buzzfeed--2020-05-06--The Supreme Court Heard Arguments Over Whether Trump Can Let Employers Deny Birth Control Coverage F

The Supreme Court Heard Arguments Over Whether Trump Can Let Employers Deny Birth Control Coverage For Moral Reasons

On the third day of the Supreme Court ’ s historic livestreamed hearings , the court heard arguments in two combined cases about the Trump administration 's rules granting employers and universities the ability to refuse to provide birth control coverage for their employees for religious or moral reasons .
The cases , Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania and Trump v. Pennsylvania , are the latest dispute to reach the courts over the regulation of reproductive healthcare .
It directly pertains to a requirement instated under the Affordable Care Act requiring all employers to provide employees with insurance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third time this specific requirement has come before the Supreme Court , but the first since Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh , both appointed by President Donald Trump , joined the bench .
The Obama-era contraception mandate has been challenged by religious groups before , but the Trump administration 's rule exempting organizations with a moral objection to contraception coverage goes further .
Opponents of the law , led by the state of Pennsylvania , argue it is too broad and could allow any employer to deny birth control coverage to its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was lively and highly unusual .
Not only is this week the first in history that the Supreme Court has held hearings entirely over the phone , allowing any member of the public to listen in , but it is also the first time that a justice has heard arguments and asked questions from a hospital bed .
On Tuesday , Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was taken to Johns Hopkins Hospital for treatment of a gallbladder condition .
According to the Supreme Court press office , she was treated without surgery , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infection .
Each time it was her turn to ask the counsel questions , Ginsburg gave a variation of the same speech .
The Trump administration `` tossed entirely to the wind what Congress considered to be essential , that women be provided this service , with no hassle and no cost to them . ''
Justice Clarence Thomas , who is known for his silence and sometimes goes years without asking a single question during arguments , asked four questions on Wednesday .
After initially being apparently absent or experiencing technical difficulties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak , Thomas then focused his questions on whether Pennsylvania ’ s case should have resulted in a nationwide block on the rules , rather than just within that state .
Chief Justice John Roberts — who often sides with the more conservative justices on the court , but after Justice Anthony Kennedy ’ s departure is now considered the court ’ s swing vote — seemed to align his questions with those of Justice Stephen Breyer , who is normally a member of the court ’ s liberal bloc .
Pennsylvania — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court over the rules — had argued that they would cause harm to the people seeking birth control in their state , and financial harm to the state as a whole .
On Wednesday , lawyers for the state contended that the Trump administration does not have the authority to expand exemptions to the contraceptive coverage mandate , and that the method with which they did so violated federal procedural law .
The Trump administration ’ s Department of Justice and a lawyer for the Catholic charity organization Little Sisters of the Poor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that administration had a right to issue the exemptions under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ( RFRA ) and that their clients ’ “ freedom of conscience ” was being infringed upon by the contraception coverage mandate .
The ACA ’ s mandatory birth control coverage now has a long , complex legal history , spanning several court cases .
Under Obama ’ s Department of Health and Human Services , churches and other houses of worship were already exempted from being required to apply abortion coverage , and following several court cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to provide workarounds for religious organizations that did not want to directly provide contraception coverage .
The organizations can fill out a form permitting their insurance company or the government to step in and provide contraception for the organizations ’ employees , so they wouldn ’ t have to directly .
Some of these organizations , like Little Sisters of the Poor , took issue with having to fill out the form , arguing that enabling another entity to provide contraception makes them complicit in providing something to which they are religiously opposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group March for Life , argued that they should be exempted as well , as part of the mission of their organization is opposing certain types of contraceptives , so they shouldn ’ t be forced to provide coverage of it .
In response to these complaints , the Trump administration issued rules in 2017 allowing any organization with moral or religious opposition to providing contraception to opt out without having to fill out a form to replace the coverage for their employees .
The rules were quickly blocked in the courts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revamped versions of the rules that were essentially the same .
The new rules included a low estimate of how many women would be made to seek contraception coverage outside of their employer if the rules should go into effect ( “ 126,400 women of childbearing age ” would be affected , the rules said , costing a total of “ $ 67.3 million annually ” ) .
The administration also suggested that women left without contraception coverage by the rule seek free birth control from family planning clinics receiving federal grants .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ attorneys on either side of the argument Wednesday that they didn ’ t fully understand what the problem was .
They both cited the Supreme Court case they had decided in 2016 , Zubik v. Burwell , which concerned a nearly identical issue .
In Zubik , religious organizations argued that the contraceptive mandate violated their religious freedoms .
Roberts and Breyer told the attorneys Wednesday that they didn ’ t understand why they couldn ’ t work out an agreement then , and they still don ’ t understand it .
Under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ the insurance coverer would not provide the services through the Little Sisters ' plan , but could provide them directly to the employee , ” Roberts said to Department of Justice Solicitor General Noel Francisco Wednesday at the opening of arguments .
“ Why is n't that sort of accommodation sufficient ?
I did not understand the problem at the time of Zubik and I 'm not sure I understand now.
” Justice Breyer agreed , saying that “ the point ” of the religious exemptions in the ACA ’ s contraception @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out accommodations , because there can be some of the most difficult to resolve disputes and they can substitute a kind of hostility for harmony , ” he said .
“ So from that point of view , I really repeat the Chief Justice 's question : I do n't understand why this ca n't be worked out , ” he added .

On the third day of the Supreme Court’s historic livestreamed hearings, the court heard arguments in two combined cases about the Trump administration's rules granting employers and universities the ability to refuse to provide birth control coverage for their employees for religious or moral reasons.
The cases, Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania and Trump v. Pennsylvania, are the latest dispute to reach the courts over the regulation of reproductive healthcare. It directly pertains to a requirement instated under the Affordable Care Act requiring all employers to provide employees with insurance coverage for contraception. Wednesday was the third time this specific requirement has come before the Supreme Court, but the first since Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, both appointed by President Donald Trump, joined the bench.
The Obama-era contraception mandate has been challenged by religious groups before, but the Trump administration's rule exempting organizations with a moral objection to contraception coverage goes further. Opponents of the law, led by the state of Pennsylvania, argue it is too broad and could allow any employer to deny birth control coverage to its employees.
Wednesday morning’s hearing was lively and highly unusual. Not only is this week the first in history that the Supreme Court has held hearings entirely over the phone, allowing any member of the public to listen in, but it is also the first time that a justice has heard arguments and asked questions from a hospital bed.
On Tuesday, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was taken to Johns Hopkins Hospital for treatment of a gallbladder condition. According to the Supreme Court press office, she was treated without surgery, and her condition was a “benign” infection.
Each time it was her turn to ask the counsel questions, Ginsburg gave a variation of the same speech. The Trump administration "tossed entirely to the wind what Congress considered to be essential, that women be provided this service, with no hassle and no cost to them."
Justice Clarence Thomas, who is known for his silence and sometimes goes years without asking a single question during arguments, asked four questions on Wednesday. After initially being apparently absent or experiencing technical difficulties when it was first his turn to speak, Thomas then focused his questions on whether Pennsylvania’s case should have resulted in a nationwide block on the rules, rather than just within that state.
Chief Justice John Roberts — who often sides with the more conservative justices on the court, but after Justice Anthony Kennedy’s departure is now considered the court’s swing vote — seemed to align his questions with those of Justice Stephen Breyer, who is normally a member of the court’s liberal bloc.
Pennsylvania — which originally brought the Trump administration to court over the rules — had argued that they would cause harm to the people seeking birth control in their state, and financial harm to the state as a whole. On Wednesday, lawyers for the state contended that the Trump administration does not have the authority to expand exemptions to the contraceptive coverage mandate, and that the method with which they did so violated federal procedural law.
The Trump administration’s Department of Justice and a lawyer for the Catholic charity organization Little Sisters of the Poor countered these arguments, telling the justices that administration had a right to issue the exemptions under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and that their clients’ “freedom of conscience” was being infringed upon by the contraception coverage mandate.
The ACA’s mandatory birth control coverage now has a long, complex legal history, spanning several court cases. Under Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services, churches and other houses of worship were already exempted from being required to apply abortion coverage, and following several court cases, additional “accommodations” were made to provide workarounds for religious organizations that did not want to directly provide contraception coverage. The organizations can fill out a form permitting their insurance company or the government to step in and provide contraception for the organizations’ employees, so they wouldn’t have to directly.
Some of these organizations, like Little Sisters of the Poor, took issue with having to fill out the form, arguing that enabling another entity to provide contraception makes them complicit in providing something to which they are religiously opposed. Others, like the secular anti-abortion group March for Life, argued that they should be exempted as well, as part of the mission of their organization is opposing certain types of contraceptives, so they shouldn’t be forced to provide coverage of it.
In response to these complaints, the Trump administration issued rules in 2017 allowing any organization with moral or religious opposition to providing contraception to opt out without having to fill out a form to replace the coverage for their employees. The rules were quickly blocked in the courts, so in 2018, the administration issued revamped versions of the rules that were essentially the same. The new rules included a low estimate of how many women would be made to seek contraception coverage outside of their employer if the rules should go into effect (“126,400 women of childbearing age” would be affected, the rules said, costing a total of “$67.3 million annually”). The administration also suggested that women left without contraception coverage by the rule seek free birth control from family planning clinics receiving federal grants.
Both Justices Roberts and Breyer told the attorneys on either side of the argument Wednesday that they didn’t fully understand what the problem was. They both cited the Supreme Court case they had decided in 2016, Zubik v. Burwell, which concerned a nearly identical issue. In Zubik, religious organizations argued that the contraceptive mandate violated their religious freedoms. Roberts and Breyer told the attorneys Wednesday that they didn’t understand why they couldn’t work out an agreement then, and they still don’t understand it.
Under the Obama administration’s accommodations, “the insurance coverer would not provide the services through the Little Sisters' plan, but could provide them directly to the employee,” Roberts said to Department of Justice Solicitor General Noel Francisco Wednesday at the opening of arguments.
“Why isn't that sort of accommodation sufficient? I did not understand the problem at the time of Zubik and I'm not sure I understand now.”
Justice Breyer agreed, saying that “the point” of the religious exemptions in the ACA’s contraception requirement is “to try to work out accommodations, because there can be some of the most difficult to resolve disputes and they can substitute a kind of hostility for harmony,” he said.
“So from that point of view, I really repeat the Chief Justice's question: I don't understand why this can't be worked out,” he added.


buzzfeed--2020-05-06--The Coronavirus Is Killing People Of Color At Outsized Rates. Local Lawmakers Want The Justice Depar

The Coronavirus Is Killing People Of Color At Outsized Rates. Local Lawmakers Want The Justice Department To Investigate Who Is To Blame.

BuzzFeed News has reporters across five continents bringing you trustworthy stories about the impact of the coronavirus .
To help keep this news free , become a member and sign up for our newsletter , Outbreak Today .
WASHINGTON — Lawmakers in the hardest-hit communities across the country are calling on the Justice Department to investigate potential civil rights violations in the disproportionate impact the coronavirus pandemic has had on communities of color .
Nearly three dozen lawmakers from all over the country , including New York , Chicago , Baltimore , Austin , and Detroit , signed onto a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Civil Rights Division investigate the actions of executive branches , at all levels of government , and their responses to COVID-19 , the disease caused by the novel coronavirus .
In cities across the country , black and Latinx people are dying at higher rates , the letter notes .
BuzzFeed News has reported on a system of comorbidities and structural racism that have contributed to the disproportionate numbers .
New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams , who signed the letter obtained in advance by BuzzFeed News , said Tuesday that while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inequities that existed beforehand that we have to address , [ it was ] exacerbated by terrible decisions that were made as the virus came into play.
” Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams , another signatory , told BuzzFeed News , “ It could not have been a coincidence that from the Southside of Chicago to South Jamaica , Queens , you get the same outcome .
There was information that was known beforehand so you have to believe there were conscious decisions made in the deployment of resources , assets , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ask DOJ to investigate , among other things , an uneven distribution of testing sites and inadequate protection for essential workers , who are disproportionately people of color .
“ Primarily people who are getting it , dying from it , are in the very communities that they just sent out to work without protection , ” Williams said .
“ These are intentional decisions that were made by local executives in the state.
” The group hopes the DOJ will expedite an investigation and offer subsequent policy recommendations ahead of a possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said could happen this fall and winter .
“ We need some systems in place , so we ’ re hoping there ’ s a preliminary finding and then a longer-term finding , ” said Adams .
Access to testing is also an issue local lawmakers hope the DOJ will help address .
In mid-April , the New York Post reported that most residents living in zip codes with the highest per capita testing rates in New York City were whiter and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blacks make up 78.6 % of the population , city councilmember Mary Sheffield told BuzzFeed News there have been reports that some residents did not have access to testing .
“ There ’ ve been some concerning news reports of individuals who are denied treatment , denied testing , and then , unfortunately , passed away and bus drivers not having personal protective equipment when they ’ re on their jobs , ” Sheffield , who also signed onto the letter , told BuzzFeed News Tuesday .
Federal lawmakers have made their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus pandemic is affecting people of color .
Democrats in Congress pushed last month for the CDC to publish race and ethnicity data for COVID-19 .
And this week , Sen. Kamala Harris will introduce legislation that would create a federally appointed task force to oversee the distribution of coronavirus-related resources and funding in communities of color .
“ We can ’ t make the same errors or intentional decisions that affected black and brown communities , like the ones we just did , ” said Williams .
“ It ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has happened , let ’ s move forward .
”

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers in the hardest-hit communities across the country are calling on the Justice Department to investigate potential civil rights violations in the disproportionate impact the coronavirus pandemic has had on communities of color.
Nearly three dozen lawmakers from all over the country, including New York, Chicago, Baltimore, Austin, and Detroit, signed onto a letter requesting the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division investigate the actions of executive branches, at all levels of government, and their responses to COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus.
In cities across the country, black and Latinx people are dying at higher rates, the letter notes. BuzzFeed News has reported on a system of comorbidities and structural racism that have contributed to the disproportionate numbers.
New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, who signed the letter obtained in advance by BuzzFeed News, said Tuesday that while the disparity “is built upon historical inequities that existed beforehand that we have to address, [it was] exacerbated by terrible decisions that were made as the virus came into play.”
Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, another signatory, told BuzzFeed News, “It could not have been a coincidence that from the Southside of Chicago to South Jamaica, Queens, you get the same outcome. There was information that was known beforehand so you have to believe there were conscious decisions made in the deployment of resources, assets, and instructions.”
The letter goes on to ask DOJ to investigate, among other things, an uneven distribution of testing sites and inadequate protection for essential workers, who are disproportionately people of color.
“Primarily people who are getting it, dying from it, are in the very communities that they just sent out to work without protection,” Williams said. “These are intentional decisions that were made by local executives in the state.”
The group hopes the DOJ will expedite an investigation and offer subsequent policy recommendations ahead of a possible “second wave” of coronavirus cases that the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said could happen this fall and winter.
“We need some systems in place, so we’re hoping there’s a preliminary finding and then a longer-term finding,” said Adams.
Access to testing is also an issue local lawmakers hope the DOJ will help address. In mid-April, the New York Post reported that most residents living in zip codes with the highest per capita testing rates in New York City were whiter and wealthier. And in Detroit, where blacks make up 78.6% of the population, city councilmember Mary Sheffield told BuzzFeed News there have been reports that some residents did not have access to testing.
“There’ve been some concerning news reports of individuals who are denied treatment, denied testing, and then, unfortunately, passed away and bus drivers not having personal protective equipment when they’re on their jobs,” Sheffield, who also signed onto the letter, told BuzzFeed News Tuesday.
Federal lawmakers have made their own calls for better oversight into how the coronavirus pandemic is affecting people of color. Democrats in Congress pushed last month for the CDC to publish race and ethnicity data for COVID-19. And this week, Sen. Kamala Harris will introduce legislation that would create a federally appointed task force to oversee the distribution of coronavirus-related resources and funding in communities of color.
“We can’t make the same errors or intentional decisions that affected black and brown communities, like the ones we just did,” said Williams. “It’s not enough to say, ‘Oh this has happened, let’s move forward.”


buzzfeed--2020-05-06--Obama Privately Blasted A Republican Investigation Into Joe Biden And Ukraine, Calling It An Effort

Obama Privately Blasted A Republican Investigation Into Joe Biden And Ukraine, Calling It An Effort To Boost “Russian Disinformation”

However , Obama ultimately agreed that the records could be released “ in the interest of countering the misinformation campaign underlying this request , ” according to the letter , which was provided to BuzzFeed News by his office in response to questions about the records request .
Since mid-March , the National Archives has turned over around 9,400 pages of records to the Senate committees , according to an agency spokesperson .
The letter from Obama adds to Democratic criticism of the Senate probe as being a politically motivated effort to damage Biden ’ s presidential campaign against President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obama or his office has commented on the controversial investigation into his former vice president .
The November request for records came from Republican Sens .
Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson , who have been investigating matters related to Democrats and Ukraine since the fall , when Trump was impeached for his interactions with Ukraine .
Grassley and Johnson , who chair the Finance and Homeland Security committees , respectively , asked the National Archives for records on meetings between the Obama administration and Ukrainian officials , as well meetings between Obama officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the heart of the debunked Ukrainian election interference narrative .
“ It arises out of efforts by some , actively supported by Russia , to shift the blame for Russian interference in the 2016 election to Ukraine , ” said the letter , dated March 13 .
It pointed to comments made by Fiona Hill , a former senior National Security Council official in the Trump White House , during the impeachment investigation into the president , calling Ukrainian election meddling “ a fictional narrative that is being perpetrated and propagated by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Obama ’ s office told the National Archives and Records Administration — which maintains presidential records — that a request from two top Republican senators for Obama administration documents related to Ukraine was improper .
WASHINGTON — The office of former president Barack Obama privately blasted a congressional investigation into former vice president Joe Biden and his son , as well as alleged Ukrainian election interference , calling it an effort “ to give credence to a Russian disinformation campaign , ” according to a letter obtained by BuzzFeed News .
Under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whose records are sought and the current president are allowed to review and claim executive privilege over records requests .
`` Since 2017 , the Office of President Obama has produced 12,880 pages of presidential records in response to special access requests from the White House and Congress , '' the letter said .
In this case , representatives for Obama and Trump reviewed the records , the National Archives said , and neither had asserted privilege .
`` The accusation that our oversight gives ‘ credence to a Russian disinformation campaign ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Altenburg said in a statement on Tuesday , adding that the `` real Russian disinformation '' was contained in a dossier on Trump and Russia compiled in 2016 by former MI6 agent Christopher Steele .
`` Baseless accusations aside , our legitimate oversight will continue until we get answers for the American people.
” It ’ s unclear what ’ s in the Obama administration records that the senators now possess , but Grassley and Johnson have said they want to know whether reports about Ukrainian officials working to undermine the Trump campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ukraine was affected in any way by Biden ’ s son , Hunter , serving on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian energy company .
The senators have insisted that the probe is not an effort to help the president get re-elected .
`` Our investigation is extensive and our request for President Obama ’ s records is only one of many lines of inquiry , '' Altenburg added .
A spokesperson for Grassley did not respond to a request for comment .
US intelligence officials reportedly told Congress in the fall that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interference during the 2016 election on Ukraine .
The Senate Intelligence Committee , which has been investigating Russian interference for more than three years , inquired about the Ukrainian interference theory and came up short , Politico reported .
“ The request for early release of presidential records in order to give credence to a Russian disinformation campaign — one that has already been thoroughly investigated by a bipartisan congressional committee — is without precedent , ” said the letter , signed by Obama ’ s records representative .
“ This use of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purpose , and does not outweigh or justify infringing confidentiality interests that all presidents have sought to protect.
” Despite allowing the records to be released , Obama ’ s office leveled a warning about Grassley and Johnson ’ s request , saying that “ abuse ” of the process by which Congress can access presidential records “ strikes at the heart of presidential confidentiality interests and undermines the statutory framework and norms that govern access to presidential records.
” Though Grassley has previously raised questions about Chalupa , a former Democratic National @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ramped up in the fall and has continued since then .
BuzzFeed News previously reported that the senators were expecting approximately 10,000 pages of records from the National Archives and thousands more from the State Department .
The investigation has been slowed by the coronavirus outbreak but not halted .
Last week , Grassley and Johnson penned a letter to the State Department asking for additional documents following an initial request for records in November .

WASHINGTON — The office of former president Barack Obama privately blasted a congressional investigation into former vice president Joe Biden and his son, as well as alleged Ukrainian election interference, calling it an effort “to give credence to a Russian disinformation campaign,” according to a letter obtained by BuzzFeed News.
In March, Obama’s office told the National Archives and Records Administration — which maintains presidential records — that a request from two top Republican senators for Obama administration documents related to Ukraine was improper.
“It arises out of efforts by some, actively supported by Russia, to shift the blame for Russian interference in the 2016 election to Ukraine,” said the letter, dated March 13. It pointed to comments made by Fiona Hill, a former senior National Security Council official in the Trump White House, during the impeachment investigation into the president, calling Ukrainian election meddling “a fictional narrative that is being perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services.”
The November request for records came from Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, who have been investigating matters related to Democrats and Ukraine since the fall, when Trump was impeached for his interactions with Ukraine. Grassley and Johnson, who chair the Finance and Homeland Security committees, respectively, asked the National Archives for records on meetings between the Obama administration and Ukrainian officials, as well meetings between Obama officials and Alexandra Chalupa, the Democratic operative at the heart of the debunked Ukrainian election interference narrative.
The letter from Obama adds to Democratic criticism of the Senate probe as being a politically motivated effort to damage Biden’s presidential campaign against President Donald Trump and represents the first time Obama or his office has commented on the controversial investigation into his former vice president.
However, Obama ultimately agreed that the records could be released “in the interest of countering the misinformation campaign underlying this request,” according to the letter, which was provided to BuzzFeed News by his office in response to questions about the records request. Since mid-March, the National Archives has turned over around 9,400 pages of records to the Senate committees, according to an agency spokesperson.


buzzfeed--2020-05-07--This Is What We Know About The Wuhan Lab That Trump Blames For COVID-19

The Wuhan Institute of Virology previously conducted controversial experiments to test what could make coronaviruses more dangerous to humans , but scientists have ruled out that SARS-CoV-2 is a product of genetic engineering .
President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have been beating a drumbeat of blame for COVID-19 : Both claim that the novel coronavirus behind the pandemic came from a lab in Wuhan , China .
Asked on April 30 by a reporter if he had seen evidence that the virus emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology , Trump responded : “ Yes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” going on to accuse the World Health Organization of being “ like the public relations agency for China.
” On May 3 , Pompeo said on ABC News that there was “ enormous evidence ” that the virus originated in a Wuhan lab .
Both men claimed they were “ not allowed ” to reveal what this evidence was , suggesting their information came from classified intelligence .
Before being seized on by Trump and Pompeo , the theory that the virus came from a Wuhan lab had been promoted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Washington Examiner , as well as the Epoch Times , a publication linked to the Chinese dissident religious group Falun Gong .
While scientists can ’ t eliminate the possibility of a lab escape entirely , the evidence suggests that the virus most likely evolved naturally , probably spreading to people in a seafood market in Wuhan where live animals were also on sale .
Anonymous briefings from international intelligence officials have also suggested that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is unlikely to be the source of COVID-19 .
Despite the questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit we do know about the research that was done at the Wuhan lab and why it ’ s unlikely to be the origin of the new coronavirus .
Here ’ s what we know : The Wuhan lab began studying bat coronaviruses in 2004 after SARS .
The head of the lab , which is operated by the Chinese Academy of Sciences , is virologist Shi Zhengli .
( Shi did not immediately respond to queries about her work from BuzzFeed News ; a representative said by email that they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sciences for her to be interviewed . )
Popularly known as China ’ s “ bat woman , ” Shi studies the many different coronaviruses circulating in bats across China and beyond , trying to assess the risk that they could jump into people and cause a pandemic like COVID-19 .
That became a priority after SARS , a respiratory illness caused by another coronavirus , which appeared in China in 2002 and spread to more than two dozen countries , killing 774 people .
MERS , a similar disease caused by yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2012 , spread to 27 countries , and has killed 858 people .
Both SARS and MERS are thought to have spread to people from animals — civets in the case of SARS and dromedary camels for MERS .
But bats are believed to be the natural reservoir for these and other potentially pandemic coronaviruses , circulating the viruses in their populations and occasionally passing them to other species .
And so from 2004 onward , Shi searched caves across China for colonies of roosting bats , taking swabs from the animals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronaviruses they carry .
Shi ’ s team has since identified dozens of coronavirus variants in bats , constructing an evolutionary tree of how they are related to one another based on the sequences of the RNA that makes up their genetic material , and showing that viruses from distinct branches of this tree seem to be found in different parts of China .
In 2013 , Shi ’ s group identified two coronavirus strains from horseshoe bats that were 95 % genetically similar to the virus that caused SARS , providing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely jumped to humans via a civet , bats were the ultimate origin of the virus .
Shi ’ s team has also studied the genetic mutations that seem to make bat coronaviruses more likely to cross over into people , focusing in particular on the gene that encodes its “ spike protein.
” The halo of spikes on the surface of coronaviruses gives them their signature crownlike appearance when viewed through an electron microscope .
The ability of bat coronaviruses to infect human cells seems to depend on the interaction between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the surface of cells in the lungs .
The lab previously conducted controversial experiments to test what could make coronaviruses more dangerous to humans .
Most controversially , Shi ’ s research on the spike protein has involved experiments that some scientists view as unacceptably risky : deliberately genetically engineering viruses to study what makes them more dangerous .
In 2015 , Shi and Ralph Baric , a virologist at the University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill , described experiments in which they engineered the spike protein from one of Shi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another coronavirus that had already been adapted to infect mice .
The engineered virus replicated easily in human cells , and antibodies and vaccines developed against the SARS virus were relatively ineffective in protecting mice from infection .
Shortly after these experiments were run , the US government placed a moratorium on so-called gain-of-function research to make pathogens more dangerous .
The ban was eventually lifted in December 2017 , but the research remains controversial .
“ As the world reels from the impacts of the present pandemic , it should be clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that creating new potential pandemic pathogens is unwise , ” Richard Ebright , a molecular biologist at Rutgers University in New Jersey , told BuzzFeed News by email .
Baric did not respond to requests from BuzzFeed News to discuss his work with Shi .
BuzzFeed News could find no evidence that Shi has performed gain-of-function studies since .
Scientists are certain that the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was not genetically engineered .
In March , an international team of virologists led by Kristian Andersen of the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 , the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 .
They concluded : “ Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.
” If the virus had been deliberately engineered , scientists would expect to see sequences that are suspected to make coronaviruses more dangerous spliced into the backbone of a viral strain commonly used for experiments of this type .
Instead of this smoking gun , SARS-CoV-2 has mutations all along its genetic sequence that experts would have had no prior reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potentially pandemic virus .
This result is what they would expect to see if the virus had evolved naturally .
“ I am quite sure SARS-CoV-2 was not lab-synthesized , judging by the sequence , ” Susan Weiss , a coronavirus expert at the University of Pennsylvania who was not involved in Andersen ’ s study , told BuzzFeed News by email .
“ It seems impossible that someone could figure out how to make a virus with these properties.
” It ’ s also highly unlikely the virus escaped the Wuhan lab @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t rule out the possibility .
Such “ lab escape ” accidents are not unknown .
They happened several times during the SARS epidemic , with accidental infections occurring at labs in Singapore , Taiwan , and China .
The most serious incidents were at the Chinese National Institute of Virology in Beijing , where the virus escaped and infected people on several occasions .
Scientists also now think that the 1977 reemergence of the H1N1 flu was the result of a laboratory accident .
H1N1 , the subtype of flu that caused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t been seen in the wild since 1957 .
But in 1977 , an H1N1 virus turned up in China and Russia .
It spread across the world , but fortunately only affected younger people who had not been exposed to similar viruses before and proved less deadly than regular seasonal flu .
The 1977 pandemic H1N1 was very similar to viruses sampled from flu patients around 1950 .
Because viruses typically accumulate genetic mutations as they replicate , making them slowly change over time , the explanation for this uncanny similarity was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for years in a laboratory .
“ We and others estimated that it was 27 years in the freezer , ” Joel Wertheim of the University of California , San Diego , who has studied the origins of the 1977 flu pandemic , told BuzzFeed News .
The closest known virus to SARS-CoV-2 is called RaTG13 .
Isolated by Shi ’ s team from a horseshoe bat in Yunnan province in southern China , hundreds of miles away from Wuhan , RaTG13 has a genetic sequence that is 96 % similar to SARS-CoV-2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close match , it means the two viruses are probably separated by “ decades of evolution , ” according to Wertheim .
Andersen ’ s team also considered the possibility that the particular combination of mutations seen in SARS-CoV-2 arose as a result of growing it in cell cultures in the lab .
But they decided this was unlikely .
Some of the mutations , they noted , seemed to be the result of interacting with an animal ’ s immune system , while the part of the spike protein that binds to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar to sequences found in coronaviruses in pangolins .
Together , this evidence suggested a natural origin , they concluded .
Shi has said that she initially worried that the virus might have escaped from her lab , but found no close match among her samples .
“ That really took a load off my mind , ” she told Scientific American .
“ I had not slept a wink for days.
” Proponents of the lab-origin theory have also pointed out that only 27 of 41 patients described in a study of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direct connection to the seafood market that has been blamed for the emergence of COVID-19 .
But unlike the accidents with SARS , there is no evidence that anyone connected to the Wuhan Institute of Virology was among the early patients .
While highly unlikely , scientists can ’ t rule out that SARS-CoV-2 was secretly studied in a lab and accidentally released .
The brief appearance in mid-April of online notices and a Chinese government directive suggesting that research in China on the origins of COVID-19 must be “ strictly and tightly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has added to suspicion of a cover-up by Chinese authorities .
US intelligence is looking into whether the virus escaped from the lab , but the international intelligence community suggests that ’ s “ highly unlikely.
” Speculation that COVID-19 may have been released from the Wuhan Institute of Virology grew after Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin reported on April 14 that he had seen a 2018 US diplomatic cable warning about “ inadequate safety ” at the facility .
However , Dennis Carroll , a virologist and former official with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has funded Shi ’ s work , has questioned the importance of the cables , which he saw while working in Beijing .
“ I didn ’ t place an enormous amount of weight on the observations that were made because they were not part of a critical , standardized evaluation , ” Carroll told Science .
On April 30 , after Trump started to blame the Wuhan lab for COVID-19 , the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a statement saying that “ the entire intelligence community ” agreed with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not genetically modified , but was leaving open the possibility that it had been accidentally released from a lab .
“ The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan , ” the statement went on .
The same day , the New York Times reported that senior Trump administration officials had been applying pressure to US intelligence agencies to hunt for evidence to support the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sydney Morning Herald that a dossier shared among political leaders in the Five Eyes coalition — the US , UK , Canada , Australia , and New Zealand — linking the coronavirus to a Wuhan laboratory was mostly based on news reports and contained no original intelligence .
Anonymous officials from the Five Eyes coalition told CNN that an intelligence assessment shared in the network suggests the lab-release theory is “ highly unlikely.
” Nevertheless , the fight over the Wuhan lab has dealt a blow to research into COVID-19 and other potentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a grant to Peter Daszak of the EcoHealth Alliance in New York City from the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ( NIAID ) , given to understand the risks of coronaviruses spreading from bats to people .
Daszak has worked with Shi to study China ’ s bat coronaviruses , including the 2013 paper on the two horseshoe bat viruses similar to the SARS virus .
But on April 24 , the grant to Daszak was abruptly terminated , as first reported by Politico .
That happened just one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the funding for the Wuhan lab at a press conference and said : “ We will end that grant very quickly.
” In 2016 , Shi and Daszak also described a “ fast and cost-effective method ” for genetically engineering coronaviruses , funded in part by the NIAID grant .
But it ’ s unclear that this aspect of the work had anything to do with the termination of the grant .
Instead , emails obtained by Science from the National Institute of Health ’ s deputy director for extramural research suggested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was made because of safety issues at the lab , though no evidence was given to support that claim .
Other scientists have described the termination of the grant as a “ horrible precedent ” that will hamper efforts to understand the threat of future pandemics .
“ Our work on the NIAID funding was to assess the risk of bat-origin coronaviruses getting into people , causing sickness and emerging globally , ” Daszak told BuzzFeed News by email .
“ The real risk is out in nature , not in the lab @ @

President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have been beating a drumbeat of blame for COVID-19: Both claim that the novel coronavirus behind the pandemic came from a lab in Wuhan, China.
Asked on April 30 by a reporter if he had seen evidence that the virus emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Trump responded: “Yes, I have. Yes, I have,” going on to accuse the World Health Organization of being “like the public relations agency for China.”
On May 3, Pompeo said on ABC News that there was “enormous evidence” that the virus originated in a Wuhan lab. Both men claimed they were “not allowed” to reveal what this evidence was, suggesting their information came from classified intelligence.
Before being seized on by Trump and Pompeo, the theory that the virus came from a Wuhan lab had been promoted by right-wing media outlets including Fox News and the Washington Examiner, as well as the Epoch Times, a publication linked to the Chinese dissident religious group Falun Gong.
While scientists can’t eliminate the possibility of a lab escape entirely, the evidence suggests that the virus most likely evolved naturally, probably spreading to people in a seafood market in Wuhan where live animals were also on sale. Anonymous briefings from international intelligence officials have also suggested that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is unlikely to be the source of COVID-19.
Despite the questions and rumors, there’s quite a bit we do know about the research that was done at the Wuhan lab and why it’s unlikely to be the origin of the new coronavirus. Here’s what we know:
The Wuhan lab began studying bat coronaviruses in 2004 after SARS.
The head of the lab, which is operated by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, is virologist Shi Zhengli. (Shi did not immediately respond to queries about her work from BuzzFeed News; a representative said by email that they would seek permission from the Chinese Academy of Sciences for her to be interviewed.)
Popularly known as China’s “bat woman,” Shi studies the many different coronaviruses circulating in bats across China and beyond, trying to assess the risk that they could jump into people and cause a pandemic like COVID-19.
That became a priority after SARS, a respiratory illness caused by another coronavirus, which appeared in China in 2002 and spread to more than two dozen countries, killing 774 people. MERS, a similar disease caused by yet another coronavirus, emerged in Saudi Arabia in 2012, spread to 27 countries, and has killed 858 people.
Both SARS and MERS are thought to have spread to people from animals — civets in the case of SARS and dromedary camels for MERS. But bats are believed to be the natural reservoir for these and other potentially pandemic coronaviruses, circulating the viruses in their populations and occasionally passing them to other species. And so from 2004 onward, Shi searched caves across China for colonies of roosting bats, taking swabs from the animals and collecting their droppings to examine the coronaviruses they carry.
Shi’s team has since identified dozens of coronavirus variants in bats, constructing an evolutionary tree of how they are related to one another based on the sequences of the RNA that makes up their genetic material, and showing that viruses from distinct branches of this tree seem to be found in different parts of China. In 2013, Shi’s group identified two coronavirus strains from horseshoe bats that were 95% genetically similar to the virus that caused SARS, providing the strongest evidence that, while the virus likely jumped to humans via a civet, bats were the ultimate origin of the virus.
Shi’s team has also studied the genetic mutations that seem to make bat coronaviruses more likely to cross over into people, focusing in particular on the gene that encodes its “spike protein.” The halo of spikes on the surface of coronaviruses gives them their signature crownlike appearance when viewed through an electron microscope. The ability of bat coronaviruses to infect human cells seems to depend on the interaction between the spike protein and a receptor called ACE2 on the surface of cells in the lungs.


buzzfeed--2020-05-07--Michael Flynn Admitted Lying To The FBI. The Justice Department Now Says That Doesn’t Matter.

Flynn ’ s attack on the prosecution tracked a common refrain from Trump — that the investigation by the FBI and , later , Mueller ’ s office , was a politically motivated attack against Trump and his administration .
A few hours before Shea filed the notice , Brandon Van Grack , one of the lead prosecutors and a former member of Mueller ’ s team , notified the court that he was withdrawing from the case .
He did not provide an explanation .
Van Grack did not immediately return a request for comment .
Until now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team , and later from the US attorney ’ s office in Washington — defended their handling of the case and rebuffed Flynn ’ s allegations of government misconduct .
The motion to dismiss the case filed on Thursday is signed by Shea alone .
“ We opened the Russia investigation to determine if the Russian government coordinated with the Trump campaign .
Mr. Flynn had prominent , high level interactions with Russian officials , so we investigated whether he might be that point of coordination .
We received incontrovertible evidence that Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than one occasion , that he actively tried to influence the actions of Russian officials , and that those officials acceded to his requests .
The FBI was obligated to interview him to better understand why he was talking to Russian officials , ” McCabe said .
Former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe , who played a central role in the decision to interview Flynn in January 2017 , released a statement defending the interview and blasting the dismissal as “ pure politics designed to please the president.
” “ The decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is outrageous .
The evidence against General Flynn is overwhelming .
He pleaded guilty to lying to investigators .
And now a politicized and thoroughly corrupt Department of Justice is going to let the President ’ s crony simply walk away .
Americans are right to be furious and worried about the continued erosion of our rule of law , ” Nadler said .
Democrats were quick to criticize the decision as a politically motivated ploy to benefit one of Trump ’ s allies .
House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerrold Nadler released a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and saying he would ask the Justice Department ’ s inspector general to investigate .
Flynn ’ s lead attorney , Sidney Powell , did not immediately return a request for comment .
Trump has decried the prosecution of Flynn but been publicly noncommittal about whether he would pardon his former national security adviser .
The filing from Shea technically doesn ’ t end Flynn ’ s legal battle on its own — the judge has to grant the motion to dismiss — but it is unusual for a judge to interfere when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pursue a criminal case .
Shea stressed in Thursday ’ s filing that judges can only deny a request by the government to drop a prosecution under very narrow circumstances .
Regardless of whether Flynn lied , Shea wrote , federal criminal law required that lies had to be “ material ” to an investigation .
Shea said the Flynn interview in 2017 about his contacts with the Russian ambassador were “ untethered ” to a counterintelligence investigation into Flynn related to the broader Russia probe that the FBI had been preparing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On Thursday , the strategy paid off .
Timothy Shea , who has been serving as the interim US attorney for the District of Columbia , filed papers with the court seeking to dismiss the entire criminal case against Flynn .
Citing new evidence uncovered during a review of Flynn ’ s case by the Justice Department that Attorney General Bill Barr launched earlier this year , Shea wrote that the government was no longer persuaded that the January 2017 interview in which Flynn admitted lying to FBI agents “ was conducted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next two years , however , what seemed like one of the most clear-cut , open-and-shut cases to come out of Mueller ’ s office unraveled into a politically charged morass .
His sentencing was repeatedly delayed as he brought on new lawyers to try to claw back his guilty plea and lodge an attack , supported by his former boss President Donald Trump , on the prosecution itself .
He admitted he had lied to agents about his conversations with the Russian ambassador to the United States after the 2016 election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then–special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s office .
He agreed to cooperate with the investigation into Russian interference in the election , in the hopes of scoring the government ’ s support for a lower sentence .
WASHINGTON — On Dec. 1 , 2017 , Michael Flynn walked into the federal courthouse in Washington , DC , and pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI .
Flynn ’ s lawyers tried to dismantle the prosecution from multiple angles .
They initially argued that the case should be dismissed because prosecutors failed to fulfill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that might be helpful to Flynn ’ s defense , known as “ Brady ” materials .
But Sullivan ruled in December that Flynn ’ s lawyers hadn ’ t proven any violations by the government .
They tried again after the Justice Department ’ s inspector general released a report in December identifying problems with applications submitted by DOJ officials to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to carry out surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page as part of the investigation into Russian interference in the election .
Flynn ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report was proof that Flynn ’ s case was rooted in “ egregious government misconduct.
” At each turn , prosecutors argued that none of the information presented by Flynn ’ s lawyers changed the fact that he ’ d lied to the FBI , the only crime he was charged with , and that he ’ d admitted it .
But Barr fueled Flynn ’ s theory of government misconduct earlier this year when he appointed Jeffrey Jensen , the US attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri , to do an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In late April , Flynn ’ s lawyers released a new set of documents that Jensen ’ s review had uncovered , including emails and notes prepared by FBI officials around the time of the Flynn interview .
On one page of handwritten notes with “ 01/24/2017 ” in the corner that Flynn ’ s lawyers received from prosecutors and filed on the public court docket , someone had written , “ What is our goal ?
Truth/Admission or to get him to lie , so we can prosecute him or get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t indicate who wrote it , but the Washington Post reported that it was E.W .
Priestap , the former assistant director of the FBI ’ s counterintelligence division who retired at the end of 2018 .
Elsewhere on the page , the author wrote : “ Our goal is to determine if Mike Flynn is going to tell the truth @ his relationship w/ Russians.
” Flynn ’ s lawyers also released text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page — two former FBI officials involved in the Russia investigation who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Trump — and at least one other person whose name is redacted discussing keeping the FBI ’ s investigation into Flynn open in the weeks leading up to the January 2017 interview .
“ Since August 2016 at the latest , partisan FBI and DOJ leaders conspired to destroy Mr. Flynn , ” Flynn ’ s lawyers wrote in an April 24 brief accompanying the disclosure of the new documents .
Flynn had agreed as part of his plea deal that his lies were “ material ” without a full understanding of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the FBI , Shea wrote in Thursday ’ s filing .
And what ’ s more , Shea said he was no longer convinced that prosecutors could prove “ beyond a reasonable doubt ” that Flynn lied at all — he wrote that Flynn ’ s answers were “ vague , ” the FBI agents at the time didn ’ t think Flynn showed signs of lying , and then–FBI director James Comey had characterized it as a “ close call.
” For a lie to be “ material , ” Shea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than even just relevant to the investigation — it has to bear directly on decision making in that investigation .
The FBI already had transcripts of the calls between Flynn and then–Russian ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak , and those calls alone weren ’ t enough to continue the counterintelligence investigation or to open a new criminal investigation , he wrote .
“ In the case of Mr. Flynn , the evidence shows his statements were not ‘ material ’ to any viable counterintelligence investigation — or any investigation for that matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shea wrote .
The fact that Flynn may not have accurately told Vice President Mike Pence or then–White House press secretary Sean Spicer about the substance of the Kislyak calls — the reason Trump said he ’ d fired Flynn — also wasn ’ t enough to support the investigation , Shea wrote .
“ The frail and shifting justifications for its ongoing probe of Mr. Flynn , as well as the irregular procedure that preceded his interview , suggests that the FBI was eager to interview Mr. Flynn irrespective of any underlying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ briefly served as Trump 's first national security adviser before he resigned in mid-February 2017 amid reports that he misled Pence about his communications with Kislyak during the presidential transition period .
Several weeks before he resigned , Sally Yates , the acting attorney general , had warned the White House that Flynn could be subject to blackmail by the Russian government because it was aware Flynn had made false statements .
In December 2017 — right after Flynn ’ s plea deal became public — Trump tweeted that he “ had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Vice President and the FBI.
” But the administration ’ s attitude has evolved since then .
In a sign that the Trump administration was embracing Flynn ’ s cause , Pence told reporters in late April that he was “ inclined , more than ever ” to believe that any omissions by Flynn about his contacts with Kislyak had been “ unintentional.
” Flynn was initially part of a joint defense agreement with Trump , but withdrew in November 2017 , according to Mueller 's final report .
At the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , John Dowd , left a voicemail for Flynn 's lawyer questioning Flynn 's reason for pulling out .
Dowd said that if Flynn had cut a deal with prosecutors , `` remember what we 've always said about the president and his feelings toward Flynn , and that still remains . ''
( The judge in Flynn 's case released the audio of the recording in early June . )
According to Mueller , when Flynn 's counsel reiterated to Dowd that they could no longer share information , Dowd `` was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and said he 'd report the `` hostility '' back to Trump .
Flynn 's lawyer told the special counsel 's office that they interpreted this as an effort to get Flynn to reconsider his position .
Flynn pleaded guilty in court on Dec. 1 , 2017 .
He agreed to cooperate with Mueller 's office , and the materials he turned over to prosecutors included Dowd 's voicemail , according to a presentencing memo that prosecutors filed in court detailing Flynn 's assistance to the government .
As part of his plea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2017 he had lied to the FBI about several interactions with Kislyak .
He told agents he had n't asked Kislyak to avoid escalating Russia 's response to the Obama administration 's announcement of sanctions in December 2016 , when , in fact , he had .
He also told agents that he had n't asked any countries to take a specific position on a United Nations resolution about Israeli settlements , when , again , he 'd discussed it with Kislyak .
Flynn was n't charged with any other crimes besides one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interactions with Kislyak , but his plea agreement also included an admission that he 'd made false statements to the US Department of Justice about work he 'd done for the benefit of the Turkish government .
In filings to the department under the Foreign Agents Registration Act , Flynn had represented that he did n't know the extent of the Turkish government 's involvement in a project he was working on , when in fact Turkey was involved in overseeing the project .
Flynn appeared for a sentencing hearing before Sullivan in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move cut the hearing short and told the judge he wanted a delay .
During the hearing , Sullivan had repeatedly questioned whether Flynn wanted to be sentenced before he was completely finished with any possible cooperation with the government and could present the court with the totality of his assistance to the feds .
The judge also had harsh words about the crimes Flynn had pleaded guilty to and warned that he could n't guarantee he would n't send Flynn to prison .
`` I 'm not hiding my disgust , my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sullivan said at the time .
Flynn took Sullivan up on the judge ’ s offer to delay the sentencing to allow Flynn to finish his cooperation .
In advance of the December 2018 sentencing hearing , prosecutors had asked that Flynn get credit for his cooperation .
Flynn met with the special counsel 's office and other Justice Department offices 19 times , for a total of 63 hours , according to court filings .
But that relationship turned sour , at least publicly , starting in June 2019 , when Flynn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team led by Powell — a Trump supporter , Mueller critic , and regular commentator on Fox News .
Trump praised the pick , tweeting on June 13 that Flynn `` has not retained a good lawyer , he has retained a GREAT LAWYER , Sidney Powell . ''

Flynn’s lawyers tried to dismantle the prosecution from multiple angles. They initially argued that the case should be dismissed because prosecutors failed to fulfill a legal requirement to turn over evidence that might be helpful to Flynn’s defense, known as “Brady” materials. But Sullivan ruled in December that Flynn’s lawyers hadn’t proven any violations by the government.
They tried again after the Justice Department’s inspector general released a report in December identifying problems with applications submitted by DOJ officials to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to carry out surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page as part of the investigation into Russian interference in the election. Flynn’s lawyers argued the inspector general’s report was proof that Flynn’s case was rooted in “egregious government misconduct.”
At each turn, prosecutors argued that none of the information presented by Flynn’s lawyers changed the fact that he’d lied to the FBI, the only crime he was charged with, and that he’d admitted it.
But Barr fueled Flynn’s theory of government misconduct earlier this year when he appointed Jensen, the US attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, to do an outside review of Flynn’s case.
In late April, Flynn’s lawyers released a new set of documents that Jensen’s review had uncovered, including emails and notes prepared by FBI officials around the time of the Flynn interview. On one page of handwritten notes with “01/24/2017” in the corner that Flynn’s lawyers received from prosecutors and filed on the public court docket, someone had written, “What is our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” The document didn’t indicate who wrote it, but the Washington Post reported that it was E.W. Priestap, the former assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division who retired at the end of 2018.
Elsewhere on the page, the author wrote: “Our goal is to determine if Mike Flynn is going to tell the truth @ his relationship w/ Russians.”
Flynn’s lawyers also released text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page — two former FBI officials involved in the Russia investigation who have been the frequent subject of attacks from Trump — and at least one other person whose name is redacted discussing keeping the FBI’s investigation into Flynn open in the weeks leading up to the January 2017 interview.
“Since August 2016 at the latest, partisan FBI and DOJ leaders conspired to destroy Mr. Flynn,” Flynn’s lawyers wrote in an April 24 brief accompanying the disclosure of the new documents.
Flynn had agreed as part of his plea deal that his lies were “material” without a full understanding of what was going on behind the scenes at the FBI, Shea wrote in Thursday’s filing. And what’s more, Shea said he was no longer convinced that prosecutors could prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Flynn lied at all — he wrote that Flynn’s answers were “vague,” the FBI agents at the time didn’t think Flynn showed signs of lying, and then–FBI director James Comey had characterized it as a “close call.”
For a lie to be “material,” Shea wrote, it has to be more than even just relevant to the investigation — it has to bear directly on decision making in that investigation. The FBI already had transcripts of the calls between Flynn and then–Russian ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak, and those calls alone weren’t enough to continue the counterintelligence investigation or to open a new criminal investigation, he wrote.
“In the case of Mr. Flynn, the evidence shows his statements were not ‘material’ to any viable counterintelligence investigation — or any investigation for that matter — initiated by the FBI,” Shea wrote.
The fact that Flynn may not have accurately told Vice President Mike Pence or then–White House press secretary Sean Spicer about the substance of the Kislyak calls — the reason Trump said he’d fired Flynn — also wasn’t enough to support the investigation, Shea wrote.
“The frail and shifting justifications for its ongoing probe of Mr. Flynn, as well as the irregular procedure that preceded his interview, suggests that the FBI was eager to interview Mr. Flynn irrespective of any underlying investigation,” he wrote.
"Thank you Mr. President!!”
Flynn briefly served as Trump's first national security adviser before he resigned in mid-February 2017 amid reports that he misled Pence about his communications with Kislyak during the presidential transition period. Several weeks before he resigned, Sally Yates, the acting attorney general, had warned the White House that Flynn could be subject to blackmail by the Russian government because it was aware Flynn had made false statements.
In December 2017 — right after Flynn’s plea deal became public — Trump tweeted that he “had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI.” But the administration’s attitude has evolved since then. In a sign that the Trump administration was embracing Flynn’s cause, Pence told reporters in late April that he was “inclined, more than ever” to believe that any omissions by Flynn about his contacts with Kislyak had been “unintentional.”
Flynn was initially part of a joint defense agreement with Trump, but withdrew in November 2017, according to Mueller's final report. At the time, one of Trump's personal attorneys, John Dowd, left a voicemail for Flynn's lawyer questioning Flynn's reason for pulling out. Dowd said that if Flynn had cut a deal with prosecutors, "remember what we've always said about the president and his feelings toward Flynn, and that still remains." (The judge in Flynn's case released the audio of the recording in early June.)
According to Mueller, when Flynn's counsel reiterated to Dowd that they could no longer share information, Dowd "was indignant and vocal in his disagreement" and said he'd report the "hostility" back to Trump. Flynn's lawyer told the special counsel's office that they interpreted this as an effort to get Flynn to reconsider his position.
Flynn pleaded guilty in court on Dec. 1, 2017. He agreed to cooperate with Mueller's office, and the materials he turned over to prosecutors included Dowd's voicemail, according to a presentencing memo that prosecutors filed in court detailing Flynn's assistance to the government.
As part of his plea deal, Flynn admitted that in January 2017 he had lied to the FBI about several interactions with Kislyak. He told agents he hadn't asked Kislyak to avoid escalating Russia's response to the Obama administration's announcement of sanctions in December 2016, when, in fact, he had. He also told agents that he hadn't asked any countries to take a specific position on a United Nations resolution about Israeli settlements, when, again, he'd discussed it with Kislyak.
Flynn wasn't charged with any other crimes besides one count of making false statements about his interactions with Kislyak, but his plea agreement also included an admission that he'd made false statements to the US Department of Justice about work he'd done for the benefit of the Turkish government. In filings to the department under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, Flynn had represented that he didn't know the extent of the Turkish government's involvement in a project he was working on, when in fact Turkey was involved in overseeing the project.
Flynn appeared for a sentencing hearing before Sullivan in December 2018, but in a surprise move cut the hearing short and told the judge he wanted a delay.
During the hearing, Sullivan had repeatedly questioned whether Flynn wanted to be sentenced before he was completely finished with any possible cooperation with the government and could present the court with the totality of his assistance to the feds. The judge also had harsh words about the crimes Flynn had pleaded guilty to and warned that he couldn't guarantee he wouldn't send Flynn to prison.
"I'm not hiding my disgust, my disdain for this criminal offense," Sullivan said at the time. Flynn took Sullivan up on the judge’s offer to delay the sentencing to allow Flynn to finish his cooperation.
In advance of the December 2018 sentencing hearing, prosecutors had asked that Flynn get credit for his cooperation. Flynn met with the special counsel's office and other Justice Department offices 19 times, for a total of 63 hours, according to court filings.
But that relationship turned sour, at least publicly, starting in June 2019, when Flynn replaced his former lawyers with a new team led by Powell — a Trump supporter, Mueller critic, and regular commentator on Fox News. Trump praised the pick, tweeting on June 13 that Flynn "has not retained a good lawyer, he has retained a GREAT LAWYER, Sidney Powell."


buzzfeed--2020-05-07--A Florida Entrepreneur Bought Anti-Lockdown URLs To Raise Money. But He Got Death Threats.

Last month , a man from Florida purchased several domains associated with the nationwide anti-lockdown protests during the coronavirus pandemic , which he planned to use to raise money for the protesters .
But he told BuzzFeed News that after he forgot to make his email address private on the domain registry , he was flooded with death threats .
In April , Brad Lee Butcher , an entrepreneur from Sebastian , Florida , bought reopenNC.com , reopenNC.org , reopenNY.com , reopenFL.com , and reopenMI.com , and several others , all of which he redirected to a petition he had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of businesses in North Carolina .
As of Thursday , all of the sites Butcher bought have been taken down .
Butcher said that he purchased the domains because he had family in North Carolina who were part of the Reopen NC protests , and he thought the website could raise money for them to make signs and T-shirts .
“ I have been in advertising and marketing for a while and my natural train of thought is to follow trends , ” Butcher said .
“ I figured maybe I could help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or whatever would help them out.
” The anti-lockdown protests spreading across the US over the last month were organized on Facebook in groups like `` Indiana Citizens Against Excessive Quarantine , '' `` Operation Gridlock Tennessee , '' and “ Reopen NC.
” Butcher said his mother was active in the Reopen NC Facebook group , the leader of which announced last month she had tested positive for COVID-19 .
The quick spread of these lockdown groups in April made some digital security experts suspicious that the protests could be part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these groups are the work of conservative activists in the United States .
Butcher is not the only entrepreneur who bought domain names to capitalize on the anti-lockdown protests — nor the only one from Florida .
More than 200 domain names , like reopenmaine.com , reopenky.com , liberatewyoming.com , are owned by Michael Murphy , a former day trader from Jacksonville , who runs an antiques and buildings supplies salvage business with his wife .
In April , Murphy told BuzzFeed News he had purchased them to “ hoodwink '' conservatives and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Murphy ’ s attempt to snap up the domain names backfired , however , after a Reddit thread accusing him of astroturfing went viral .
Butcher ’ s plan to buy a few reopen domains also went awry after he forgot to hide his personal information on the site 's registration information .
From that , people were able to look up his name , email , and phone number .
Soon after his sites went up , he said he got a call from someone he didn ’ t know telling him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all over Twitter .
“ Profiting from people dying was what the main theme was , ” he said .
“ They made me the merchant of death.
” He said the websites didn ’ t also raise as much money as he had thought .
“ We were able to have two to three people making the shirts in North Carolina for about two to three weeks , ” he said .
Following his domain buying spree , Butcher said he was pivoting to a new business : He 's started a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sells shirts that say things like “ Fuck China '' and “ Fuck COVID-19.
” According to the site ’ s description , “ This is not a call for violence .
This is not a racist shirt .
China is not a race .
It does not say Fuck the Chinese anywhere in the world .
This shirt says , fuck the leaders of China and communism .
This includes most of our US media and all wanting to undermine our constitution and instill socialism in the US.
” “ The merchant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he said .
“ I 'll be selling even more interesting shirts there .
”

Last month, a man from Florida purchased several domains associated with the nationwide anti-lockdown protests during the coronavirus pandemic, which he planned to use to raise money for the protesters. But he told BuzzFeed News that after he forgot to make his email address private on the domain registry, he was flooded with death threats.
In April, Brad Lee Butcher, an entrepreneur from Sebastian, Florida, bought reopenNC.com, reopenNC.org, reopenNY.com, reopenFL.com, and reopenMI.com, and several others, all of which he redirected to a petition he had posted on reopenNC.com calling for the reopening of businesses in North Carolina.
As of Thursday, all of the sites Butcher bought have been taken down.
Butcher said that he purchased the domains because he had family in North Carolina who were part of the Reopen NC protests, and he thought the website could raise money for them to make signs and T-shirts.
“I have been in advertising and marketing for a while and my natural train of thought is to follow trends,” Butcher said. “I figured maybe I could help them all get shirts or signs, or whatever would help them out.”


buzzfeed--2020-05-07--The Coronavirus Is Keeping Addiction Counselors From Their Patients. So The Industry Has Transformed

The Coronavirus Is Keeping Addiction Counselors From Their Patients. So The Industry Has Transformed.

BuzzFeed News has reporters across five continents bringing you trustworthy stories about the impact of the coronavirus .
To help keep this news free , become a member and sign up for our newsletter , Outbreak Today .
No one gets turned away .
That was the principle for Options Recovery Services , a Bay Area addiction treatment network : If you showed up asking for help , you got it .
But when the coronavirus pandemic caused a nationwide shutdown , addiction and mental health practitioners scrambled to find a way to keep treating patients .
They faced a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centers put staff and people already in treatment at a greater risk of infection .
But turning them away can mean leaving people to battle their addictions without help .
Many of Options Recovery Services ’ walk-ins are people recently released from jail or psychiatric institutions .
Overdose deaths have drastically increased in the Bay Area in recent years with the rise of fentanyl .
“ If we turn them away we may be picking how they die , ” said Tom Gorham , executive director of Options ’ drug treatment program .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Gorham decided to keep the doors open despite the coronavirus pandemic .
It ’ s personal for him .
Alcohol once led him to a life of crime and homelessness .
One day when he was in jail he met Davida Coady , the founder of Options Recovery Services .
He got clean and made helping others his life ’ s work .
He ’ d end up marrying Coady .
But the decision to keep taking in patients off the street did not initially go over well with staff , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It was very unpopular at first , ” Gorham said .
They talked through it and after instituting a slew of safety measures — social distancing , temperature checks , face masks , frequent hand-washing — kept the doors open .
Staff were told that they were not required to physically come to work , but Gorham said everyone has .
So far there have been no infections among the roughly 120 patients being housed .
“ They are very , very grateful and they ’ re letting us know , ” said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come from traumatic backgrounds .
They ’ ve never seen this kind of love and caring in their entire life and they ’ re overwhelmed .
So that ’ s really beautiful that this moment has created this opportunity , in a way , for them to really redefine their lives like we ’ re all basically doing.
” Elsewhere , centers have closed physically but kept operating by moving to Skype and Zoom and other streaming platforms .
Addiction professionals across the country told BuzzFeed News that they first scrambled to adapt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up having lots of uptake for their new remote services .
“ We ’ ve kind of had to reinvent ourselves over the past six weeks , ” said Gerry Schmidt of Valley HealthCare System in Morgantown , West Virginia .
It ’ s a large , comprehensive network with about 370 employees over 18 sites .
Almost all of their outpatient services have been converted to telehealth — video or phone calls .
They ’ ve maintained some limited in-person services such as patients coming for blood draws or injections .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the technology at home for telehealth ?
Valley HealthCare has set up computers at their sites so that people can come in and videoconference with a clinician in another room .
There have been challenges , such as getting enough personal protection equipment , but Shmidt said overall the transformation has been incredibly successful .
“ I ’ m amazed at how resilient our clients are , ” said Schmidt .
“ They ’ ve been really receptive of it , as have our clinicians.
” It is by no means a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treating substance abuse and mental health disorders , much of what they look for is nonverbal .
It ’ s harder to get a sense of how stable a patient is from a little box on a screen , especially in group settings .
Things like smelling for drugs or alcohol can be extremely useful and are obviously impossible remotely .
“ I have a couple patients that are anorexic and I typically weigh them in the office , ” said Malcolm Horn .
“ When I see them face to face I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little thin .
I can ’ t do that with telehealth .
I see them from the shoulders up.
” Horn runs a team of mental health counselors at the Rimrock Foundation in Billings , Montana .
She ’ s already been doing telehealth for five or six years because many of their clients live in rural areas .
She calls group meetings the first line of defense against substance abuse , but said that some of their patients opted out until face-to-face is possible again .
“ Is it better than nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Is it what I would prefer to do ?
No.
” The industry had been moving toward telehealth for years , but it was slowed by a variety of technical and regulatory hurdles .
There were privacy concerns and restrictions on what videoconference technology could be used .
There were jurisdictional issues around treating someone in a different state , and concerns about fraud .
But at the drop of a hat , coronavirus changed everything .
The Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services quickly moved to relax its restrictions .
Billing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been opened up .
The Association for Behavioral Health and Wellness , which represents payers , said its members are all covering telehealth services now .
There is also a feeling among many that there is no going back — the outbreak has permanently changed the industry .
Turning Point Counseling Services in Fairbanks , Alaska , was seeing 400 patient visits per week before the coronavirus .
When a clinician got sick , they switched entirely to telemedicine .
After going through the bumps of getting their whole practice online , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for video sessions .
“ Our experience is this works .
We are not waiting for this COVID thing to pass over , ” said Turning Point CEO Gunnar Ebbesson .
“ We are doing the work.
” Ebbeson says telehealth has `` completely changed the landscape of what ’ s possible ” in terms of providing addiction and mental health services to far more people .
That ’ s something that could soon become necessary .
Every clinician quoted in this story said they expect the conditions caused by the coronavirus to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when this is over .
People being stuck inside fearing for their health and stressed about losing their jobs is a societywide recipe for more substance abuse .
“ This has been a public health disaster waiting to happen and here we are , ” said Gorham .
“ We didn ’ t want to address it before , now here you go .
It ’ s in our laps .
”

No one gets turned away. That was the principle for Options Recovery Services, a Bay Area addiction treatment network: If you showed up asking for help, you got it.
But when the coronavirus pandemic caused a nationwide shutdown, addiction and mental health practitioners scrambled to find a way to keep treating patients. They faced a terrible choice. Taking people into outpatient centers put staff and people already in treatment at a greater risk of infection. But turning them away can mean leaving people to battle their addictions without help.
Many of Options Recovery Services’ walk-ins are people recently released from jail or psychiatric institutions. Overdose deaths have drastically increased in the Bay Area in recent years with the rise of fentanyl.
“If we turn them away we may be picking how they die,” said Tom Gorham, executive director of Options’ drug treatment program. “I’m not going there.”
Gorham decided to keep the doors open despite the coronavirus pandemic. It’s personal for him. Alcohol once led him to a life of crime and homelessness. One day when he was in jail he met Davida Coady, the founder of Options Recovery Services. He got clean and made helping others his life’s work. He’d end up marrying Coady.
But the decision to keep taking in patients off the street did not initially go over well with staff, who were afraid for their safety. “It was very unpopular at first,” Gorham said. They talked through it and after instituting a slew of safety measures — social distancing, temperature checks, face masks, frequent hand-washing — kept the doors open. Staff were told that they were not required to physically come to work, but Gorham said everyone has.
So far there have been no infections among the roughly 120 patients being housed.
“They are very, very grateful and they’re letting us know,” said Gorham. “A lot of people come from traumatic backgrounds. They’ve never seen this kind of love and caring in their entire life and they’re overwhelmed. So that’s really beautiful that this moment has created this opportunity, in a way, for them to really redefine their lives like we’re all basically doing.”
Elsewhere, centers have closed physically but kept operating by moving to Skype and Zoom and other streaming platforms. Addiction professionals across the country told BuzzFeed News that they first scrambled to adapt to the outbreak, but have ended up having lots of uptake for their new remote services.
“We’ve kind of had to reinvent ourselves over the past six weeks,” said Gerry Schmidt of Valley HealthCare System in Morgantown, West Virginia. It’s a large, comprehensive network with about 370 employees over 18 sites. Almost all of their outpatient services have been converted to telehealth — video or phone calls. They’ve maintained some limited in-person services such as patients coming for blood draws or injections.
But what about people who don’t have the technology at home for telehealth? Valley HealthCare has set up computers at their sites so that people can come in and videoconference with a clinician in another room. There have been challenges, such as getting enough personal protection equipment, but Shmidt said overall the transformation has been incredibly successful.
“I’m amazed at how resilient our clients are,” said Schmidt. “They’ve been really receptive of it, as have our clinicians.”
It is by no means a perfect solution for everyone. For people treating substance abuse and mental health disorders, much of what they look for is nonverbal. It’s harder to get a sense of how stable a patient is from a little box on a screen, especially in group settings. Things like smelling for drugs or alcohol can be extremely useful and are obviously impossible remotely.
“I have a couple patients that are anorexic and I typically weigh them in the office,” said Malcolm Horn. “When I see them face to face I can see hey, you look a little thin. I can’t do that with telehealth. I see them from the shoulders up.”
Horn runs a team of mental health counselors at the Rimrock Foundation in Billings, Montana. She’s already been doing telehealth for five or six years because many of their clients live in rural areas. She calls group meetings the first line of defense against substance abuse, but said that some of their patients opted out until face-to-face is possible again. “Is it better than nothing? Yes,” she said. “Is it what I would prefer to do? No.”
The industry had been moving toward telehealth for years, but it was slowed by a variety of technical and regulatory hurdles. There were privacy concerns and restrictions on what videoconference technology could be used. There were jurisdictional issues around treating someone in a different state, and concerns about fraud. But at the drop of a hat, coronavirus changed everything.
The Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services quickly moved to relax its restrictions. Billing insurance companies for telehealth services has also been opened up. The Association for Behavioral Health and Wellness, which represents payers, said its members are all covering telehealth services now.
There is also a feeling among many that there is no going back — the outbreak has permanently changed the industry. Turning Point Counseling Services in Fairbanks, Alaska, was seeing 400 patient visits per week before the coronavirus. When a clinician got sick, they switched entirely to telemedicine. After going through the bumps of getting their whole practice online, they’ve now seen near-100% attendance for video sessions.
“Our experience is this works. We are not waiting for this COVID thing to pass over,” said Turning Point CEO Gunnar Ebbesson. “We are doing the work.”
Ebbeson says telehealth has "completely changed the landscape of what’s possible” in terms of providing addiction and mental health services to far more people. That’s something that could soon become necessary. Every clinician quoted in this story said they expect the conditions caused by the coronavirus to lead to a rise in PTSD-type symptoms when this is over. People being stuck inside fearing for their health and stressed about losing their jobs is a societywide recipe for more substance abuse.
“This has been a public health disaster waiting to happen and here we are,” said Gorham. “We didn’t want to address it before, now here you go. It’s in our laps.”