talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-14--Burr Stepping Down As Intel Chair During Investigation Into Stock Dump

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) announced on Thursday that Sen. Richard Burr ( R-NC ) will be stepping down from his position as Senate Intelligence Committee chair effective Friday , while investigators probe the enormous stock sales he made shortly before COVID-19 shattered the economy .
“ Senator Burr contacted me this morning to inform me of his decision to step aside as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee during the pendency of the investigation , ” McConnell said in a statement .
“ We agreed that this decision would be in the best interests of the committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the day tomorrow.
” Burr told ABC News reporter Allison Pecorin that the investigation was a “ distraction to the hard work of the committee.
” “ And I think the security of the country is too important to have a distraction , ” he said .
The development came after FBI agents served Burr a search warrant and seized his cell phone on Wednesday night in a dramatic escalation of the Justice Department ’ s investigation , which began at the end of March .
Unnamed officials told the Los Angeles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s status as a high-ranking senator , the only way the FBI could ’ ve been granted the warrant was if the top brass at the DOJ signed off on it .
The GOP senator , whose committee had regularly received closed door briefings on COVID-19 as the outbreak was beginning to ramp up in January , sold up to $ 2.6 million worth of stocks in mid-February .
Law enforcement opened a probe into the transactions for potential inside trading , which violates the STOCK Act of 2012 that forbids members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their stock transactions .

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced on Thursday that Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) will be stepping down from his position as Senate Intelligence Committee chair effective Friday, while investigators probe the enormous stock sales he made shortly before COVID-19 shattered the economy.
“Senator Burr contacted me this morning to inform me of his decision to step aside as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee during the pendency of the investigation,” McConnell said in a statement. “We agreed that this decision would be in the best interests of the committee and will be effective at the end of the day tomorrow.”
Burr told ABC News reporter Allison Pecorin that the investigation was a “distraction to the hard work of the committee.”
“And I think the security of the country is too important to have a distraction,” he said.
The development came after FBI agents served Burr a search warrant and seized his cell phone on Wednesday night in a dramatic escalation of the Justice Department’s investigation, which began at the end of March.
Unnamed officials told the Los Angeles Times and CNN that given Burr’s status as a high-ranking senator, the only way the FBI could’ve been granted the warrant was if the top brass at the DOJ signed off on it.
The GOP senator, whose committee had regularly received closed door briefings on COVID-19 as the outbreak was beginning to ramp up in January, sold up to $2.6 million worth of stocks in mid-February.
Law enforcement opened a probe into the transactions for potential inside trading, which violates the STOCK Act of 2012 that forbids members of Congress from using nonpublic information to inform their stock transactions.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-14--It Likely Will Take Longer Than 12-18 Months To Find Safe Vaccine, Whistleblower Testifies

A vaccine expert and government whistleblower warned Thursday that the widely discussed 12-18 month timeline for a COVID-19 vaccine is “ aggressive ” and may not leave enough room for a full safety assessment .
“ A lot of optimism is swirling around about a 12-18 month time frame , if everything goes perfectly , ” testified Dr. Rick Bright , who until recently was the director of a crucial research division at the Department of Health and Human Services .
“ We ’ ve never seen everything go perfectly , ” Bright said .
Bright expressed concern that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cutting out critical steps , we may not have a full assessment of the safety of that vaccine.
” A 12-18 month time frame to expect a COVID-19 vaccine Bright said , was optimistic .
“ I think it ’ s going to take longer than that to do so , ” he said , before clarifying that the 12-18 month time frame he was concerned about began when commercial and academic labs first started working on a vaccine earlier this year .
Vaccines weren ’ t the primary subject of Dr. Rick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Subcommittee on Health Thursday .
The former director of BARDA , HHS ’ Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority , was there to answer questions about his whistleblower complaint , which alleged that political pressure , bureaucratic hurdles and cronyism hampered the government ’ s COVID-19 response .
But Bright is a vaccine specialist and BARDA has been central to the government ’ s effort to support COVID-19 vaccine development .
Bright also identified potential supply chain issues that could hamper the distribution of vaccines : “ Reagents and buffers and salts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as well as the glass vials that vaccines are put into , and needles and syringes.
” Even with a potential vaccine in hand , Bright said , there are plenty of unanswered questions that the government will need to work through — such as how to distribute and administer the vaccine widely .
“ We haven ’ t yet gotten to those downstream strategies yet in our government , and I think those are going to become a significant issue down the road if we don ’ t plan for that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you can imagine the scenario this fall or winter , maybe even early next spring when a vaccine becomes available , there ’ s no one company that can produce enough for our country or for the world , ” Bright added separately .
“ There ’ s going to be limited supplies .
We need to have a strategy and plan in place now to make sure that we can not only fill that vaccine , make it , distribute it , but administer it in a fair and equitable plan @ @

A vaccine expert and government whistleblower warned Thursday that the widely discussed 12-18 month timeline for a COVID-19 vaccine is “aggressive” and may not leave enough room for a full safety assessment.
“A lot of optimism is swirling around about a 12-18 month time frame, if everything goes perfectly,” testified Dr. Rick Bright, who until recently was the director of a crucial research division at the Department of Health and Human Services.
“We’ve never seen everything go perfectly,” Bright said.
Bright expressed concern that “if we rush too quickly and consider cutting out critical steps, we may not have a full assessment of the safety of that vaccine.”
A 12-18 month time frame to expect a COVID-19 vaccine Bright said, was optimistic.
“I think it’s going to take longer than that to do so,” he said, before clarifying that the 12-18 month time frame he was concerned about began when commercial and academic labs first started working on a vaccine earlier this year.
Vaccines weren’t the primary subject of Dr. Rick Bright’s testimony before the House Subcommittee on Health Thursday. The former director of BARDA, HHS’ Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, was there to answer questions about his whistleblower complaint, which alleged that political pressure, bureaucratic hurdles and cronyism hampered the government’s COVID-19 response.
But Bright is a vaccine specialist and BARDA has been central to the government’s effort to support COVID-19 vaccine development.
Bright also identified potential supply chain issues that could hamper the distribution of vaccines: “Reagents and buffers and salts and various ingredients that go into a vaccine, as well as the glass vials that vaccines are put into, and needles and syringes.”
Even with a potential vaccine in hand, Bright said, there are plenty of unanswered questions that the government will need to work through — such as how to distribute and administer the vaccine widely.
“We haven’t yet gotten to those downstream strategies yet in our government, and I think those are going to become a significant issue down the road if we don’t plan for that now,” he said.
“If you can imagine the scenario this fall or winter, maybe even early next spring when a vaccine becomes available, there’s no one company that can produce enough for our country or for the world,” Bright added separately. “There’s going to be limited supplies. We need to have a strategy and plan in place now to make sure that we can not only fill that vaccine, make it, distribute it, but administer it in a fair and equitable plan.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-14--‘We’re The Wild West’: WI Counties Issue Patchwork Of COVID Orders After Court Decision

Hours after the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down Gov .
Tony Evers ’ ( D ) extended stay-at-home order Wednesday , the state ’ s biggest counties hastily cobbled together their own measures to fill the sudden void .
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett immediately issued a statement that the city ’ s stay-at-home order is still in effect , with no expiration date .
Elsewhere in Milwaukee County , the state ’ s biggest and home to nearly one million people , the 18 suburban municipalities and their 10 public health officials signed an order outlining how local businesses can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only available for takeout , and other businesses like barbershops must maintain social distancing efforts .
The officials called the situation “ fluid ” and said future steps would be determined by the data on cases coming out of the county .
Saying they were “ disappointed ” in the ruling , officials in Dane County , home to Madison , released their own stay-at-home order that “ incorporates the elements ” of the former state-wide one , effective immediately .
It allows for full worship services , with proper social distancing .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Madison & Dane County has identified using the Badger Bounce Back scorecard our county data looks promising , but it is critical to continue following Safer at Home right now to keep Dane County residents healthy and keep our healthcare system from becoming overwhelmed , ” they said .
The order will be in effect until May 26 .
And in Brown County , home to Green Bay , public health officer Anna Destree fired off an order that county residents must follow the guidelines enshrined in the former state stay-at-home order until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremely grave Gov .
Tony Evers ( D ) , these emergency measures may not be enough .
During an interview he gave late Wednesday , soon after the ruling , Evers painted a grim picture of the likelihood that any statewide measure could be put into place quickly .
“ Unfortunately , in this one fell swoop , four judges who didn ’ t really care about what the statutes talk about have thrown our state into chaos , ” he told MSNBC ’ s Ali Velshi of the 4-3 Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s conservative justices found that Evers could not extend the original stay-at-home order without approval from the legislature .
One of the conservative justices , Brian Hagedorn , sided with the liberals .
“ We ’ re the wild west , Ali , ” Evers said .
“ There are no restrictions at all across the state of Wisconsin.
” He said that since his authority has been “ taken away , ” he ’ ll meet with the Republican-led legislature Thursday to figure out next steps .
However , he said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t have any kind of plan and will want to craft an administrative rule .
“ An administrative rule in the state of Wisconsin takes at least — at least two weeks , at least , ” he said .
“ And we ’ ve already started tonight where different counties are saying ‘ bring it on , ’ we have other counties saying ‘ no , we don ’ t want this to happen.
’ So suddenly it ’ s a 72-county affair.
” Some , both in and outside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statewide COVID-19 mitigation orders to be cause for celebration .
As soon as the order came down , the Tavern League of Wisconsin , the state ’ s trade association for the alcohol retailer segment of the hospitality industry , blasted out a notice on its Facebook page .
“ The Supreme Court Order is effective immediately , ” it said .
“ There is no stay included in the decision .
It is legal to open your business today.
” Nick ’ s Bar in Plattesville , southwest of Madison , posted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than an hour after the ruling came down : President Donald Trump cheered the decision on his favorite medium .
So far , Wisconsin has had 10,902 cases and 421 deaths , per the state health department .
“ We ’ re just leaving it open , we ’ re going to have more cases , we ’ re going to have more deaths , and it ’ s a sad occasion for the state , ” Evers said .
“ I can ’ t tell you how disappointed I am .
”

Hours after the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down Gov. Tony Evers’ (D) extended stay-at-home order Wednesday, the state’s biggest counties hastily cobbled together their own measures to fill the sudden void.
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett immediately issued a statement that the city’s stay-at-home order is still in effect, with no expiration date.
Elsewhere in Milwaukee County, the state’s biggest and home to nearly one million people, the 18 suburban municipalities and their 10 public health officials signed an order outlining how local businesses can proceed. Bars and restaurants are still only available for takeout, and other businesses like barbershops must maintain social distancing efforts.
The officials called the situation “fluid” and said future steps would be determined by the data on cases coming out of the county.
Saying they were “disappointed” in the ruling, officials in Dane County, home to Madison, released their own stay-at-home order that “incorporates the elements” of the former state-wide one, effective immediately. It allows for full worship services, with proper social distancing.
“According to the criteria Public Health Madison & Dane County has identified using the Badger Bounce Back scorecard our county data looks promising, but it is critical to continue following Safer at Home right now to keep Dane County residents healthy and keep our healthcare system from becoming overwhelmed,” they said. The order will be in effect until May 26.
And in Brown County, home to Green Bay, public health officer Anna Destree fired off an order that county residents must follow the guidelines enshrined in the former state stay-at-home order until May 20.
Still, per an extremely grave Gov. Tony Evers (D), these emergency measures may not be enough. During an interview he gave late Wednesday, soon after the ruling, Evers painted a grim picture of the likelihood that any statewide measure could be put into place quickly.
“Unfortunately, in this one fell swoop, four judges who didn’t really care about what the statutes talk about have thrown our state into chaos,” he told MSNBC’s Ali Velshi of the 4-3 Supreme Court decision. Four of the court’s conservative justices found that Evers could not extend the original stay-at-home order without approval from the legislature. One of the conservative justices, Brian Hagedorn, sided with the liberals.
“We’re the wild west, Ali,” Evers said. “There are no restrictions at all across the state of Wisconsin.”
He said that since his authority has been “taken away,” he’ll meet with the Republican-led legislature Thursday to figure out next steps. However, he said, it’s clear that they don’t have any kind of plan and will want to craft an administrative rule.
“An administrative rule in the state of Wisconsin takes at least — at least two weeks, at least,” he said. “And we’ve already started tonight where different counties are saying ‘bring it on,’ we have other counties saying ‘no, we don’t want this to happen.’ So suddenly it’s a 72-county affair.”
Some, both in and outside the state, found the sudden lack of statewide COVID-19 mitigation orders to be cause for celebration.
As soon as the order came down, the Tavern League of Wisconsin, the state’s trade association for the alcohol retailer segment of the hospitality industry, blasted out a notice on its Facebook page.
“The Supreme Court Order is effective immediately,” it said. “There is no stay included in the decision. It is legal to open your business today.”
Some bars took heed.
Nick’s Bar in Plattesville, southwest of Madison, posted a picture of its packed bar less than an hour after the ruling came down:
45 minutes after the bars open in Wisconsin…. pic.twitter.com/xqaDlS6ajP — Nick’s bar (@nicksonsec) May 14, 2020
President Donald Trump cheered the decision on his favorite medium.
The Great State of Wisconsin, home to Tom Tiffany’s big Congressional Victory on Tuesday, was just given another win. Its Democrat Governor was forced by the courts to let the State Open. The people want to get on with their lives. The place is bustling! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 14, 2020
So far, Wisconsin has had 10,902 cases and 421 deaths, per the state health department.
“We’re just leaving it open, we’re going to have more cases, we’re going to have more deaths, and it’s a sad occasion for the state,” Evers said. “I can’t tell you how disappointed I am.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-14--Trump Dismisses Fauci’s Warning Against Reopening Schools: ‘I Totally Disagree’

President Donald Trump on Thursday rejected White House COVID-19 task force official Dr. Anthony Fauci ’ s assertion during a Senate hearing that schools could not be expected to reopen by fall .
“ Anthony is a good person , very good person , ” Trump told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo .
“ I ’ ve disagreed with him .
When I closed the border to China , he disagreed with that , and then ultimately he agreed.
” He argued that “ we have to open our schools ” because “ young people are very little [ sic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totally disagree with [ Fauci ] on schools , ” Trump said .
The remarks largely echo the President ’ s dissenting response to Fauci on Wednesday , saying that the doctor ’ s warning was “ not an acceptable answer , especially when it comes to schools.
” During a hearing with the Senate Health Education , Labor and Pensions Committee on Tuesday , Fauci told lawmakers that “ the idea of having treatments available or a vaccine to facilitate re-entry of students into the fall term would be something that would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far.
” “ Even at the top speed we ’ re going , ” he added .

President Donald Trump on Thursday rejected White House COVID-19 task force official Dr. Anthony Fauci’s assertion during a Senate hearing that schools could not be expected to reopen by fall.
“Anthony is a good person, very good person,” Trump told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo. “I’ve disagreed with him. When I closed the border to China, he disagreed with that, and then ultimately he agreed.”
He argued that “we have to open our schools” because “young people are very little [sic] affected by this.”
“I totally disagree with [Fauci] on schools,” Trump said.
The remarks largely echo the President’s dissenting response to Fauci on Wednesday, saying that the doctor’s warning was “not an acceptable answer, especially when it comes to schools.”
During a hearing with the Senate Health Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Tuesday, Fauci told lawmakers that “the idea of having treatments available or a vaccine to facilitate re-entry of students into the fall term would be something that would be a bit of a bridge too far.”
“Even at the top speed we’re going,” he added.
Watch Trump below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--McConnell Admits Obama Admin Did Leave Behind A Plan On Pandemics: ‘I Was Wrong’

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-KY ) backpedaled on Thursday night after accusing former President Barack Obama administration of leaving President Donald Trump unprepared to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic .
“ I was wrong , ” the GOP leader told Fox News host Bret Baier .
“ They did leave behind a plan.
” “ So I clearly made a mistake in that regard , ” he added .
During a virtual Trump campaign event on Monday , McConnell had made the false claim about the Obama administration , which has been manufactured by Trump in an effort @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s feeble response to the outbreak .
“ We want to be early , ready for the next [ pandemic ] , because clearly the Obama administration did not leave to this administration any kind of game plan for something like this , ” McConnell said on Monday .
Former Obama administration Ebola response coordinator Ronald Klain and Obama administration deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes pushed back on the senator ’ s claim that same day .
“ We literally left them a 69-page Pandemic Playbook… .
that they ignored .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Office…that they abolished .
And a global monitoring system called PREDICT…that they cut by 75 % , ” Klain tweeted .
“ The maddening thing is Obama left them a WH office for pandemics , a literal playbook , a cabinet-level exercise , and a global infrastructure to deal with ‘ something like this , ' ” Rhodes tweeted .
And a Politico report confirms that the Obama administration did leave behind a 69-page playbook on handling pandemics by its National Security Council .

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) backpedaled on Thursday night after accusing former President Barack Obama administration of leaving President Donald Trump unprepared to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.
“I was wrong,” the GOP leader told Fox News host Bret Baier. “They did leave behind a plan.”
“So I clearly made a mistake in that regard,” he added.
During a virtual Trump campaign event on Monday, McConnell had made the false claim about the Obama administration, which has been manufactured by Trump in an effort to shift blame for his own administration’s feeble response to the outbreak.
“We want to be early, ready for the next [pandemic], because clearly the Obama administration did not leave to this administration any kind of game plan for something like this,” McConnell said on Monday.
Former Obama administration Ebola response coordinator Ronald Klain and Obama administration deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes pushed back on the senator’s claim that same day.
“We literally left them a 69-page Pandemic Playbook…. that they ignored. And an office called the Pandemic Preparedness Office…that they abolished. And a global monitoring system called PREDICT…that they cut by 75%,” Klain tweeted.
“The maddening thing is Obama left them a WH office for pandemics, a literal playbook, a cabinet-level exercise, and a global infrastructure to deal with ‘something like this,'” Rhodes tweeted.
And a Politico report confirms that the Obama administration did leave behind a 69-page playbook on handling pandemics by its National Security Council.
Watch McConnell below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--Three Things To Watch As Whitmer And The GOP-Led Legislature Clash In Court

Attorneys for Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer ( D ) and the Republican-controlled legislature will ( virtually ) meet in court Friday morning for oral arguments on the legislature ’ s lawsuit over Whitmer ’ s COVID-related executive orders .
Both chambers of the legislature sued Whitmer earlier this month after she issued new emergency declarations via executive order .
Lawmakers had intentionally allowed her previous orders to lapse without approving an extension .
The case will be heard by Judge Cynthia Stephens in the Michigan State Court of Claims .
Here are three points to watch during this legal battle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two conflicting state laws .
Both Whitmer and the legislature are claiming that one of the laws undergirds their respective cases .
First is the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act of 1945 that grants sweeping powers to the governor , and which team Whitmer is pointing to as her hall pass in issuing consecutive emergency declarations .
The legislature claims that the law was meant to apply to emergencies like riots and civil unrest , and only to limited geographic areas .
The second is the Emergency Management Act of 1976 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days , the governor must get legislative approval to extend an emergency declaration .
The legislature argues that she ran afoul of that mandate when she unilaterally issued another emergency declaration after the 28-day window .
Whitmer says she was actually following that law , as she formally terminated her old emergency declaration before issuing a new one .
Whitmer ’ s attorneys also argue that she ’ s covered even if the judge decides that her maneuvering with the new orders doesn ’ t satisfy the 1976 law , since the 1945 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I tend to agree with the majority that she probably has the better of the argument because that 1945 Emergency Powers Act gives her all kinds of authority here , ” said Devin Schindler , a professor of constitutional law at Western Michigan University ’ s Cooley Law School .
He added that he doesn ’ t agree with the legislature that limitations about geography or type of emergency are written into the statute .
“ The act is broad enough to give her real authority , ” he said .
Brigadier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an associate dean and professor of constitutional law at Cooley Law School , also found the legislature ’ s reading of the 1945 law weak .
He said that there is nothing written in the law that says the emergencies could not include a pandemic , or that limits the governor from issuing statewide orders , adding that actually , the law has “ quite the opposite of limiting language.
” “ It grants extremely broad discretion in terms of what the governor can do , ” he said .
Robert Sedler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State University , brought up another concept that may deflate the legislature ’ s attempt to hang its hat on the 1976 law .
“ There is a general rule against implied repeal , ” he said .
“ The enactment of subsequent law does not impliedly repeal the earlier law , unless that intent to repeal is manifest.
” In other words , the 1976 law does not invalidate or supersede the 1945 law , because the legislature never repealed the first one .
By leaving it on the books and not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ invalidate the first , they ’ ve left the earlier law applicable and valid .
Governing In The Time Of Pandemic Another major factor in the case is the time in which it is being brought — the emergency to which the emergency order applies .
The case for executive authority may be more acute in the context of a global catastrophe .
“ What this comes down to in my mind is the court ’ s willingness to defer to Gov .
Whitmer ’ s determination that an emergency continues to exist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speaking , with the exception of Wisconsin yesterday , courts will defer in these kind of emergency situations to executive branch determination.
” He added that he sees it as “ unlikely ” that the courts will want to put handling of the emergency into the legislature ’ s hands , a body which is crafted to “ move slowly , unlike the governor.
” McDaniel also looked forward to what would happen if Whitmer ’ s order is invalidated .
“ So , they decide the governor should have acted differently , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he asked .
“ What ’ s the next thing they can do ?
There is no power in the legislature to execute the laws of state to confront an emergency.
” This Is Just The Beginning Both sides know that Friday ’ s oral arguments are just the beginning , and that an appeal is almost certain no matter what happens .
McDaniel pointed out that either decision will leave a branch of government more hobbled than it was before .
“ It seems to be that if Judge Stephens in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue , there has to be limitation on either the legislature ’ s authority under the emergency laws or a limitation on the governor ’ s authority , ” he said .
“ Either way , the parties will likely feel the need to appeal .
”

Attorneys for Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) and the Republican-controlled legislature will (virtually) meet in court Friday morning for oral arguments on the legislature’s lawsuit over Whitmer’s COVID-related executive orders.
Both chambers of the legislature sued Whitmer earlier this month after she issued new emergency declarations via executive order. Lawmakers had intentionally allowed her previous orders to lapse without approving an extension.
The case will be heard by Judge Cynthia Stephens in the Michigan State Court of Claims.
Here are three points to watch during this legal battle:
The Central Issue: State Laws In Conflict
At issue in the case are two conflicting state laws. Both Whitmer and the legislature are claiming that one of the laws undergirds their respective cases.
First is the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act of 1945 that grants sweeping powers to the governor, and which team Whitmer is pointing to as her hall pass in issuing consecutive emergency declarations. The legislature claims that the law was meant to apply to emergencies like riots and civil unrest, and only to limited geographic areas.
The second is the Emergency Management Act of 1976, which includes language indicating that after 28 days, the governor must get legislative approval to extend an emergency declaration. The legislature argues that she ran afoul of that mandate when she unilaterally issued another emergency declaration after the 28-day window. Whitmer says she was actually following that law, as she formally terminated her old emergency declaration before issuing a new one. Whitmer’s attorneys also argue that she’s covered even if the judge decides that her maneuvering with the new orders doesn’t satisfy the 1976 law, since the 1945 one is still on the books.
Legal experts told TPM that team Whitmer’s interpretation makes sense.
“I tend to agree with the majority that she probably has the better of the argument because that 1945 Emergency Powers Act gives her all kinds of authority here,” said Devin Schindler, a professor of constitutional law at Western Michigan University’s Cooley Law School.
He added that he doesn’t agree with the legislature that limitations about geography or type of emergency are written into the statute. “The act is broad enough to give her real authority,” he said.
Brigadier General (ret.) Michael McDaniel, an associate dean and professor of constitutional law at Cooley Law School, also found the legislature’s reading of the 1945 law weak.
He said that there is nothing written in the law that says the emergencies could not include a pandemic, or that limits the governor from issuing statewide orders, adding that actually, the law has “quite the opposite of limiting language.”
“It grants extremely broad discretion in terms of what the governor can do,” he said.
Robert Sedler, a distinguished law professor at Wayne State University, brought up another concept that may deflate the legislature’s attempt to hang its hat on the 1976 law.
“There is a general rule against implied repeal,” he said. “The enactment of subsequent law does not impliedly repeal the earlier law, unless that intent to repeal is manifest.” In other words, the 1976 law does not invalidate or supersede the 1945 law, because the legislature never repealed the first one. By leaving it on the books and not writing language into the second law to invalidate the first, they’ve left the earlier law applicable and valid.
Governing In The Time Of Pandemic
Another major factor in the case is the time in which it is being brought — the emergency to which the emergency order applies. The case for executive authority may be more acute in the context of a global catastrophe.
“What this comes down to in my mind is the court’s willingness to defer to Gov. Whitmer’s determination that an emergency continues to exist,” Schindler said. “Generally speaking, with the exception of Wisconsin yesterday, courts will defer in these kind of emergency situations to executive branch determination.”
He added that he sees it as “unlikely” that the courts will want to put handling of the emergency into the legislature’s hands, a body which is crafted to “move slowly, unlike the governor.”
McDaniel also looked forward to what would happen if Whitmer’s order is invalidated.
“So, they decide the governor should have acted differently, then what’s next?” he asked. “What’s the next thing they can do? There is no power in the legislature to execute the laws of state to confront an emergency.”
This Is Just The Beginning
Both sides know that Friday’s oral arguments are just the beginning, and that an appeal is almost certain no matter what happens.
McDaniel pointed out that either decision will leave a branch of government more hobbled than it was before.
“It seems to be that if Judge Stephens in the Court of Claims rules on the ultimate issue, there has to be limitation on either the legislature’s authority under the emergency laws or a limitation on the governor’s authority,” he said. “Either way, the parties will likely feel the need to appeal.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--ICYMI: Weekend Reads From TPM

ICYMI: Weekend Reads From TPM

• The judge overseeing Michael Flynn ’ s criminal case appointed a retired judge to brief him on whether the former national security adviser should be held in criminal contempt of court .
• The appointed judge , John Gleeson , successfully prosecuted mob boss “ Teflon Don ” John Gotti .
Gleeson was formerly a federal prosecutor in New York .
• What ’ s the right-wing conspiracy about “ unmasking ” Flynn all about ?
Josh Kovensky digs in .
Sparks Fly On Capitol Hill — Some Over Zoom • Dr. Anthony Fauci told a Senate panel that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is likely much higher than the current official count .
• Fauci also tussled with Sen. Rand Paul ( R-KY ) over whether he considered himself the “ end-all ” authority on the coronavirus .
• Sen. Mitt Romeny ( R-UT ) took the Trump administration to task over its record on COVID-19 testing .
• Dr. Rick Bright , a vaccine expert and government whistleblower , told a House panel that a coronavirus vaccine will likely take longer than 12-18 months .
He also asserted that there ’ s no “ master @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• Matt Shuham takes a long look at The Federalist ’ s COVID-19 coverage .
The conservative website , Shuham writes , “ has been at the vanguard of the backlash against COVID-19 public health orders .
”

The California State Bar is arguing that recent criminal charges against John Eastman in Fulton County, Georgia should not prevent…


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--GOP Rep, Florida Man Says ‘There’s Just No Need’ To Wear A Mask Around The Capitol

A retiring Florida ( congress ) man said Friday that “ there ’ s just no need ” to wear a mask while milling around the Capitol .
CNN ’ s Manu Raju spotted Rep. Ted Yoho ( R-FL ) on the House floor and around the Capitol grounds without a mask , at one point having a lengthy conversation within a couple feet of another man .
Yoho , a Trump ally who aligned himself with the Tea Party , told CNN there was no need to wear a mask because of “ herd immunity.
” “ Viruses do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told CNN .
Asked if he felt he was protected by herd immunity , Yoho responded : “ I think the only way you ’ re going to get it is to get exposed.
” The congressman ’ s reasoning is a little cloudy .
Herd immunity occurs when so many people become immune to an infectious disease ( through infection or a vaccine ) that it slows the disease ’ s spread .
The World Health Organization has warned that there is no evidence of developed immunity to COVID-19 after an infection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 survivors are reasonably likely to develop some immunity to the disease .
The United States is far from achieving herd immunity with COVID-19 , and doing so without a vaccine would cost a great number of lives .
“ Humans are not herds , ” one World Health Organization official reminded the human race this week .
A spokesperson for Yoho did not return TPM ’ s request for comment .
In December , Yoho said he was retiring at the end of his current term .

A retiring Florida (congress)man said Friday that “there’s just no need” to wear a mask while milling around the Capitol.
CNN’s Manu Raju spotted Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL) on the House floor and around the Capitol grounds without a mask, at one point having a lengthy conversation within a couple feet of another man.
The photo is from today of Yoho, having an extended conversation without a mask pic.twitter.com/rPZ6VEzW4g — Manu Raju (@mkraju) May 15, 2020
Yoho, a Trump ally who aligned himself with the Tea Party, told CNN there was no need to wear a mask because of “herd immunity.”
“Viruses do what viruses do,” the congressman told CNN.
Asked if he felt he was protected by herd immunity, Yoho responded: “I think the only way you’re going to get it is to get exposed.”
The congressman’s reasoning is a little cloudy.
Herd immunity occurs when so many people become immune to an infectious disease (through infection or a vaccine) that it slows the disease’s spread. The World Health Organization has warned that there is no evidence of developed immunity to COVID-19 after an infection, but infectious disease experts have said COVID-19 survivors are reasonably likely to develop some immunity to the disease.
The United States is far from achieving herd immunity with COVID-19, and doing so without a vaccine would cost a great number of lives.
“Humans are not herds,” one World Health Organization official reminded the human race this week.
A spokesperson for Yoho did not return TPM’s request for comment.
In December, Yoho said he was retiring at the end of his current term.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--Criminal Trespass Charges Dropped Against Two Journos Who Reported At Liberty U

Two journalists who entered Liberty University ’ s campus to report stories about the school keeping its dorms open during the coronavirus pandemic will not be prosecuted for criminal trespass .
The two , ProPublica reporter Alec MacGillis and freelance photojournalist Julia Rendleman , reported on the campus in late March .
A few days earlier , the school had put up “ no trespassing ” signs at its entrances , the city of Lynchburg said .
Bethany Harrison , the commonwealth ’ s attorney for the city of Lynchburg , actually concluded that the proof met the statutory requirements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per a statement from the city obtained by TPM .
“ However , after consultation and agreement with Liberty University President Jerry Falwell , Jr. , she elects not to pursue criminal prosecution and penalties against these journalists , ” the statement read .
Both journalists issued apologies through their lawyers , asserting that they did not know about the no trespassing requirements , which were put in place in response to the pandemic .
“ President Falwell is satisfied with having the reporters understand that they have to respect the no trespassing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scott Lamb about the reason for the dropped charges .
Falwell announced that he ’ d be pursuing criminal trespass charges at the beginning of April on the right-wing radio show , the “ Todd Starnes Show.
” Warrants were obtained by Detective Sergeant Alan Wilkins with the Liberty University Police Department .
Falwell became the subject of many news stories after publicly downplaying the severity of the coronavirus , then letting students return to opened dorms after spring break .
By that point , many colleges across the country had at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s attorney for the city of Lynchburg ’ s statement here : This story has been updated with a response from Liberty University .

Two journalists who entered Liberty University’s campus to report stories about the school keeping its dorms open during the coronavirus pandemic will not be prosecuted for criminal trespass.
The two, ProPublica reporter Alec MacGillis and freelance photojournalist Julia Rendleman, reported on the campus in late March. A few days earlier, the school had put up “no trespassing” signs at its entrances, the city of Lynchburg said.
Bethany Harrison, the commonwealth’s attorney for the city of Lynchburg, actually concluded that the proof met the statutory requirements to support a criminal trespass charge, per a statement from the city obtained by TPM.
“However, after consultation and agreement with Liberty University President Jerry Falwell, Jr., she elects not to pursue criminal prosecution and penalties against these journalists,” the statement read.
Both journalists issued apologies through their lawyers, asserting that they did not know about the no trespassing requirements, which were put in place in response to the pandemic.
“President Falwell is satisfied with having the reporters understand that they have to respect the no trespassing signs,” said Liberty University spokesperson Scott Lamb about the reason for the dropped charges.
Falwell announced that he’d be pursuing criminal trespass charges at the beginning of April on the right-wing radio show, the “Todd Starnes Show.”
Warrants were obtained by Detective Sergeant Alan Wilkins with the Liberty University Police Department.
Falwell became the subject of many news stories after publicly downplaying the severity of the coronavirus, then letting students return to opened dorms after spring break. By that point, many colleges across the country had at least temporarily shuttered.
Read the commonwealth’s attorney for the city of Lynchburg’s statement here:
This story has been updated with a response from Liberty University.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--‘Vaccine Or No Vaccine,’ Trump Wants US Reopen Because COVID ‘Will Go Away’

President Donald Trump said on Friday that he wants the U.S. to reopen regardless of whether there ’ s a vaccine for COVID-19 available because , in his mind , the pandemic will go away on its own .
“ Vaccine or no vaccine , we ’ re back , and we ’ re starting the process , ” Trump said during a press briefing on a project to rapidly develop a COVID-19 vaccine .
“ In many cases , they don ’ t have vaccines , and a virus or a flu comes and you fight through it.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump said he believes we ’ ll have a “ a vaccine in the pretty near future ” and once again put a rosy spin on the situation even if there isn ’ t one .
“ And if we do , we ’ ll really be a big step ahead , ” he told reporters .
“ And if we don ’ t , we are going to be like so many other cases where you had a problem come in , it will go away at some point .
It will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and it may not flare up .
We ’ ll have to see what happens.
” Trump made similarly dismissive comments about vaccines ’ efficacy against COVID-19 last week .
“ This is going to go away without a vaccine , ” he said .
“ It ’ s going to go away , and we ’ re not going to see it again , hopefully , after a period of time.
” Health experts have repeatedly warned that life won ’ t fully go back to normal until there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than a year or longer .

President Donald Trump said on Friday that he wants the U.S. to reopen regardless of whether there’s a vaccine for COVID-19 available because, in his mind, the pandemic will go away on its own.
“Vaccine or no vaccine, we’re back, and we’re starting the process,” Trump said during a press briefing on a project to rapidly develop a COVID-19 vaccine. “In many cases, they don’t have vaccines, and a virus or a flu comes and you fight through it.”
When asked to clarify his statement, Trump said he believes we’ll have a “a vaccine in the pretty near future” and once again put a rosy spin on the situation even if there isn’t one.
“And if we do, we’ll really be a big step ahead,” he told reporters. “And if we don’t, we are going to be like so many other cases where you had a problem come in, it will go away at some point. It will go away. It may flare up, and it may not flare up. We’ll have to see what happens.”
Trump made similarly dismissive comments about vaccines’ efficacy against COVID-19 last week.
“This is going to go away without a vaccine,” he said. “It’s going to go away, and we’re not going to see it again, hopefully, after a period of time.”
Health experts have repeatedly warned that life won’t fully go back to normal until there’s a vaccine, which could take more than a year or longer.
Watch Trump below:
Trump says "vaccine or no vaccine, we're back" pic.twitter.com/BVnF0JR9Ju — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) May 15, 2020


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--COVID Is Spreading Deeper Into Areas With High Trump Support, Data Shows

COVID-19 has been spreading heavily in areas of the country with high political support for President Trump , potentially increasing the disease ’ s visibility and death toll in areas loyal to the President .
According to data compiled by the Brookings Institution ’ s Bill Frey , COVID-19 is spreading faster in less populated areas , leaving big cities and entering rural America .
“ A big part of the shift is the disease moving to the South , and into the Midwest , into a lot of rural counties , ” Frey told TPM .
The trend revealed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that cases have been increasing more rapidly in rural areas .
Localized outbreaks in food processing plants and prisons have spurred the increase , along with what Frey described as spread in “ rural areas where most of the population is kind of dispersed.
” Data that Frey published in a blog post at the Brookings Institution showed that the number of people residing in ” high prevalence ” COVID-19 counties — areas with a rate of 100 cases per 100,000 people or more — had tipped in late April from being a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton in 2016 to a majority that voted for Trump .
Frey took county-level case counts compiled by the New York Times and combined it with population data from the Census Bureau , before overlaying it with data showing which counties voted for Clinton in 2016 and which voted for Trump .
As of May 10 , the data suggests , Trump counties were leading Clinton counties in having highly prevalent COVID-19 outbreaks by a margin of roughly 6 percent .
“ It ’ s not only that it ’ s Trump counties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country is now living in high-prevalence counties , ” Frey said .
The data reflects a larger trend in the spread of the disease around the country as a whole .
For example , on March 29 , Frey found that 8 percent of the U.S. population lived in so-called “ high prevalence ” COVID-19 counties — areas with a rate of 100 cases per 100,000 people or more .
As of May 10 , that number had increased to 72 percent of the population .
At the same time , only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ areas were urban residents — the rest were either in suburban or rural areas .
“ If you look at the map of states that Trump took in 2016 , and especially in Wisconsin , Pennsylvania , Michigan — these are small town areas that he mopped up , ” Frey added .
Researchers at the Kaiser Family Foundation found that COVID-19 began to increase its rate of spread in rural areas in late April .
Separate projections from the Centers for Disease Control and the Federal Emergency Management Agency leaked in early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the country ’ s coming hotspots would mostly be in more rural areas than where the U.S. crisis began , in big , urban areas like New York City and Detroit .
The disease ’ s rural spread has stoked fears that it may catastrophically intersect with the pre-existing rural health-care crisis .
Since 2010 , 126 rural hospitals have closed , largely due to financial shortfalls .
The providers run on tight margins and have limited space in their intensive care units .
Meanwhile , the rural population in general may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population of urban areas .
According to data from the National Rural Health Association , chronic respiratory disease cases are 75 percent more common in rural areas than in urban , while the rate of people 65 years and older is far higher than in cities .
One doctor in St .
Cloud , Minnesota told TPM that cases were coming in from rural areas around the city of 68,000 , but that doctors ’ ability to discern the extent of local spread was limited by the continued lack of testing .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bunch of very , very rural areas of farmers , very small communities , and none of those people are tested , so we really have no idea what the community spread is , ” Dr. John Mahowald , a cardiologist at CentraCare St .
Cloud Hospital , told TPM .
“ In the county where I live , in one week there were 50 cases , the next week there were 800 , ” he said .
“ And we didn ’ t know that without testing .
”

COVID-19 has been spreading heavily in areas of the country with high political support for President Trump, potentially increasing the disease’s visibility and death toll in areas loyal to the President.
According to data compiled by the Brookings Institution’s Bill Frey, COVID-19 is spreading faster in less populated areas, leaving big cities and entering rural America.
“A big part of the shift is the disease moving to the South, and into the Midwest, into a lot of rural counties,” Frey told TPM.
The trend revealed by his research follows on separate indications that cases have been increasing more rapidly in rural areas. Localized outbreaks in food processing plants and prisons have spurred the increase, along with what Frey described as spread in “rural areas where most of the population is kind of dispersed.”
Data that Frey published in a blog post at the Brookings Institution showed that the number of people residing in”high prevalence” COVID-19 counties — areas with a rate of 100 cases per 100,000 people or more — had tipped in late April from being a majority of counties that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 to a majority that voted for Trump.
Frey took county-level case counts compiled by the New York Times and combined it with population data from the Census Bureau, before overlaying it with data showing which counties voted for Clinton in 2016 and which voted for Trump.
As of May 10, the data suggests, Trump counties were leading Clinton counties in having highly prevalent COVID-19 outbreaks by a margin of roughly 6 percent.
“It’s not only that it’s Trump counties — its that a huge portion of the country is now living in high-prevalence counties,” Frey said.
The data reflects a larger trend in the spread of the disease around the country as a whole. For example, on March 29, Frey found that 8 percent of the U.S. population lived in so-called “high prevalence” COVID-19 counties — areas with a rate of 100 cases per 100,000 people or more.
As of May 10, that number had increased to 72 percent of the population. At the same time, only 22.9 percent of people living in high-prevalence areas were urban residents — the rest were either in suburban or rural areas.
“If you look at the map of states that Trump took in 2016, and especially in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan — these are small town areas that he mopped up,” Frey added.
Researchers at the Kaiser Family Foundation found that COVID-19 began to increase its rate of spread in rural areas in late April. Separate projections from the Centers for Disease Control and the Federal Emergency Management Agency leaked in early May to the New York Times suggested that the country’s coming hotspots would mostly be in more rural areas than where the U.S. crisis began, in big, urban areas like New York City and Detroit.
The disease’s rural spread has stoked fears that it may catastrophically intersect with the pre-existing rural health-care crisis.
Since 2010, 126 rural hospitals have closed, largely due to financial shortfalls. The providers run on tight margins and have limited space in their intensive care units.
Meanwhile, the rural population in general may be more susceptible to COVID-19 than the population of urban areas. According to data from the National Rural Health Association, chronic respiratory disease cases are 75 percent more common in rural areas than in urban, while the rate of people 65 years and older is far higher than in cities.
One doctor in St. Cloud, Minnesota told TPM that cases were coming in from rural areas around the city of 68,000, but that doctors’ ability to discern the extent of local spread was limited by the continued lack of testing.
“We’re surrounded by a whole bunch of very, very rural areas of farmers, very small communities, and none of those people are tested, so we really have no idea what the community spread is,” Dr. John Mahowald, a cardiologist at CentraCare St. Cloud Hospital, told TPM.
“In the county where I live, in one week there were 50 cases, the next week there were 800,” he said. “And we didn’t know that without testing.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--Prestigious Medical Journal Slams Trump Admin COVID-19 Response In Editorial

The prestigious medical journal The Lancet took square aim at the Trump administration on Friday , urging Americans to elect a president “ who will understand that public health should not be guided by partisan politics.
” The administration , the unsigned editorial argued , has enacted an “ inconsistent and incoherent national response to the COVID-19 crisis ” and marginalized public health experts .
The article focused on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , which has been unusually absent from the Trump administration ’ s public COVID-19 messaging .
That started , as the Lancet noted , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Nancy Messonnier warned on Feb. 25 that “ disruption to everyday life might be severe.
” “ Messonnier subsequently no longer appeared at White House briefings on COVID-19 , ” The Lancet noted .
The editorial took stock of some of the CDC ’ s missteps .
In July 2019 , the Trump administration eliminated a key CDC public health position in China — an American epidemiologist tasked with training others in the country — thus eliminating key eyes and ears on the ground .
And the CDC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blurring the picture of the disease as it grew across the country .
That the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Deborah Birx reportedly said last week “ there is nothing from the CDC that I can trust , ” the Lancet argued , was “ a shocking indictment of an agency that was once regarded as the gold standard for global disease detection and control.
” ( Birx , The Daily Beast reported separately , is one of several administration officials pressuring the CDC to change how it counts COVID-19 statistics .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump himself , would reduce the official death toll . )
Still , according to the editorial , “ punishing the agency by marginalising and hobbling it is not the solution.
” “ The Administration is obsessed with magic bullets — vaccines , new medicines , or a hope that the virus will simply disappear , ” the editorial argued .
“ But only a steadfast reliance on basic public health principles , like test , trace , and isolate , will see the emergency brought to an end , and this requires @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ”

The prestigious medical journal The Lancet took square aim at the Trump administration on Friday, urging Americans to elect a president “who will understand that public health should not be guided by partisan politics.”
The administration, the unsigned editorial argued, has enacted an “inconsistent and incoherent national response to the COVID-19 crisis” and marginalized public health experts.
The article focused on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has been unusually absent from the Trump administration’s public COVID-19 messaging. That started, as the Lancet noted, when the director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Nancy Messonnier warned on Feb. 25 that “disruption to everyday life might be severe.”
“Messonnier subsequently no longer appeared at White House briefings on COVID-19,” The Lancet noted.
The editorial took stock of some of the CDC’s missteps. In July 2019, the Trump administration eliminated a key CDC public health position in China — an American epidemiologist tasked with training others in the country — thus eliminating key eyes and ears on the ground. And the CDC bungling early testing for COVID-19 stateside, blurring the picture of the disease as it grew across the country.
That the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Deborah Birx reportedly said last week “there is nothing from the CDC that I can trust,” the Lancet argued, was “a shocking indictment of an agency that was once regarded as the gold standard for global disease detection and control.” (Birx, The Daily Beast reported separately, is one of several administration officials pressuring the CDC to change how it counts COVID-19 statistics. The proposed changes, which are championed by Trump himself, would reduce the official death toll.)
Still, according to the editorial, “punishing the agency by marginalising and hobbling it is not the solution.”
“The Administration is obsessed with magic bullets — vaccines, new medicines, or a hope that the virus will simply disappear,” the editorial argued. “But only a steadfast reliance on basic public health principles, like test, trace, and isolate, will see the emergency brought to an end, and this requires an effective national public health agency.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--WI Mayor Slams State Supreme Court’s ‘Outrageous’ Decision On Stay-At-Home Order

Madison , Wisconsin Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway on Friday blasted the Wisconsin Supreme Court ’ s decision to strike down Gov .
Tony Evers ’ ( D ) stay-at-home order on Wednesday amid the coronavirus pandemic .
Rhodes-Conway , who has continued to enforce the order in her city despite the court ’ s ruling , told CNN anchor John Berman that the decision “ is just outrageous.
” “ It ’ s irresponsible , and it ’ s really disappointing , ” she said .
“ And the court has decided that with the flip of a switch , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health guidance at all in response to this pandemic.
” The mayor said she was “ extremely worried ” about the possibility of the virus continuing to spread in Madison from those traveling to her city from areas of the state that have lifted the order .
“ I just have to hope everyone is going to be responsible and do their best to take care of themselves and their community , ” she said .
“ And I ’ m really hoping that other counties surrounding us will continue to adopt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and ours , safe .
”

Madison, Wisconsin Mayor Satya Rhodes-Conway on Friday blasted the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Gov. Tony Evers’ (D) stay-at-home order on Wednesday amid the coronavirus pandemic.
Rhodes-Conway, who has continued to enforce the order in her city despite the court’s ruling, told CNN anchor John Berman that the decision “is just outrageous.”
“It’s irresponsible, and it’s really disappointing,” she said. “And the court has decided that with the flip of a switch, the state is just without any sort of public health guidance at all in response to this pandemic.”
The mayor said she was “extremely worried” about the possibility of the virus continuing to spread in Madison from those traveling to her city from areas of the state that have lifted the order.
“I just have to hope everyone is going to be responsible and do their best to take care of themselves and their community,” she said. “And I’m really hoping that other counties surrounding us will continue to adopt public health orders to keep their communities, and ours, safe.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--When You Just Can’t Stop Cooperating

When You Just Can’t Stop Cooperating

He ’ s the American political consultant who pleaded guilty in August 2018 to violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act , and who admitted in his plea to illegally helping a Ukrainian politician client of Paul Manafort ’ s secure tickets to Trump ’ s inauguration .
Patten has since been sentenced , and , according to government reports , provided extensive cooperation to investigations in multiple jurisdictions .
The Ukrainian client for whom Patten illegally funneled money into the inauguration was none other than Sergey Lyovochkin , who met with Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik while in D.C. on that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , allegedly received polling data from Manafort .
But that ’ s all in the past .
What ’ s interesting now is that Patten has filed for an early end to his probation .
The government decided not to oppose the request , and noted the following in its filing about the matter : In addition , the defendant acceded to a request to debrief with the government on April , 17 , 2020 .
On that date , the defendant met in person with the government in the presence of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2.5 hours .
The government investigators assess that the defendant did not appear evasive or deceitful , appeared to answer all the questions put to him to the best of his ability , and admitted to a lack of knowledge or memory when appropriate .
The government views the defendant ’ s debrief as being helpful to ongoing investigations .
It ’ s not clear what Patten was asked about , or in what investigations he would still be participating .
The Assistant U.S. Attorney who signed the filing — a career official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , after the case ’ s previous federal prosecutor left for the SEC .
An attorney for Patten didn ’ t return a request for comment .
Prosecutors are still reportedly investigating widespread foreign contributions to Trump ’ s inaugural committee .
In his August 2018 guilty plea , Patten admitted to using a straw donor for foreign contributions to the committee in exchange for tickets to the inaugural .
Any other string emanating from the Ukraine element of this — be it related to Manafort or Konstantin Kilimnik — could also be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Patten ’ s newfound cooperation ( and early end to probation ) comes as the Justice Department is exhibiting what might generously be described as “ curiosity ” about investigations into Russian interference in 2016 .
Attorney General Bill Barr has tasked several U.S .
Attorneys with combing through portions of the investigation , most notably Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham .
Meanwhile , the DOJ made a starkly politicized move last week to drop charges against Michael Flynn , an unprecedented reversal of charges against a defendant who had pleaded guilty .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Patten is cooperating .
From the above , all we know is that Patten remains an active , cooperating witness available to the government .

Remember Sam Patten?
He’s the American political consultant who pleaded guilty in August 2018 to violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act, and who admitted in his plea to illegally helping a Ukrainian politician client of Paul Manafort’s secure tickets to Trump’s inauguration.
Patten has since been sentenced, and, according to government reports, provided extensive cooperation to investigations in multiple jurisdictions.
The Ukrainian client for whom Patten illegally funneled money into the inauguration was none other than Sergey Lyovochkin, who met with Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik while in D.C. on that trip and who, during the campaign, allegedly received polling data from Manafort.
But that’s all in the past. What’s interesting now is that Patten has filed for an early end to his probation. The government decided not to oppose the request, and noted the following in its filing about the matter:
In addition, the defendant acceded to a request to debrief with the government on April, 17, 2020. On that date, the defendant met in person with the government in the presence of his attorney, and answered questions for approximately 2.5 hours. The government investigators assess that the defendant did not appear evasive or deceitful, appeared to answer all the questions put to him to the best of his ability, and admitted to a lack of knowledge or memory when appropriate. The government views the defendant’s debrief as being helpful to ongoing investigations.
It’s not clear what Patten was asked about, or in what investigations he would still be participating.
The Assistant U.S. Attorney who signed the filing — a career official — joined the case 11 days ago, after the case’s previous federal prosecutor left for the SEC.
An attorney for Patten didn’t return a request for comment.
Prosecutors are still reportedly investigating widespread foreign contributions to Trump’s inaugural committee. In his August 2018 guilty plea, Patten admitted to using a straw donor for foreign contributions to the committee in exchange for tickets to the inaugural.
Any other string emanating from the Ukraine element of this — be it related to Manafort or Konstantin Kilimnik — could also be relevant.
At the same time, Patten’s newfound cooperation (and early end to probation) comes as the Justice Department is exhibiting what might generously be described as “curiosity” about investigations into Russian interference in 2016. Attorney General Bill Barr has tasked several U.S. Attorneys with combing through portions of the investigation, most notably Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham.
Meanwhile, the DOJ made a starkly politicized move last week to drop charges against Michael Flynn, an unprecedented reversal of charges against a defendant who had pleaded guilty.
It remains unclear how or on what Patten is cooperating. From the above, all we know is that Patten remains an active, cooperating witness available to the government.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--Russian Doctors Say Woman May Have Contracted COVID-19 Twice

MOSCOW — Russian doctors say they are treating a woman who may have contracted coronavirus for the second time after @ @ @ @ @ woman was discharged from a hospital in the Siberian city of Ulan-Ude after receiving treatment @ @ @ @ @ for it in early April .
But two weeks later she started having respiratory symptoms @ @ @ @ @ the virus for the second time .
She was readmitted to the hospital and is @ @ @ @ @ its chief doctor Tatyana Symbelova .
“ The question is whether it ’ s a @ @ @ @ @ passed between discharged and respiratory symptoms appearing , or the disease she had earlier coming @ @ @ @ @ entirely clear for us at this point , ” Symbelova says .
According to the @ @ @ @ @ studies have shown people who have recovered from the coronavirus are immune to becoming infected @ @ @ @ @ 262,000 coronavirus cases on Friday and 2,418 deaths .

MOSCOW — Russian doctors say they are treating a woman who may have contracted coronavirus for the second time after recovering from it.
The woman was discharged from a hospital in the Siberian city of Ulan-Ude after receiving treatment for coronavirus and testing negative for it in early April. But two weeks later she started having respiratory symptoms again and tested positive for the virus for the second time.
She was readmitted to the hospital and is currently being treated, says its chief doctor Tatyana Symbelova.
“The question is whether it’s a re-infection, because 15-16 days passed between discharged and respiratory symptoms appearing, or the disease she had earlier coming back. It is not entirely clear for us at this point,” Symbelova says.
According to the World Health Organization, no studies have shown people who have recovered from the coronavirus are immune to becoming infected again.
Russia reported over 262,000 coronavirus cases on Friday and 2,418 deaths.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-15--Loeffler Turns Over Stock Transaction Records Amid Scrutiny Of Sales

Sen. Kelly Loeffler ( R-GA ) gave documents on her stock transactions to the Department of Justice , along with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Senate Ethics Committee , on Thursday .
A spokesperson for Loeffler told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution late Thursday that the documents prove the GOP senator and her husband “ acted entirely appropriately ” when they dumped millions in stock at the same time Loeffler was receiving private Senate briefings on COVID-19 right before the pandemic wrecked the U.S. stock market .
“ The documents and information demonstrated her and her husband ’ s lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well the details of those accounts , ” said the spokesperson , who reportedly did not clarify whether the lawmaker had given up the records voluntarily .
It is also unclear whether the feds have questioned or subpoenaed Loeffler .
The senator ’ s office told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution earlier Thursday that the feds have not served her with any search warrants .
Loeffler ’ s colleague , Sen. Richard Burr ( R-NC ) , is currently being investigated by the Justice Department over stock sales he ’ d made just before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 .
Like Loeffler , the North Carolina senator had received briefings on the outbreak behind closed doors as Senate Intelligence Committee chair .
Burr temporarily stepped down from his chairmanship of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday after the FBI seized his cell phone in the Justice Department ’ s probe .

Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-GA) gave documents on her stock transactions to the Department of Justice, along with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Senate Ethics Committee, on Thursday.
A spokesperson for Loeffler told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution late Thursday that the documents prove the GOP senator and her husband “acted entirely appropriately” when they dumped millions in stock at the same time Loeffler was receiving private Senate briefings on COVID-19 right before the pandemic wrecked the U.S. stock market.
“The documents and information demonstrated her and her husband’s lack of involvement in their managed accounts, as well the details of those accounts,” said the spokesperson, who reportedly did not clarify whether the lawmaker had given up the records voluntarily. It is also unclear whether the feds have questioned or subpoenaed Loeffler. The senator’s office told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution earlier Thursday that the feds have not served her with any search warrants.
Loeffler’s colleague, Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), is currently being investigated by the Justice Department over stock sales he’d made just before the market plummeted as a result of COVID-19. Like Loeffler, the North Carolina senator had received briefings on the outbreak behind closed doors as Senate Intelligence Committee chair.
Burr temporarily stepped down from his chairmanship of the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday after the FBI seized his cell phone in the Justice Department’s probe.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-16--Trump Fires Another Watchdog: State Department IG Gets The Boot

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — President Donald Trump has fired the State Department ’ s inspector general , an Obama administration appointee whose office was critical of alleged political bias in the agency ’ s management .
The ouster is the latest in a series of moves against independent executive branch watchdogs who have found fault with the Trump administration .
A senior department official said Trump removed Steve Linick from his job on Friday but gave no reason for his ouster .
In a letter to Congress , Trump said Linick , who had held the job since 2013 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that his removal would take effect in 30 days .
Trump did not mention Linick by name in his letter .
Democrats in Congress immediately cried foul , with the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee suggesting that Linick was fired in part in retaliation for opening an unspecified investigation into Secretary of State Mike Pompeo .
“ This firing is the outrageous act of a president trying to protect one of his most loyal supporters , the secretary of state , from accountability , ” Eliot Engel , D-N.Y. , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have learned that the Office of the Inspector General had opened an investigation into Secretary Pompeo .
Mr. Linick ’ s firing amid such a probe strongly suggests that this is an unlawful act of retaliation.
” Engel offered no details of the alleged investigation into Pompeo , although two congressional aides said the probe involved allegations that Pompeo may have improperly treated staff .
Linick ’ s office has issued several reports critical of the department ’ s handling of personnel matters during the Trump administration , including accusing some of political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ If Inspector General Linick was fired because he was conducting an investigation of conduct by Secretary Pompeo , the Senate can not let this stand , ” said Sen. Chris Murphy , D-Conn. “ The Senate Foreign Relations Committee must get to bottom of what happened here.
” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also condemned Linick ’ s ouster , saying he had been “ punished for honorably performing his duty to protect the Constitution and our national security.
” “ The president must cease his pattern of reprisal and retaliation against the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans safe , particularly during this time of global emergency.
” Linick , whose office also took issue with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ’ s use of a private email server while she served as America ’ s top diplomat , played a minor role in the Ukraine impeachment investigation into Trump .
In October , Linick turned over documents to House investigators that he had received from State Department ’ s Counselor T. Ulrich Brechbuhl , a close Pompeo associate , which contained information from debunked conspiracy theories about Ukraine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Linick will replaced by Stephen Akard , a former career foreign service officer who has close ties to Vice President Mike Pence , said the official , who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity .
Akard currently runs the department ’ s Office of Foreign Missions .
He had been nominated to be the director general of the foreign service but withdrew after objections he wasn ’ t experienced enough .
Linick , a former assistant U.S. attorney in California and Virginia , had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critical of the department ’ s management policies during the Trump administration .
His office had criticized several Trump appointees for their treatment of career staff for apparently being insufficiently supportive of Trump and his policies .
Under Linick , the State Department ’ s inspector general office was also critical of former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson ’ s hiring freeze and attempts to streamline the agency by slashing its funding and personnel .
Trump has been taking aim lately at inspectors general .
In April , he fired Michael Atkinson , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for his role in the whistleblower complaint that led to Trump ’ s impeachment .
Then Trump removed Glenn Fine as acting inspector general at the Defense Department , a move that stripped him of his post as chairman of the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee .
During a White House briefing on COVID-19 , Trump questioned the independence of an inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services over a report that said there was a shortage of supplies and testing at hospitals .
Associated Press writer Deb Riechmann contributed @ @ @ @

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump has fired the State Department’s inspector general, an Obama administration appointee whose office was critical of alleged political bias in the agency’s management. The ouster is the latest in a series of moves against independent executive branch watchdogs who have found fault with the Trump administration.
A senior department official said Trump removed Steve Linick from his job on Friday but gave no reason for his ouster. In a letter to Congress, Trump said Linick, who had held the job since 2013, no longer had his full confidence and that his removal would take effect in 30 days. Trump did not mention Linick by name in his letter.
Democrats in Congress immediately cried foul, with the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee suggesting that Linick was fired in part in retaliation for opening an unspecified investigation into Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
“This firing is the outrageous act of a president trying to protect one of his most loyal supporters, the secretary of state, from accountability,” Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., said in a statement. “I have learned that the Office of the Inspector General had opened an investigation into Secretary Pompeo. Mr. Linick’s firing amid such a probe strongly suggests that this is an unlawful act of retaliation.”
Engel offered no details of the alleged investigation into Pompeo, although two congressional aides said the probe involved allegations that Pompeo may have improperly treated staff. Linick’s office has issued several reports critical of the department’s handling of personnel matters during the Trump administration, including accusing some of political appointees of retaliating against career officials.
“If Inspector General Linick was fired because he was conducting an investigation of conduct by Secretary Pompeo, the Senate cannot let this stand,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn. “The Senate Foreign Relations Committee must get to bottom of what happened here.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also condemned Linick’s ouster, saying he had been “punished for honorably performing his duty to protect the Constitution and our national security.”
“The president must cease his pattern of reprisal and retaliation against the public servants who are working to keep Americans safe, particularly during this time of global emergency.”
Linick, whose office also took issue with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she served as America’s top diplomat, played a minor role in the Ukraine impeachment investigation into Trump.
In October, Linick turned over documents to House investigators that he had received from State Department’s Counselor T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, a close Pompeo associate, which contained information from debunked conspiracy theories about Ukraine’s role in the 2016 election.
Linick will replaced by Stephen Akard, a former career foreign service officer who has close ties to Vice President Mike Pence, said the official, who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. Akard currently runs the department’s Office of Foreign Missions. He had been nominated to be the director general of the foreign service but withdrew after objections he wasn’t experienced enough.
Linick, a former assistant U.S. attorney in California and Virginia, had overseen inspector general reports that were highly critical of the department’s management policies during the Trump administration. His office had criticized several Trump appointees for their treatment of career staff for apparently being insufficiently supportive of Trump and his policies.
Under Linick, the State Department’s inspector general office was also critical of former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s hiring freeze and attempts to streamline the agency by slashing its funding and personnel.
Trump has been taking aim lately at inspectors general.
In April, he fired Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence community, for his role in the whistleblower complaint that led to Trump’s impeachment.
Then Trump removed Glenn Fine as acting inspector general at the Defense Department, a move that stripped him of his post as chairman of the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee.
During a White House briefing on COVID-19, Trump questioned the independence of an inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services over a report that said there was a shortage of supplies and testing at hospitals.
___
Associated Press writer Deb Riechmann contributed to this report.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-16--House Approves Massive $3 Trillion Coronavirus Relief Bill

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — Democrats have powered a massive $ 3 trillion coronavirus relief bill through the House , an election-year measure designed to brace a U.S. economy in free fall and a health care system struggling to contain a pandemic still pummeling the country .
Friday ’ s 208-199 vote , with all but one Republican opposed , advances what boils down to a campaign-season display of Democratic economic and health-care priorities .
It has no chance of becoming law as written , but will likely spark difficult negotiations with the White House and Senate Republicans .
Any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 response bill before November ’ s presidential and congressional elections .
The enormous Democratic measure would cost more than the prior four coronavirus bills combined .
It would deliver almost $ 1 trillion for state and local governments , another round of $ 1,200 direct payments to individuals and help for the unemployed , renters and homeowners , college debt holders and the struggling Postal Service .
“ Not to act now is not only irresponsible in a humanitarian way , it is irresponsible because it ’ s only going to cost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pelosi , D-Calif. “ More in terms of lives , livelihood , cost to the budget , cost to our democracy.
” Republicans mocked the bill as a bloated Democratic wish-list that was dead on arrival in the GOP-led Senate and , for good measure , faced a White House veto threat .
Party leaders say they want to assess how $ 3 trillion approved earlier is working and see if some states ’ partial business reopenings would spark an economic revival that would ease the need for more safety net programs .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and awaiting stronger signals from President Donald Trump about what he will support .
“ Phase Four is going to happen , ” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office , using Washington insider-speak for the measure .
“ But it ’ s going to happen in a much better way for the American people.
” Trump and top Republicans like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , are insisting the next measure should protect reopening businesses from liability lawsuits .
The president is also demanding a cut to payroll taxes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The daylong debate painted a Capitol scene that ’ s become common in the era of coronavirus , even as it remains disconcerting .
The sparsely populated House floor was dotted with lawmakers and aides wearing protective masks and even gloves , though some Republicans lacked them .
Many members looked shaggier and sported beards they had not worn weeks ago .
Roll call votes lasted over an hour each because lawmakers were voting in small groups to limit crowding .
To enhance the bill ’ s political impact , Democrats named @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the payments it would provide front-line emergency workers .
With more than 86,000 Americans dead , 1.4 million confirmed infections and 36 million filing unemployment claims in an frozen economy , Democrats saw GOP opposition as an easy campaign-season target .
“ Are you kidding me ?
” said Rep. Tim Ryan , D-Ohio , of Republican assertions that it was time to stop spending more money .
“ Where do you guys live ?
Food lines at our food banks around the block ?
In the United States of America ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic political blunder .
They said overly generous unemployment benefits discouraged people from returning to work , and attacked language helping immigrants in the U.S. illegally get federal benefits .
They also singled out provisions helping states set up voting by mail and easing the marijuana industry ’ s access to banks .
“ It may help the cannabis industry , but it won ’ t help Main Street , ” said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy , R-Calif. Pelosi pushed the measure through after overcoming party divisions aggravated by election pressures .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ its price tag and politically fraught provisions like assisting marijuana businesses .
A few progressive Democrats were upset because it did not do more , such as guaranteeing workers ’ salaries and bolstering their health insurance coverage .
Fourteen Democrats voted against the measure .
Nearly all are centrists and number among the party ’ s most vulnerable lawmakers in November ’ s elections : freshmen from districts Trump won in 2016 .
Among them was Rep. Cindy Axne of Iowa , who labeled the measure “ bloated.
” Another , Rep. Abigail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This bill strays far beyond delivering relief or responding to an urgent crisis , & it has no chance at becoming law.
” Republicans were already planning to use the day ’ s votes against other moderate Democrats who backed Friday ’ s legislation and face competitive reelection races .
Clearly , the bipartisan consensus that produced four previous coronavirus bills was crumbling quickly .
Polls show GOP voters are satisfied with the federal response and aren ’ t agitating for more .
Self-branded deficit hawks are citing the massive increase in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some congressional aides said the Democratic bill ’ s real price tag could breach $ 3.5 trillion .
A partial estimate of tax provisions alone revealed eye-popping costs : $ 412 billion to renew $ 1,200 cash payments to individuals , more than $ 100 billion to pay health insurance premiums for the unemployed and $ 164 billion to make an “ employee retention ” tax credit for businesses more generous .
Republicans leaders faced disunity between conservatives who feel enough has been done and pragmatists who back rescuing the Postal Service from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state and local governments .
The huge price tag and a lack of consultation with Republicans by Pelosi cemented GOP opposition .
“ This bill is nothing more than the Democratic policy agenda masquerading as a response to the coronavirus crisis , ” said Rep. Tom Cole , R-Okla .
He said the bill is “ going nowhere , and is going nowhere fast.
” Liberal Rep. Pramila Jayapal , D-Wash. , also opposed the bill .
She told reporters that if constituents ask her if the bill would put money in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I can ’ t tell them yes.
” The lone Republican backing the legislation was Rep. Peter King of New York , who is retiring .

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats have powered a massive $3 trillion coronavirus relief bill through the House, an election-year measure designed to brace a U.S. economy in free fall and a health care system struggling to contain a pandemic still pummeling the country.
Friday’s 208-199 vote, with all but one Republican opposed, advances what boils down to a campaign-season display of Democratic economic and health-care priorities. It has no chance of becoming law as written, but will likely spark difficult negotiations with the White House and Senate Republicans. Any product would probably be the last major COVID-19 response bill before November’s presidential and congressional elections.
The enormous Democratic measure would cost more than the prior four coronavirus bills combined. It would deliver almost $1 trillion for state and local governments, another round of $1,200 direct payments to individuals and help for the unemployed, renters and homeowners, college debt holders and the struggling Postal Service.
“Not to act now is not only irresponsible in a humanitarian way, it is irresponsible because it’s only going to cost more,” warned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “More in terms of lives, livelihood, cost to the budget, cost to our democracy.”
Republicans mocked the bill as a bloated Democratic wish-list that was dead on arrival in the GOP-led Senate and, for good measure, faced a White House veto threat. Party leaders say they want to assess how $3 trillion approved earlier is working and see if some states’ partial business reopenings would spark an economic revival that would ease the need for more safety net programs.
Republicans are also sorting through internal divisions and awaiting stronger signals from President Donald Trump about what he will support.
“Phase Four is going to happen,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, using Washington insider-speak for the measure. “But it’s going to happen in a much better way for the American people.”
Trump and top Republicans like Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., are insisting the next measure should protect reopening businesses from liability lawsuits. The president is also demanding a cut to payroll taxes, but GOP leaders are not yet onboard.
The daylong debate painted a Capitol scene that’s become common in the era of coronavirus, even as it remains disconcerting. The sparsely populated House floor was dotted with lawmakers and aides wearing protective masks and even gloves, though some Republicans lacked them.
Many members looked shaggier and sported beards they had not worn weeks ago. Roll call votes lasted over an hour each because lawmakers were voting in small groups to limit crowding.
To enhance the bill’s political impact, Democrats named their measure “The Heroes Act” for the payments it would provide front-line emergency workers. With more than 86,000 Americans dead, 1.4 million confirmed infections and 36 million filing unemployment claims in an frozen economy, Democrats saw GOP opposition as an easy campaign-season target.
“Are you kidding me?” said Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, of Republican assertions that it was time to stop spending more money. “Where do you guys live? Food lines at our food banks around the block? In the United States of America?”
Republicans saw the bill as a Democratic political blunder. They said overly generous unemployment benefits discouraged people from returning to work, and attacked language helping immigrants in the U.S. illegally get federal benefits. They also singled out provisions helping states set up voting by mail and easing the marijuana industry’s access to banks.
“It may help the cannabis industry, but it won’t help Main Street,” said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.
Pelosi pushed the measure through after overcoming party divisions aggravated by election pressures. Some moderate Democrats opposed the package for its price tag and politically fraught provisions like assisting marijuana businesses. A few progressive Democrats were upset because it did not do more, such as guaranteeing workers’ salaries and bolstering their health insurance coverage.
Fourteen Democrats voted against the measure. Nearly all are centrists and number among the party’s most vulnerable lawmakers in November’s elections: freshmen from districts Trump won in 2016.
Among them was Rep. Cindy Axne of Iowa, who labeled the measure “bloated.” Another, Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia, tweeted, “This bill strays far beyond delivering relief or responding to an urgent crisis, & it has no chance at becoming law.”
Republicans were already planning to use the day’s votes against other moderate Democrats who backed Friday’s legislation and face competitive reelection races.
Clearly, the bipartisan consensus that produced four previous coronavirus bills was crumbling quickly. Polls show GOP voters are satisfied with the federal response and aren’t agitating for more. Self-branded deficit hawks are citing the massive increase in the spiraling $25 trillion national debt.
Some congressional aides said the Democratic bill’s real price tag could breach $3.5 trillion. A partial estimate of tax provisions alone revealed eye-popping costs: $412 billion to renew $1,200 cash payments to individuals, more than $100 billion to pay health insurance premiums for the unemployed and $164 billion to make an “employee retention” tax credit for businesses more generous.
Republicans leaders faced disunity between conservatives who feel enough has been done and pragmatists who back rescuing the Postal Service from looming insolvency and delivering cash to revenue-starved state and local governments. The huge price tag and a lack of consultation with Republicans by Pelosi cemented GOP opposition.
“This bill is nothing more than the Democratic policy agenda masquerading as a response to the coronavirus crisis,” said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla. He said the bill is “going nowhere, and is going nowhere fast.”
Liberal Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., also opposed the bill. She told reporters that if constituents ask her if the bill would put money in their pockets or preserve their health care, “I can’t tell them yes.”
The lone Republican backing the legislation was Rep. Peter King of New York, who is retiring.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-05-16--Obama Critiques Trump Admin’s Virus Response: Not ‘Even Pretending To Be In Charge’

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — Former President Barack Obama on Saturday criticized U.S. leaders overseeing the nation ’ s response to the coronavirus , telling college graduates in an online commencement address that the pandemic shows many officials “ aren ’ t even pretending to be in charge.
” Obama spoke on “ Show Me Your Walk , HBCU Edition , ” a two-hour event for students graduating from historically black colleges and universities broadcast on YouTube , Facebook and Twitter .
His remarks were unexpectedly political , given the venue , and touched on current events beyond the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ More than anything , this pandemic has fully , finally torn back the curtain on the idea that so many of the folks in charge know what they ’ re doing , ” Obama said .
“ A lot them aren ’ t even pretending to be in charge.
” Obama did not name President Donald Trump or any other federal or state officials in his comments .
But last Friday , he harshly criticized Trump ’ s handling of the pandemic as an “ absolute chaotic disaster ” in a call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Yahoo News .
The commencement remarks were the latest sign that Obama intends to play an increasingly active role in the coming election .
He has generally kept a low profile in the years since he left office , even as Trump has disparaged him .
Obama told supporters on the call that he would be “ spending as much time as necessary and campaigning as hard as I can ” for Joe Biden , who served as his vice president .
As he congratulated the graduates Saturday and commiserated over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and economic turmoil the virus has wrought , the former president noted the February shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery , 25 , who was killed while jogging on a residential street in Georgia .
“ Let ’ s be honest : A disease like this just spotlights the underlying inequalities and extra burdens that black communities have historically had to deal with in this country , ” Obama said .
“ We see it in the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on our communities , just as we see it when a black man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel like they can stop and question and shoot him if he doesn ’ t submit to their questioning.
” “ Injustice like this isn ’ t new , ” Obama went on to say .
“ What is new is that so much of your generation has woken up to the fact that the status quo needs fixing , that the old ways of doing things don ’ t work.
” In the face of a void in leadership , he said , it would be up to the graduates to shape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s going to get better , it ’ s going to be up to you , ” he said .
It is a perilous time for the nation ’ s historically black colleges and universities , which have long struggled with less funding and smaller endowments than their predominantly white peers and are now dealing with the financial challenges of the coronavirus .
Even at the better-endowed HBCUs , officials are bracing for a tough few years .
Obama will also deliver a televised prime-time commencement address later Saturday for the high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event with LeBron James , Malala Yousafzai and Ben Platt , among others .

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Barack Obama on Saturday criticized U.S. leaders overseeing the nation’s response to the coronavirus, telling college graduates in an online commencement address that the pandemic shows many officials “aren’t even pretending to be in charge.”
Obama spoke on “Show Me Your Walk, HBCU Edition,” a two-hour event for students graduating from historically black colleges and universities broadcast on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter. His remarks were unexpectedly political, given the venue, and touched on current events beyond the virus and its social and economic impacts.
“More than anything, this pandemic has fully, finally torn back the curtain on the idea that so many of the folks in charge know what they’re doing,” Obama said. “A lot them aren’t even pretending to be in charge.”
Obama did not name President Donald Trump or any other federal or state officials in his comments. But last Friday, he harshly criticized Trump’s handling of the pandemic as an “absolute chaotic disaster” in a call with 3,000 members of his administrations obtained by Yahoo News.
The commencement remarks were the latest sign that Obama intends to play an increasingly active role in the coming election. He has generally kept a low profile in the years since he left office, even as Trump has disparaged him. Obama told supporters on the call that he would be “spending as much time as necessary and campaigning as hard as I can” for Joe Biden, who served as his vice president.
As he congratulated the graduates Saturday and commiserated over the enormous challenges they face given the devastation and economic turmoil the virus has wrought, the former president noted the February shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery, 25, who was killed while jogging on a residential street in Georgia.
“Let’s be honest: A disease like this just spotlights the underlying inequalities and extra burdens that black communities have historically had to deal with in this country,” Obama said. “We see it in the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on our communities, just as we see it when a black man goes for a jog and some folks feel like they can stop and question and shoot him if he doesn’t submit to their questioning.”
“Injustice like this isn’t new,” Obama went on to say. “What is new is that so much of your generation has woken up to the fact that the status quo needs fixing, that the old ways of doing things don’t work.” In the face of a void in leadership, he said, it would be up to the graduates to shape the future.
“If the world’s going to get better, it’s going to be up to you,” he said.
It is a perilous time for the nation’s historically black colleges and universities, which have long struggled with less funding and smaller endowments than their predominantly white peers and are now dealing with the financial challenges of the coronavirus. Even at the better-endowed HBCUs, officials are bracing for a tough few years.
Obama will also deliver a televised prime-time commencement address later Saturday for the high school Class of 2020 during an hour-long event with LeBron James, Malala Yousafzai and Ben Platt, among others.