inquiry about its invocations of the law in the COVID-19 cases .
‘ This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ The statute in question is 34 U.S.C .
section 12601 , which authorizes the attorney general to bring civil lawsuits to remedy “ pattern or practice “ by law enforcement entities that violate civil rights .
The way the Justice Department is using it now is “ odd ” and “ peculiar , ” former DOJ officials with section 12601 experience told TPM .
They stressed , however , that cases where police officers are unfairly targeting Americans on the basis of their religion is well within the law ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sign of the times and a sign of priorities that various administrations are going to focus on : whether it ’ s disproportionately targeting black and brown populations for policy , or whether its disproportionately targeting religious places of worship for policing , ” said Julie Abbate , a former DOJ official who worked on section 12601 cases .
The law is typically used to investigate internal police department policies or repeated instances where local law enforcement is disproportionally cracking down on a particular group , be it related to race , religion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where the Justice Department has cited it recently were singular episodes , where local law enforcement agents were enforcing a coronavirus public health order against churches whose services allegedly violated the social distancing requirements of the order .
The Justice Department argued that because the orders carved out exceptions for other businesses but not for churches , the orders themselves could be a violation of religious rights .
The Trump administration made this argument in “ statements of interest , ” which are essentially “ friend-of-the court ” briefs the Justice Department has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to citing that broad authority , the department cited section 12601 as why it was offering the court its take on the private lawsuits .
“ If the DOJ was getting back into the business of enforcing pattern and practice violations of law enforcement entities , that , I think , would be a good thing , ” said Justin Levitt , who worked in DOJ ’ s civil rights division during the Obama administration .
“ This is a really weird way to do it.
“ This ostensible interest in holding police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ churches is notable , former DOJ lawyers told TPM , given how DOJ ’ s political leaders under Trump have publicly downplayed and even mocked efforts to monitor systemic police misconduct .
The administration ’ s record on “ pattern and practice ” cases is “ anemic , ” Chiraag Bains , a former DOJ attorney who now works at Demos , said .
“ I found it ironic that they ’ re relying on this statute , given that they are doing precious little to enforce it.
” As the administration noted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 12601 “ allows the United States to bring suit when law enforcement officers engage in a pattern or practice that deprives individuals of their federal constitutional or statutory rights.
” Former DOJ officials were skeptical that the Justice Department would ultimately bring its own section 12601 lawsuits against COVID-19 orders , given how much time it takes for those cases to come together .
But even an investigation , which section 12601 also authorizes , could have an “ harassing ” effect , Samberg-Champion warned , as the Justice Department could start “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Other former DOJ officials pointed to the safeguards that are in place and the career attorneys who would be in charge of leading such investigations as a reason that the Justice Department wouldn ’ t go overboard trying to investigate state and local shutdown ordinances .
“ I worry this is being used to harass in the press … that this gets covered with the notion that the DOJ might be coming after you , ” Levitt said .
“ I am actually not worried about the DOJ coming after these local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the homework they would have to do .
”

President Trump’s Justice Department has found a use for a federal police accountability law its leaders have previously dismissed: going after COVID-19 public health orders.
The law, inserted into the 1994 crime bill after the Rodney King beating, had empowered past administrations to investigate police brutality and racial profiling. Trump’s first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, persistently bashed those efforts, and he sought to curb the consent decrees that kept police department’s feet to the fire. In the last three years, Justice Department action on systemic police misconduct has been sparse.
But the pandemic — and Attorney General Bill Barr’s stated eagerness to go after lockdown ordinances he believes are unconstitutional — has presented the administration another way to invoke the law.
The Justice Department has cited it in recent filings to back churches that had gone to court to fight local and state public health orders that curtailed their services.
So far, the Justice Department has only invoked the law to explain to courts why it was weighing in on lawsuits brought by private challengers. But the citations also seem in line with the more proactive approach Barr has hinted he’d like the Justice Department to take, as the law allows the department to itself launch investigations and bring lawsuits.
“The fact that they’re citing it, they seem to be laying a marker that they could say some of these police departments are systematically discriminating against religious institutions,” said Sasha Samberg-Champion, a former DOJ civil rights attorney. “They at least seem to be grasping some sort of authority that would allow them to do something on their own.”
The Justice Department did not respond to TPM’s inquiry about its invocations of the law in the COVID-19 cases.
‘This Is A Really Weird Way To Do It’
The statute in question is 34 U.S.C. section 12601, which authorizes the attorney general to bring civil lawsuits to remedy “pattern or practice“ by law enforcement entities that violate civil rights.
The way the Justice Department is using it now is “odd” and “peculiar,” former DOJ officials with section 12601 experience told TPM. They stressed, however, that cases where police officers are unfairly targeting Americans on the basis of their religion is well within the law’s scope.
“It’s just sign of the times and a sign of priorities that various administrations are going to focus on: whether it’s disproportionately targeting black and brown populations for policy, or whether its disproportionately targeting religious places of worship for policing,” said Julie Abbate, a former DOJ official who worked on section 12601 cases.
The law is typically used to investigate internal police department policies or repeated instances where local law enforcement is disproportionally cracking down on a particular group, be it related to race, religion or gender.
The two pandemic cases where the Justice Department has cited it recently were singular episodes, where local law enforcement agents were enforcing a coronavirus public health order against churches whose services allegedly violated the social distancing requirements of the order.
The Justice Department argued that because the orders carved out exceptions for other businesses but not for churches, the orders themselves could be a violation of religious rights.
The Trump administration made this argument in “statements of interest,” which are essentially “friend-of-the court” briefs the Justice Department has broad authority to file. In addition to citing that broad authority, the department cited section 12601 as why it was offering the court its take on the private lawsuits.
“If the DOJ was getting back into the business of enforcing pattern and practice violations of law enforcement entities, that, I think, would be a good thing,” said Justin Levitt, who worked in DOJ’s civil rights division during the Obama administration. “This is a really weird way to do it.“
This ostensible interest in holding police forces accountable for enforcing shutdown orders on churches is notable, former DOJ lawyers told TPM, given how DOJ’s political leaders under Trump have publicly downplayed and even mocked efforts to monitor systemic police misconduct. The administration’s record on “pattern and practice” cases is “anemic,” Chiraag Bains, a former DOJ attorney who now works at Demos, said.
“I found it ironic that they’re relying on this statute, given that they are doing precious little to enforce it.”
The Potential For ‘Harassing’
As the administration noted in its church case filings, section 12601 “allows the United States to bring suit when law enforcement officers engage in a pattern or practice that deprives individuals of their federal constitutional or statutory rights.”
Former DOJ officials were skeptical that the Justice Department would ultimately bring its own section 12601 lawsuits against COVID-19 orders, given how much time it takes for those cases to come together. But even an investigation, which section 12601 also authorizes, could have an “harassing” effect, Samberg-Champion warned, as the Justice Department could start “demanding information” from states and localities.
Other former DOJ officials pointed to the safeguards that are in place and the career attorneys who would be in charge of leading such investigations as a reason that the Justice Department wouldn’t go overboard trying to investigate state and local shutdown ordinances.
“I worry this is being used to harass in the press … that this gets covered with the notion that the DOJ might be coming after you,” Levitt said. “I am actually not worried about the DOJ coming after these local law enforcement agencies, because of all the homework they would have to do.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-08--Two Georgia Men Arrested On Murder Charges In Shooting Of Ahmaud Arbery

SAVANNAH , Ga. ( AP ) — A white father and son accused of fatally shooting a black man on @ @ @ @ @ arrested Thursday and charged with murder and aggravated assault after a national outcry that no @ @ @ @ @ authorities said .
Gregory McMichael , 64 , and Travis McMichael , 34 , will @ @ @ @ @ County Jail , the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said in a news release .
Ahmaud @ @ @ @ @ just outside the port city of Brunswick .
The men who pursued him in a @ @ @ @ @ believed Arbery was a burglar .
The GBI opened an investigation this week after the @ @ @ @ @ a Brunswick radio station .
Republican Gov .
Brian Kemp told reporters that he ’ @ @ @ @ @ “ find the truth .
”

SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) — A white father and son accused of fatally shooting a black man on a residential Georgia street were arrested Thursday and charged with murder and aggravated assault after a national outcry that no arrests had been made, authorities said.
Gregory McMichael, 64, and Travis McMichael, 34, will be booked into the Glynn County Jail, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said in a news release.
Ahmaud Arbery was killed Feb. 23 just outside the port city of Brunswick. The men who pursued him in a pickup truck told police they believed Arbery was a burglar.
The GBI opened an investigation this week after the video was posted online by a Brunswick radio station. Republican Gov. Brian Kemp told reporters that he’s confident the agency will “find the truth.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-07--Bill Barr On Bombshell Reversal In Flynn Case: It Was An ‘Easy Decision’

Attorney General Bill Barr defended the Justice Department ’ s bombshell move to drop its case against Michael Flynn Thursday , claiming to CBS News that “ the crime can not be established here.
” In filings earlier Thursday , the Justice Department told a court it was seeking to withdraw the case because “ newly discovered ” information had led the government to conclude — according to the interim U.S. Attorney for D.C , where the Flynn case had been brought — that Flynn ’ s statements to the FBI were not “ material ” to its Russia investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage , ” Barr told CBS News in an interview aired Thursday evening .
Flynn had admitted to lying to the FBI about his Russian contacts as part of a December 2017 plea deal with special counsel Robert Mueller .
His judge , U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan , has previously affirmed that the statements were material to the FBI ’ s investigation .
Asked by CBS News if the fact remained that Flynn had lied in the 2016 FBI interview , Barr did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well , people sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes , ” Barr said .
In addition to the initial plea , Flynn confirmed under oath to Sullivan a year later that he had lied about his late 2016 conversations with then-Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak .
He changed his tune last summer , after firing his original legal team and replacing them with a team lead by an outspoken anti-Mueller critic .
Flynn had been in a protracted battle to withdraw his plea and get his prosecution thrown out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to dismiss the case on Thursday .
Flynn ’ s claims of prosecutorial misconduct had reached a fever pitch in recent days , and were echoed by President Trump , fueling speculation that the President would pardon his former adviser .
Barr on Thursday denied he was doing Trump ’ s bidding .
“ I am doing the law ’ s bidding , ” he told CBS .
He was asked how he believed history would remember the reversal .
“ History is written by the winners , so it largely depends on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he replied .

The story was updated after CBS News posted the full transcript of its interview.
Attorney General Bill Barr defended the Justice Department’s bombshell move to drop its case against Michael Flynn Thursday, telling CBS News that it was an “easy decision.”
“I think easy because once I saw all the facts and some of the tactics used by the FBI in this instance and also the legal problems with the case, it was an easy decision,” Barr said.
In filings earlier Thursday, the Justice Department told a court it was seeking to withdraw the case because “newly discovered” information had led the government to conclude — according to the interim U.S. Attorney for D.C, where the Flynn case had been brought — that Flynn’s false statements to the FBI were not “material” to its Russia investigation. The FBI had interviewed Flynn in January 2017 about late 2016 conversations with a Russian official.
“They did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage,” Barr told CBS News, adding that Flynn’s conversations with the Russian official were a “perfectly legitimate and appropriate call he made as a member of the transition.”
“There was no mystery about the call,” Barr said. “But [the FBI] initially tried some theories of how they could open another investigation, which didn’t fly. And then they found out that they had not technically closed the earlier investigation. And they kept it open for the express purpose of trying to catch, lay a perjury trap for General Flynn.”
Barr went so far as to describe Flynn’s conversations with the Russian official — in which he urged Russia to moderate its reaction to U.S. sanctions — “laudable.”
Flynn had admitted to lying to the FBI about his Russian contacts as part of a December 2017 plea deal with special counsel Robert Mueller. His judge, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, has previously affirmed that the statements were material to the FBI’s investigation.
In addition to the initial plea, Flynn confirmed that he lied under oath to Sullivan a year later.
Asked by CBS News Thursday if the fact remained that Flynn lied, Barr — referencing remarks that were previously made by former FBI director James Comey — said that “on its face… it’s not so clear.”
“You know, people sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes,” Barr said.
Flynn’s plea deal with the government started going off the rails last summer, after he fired his original legal team and replaced them with a team lead by an outspoken anti-Mueller critic. Flynn had been in a protracted battle to withdraw his plea and get his prosecution thrown out when the Justice Department filed its motion to dismiss the case on Thursday.
Flynn’s claims of prosecutorial misconduct had reached a fever pitch in recent days, and were echoed by President Trump, fueling speculation that the President would pardon his former adviser.
Barr on Thursday denied he was doing Trump’s bidding and said that the Justice Department did not advise the White House ahead time of the reversal.
“I am doing the law’s bidding,” he told CBS.
Barr also took some shots at Mueller’s investigation, particularly when asked about indications that the so-called “Steele” dossier — a collection of Trump-Russian allegations that had been given to the FBI by a former British spy who was researching the issue for Democrats — was in fact Russian disinformation.
“I think that is something that Robert Mueller was responsible for looking at under his charter, which is the potential of Russian influence,” Barr said. “But I think it was ignored and there was mounting indications that this could very well have been happening and no one really stopped to look at it.”
He suggested that Mueller’s team may have gotten “too wedded to a particular outcome” and to “pursuing a particular agenda.”
He was asked how he believed history would remember the reversal.
“History is written by the winners, so it largely depends on who is writing the history,” he replied. “But I think a fair history would say that it was a good decision because it upheld the rule of law.”