hotair--2020-03-31--Tucker Carlson: The feds are lying. We should be wearing masks.

It ’ s a no-brainer , so much so that the Internet is teeming with arguments lately encouraging mask-wearing in public until the pandemic is over .
The CDC is reportedly weighing whether to formally recommend it , as Ed will detail in an upcoming post .
I ’ m even inclined to agree with Tucker ’ s theory for why the feds have discouraged mask-wearing to this point .
It ’ s not because masks don ’ t work .
They do .
It ’ s because the shortage of masks for medical professionals is/was so severe that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already scant existing supply if Americans were suddenly told to cover up .
Every mask that hasn ’ t been bought and hoarded by an average joe is a mask that ’ s available to a doctor , nurse , or EMT .
But it ’ s not a zero-sum game , of course .
As Carlson says , no one disputes that medical workers should have priority for top-of-the-line N95 respirators .
The question is whether we should be making our own basic cloth masks to provide some minimal protection in public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Obviously .
They work !
My data-focused research institute , fast.ai , has found 34 scientific papers indicating basic masks can be effective in reducing virus transmission in public — and not a single paper that shows clear evidence that they can not … Studies have documented definitively that in controlled environments like airplanes , people with masks rarely infect others and rarely become infected themselves , while those without masks more easily infect others or become infected themselves… Oxford University found evidence this month for the effectiveness of simple fabric mouth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they now are officially acceptable for use in a hospital in many situations .
A 2013 study looked at the best widely available materials for filtering out tiny droplets that might carry a virus from one person to another .
It found that cotton fabric available in t-shirts or pillowcases were 68-70 percent effective compared to the 89 percent effectiveness of surgical masks .
More layers are better , although obviously that ’ ll reduce breathability , and a snug fit is essential .
Per Business Insider , a 2006 experiment found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” could be made without sewing : “ First , they boiled the cotton for 10 minutes to sterilize it , then cut it to size and formed a mask using one outer layer and eight inner layers covering the nose and mouth .
The mask could be tied around the head to get a snug fit without elastic.
” The more of us who wear masks , the more layers of filtration there are between each of us and the virus .
A biologist published a post a few days ago at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the mouth and nose will reduce particles in the near atmosphere produced by coughing by 10 percent ; the same tea towel worn by someone in the vicinity should catch two-thirds of the particles that make it through the cougher ’ s mask .
( Results were much better with surgical masks and N95s . )
Droplets can spread from an infected person to the uninfected even without coughing or sneezing , of course , but coughing or sneezing ejects them so rapidly that particles can reach much further than the standard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social distancing .
Masks are a last line of defense around a symptomatic person .
In lieu of N95s , surgical masks seem to be the best option… …but doctors and nurses have dibs on those as long as shortages last .
And although the CDC hasn ’ t formally recommended homemade masks for the rest of us yet , remember that they have advised medical workers to use a bandana or a scarf in a worst-case scenario where medical masks aren ’ t available .
Some protection is better than nothing .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ they encouraged the public to wear them yet , assuming Tucker ’ s wrong about them wanting to hoard masks for medical pros ?
One persistent argument is that mask-wearing will backfire by leading people to touch their faces more often in adjusting their masks .
Nonsense , say researchers : As for federal officials ’ argument that wearing a mask will cause people to touch their face more often , Soe-Lin said she has looked for studies that back such a finding and found none .
Both she and Hecht said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been touching their faces far less often since donning face coverings .
Schaffner also said he was aware of no data showing that wearing a mask could increase risk by making people touch their face more .
He said he was also not aware of data showing that wearing a mask could cause a user to touch their face less often , but he said that in his own personal experience , he , too , tends to touch his face less often when he wears a mask to treat patients… “ If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to wear a mask when they went out , all those asymptomatic carriers that are now transmitting it through respiratory droplets it would be much harder for them to transmit it , ” former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said during a video chat interview with The Wall Street Journal last week .
It may be that masks lead to less face-touching , not more .
Another claim is that masks will backfire by giving people a false sense of security about infection .
“ If I ’ m wearing my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about social distancing , ” some idiots will supposedly conclude .
Also likely nonsense : You could argue just as easily that masks will help reinforce the new norms about social distancing .
They ’ re a visible reminder of the threat from COVID-19 ; seeing everyone around you wearing one may generate social pressure to conform and take the threat more seriously .
Masks aren ’ t merely about protecting the wearer from being infected , after all .
They ’ re about preventing an infected person who ’ s asymptomatic from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us who are wearing masks , the more the holdouts may feel inclined to join in lest they be accused of selfish recklessness .
In lieu of an exit question , here ’ s a tutorial on how to make your own .
I imagine a couple of cotton bandanas layered over each other and then tied tightly around the head would do well enough if , like me , you don ’ t know how to sew .

It’s a no-brainer, so much so that the Internet is teeming with arguments lately encouraging mask-wearing in public until the pandemic is over. The CDC is reportedly weighing whether to formally recommend it, as Ed will detail in an upcoming post.
I’m even inclined to agree with Tucker’s theory for why the feds have discouraged mask-wearing to this point. It’s not because masks don’t work. They do. It’s because the shortage of masks for medical professionals is/was so severe that the CDC feared public demand would overwhelm the already scant existing supply if Americans were suddenly told to cover up. Every mask that hasn’t been bought and hoarded by an average joe is a mask that’s available to a doctor, nurse, or EMT.
But it’s not a zero-sum game, of course. As Carlson says, no one disputes that medical workers should have priority for top-of-the-line N95 respirators. The question is whether we should be making our own basic cloth masks to provide some minimal protection in public to reduce levels of transmission. Answer: Obviously. They work!
My data-focused research institute, fast.ai, has found 34 scientific papers indicating basic masks can be effective in reducing virus transmission in public — and not a single paper that shows clear evidence that they cannot… Studies have documented definitively that in controlled environments like airplanes, people with masks rarely infect others and rarely become infected themselves, while those without masks more easily infect others or become infected themselves… Oxford University found evidence this month for the effectiveness of simple fabric mouth and nose covers to be so compelling they now are officially acceptable for use in a hospital in many situations.
A 2013 study looked at the best widely available materials for filtering out tiny droplets that might carry a virus from one person to another. It found that cotton fabric available in t-shirts or pillowcases were 68-70 percent effective compared to the 89 percent effectiveness of surgical masks. More layers are better, although obviously that’ll reduce breathability, and a snug fit is essential. Per Business Insider, a 2006 experiment found that an effective mask providing “substantial protection” could be made without sewing: “First, they boiled the cotton for 10 minutes to sterilize it, then cut it to size and formed a mask using one outer layer and eight inner layers covering the nose and mouth. The mask could be tied around the head to get a snug fit without elastic.”
The more of us who wear masks, the more layers of filtration there are between each of us and the virus. A biologist published a post a few days ago at Medium noting that a tea towel worn around the mouth and nose will reduce particles in the near atmosphere produced by coughing by 10 percent; the same tea towel worn by someone in the vicinity should catch two-thirds of the particles that make it through the cougher’s mask. (Results were much better with surgical masks and N95s.) Droplets can spread from an infected person to the uninfected even without coughing or sneezing, of course, but coughing or sneezing ejects them so rapidly that particles can reach much further than the standard six-foot radius recommended as part of normal social distancing. Masks are a last line of defense around a symptomatic person.
In lieu of N95s, surgical masks seem to be the best option…
Similarly, in a study still under review, 246 participants with symptoms of respiratory infection breathed into a droplet-collecting device called the Gesundheit-II for 30 minutes. When volunteers were bare-mouthed, coronavirus was detected in 30 to 40 percent of their sampled droplets; when they wore a surgical mask, no coronavirus was detected. Another study using a realistic manikin that simulated human breathing concluded that, when accounting for leakage, a surgical mask can filter at least 60 percent of 0.3 micron particles. A similar manikin study demonstrated that surgical masks reduce exposure to aerosolized influenza virus by sixfold, on average.
…but doctors and nurses have dibs on those as long as shortages last. And although the CDC hasn’t formally recommended homemade masks for the rest of us yet, remember that they have advised medical workers to use a bandana or a scarf in a worst-case scenario where medical masks aren’t available. Some protection is better than nothing. Obviously.
So why haven’t they encouraged the public to wear them yet, assuming Tucker’s wrong about them wanting to hoard masks for medical pros? One persistent argument is that mask-wearing will backfire by leading people to touch their faces more often in adjusting their masks. Nonsense, say researchers:
As for federal officials’ argument that wearing a mask will cause people to touch their face more often, Soe-Lin said she has looked for studies that back such a finding and found none. Both she and Hecht said that in their personal experience, they have been touching their faces far less often since donning face coverings. Schaffner also said he was aware of no data showing that wearing a mask could increase risk by making people touch their face more. He said he was also not aware of data showing that wearing a mask could cause a user to touch their face less often, but he said that in his own personal experience, he, too, tends to touch his face less often when he wears a mask to treat patients… “If you mandated that the entire population had to wear a mask when they went out, all those asymptomatic carriers that are now transmitting it through respiratory droplets it would be much harder for them to transmit it,” former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said during a video chat interview with The Wall Street Journal last week.
It may be that masks lead to less face-touching, not more. Another claim is that masks will backfire by giving people a false sense of security about infection. “If I’m wearing my mask, I can ignore the rules about social distancing,” some idiots will supposedly conclude. Also likely nonsense:
We give cars anti-lock brakes and seat belts despite the possibility that people might drive more riskily knowing the safety equipment is there. Construction workers wear hard hats even though the hats presumably could encourage less attention to safety. If any risky behavior does occur, societies have the power to make laws against it.
You could argue just as easily that masks will help reinforce the new norms about social distancing. They’re a visible reminder of the threat from COVID-19; seeing everyone around you wearing one may generate social pressure to conform and take the threat more seriously. Masks aren’t merely about protecting the wearer from being infected, after all. They’re about preventing an infected person who’s asymptomatic from unwittingly infecting others. The more of us who are wearing masks, the more the holdouts may feel inclined to join in lest they be accused of selfish recklessness.
In lieu of an exit question, here’s a tutorial on how to make your own. I imagine a couple of cotton bandanas layered over each other and then tied tightly around the head would do well enough if, like me, you don’t know how to sew.


hotair--2020-03-31--AOC: Support strikers, not elderly customers - Amazon fires back

The strike against Amazon turned out to be a dud .
Despite the best efforts of a discontented Amazon employee at its Staten Island warehouse , the walk-out he called for only inspired 15 workers to participate on Monday , according to Amazon .
Chris Smalls , a management assistant , and walk-out organizer , however , says about 50 people walked out .
There are 5,000 employees at the warehouse .
Whichever number is the real one , Smalls is in the minority of those trying to leverage their much-needed services against the demands in which companies find themselves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Not only did the walk-out fail , but Smalls was also fired .
As I wrote about yesterday , Smalls is on paid sick leave himself .
Management at the Amazon warehouse told him to stay at home after he came in contact with an employee who tested positive for COVID-19 .
The reason he called for the walk-out by employees was to pressure the management of the warehouse into shutting down the facility and doing a major cleaning of it after a worker tested positive for COVID-19 as well as paying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found a supporter in Sandy from the Bronx , a.k.a .
Rep. Alexandria Cortez-Ocasio .
She tweeted out encouragement .
Instead of remaining home , Smalls , an employee with the company for five years , went to the warehouse Monday to participate in the walk-out .
He was fired for violating instructions to stay home and self-quarantine .
He calls it retaliation for organizing the walk-out , the company says it is for showing up in person when he should have been at home .
New York Attorney General Letitia James is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it “ disgraceful ” and calls upon the National Labor Relations Board to investigate .
Amazon spokeswoman Lisa Levandowski stated in an email statement that Amazon is working to keep up with increased customer demands while protecting employees at work .
Also on Monday , Instacart shoppers began a nationwide strike to demand additional pay , hazard pay with each order , and additional safety protection .
Like with the Amazon walk-out most Instacart workers were ignoring the call to strike , grateful to be employed during a time of massive lay-offs due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t stop two presidential candidates from weighing in on Twitter and Facebook in support of the strike .
Bernie was out in front of it , of course , as he tweeted about it on Saturday .
As usual , Joe Biden responded in the same way on Facebook in hopes of keeping up with comrade Sanders on Sunday .
What Joe Biden did here was to allow the radical far-left of the Democrat Party to push him to their socialist side of the argument .
Instead of standing up in support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real need right now , the elderly and medically at-risk Americans who are sheltering-in-place as instructed by experts in the medical field and public officials , the socialist wing of the Democrat Party encourages a disruption of service to them .
Even though Amazon and Instacart have both said that they are responding to employees and doing what is possible to keep everyone safe and employed , it wasn ’ t enough for the discontented employees .
Joe Biden , the safe and reliable candidate , is being pushed farther left in order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will need Sanders ’ supporters in November and he has to try and look like he ’ s one of them .
That ’ s not leadership , that ’ s herd mentality .
Today , workers at Whole Foods are planning to strike , too .
Whole Foods is owned by Amazon and the company has already made provisions for its workers .
Just like with Amazon warehouse workers and Instacart shoppers , it ’ s not enough to satisfy them .
They want stores to be shut down because employees have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ City , Chicago , Louisiana , and California .
At a time when food stores are scrambling to keep up with demand , they want stores to close .
That throws all the employees out of work and further compromises customers who are unable to get out and shop for themselves .
It should also be noted that the hourly rate for Amazon workers who moved over to Whole Foods is $ 19 per hour and $ 38 per hour for overtime .
Amazon Prime has seen a large increase in business as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is true for Instacart and other delivery services .
All are hiring additional workers to keep up with the demands .
At a time of national crisis , the ugly wing of the socialist left rises and politicians look to score cheap points at the expense of the food supply of elderly and medically at-risk Americans .
It is despicable .
We have come to expect it from the likes of AOC and Bernie .
We see you , too , Joe Biden .
You ’ d think two old medically-compromised geezers like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stand they are taking in hopes of gaining votes in November .

The strike against Amazon turned out to be a dud. Despite the best efforts of a discontented Amazon employee at its Staten Island warehouse, the walk-out he called for only inspired 15 workers to participate on Monday, according to Amazon.
Chris Smalls, a management assistant, and walk-out organizer, however, says about 50 people walked out. There are 5,000 employees at the warehouse. Whichever number is the real one, Smalls is in the minority of those trying to leverage their much-needed services against the demands in which companies find themselves in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic. Not only did the walk-out fail, but Smalls was also fired.
As I wrote about yesterday, Smalls is on paid sick leave himself. Management at the Amazon warehouse told him to stay at home after he came in contact with an employee who tested positive for COVID-19. The reason he called for the walk-out by employees was to pressure the management of the warehouse into shutting down the facility and doing a major cleaning of it after a worker tested positive for COVID-19 as well as paying workers higher wages.
Smalls’ walk-out found a supporter in Sandy from the Bronx, a.k.a. Rep. Alexandria Cortez-Ocasio. She tweeted out encouragement.
First Instacart, then Amazon, now Whole Foods: workers are withholding their labor& demanding dignity. When people work an hourly job, it’s suggested in many ways that you‘re unimportant or expendable. Except you aren’t. Everyone deserves safe work, paid leave, & a living wage. https://t.co/JCC7A6RiUe — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 30, 2020
Instead of remaining home, Smalls, an employee with the company for five years, went to the warehouse Monday to participate in the walk-out. He was fired for violating instructions to stay home and self-quarantine. He calls it retaliation for organizing the walk-out, the company says it is for showing up in person when he should have been at home.
“Despite that instruction to stay home with pay, he came on site today, March 30, further putting the teams at risk. This is unacceptable and we have terminated his employment as a result of these multiple safety issues,” Kristen Kish said in a statement. “Like all businesses grappling with the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, we are working hard to keep employees safe while serving communities and the most vulnerable,” the statement said. ““The truth is the vast majority of employees continue to show up and do the heroic work of delivering for customers every day.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James is looking into the case. She calls it “disgraceful” and calls upon the National Labor Relations Board to investigate.
“In New York, the right to organize is codified into law, and any retaliatory action by management related thereto is strictly prohibited,” James said in a statement. “At a time when so many New Yorkers are struggling and are deeply concerned about their safety, this action was also immoral and inhumane.”
Amazon spokeswoman Lisa Levandowski stated in an email statement that Amazon is working to keep up with increased customer demands while protecting employees at work.
Earlier Monday, Levandowski said Amazon is increasing the facility’s cleaning, encouraging safe distancing among its staff and checking employees’ temperatures as they arrive to keep workers safe. “Like all businesses grappling with the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, we are working hard to keep employees safe while serving communities and the most vulnerable,” Levandowski said.
Also on Monday, Instacart shoppers began a nationwide strike to demand additional pay, hazard pay with each order, and additional safety protection. Like with the Amazon walk-out most Instacart workers were ignoring the call to strike, grateful to be employed during a time of massive lay-offs due to the coronavirus crisis. That didn’t stop two presidential candidates from weighing in on Twitter and Facebook in support of the strike. Bernie was out in front of it, of course, as he tweeted about it on Saturday. As usual, Joe Biden responded in the same way on Facebook in hopes of keeping up with comrade Sanders on Sunday.
.@Instacart was last valued at nearly $8 billion. A company of this size should not be forcing its workers to put themselves — and us all — at risk. I stand with the workers, and encourage Instacart to meet the their demands.https://t.co/x7Jid1NvWH — Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) March 28, 2020
https://www.facebook.com/joebiden/posts/10156794069911104?__tn__=-R
What Joe Biden did here was to allow the radical far-left of the Democrat Party to push him to their socialist side of the argument. Instead of standing up in support of the Amazon and Instacart customers in real need right now, the elderly and medically at-risk Americans who are sheltering-in-place as instructed by experts in the medical field and public officials, the socialist wing of the Democrat Party encourages a disruption of service to them. Even though Amazon and Instacart have both said that they are responding to employees and doing what is possible to keep everyone safe and employed, it wasn’t enough for the discontented employees. Joe Biden, the safe and reliable candidate, is being pushed farther left in order to keep up with Sanders. Biden will need Sanders’ supporters in November and he has to try and look like he’s one of them. That’s not leadership, that’s herd mentality.
Today, workers at Whole Foods are planning to strike, too. Whole Foods is owned by Amazon and the company has already made provisions for its workers. Just like with Amazon warehouse workers and Instacart shoppers, it’s not enough to satisfy them. They want stores to be shut down because employees have tested positive for COVID-19 in New York City, Chicago, Louisiana, and California. At a time when food stores are scrambling to keep up with demand, they want stores to close. That throws all the employees out of work and further compromises customers who are unable to get out and shop for themselves. It should also be noted that the hourly rate for Amazon workers who moved over to Whole Foods is $19 per hour and $38 per hour for overtime.
“In recent weeks, Whole Foods—a subsidiary of Amazon— has increased hourly pay for its workers by $2 an hour, offered to provide two weeks of paid sick leave to workers who test positive for Covid-19, and said it would not penalize workers for calling out sick.”
Amazon Prime has seen a large increase in business as the coronavirus pandemic continues. The same is true for Instacart and other delivery services. All are hiring additional workers to keep up with the demands. At a time of national crisis, the ugly wing of the socialist left rises and politicians look to score cheap points at the expense of the food supply of elderly and medically at-risk Americans. It is despicable. We have come to expect it from the likes of AOC and Bernie. We see you, too, Joe Biden. You’d think two old medically-compromised geezers like Biden and Sanders would understand the dangerous stand they are taking in hopes of gaining votes in November.


hotair--2020-03-31--Sweden is going for herd immunity. Will it work?

We already know how the United States has decided to handle the coronavirus pandemic .
States are going on lockdown .
Stay at home .
Social distancing .
And both schools and businesses are shuttered all across the country or operating on a limited basis at best .
Not so in Sweden .
Unlike nearly every other country in the EU , their children are still attending school , businesses remain open and public parks and playgrounds are as crowded as ever .
They are counting on herd immunity to give them long term protection in exchange for some short @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children continued to pour through the gates of their schools and kindergartens on Thursday as the Nordic nation stood increasingly alone in Europe in its approach to tackling the coronavirus pandemic .
Shops and restaurants also remained open across the country , with parks and recreational areas packed with groups enjoying the spring sunshine .
Despite a surge in Covid-19 patients and growing dissent among epidemiological experts , the Swedish government ’ s medical experts were last night standing by their decision not to follow almost all other EU nations by instituting economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that working for them thus far ?
Sweden is still in the relatively early stages of having the virus sweep over the nation , but the curve is beginning to climb for them .
One Twitter user posted a graph showing the progress of the disease in terms of deaths for both that nation and a couple of their neighbors .
As you can see from the graph above , over the past week alone the death toll has been starting to climb in all three countries .
Norway is faring the best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 lives lost as of yesterday .
Denmark is doing slightly worse , with just under 80 .
But Sweden is leading the pack by a wide margin with almost 150 .
Now , it ’ s worth noting that both Denmark and Norway have roughly half the population ( around 5 million ) that Sweden does ( a little over 10 million ) .
And Denmark ’ s population is considerably denser , being packed into a much smaller geographic area .
So you might expect Sweden ’ s numbers to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the yellow line in that graph has got to be worrisome for them .
Anders Tegnell , Sweden ’ s state epidemiologist , is still defending the government ’ s decision to hold off on any restrictive measures , citing the Public Health Agency of Sweden ’ s ability to offer expert advice and the government ’ s hesitancy to override them .
But at the same time , he admits that if things go very badly for them as happened in Italy , he will certainly be among those to take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the ongoing debate we ’ ve been having in the United States .
We repeatedly hear contradicting claims from people who are supposed to be experts in the field .
When looking at the speakeasies currently operating in Manhatten , one doctor claimed that epidemics of respiratory ailments pass quickly , and once 80 % of the people have contracted and recovered from the disease , the crisis has passed .
Other health officials caution that such a theory may be true , but the American body count will be well into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it could take all year for the wave to wash over the entire country .
The bottom line is that Sweden has chosen a very different course from America and most of Europe .
It may prove to be the laboratory where we see how effective that method is as compared to nations that are locking down their populations and shutting down their economies .
We can only pray that the body count for their experiment doesn ’ t turn into a complete catastrophe for them .
Meanwhile , on the lighter side @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s another country refusing to go into lockdown mode because of the virus , but the cure being suggested there is a little more “ out there.
” The President of Belarus apparently thinks vodka and saunas will stop the virus .
( NY Post ) The president of Belarus is insisting that vodka and saunas will cure the coronavirus — while claiming nations that have gone into lockdown are in the throes of a “ psychosis , ” according to reports .
President Alexander Lukashenko has insisted the Eastern European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for business — and even took part in a packed ice hockey match on Saturday .
“ It ’ s better to die standing than to live on your knees , ” he said , quoting the Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata , and calling sports “ the best anti-virus remedy.
” Vodka ?
Well , it ’ s better than swimming pool sanitizer I suppose .
But even though I ’ m no doctor , nor do I play one on television , I ’ m a bit dubious about this plan .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ know , Lukashenko may wind up looking like a genius .
But I wouldn ’ t hold my breath waiting for that to happen .

We already know how the United States has decided to handle the coronavirus pandemic. States are going on lockdown. Stay at home. Social distancing. And both schools and businesses are shuttered all across the country or operating on a limited basis at best. Not so in Sweden. Unlike nearly every other country in the EU, their children are still attending school, businesses remain open and public parks and playgrounds are as crowded as ever. They are counting on herd immunity to give them long term protection in exchange for some short term risks. (Telegraph)
Swedish children continued to pour through the gates of their schools and kindergartens on Thursday as the Nordic nation stood increasingly alone in Europe in its approach to tackling the coronavirus pandemic. Shops and restaurants also remained open across the country, with parks and recreational areas packed with groups enjoying the spring sunshine. Despite a surge in Covid-19 patients and growing dissent among epidemiological experts, the Swedish government’s medical experts were last night standing by their decision not to follow almost all other EU nations by instituting economic and social lockdowns.
So how is that working for them thus far? Sweden is still in the relatively early stages of having the virus sweep over the nation, but the curve is beginning to climb for them. One Twitter user posted a graph showing the progress of the disease in terms of deaths for both that nation and a couple of their neighbors.
https://twitter.com/cmhrrs/status/1244710002251763716
As you can see from the graph above, over the past week alone the death toll has been starting to climb in all three countries. Norway is faring the best, with a total of just over 30 lives lost as of yesterday. Denmark is doing slightly worse, with just under 80. But Sweden is leading the pack by a wide margin with almost 150.
Now, it’s worth noting that both Denmark and Norway have roughly half the population (around 5 million) that Sweden does (a little over 10 million). And Denmark’s population is considerably denser, being packed into a much smaller geographic area. So you might expect Sweden’s numbers to be a bit higher. But the slope on the yellow line in that graph has got to be worrisome for them.
Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s state epidemiologist, is still defending the government’s decision to hold off on any restrictive measures, citing the Public Health Agency of Sweden’s ability to offer expert advice and the government’s hesitancy to override them. But at the same time, he admits that if things go very badly for them as happened in Italy, he will certainly be among those to take the blame.
This brings us back to the ongoing debate we’ve been having in the United States. We repeatedly hear contradicting claims from people who are supposed to be experts in the field. When looking at the speakeasies currently operating in Manhatten, one doctor claimed that epidemics of respiratory ailments pass quickly, and once 80% of the people have contracted and recovered from the disease, the crisis has passed. Other health officials caution that such a theory may be true, but the American body count will be well into the millions if we did that and it could take all year for the wave to wash over the entire country.
The bottom line is that Sweden has chosen a very different course from America and most of Europe. It may prove to be the laboratory where we see how effective that method is as compared to nations that are locking down their populations and shutting down their economies. We can only pray that the body count for their experiment doesn’t turn into a complete catastrophe for them.
Meanwhile, on the lighter side of the apocalypse news this week, there’s another country refusing to go into lockdown mode because of the virus, but the cure being suggested there is a little more “out there.” The President of Belarus apparently thinks vodka and saunas will stop the virus. (NY Post)
The president of Belarus is insisting that vodka and saunas will cure the coronavirus — while claiming nations that have gone into lockdown are in the throes of a “psychosis,” according to reports. President Alexander Lukashenko has insisted the Eastern European nation of nearly 9.5 million remain open for business — and even took part in a packed ice hockey match on Saturday. “It’s better to die standing than to live on your knees,” he said, quoting the Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata, and calling sports “the best anti-virus remedy.”
Vodka? Well, it’s better than swimming pool sanitizer I suppose. But even though I’m no doctor, nor do I play one on television, I’m a bit dubious about this plan. Time will tell. For all we know, Lukashenko may wind up looking like a genius. But I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that to happen.


hotair--2020-03-31--NJ Gov relents. Gun shops now essential businesses

When we learned that the Governor of Pennsylvania had caved and agreed to allow the gun shops in his state to reopen , I noted that the next goal on this front would involve New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy .
Unlike his neighbor to the west , Murphy had declared gun shops nonessential businesses , closing them all down .
He even went so far as to shut down the background check system , ensuring that nobody could complete a legal purchase of a firearm .
With the courts seeming all too willing to allow executive authority to vastly expand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looked as if Murphy could have his way for the duration of the pandemic unless the Supreme Court stepped in .
But something changed in a relatively short period of time .
Yesterday , Murphy did his own version of an about-face maneuver and declared that the gun shops were essential services after all .
( NJ.com ) Gun retailers in New Jersey can now open as an essential business during the coronavirus outbreak , Gov .
Phil Murphy announced Monday in a reversal of his previous position on this issue .
Murphy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an essential business follows guidelines issued by the federal Department of Homeland Security , which added gun dealers , ranges and manufacturers to its essential business guide for its coronavirus response on Saturday .
“ It wouldn ’ t be my definition but that ’ s the definition at the federal level and I didn ’ t get a vote on that , ” Murphy said at his press briefing on Monday .
So Murphy is crediting this weekend ’ s decision by Homeland Security to add firearms dealers to their CISA Guidance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That makes for a fairly compelling argument on the governor ’ s part since he can basically pass the decision off to the feds .
But it ’ s also worth noting that the CICA guidance very specifically states that the state governments have the final say .
One caveat reads , “ This list is advisory in nature .
It is not , nor should it be considered , a federal directive or standard.
” So if the Governor of New Jersey really wanted to stick to his guns ( pardon the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done so .
I ’ m not doing anything more than reading the tea leaves here , but it seems as if there ’ s another explanation for what ’ s going on .
Murphy probably saw what happened to Ralph Northam ’ s gun control initiatives in New Jersey and then saw Pennsylvania ’ s Democratic Governor also cave to the Second Amendment rights and needs of his voters .
Perhaps he saw an uprising of New Jersey gun owners coming his way during the panic this virus is causing and started @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
With that in mind , having Homeland Security take this action over the weekend gave him cover to shrug his shoulders , walk away from the battle and simply claim that he was accepting the opinion of the experts at a higher level .
Just as a side note , there are plenty of examples of differences between state directives and the CISA guidelines leading to issues around the country .
In New York State , Governor Cuomo has declared real estate businesses nonessential entities , effectively putting a ton of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of work .
But the CISA guidelines specifically list “ Residential and commercial real estate services , including settlement services ” as essential functions under the section named “ Other Community or Government-Based Operations or Essential Functions.
” Seems to me that a lot more businesses around the country should be studying this list to see if their governors are being too heavy-handed in which sectors of the free market they are shutting down .

When we learned that the Governor of Pennsylvania had caved and agreed to allow the gun shops in his state to reopen, I noted that the next goal on this front would involve New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy. Unlike his neighbor to the west, Murphy had declared gun shops nonessential businesses, closing them all down. He even went so far as to shut down the background check system, ensuring that nobody could complete a legal purchase of a firearm.
With the courts seeming all too willing to allow executive authority to vastly expand under a state of emergency, it looked as if Murphy could have his way for the duration of the pandemic unless the Supreme Court stepped in. But something changed in a relatively short period of time. Yesterday, Murphy did his own version of an about-face maneuver and declared that the gun shops were essential services after all. (NJ.com)
Gun retailers in New Jersey can now open as an essential business during the coronavirus outbreak, Gov. Phil Murphy announced Monday in a reversal of his previous position on this issue. Murphy’s decision to deem firearm dealers an essential business follows guidelines issued by the federal Department of Homeland Security, which added gun dealers, ranges and manufacturers to its essential business guide for its coronavirus response on Saturday. “It wouldn’t be my definition but that’s the definition at the federal level and I didn’t get a vote on that,” Murphy said at his press briefing on Monday.
So Murphy is crediting this weekend’s decision by Homeland Security to add firearms dealers to their CISA Guidance on the Critical Infrastructure Workforce list. That makes for a fairly compelling argument on the governor’s part since he can basically pass the decision off to the feds.
But it’s also worth noting that the CICA guidance very specifically states that the state governments have the final say. One caveat reads, “This list is advisory in nature. It is not, nor should it be considered, a federal directive or standard.” So if the Governor of New Jersey really wanted to stick to his guns (pardon the pun), he could easily have done so.
I’m not doing anything more than reading the tea leaves here, but it seems as if there’s another explanation for what’s going on. Murphy probably saw what happened to Ralph Northam’s gun control initiatives in New Jersey and then saw Pennsylvania’s Democratic Governor also cave to the Second Amendment rights and needs of his voters. Perhaps he saw an uprising of New Jersey gun owners coming his way during the panic this virus is causing and started to doubt how solid his position was. With that in mind, having Homeland Security take this action over the weekend gave him cover to shrug his shoulders, walk away from the battle and simply claim that he was accepting the opinion of the experts at a higher level.
Just as a side note, there are plenty of examples of differences between state directives and the CISA guidelines leading to issues around the country. In New York State, Governor Cuomo has declared real estate businesses nonessential entities, effectively putting a ton of people (including one of my neighbors) out of work. But the CISA guidelines specifically list “Residential and commercial real estate services, including settlement services” as essential functions under the section named “Other Community or Government-Based Operations or Essential Functions.”
Seems to me that a lot more businesses around the country should be studying this list to see if their governors are being too heavy-handed in which sectors of the free market they are shutting down.


hotair--2020-03-31--Pelosi's Phase 4 coronavirus relief: Reinstate SALT deductions for high earners

Of all the hobby horses to ride in a crisis , Nancy Pelosi has climbed onto the richest .
Even the New York Times sees through this flimsy attempt to pander to voters in the two most populous states — at a time when all other taxpayers are funding a massive relief package to rescue the economy from its coronavirus coma .
The net effect of this would be a stimulus , all right … for those earning six figures or more .
And Pelosi wants to make it retroactive , too : As lawmakers prepare for another round of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus pandemic , Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested the next package include a retroactive rollback of a tax change that hurt high earners in states like New York and California .
A full rollback of the limit on the state and local tax deduction , or SALT , would provide a quick cash infusion in the form of increased tax rebates to an estimated 13 million American households — nearly all of which earn at least $ 100,000 a year .
In an interview with The New York Times , Ms. Pelosi said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ package should include additional measures to get more money directly to individuals — like the $ 1,200 direct payments for low- and middle-income taxpayers that were authorized in the $ 2 trillion bill that President Trump signed on Friday .
That could be achieved , she said , by having Congress “ retroactively undo SALT , ” a reference to a cap on the state and local tax deduction that Republicans included in their 2017 tax overhaul .
That limit prevents households from deducting more than $ 10,000 a year in state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bills .
This idea is even worse than her last attempt to stick the Green New Deal into Phase 3 , delaying the bill several days .
Republicans capped the state and local tax deduction ( SALT ) at $ 10,000 in their tax-reform bill in December 2017 while expanding the standard deduction to make up for the change with lower-income earners .
The only taxpayers this would boost with a retroactive refund would be those who pay more than the $ 10,000-per-year cap in state and local taxes , and that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much for Democrats being the party of the little people , eh ?
Pelosi ’ s proposal would force taxpayers on the lower end of the scale to subsidize those refunds to high-income earners .
It would be among the most regressive reactions to an economic crisis one could imagine .
It would force lower-tax and more efficient states to subsidize the state and local tax burden imposed by high-tax blue states by their own policies .
And it would do so at the very same time that those same high-tax states are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s share of the limited COVID-19 rescue resources .
This policy has nothing to do with economic rescue .
It has everything to do with pandering to big-ticket donors in New York , California , Massachusetts , and other deep-blue states where the SALT cap bit hardest .
If Pelosi digs her heels in on this for Phase 4 , she will be holding relief hostage for the benefit of millionaires and billionaires just to hold onto states Democrats couldn ’ t lose if they tried .
This is one of the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very long time .
It ’ s so bad that the New York Times can ’ t bring themselves to run interference for Pelosi on this idea , not in the midst of a pandemic where New Yorkers are dying by the hundreds each day .
It ’ s not just cynical — it ’ s ghoulish .

Of all the hobby horses to ride in a crisis, Nancy Pelosi has climbed onto the richest. Even the New York Times sees through this flimsy attempt to pander to voters in the two most populous states — at a time when all other taxpayers are funding a massive relief package to rescue the economy from its coronavirus coma.
The net effect of this would be a stimulus, all right … for those earning six figures or more. And Pelosi wants to make it retroactive, too:
As lawmakers prepare for another round of fiscal stimulus to address economic fallout from the coronavirus pandemic, Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested the next package include a retroactive rollback of a tax change that hurt high earners in states like New York and California. A full rollback of the limit on the state and local tax deduction, or SALT, would provide a quick cash infusion in the form of increased tax rebates to an estimated 13 million American households — nearly all of which earn at least $100,000 a year. In an interview with The New York Times, Ms. Pelosi said the next phase of an economic rescue package should include additional measures to get more money directly to individuals — like the $1,200 direct payments for low- and middle-income taxpayers that were authorized in the $2 trillion bill that President Trump signed on Friday. That could be achieved, she said, by having Congress “retroactively undo SALT,” a reference to a cap on the state and local tax deduction that Republicans included in their 2017 tax overhaul. That limit prevents households from deducting more than $10,000 a year in state and local tax expenses from their federal tax bills.
This idea is even worse than her last attempt to stick the Green New Deal into Phase 3, delaying the bill several days. Republicans capped the state and local tax deduction (SALT) at $10,000 in their tax-reform bill in December 2017 while expanding the standard deduction to make up for the change with lower-income earners. The only taxpayers this would boost with a retroactive refund would be those who pay more than the $10,000-per-year cap in state and local taxes, and that’s not exactly the poverty-stricken.
So much for Democrats being the party of the little people, eh? Pelosi’s proposal would force taxpayers on the lower end of the scale to subsidize those refunds to high-income earners. It would be among the most regressive reactions to an economic crisis one could imagine. It would force lower-tax and more efficient states to subsidize the state and local tax burden imposed by high-tax blue states by their own policies. And it would do so at the very same time that those same high-tax states are (rightfully) demanding the lion’s share of the limited COVID-19 rescue resources.
This policy has nothing to do with economic rescue. It has everything to do with pandering to big-ticket donors in New York, California, Massachusetts, and other deep-blue states where the SALT cap bit hardest. If Pelosi digs her heels in on this for Phase 4, she will be holding relief hostage for the benefit of millionaires and billionaires just to hold onto states Democrats couldn’t lose if they tried.
This is one of the most cynical ploys seen in national politics in a very long time. It’s so bad that the New York Times can’t bring themselves to run interference for Pelosi on this idea, not in the midst of a pandemic where New Yorkers are dying by the hundreds each day. It’s not just cynical — it’s ghoulish.


hotair--2020-03-31--And now a pastor has been arrested over lockdown violations

While I initially wasn ’ t sure how this could work in terms of actual prosecutions , arrests of people who violate shelter in place orders or bans on larger gatherings have been taking place .
It started with hosts of parties in New Jersey and Maryland being hauled in by the cops over the weekend .
Yesterday we received a bit of foreshadowing that houses of worship were under scrutiny when New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio threatened to start shutting down churches and synagogues , perhaps permanently .
And now , in Florida , we ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of these dystopian times yet .
The pastor of a Tampa mega-church has been arrested for holding services for the faithful .
( Associated Press ) Florida officials have arrested the pastor of a megachurch after detectives say he held two Sunday services with hundreds of people and violated a safer-at-home order in place to limit the spread of the coronavirus .
According to jail records , Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne turned himself in to authorities Monday afternoon in Hernando County , where he lives .
He was charged with unlawful assembly and violation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bail was set at $ 500 , according to the jail ’ s website , and he was released after posting bond .
Hillsborough Sheriff Chad Chronister said in a news conference Monday that he negotiated with the attorney of Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne to turn himself in to authorities in Hernando County .
His church is located in Tampa .
From the descriptions being given , the Pastor ’ s church does sound as if they were taking all of the social distancing guidelines into account .
They claim to have enforced a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pews .
They also sanitized the entire facility both before and after the service .
Hand sanitizer was made available to all congregants and shaking hands was discouraged .
So should that have been enough ?
There were “ hundreds ” of people at the service ( attendance not specified ) but it ’ s a really large church with plenty of room for people to spread out .
The Sheriff ’ s Department is taking a hard line here , saying “ Shame on this pastor , their legal staff and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us to do our job.
” The Pastor clearly plans to fight this in court .
He ’ s being charged with “ unlawful assembly , ” which is always a frightening term under any circumstances when you consider that the First Amendment contains the phrase , “ the right of the people peaceably to assemble.
” That ’ s one argument that the church ’ s attorneys will use in court .
The other , of course , is freedom of religion .
They also have some emotional cards to play if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jury .
When do people most need the comfort and solace of their spiritual leaders and faith-based community if not during a crisis like the one currently facing the world ?
The pastor is also charged with violating a public health emergency order .
Florida does grant some rather sweeping powers to the governor during a declared public health emergency , which definitely applies to this situation .
But man… the optics of dragging a pastor before a judge and locking him up or fining his church for the crime of holding services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have lived to see interesting times .
In Rhode Island , we have the police stopping cars based on what state they are arriving from and the National Guard monitoring who is arriving at train stations , airports and bus terminals .
In Boston , police officers have been seen stopping couples walking on the sidewalk and asking them what business they have that brings them out in public .
And now a pastor has been taken to jail .
I fully understand how serious the pandemic is and the need to minimize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as possible , but it ’ s impossible to escape the chills that run down one ’ s spine hearing stories like these .

While I initially wasn’t sure how this could work in terms of actual prosecutions, arrests of people who violate shelter in place orders or bans on larger gatherings have been taking place. It started with hosts of parties in New Jersey and Maryland being hauled in by the cops over the weekend. Yesterday we received a bit of foreshadowing that houses of worship were under scrutiny when New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio threatened to start shutting down churches and synagogues, perhaps permanently. And now, in Florida, we’ve seen what may be the clearest sign of these dystopian times yet. The pastor of a Tampa mega-church has been arrested for holding services for the faithful. (Associated Press)
Florida officials have arrested the pastor of a megachurch after detectives say he held two Sunday services with hundreds of people and violated a safer-at-home order in place to limit the spread of the coronavirus. According to jail records, Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne turned himself in to authorities Monday afternoon in Hernando County, where he lives. He was charged with unlawful assembly and violation of a public health emergency order. Bail was set at $500, according to the jail’s website, and he was released after posting bond. Hillsborough Sheriff Chad Chronister said in a news conference Monday that he negotiated with the attorney of Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne to turn himself in to authorities in Hernando County. His church is located in Tampa.
From the descriptions being given, the Pastor’s church does sound as if they were taking all of the social distancing guidelines into account. They claim to have enforced a six-foot separation rule between family groups in the pews. They also sanitized the entire facility both before and after the service. Hand sanitizer was made available to all congregants and shaking hands was discouraged.
So should that have been enough? There were “hundreds” of people at the service (attendance not specified) but it’s a really large church with plenty of room for people to spread out. The Sheriff’s Department is taking a hard line here, saying “Shame on this pastor, their legal staff and the leaders of this staff for forcing us to do our job.”
The Pastor clearly plans to fight this in court. He’s being charged with “unlawful assembly,” which is always a frightening term under any circumstances when you consider that the First Amendment contains the phrase, “the right of the people peaceably to assemble.” That’s one argument that the church’s attorneys will use in court. The other, of course, is freedom of religion. They also have some emotional cards to play if this were to actually go before a jury. When do people most need the comfort and solace of their spiritual leaders and faith-based community if not during a crisis like the one currently facing the world?
The pastor is also charged with violating a public health emergency order. Florida does grant some rather sweeping powers to the governor during a declared public health emergency, which definitely applies to this situation. But man… the optics of dragging a pastor before a judge and locking him up or fining his church for the crime of holding services are simply awful.
Sadly, we have lived to see interesting times. In Rhode Island, we have the police stopping cars based on what state they are arriving from and the National Guard monitoring who is arriving at train stations, airports and bus terminals. In Boston, police officers have been seen stopping couples walking on the sidewalk and asking them what business they have that brings them out in public. And now a pastor has been taken to jail. I fully understand how serious the pandemic is and the need to minimize the spread of the virus as much as possible, but it’s impossible to escape the chills that run down one’s spine hearing stories like these.


hotair--2020-03-31--New O'Keefe video: N.Y. National Guardsmen say "It's just the flu"

There is a new video out by James O ’ Keefe .
The founder of Project Veritas and a colleague took a trip to a drive-thru COVID-19 testing site in New Rochelle , a community that has been labeled as a hot spot .
The location of the testing site in New Rochelle is Glen Island Park .
O ’ Keefe explains at the beginning of the video that he has followed the established procedure and called ahead , explained that he doesn ’ t have symptoms of the coronavirus but has been traveling a lot and interacting with people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told by the New York State Health Department that he could take the test .
O ’ Keefe was asked by one National Guardsman to not take any video or photography because of HIPPA regulations and O ’ Keefe responds affirmatively .
He says he will delete a photo he took when he is asked to do so , and he apologized for taking the photograph .
He goes through the whole process on camera .
I assume his companion is filming it , though that person is never seen on camera – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ visible .
The first guardsman explains how the test works and that it the experience of being tested is worse for kids than for adults .
Then O ’ Keefe asks if the pandemic is as bad as the media portrays it to be .
“ Oh no .
It ’ s just , it ’ s just the flu ” , is his response .
He explained , “ It affects everyone differently.
” The second guardsman tells him the testing is “ just being precautious.
” A third tells O ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctor or a biologist but that they want to ensure the public ’ s safety .
He says it is not just the flu , it is worse .
A nurse comes and performs the test .
When O ’ Keefe questions her about how bad the virus really is , she explains it is different for different people .
Some experience bad symptoms , some don ’ t .
She admits they don ’ t know because “ it ’ s so new ” .
O ’ Keefe lucks out with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the nurse was able to administer a less invasive way of inserting the swab – it didn ’ t have to go all the way into his nose as deemed necessary earlier .
She swabs his mouth , too .
She says they ( at the testing site ) are taking it day by day but she knows some cases are bad .
So , the experience was filmed but no still photography was shown .
I ’ m not an expert here but I think HIPPA is in place mainly to protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this situation is O ’ Keefe .
The guardsmen and the nurse are shown following procedure so there shouldn ’ t be any liability issues for them .
Their protective gear covers up their faces on camera .
What this video does is show exactly why so many of us are confused .
Yes , James O ’ Keefe is a provocateur but he does expose some stories the public should see .
This video may be one of them .
The guardsmen , not the medical professionals , downplay the seriousness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like nurse Alyssa ) calmly tell what they know to be true .
The virus affects everyone differently , children are more uncomfortable with the testing than adults , and the virus is not the flu – it is real and it is worse .
Also , it ’ s a new coronavirus and we just don ’ t know what we don ’ t know yet .
In the meantime , I know what I am going to do .
I ’ m listening to daily briefings given by the experts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep up with how my city is coping with the COVID-19 outbreak , and I ’ m am sheltering-in-place just as much as I possibly can .
I literally only go out to go pick up medication at the drugstore , go to the bank ( the drive-thru is the only option there ) , and run in as quickly as I can into the grocery store and stay as far away from others as possible while I do so .
Most all of those things I can do without getting out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if I had a mask , I ’ d be wearing it in public , too .
Mock all that if you will .
My immune system is comprised and I will do whatever it takes to avoid this thing .
I also don ’ t want to expose my husband and grown son to it .
I can tell you that the one experience I ’ ve had going into a grocery store since the great hunkering down period began involved a masked , gloved store worker offering me a grocery cart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I entered the store .
I was grateful for that gesture .
We don ’ t know what we don ’ t know .
We can take care of ourselves and those around us , though .
I would rather overreact with safety precautions than not .
My situation is different than that of the vast majority of people .
I work from home .
Some of these precautions I do anyway .
Being inside my home for an extended period of time now is doable .
We can do this without freaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential dangers of this virus .

There is a new video out by James O’Keefe. The founder of Project Veritas and a colleague took a trip to a drive-thru COVID-19 testing site in New Rochelle, a community that has been labeled as a hot spot. The location of the testing site in New Rochelle is Glen Island Park.
O’Keefe explains at the beginning of the video that he has followed the established procedure and called ahead, explained that he doesn’t have symptoms of the coronavirus but has been traveling a lot and interacting with people who may have it. He was told by the New York State Health Department that he could take the test.
O’Keefe was asked by one National Guardsman to not take any video or photography because of HIPPA regulations and O’Keefe responds affirmatively. He says he will delete a photo he took when he is asked to do so, and he apologized for taking the photograph.
He goes through the whole process on camera. I assume his companion is filming it, though that person is never seen on camera – only a bit of his shoulder is visible. The first guardsman explains how the test works and that it the experience of being tested is worse for kids than for adults. Then O’Keefe asks if the pandemic is as bad as the media portrays it to be. “Oh no. It’s just, it’s just the flu”, is his response. He explained, “It affects everyone differently.” The second guardsman tells him the testing is “just being precautious.” A third tells O’Keefe that he’s not a doctor or a biologist but that they want to ensure the public’s safety. He says it is not just the flu, it is worse.
A nurse comes and performs the test. When O’Keefe questions her about how bad the virus really is, she explains it is different for different people. Some experience bad symptoms, some don’t. She admits they don’t know because “it’s so new”. O’Keefe lucks out with the timing of his test. That day the nurse was able to administer a less invasive way of inserting the swab – it didn’t have to go all the way into his nose as deemed necessary earlier. She swabs his mouth, too. She says they (at the testing site) are taking it day by day but she knows some cases are bad.
So, the experience was filmed but no still photography was shown. I’m not an expert here but I think HIPPA is in place mainly to protect the privacy of the patient, which in this situation is O’Keefe. The guardsmen and the nurse are shown following procedure so there shouldn’t be any liability issues for them. Their protective gear covers up their faces on camera.
What this video does is show exactly why so many of us are confused. Yes, James O’Keefe is a provocateur but he does expose some stories the public should see. This video may be one of them. The guardsmen, not the medical professionals, downplay the seriousness of the coronavirus and the professionals (like nurse Alyssa) calmly tell what they know to be true. The virus affects everyone differently, children are more uncomfortable with the testing than adults, and the virus is not the flu – it is real and it is worse. Also, it’s a new coronavirus and we just don’t know what we don’t know yet.
In the meantime, I know what I am going to do. I’m listening to daily briefings given by the experts, listening to my local elected officials to keep up with how my city is coping with the COVID-19 outbreak, and I’m am sheltering-in-place just as much as I possibly can. I literally only go out to go pick up medication at the drugstore, go to the bank (the drive-thru is the only option there), and run in as quickly as I can into the grocery store and stay as far away from others as possible while I do so. Most all of those things I can do without getting out of my car. And, yes, if I had a mask, I’d be wearing it in public, too. Mock all that if you will. My immune system is comprised and I will do whatever it takes to avoid this thing. I also don’t want to expose my husband and grown son to it. I can tell you that the one experience I’ve had going into a grocery store since the great hunkering down period began involved a masked, gloved store worker offering me a grocery cart and wiping down the handle first before I entered the store. I was grateful for that gesture.
We don’t know what we don’t know. We can take care of ourselves and those around us, though. I would rather overreact with safety precautions than not. My situation is different than that of the vast majority of people. I work from home. Some of these precautions I do anyway. Being inside my home for an extended period of time now is doable. We can do this without freaking out in panic or brushing off the potential dangers of this virus.


hotair--2020-03-31--McConnell: Impeachment "diverted the attention of the government" from coronavirus early

If Trump ’ s impeachment trial were such a distraction from COVID-19 , it ’ s strange that Mitch and Senate Republicans didn ’ t bang that drum at the time .
They weren ’ t shy about using pragmatic arguments against the process .
Lindsey Graham , for instance , made the point repeatedly that impeachment is always bitterly divisive and would hurt the country , which is why he wanted the trial over ASAP .
If he and his colleagues thought coronavirus were a calamity descending upon America and feared that their trial duties were hampering their and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , I feel like we would have heard that from them in January and February .
A lot .
Like , every four minutes .
Not “ no quid pro quo ” or “ bad , but not impeachable ” every four minutes .
“ WE ARE FACING A ONCE-IN-A-CENTURY THREAT AND NEED TO DEVOTE OUR FULL ATTENTION TO IT ” every four minutes .
McConnell has been forced to play defense , though .
Democrat Chris Murphy took a hard shot at Trump administration ’ s yesterday , pointing back to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — the day of Trump ’ s acquittal , coincidentally — warning that the White House seemed unprepared based on a briefing on coronavirus that was given to the Senate that same day .
“ That briefing was chilling to me , ” Murphy elaborated to WaPo about the briefing .
“ It was crystal clear that the administration was not taking this seriously.
” He said he thought that officials who attended , including Anthony Fauci and Alex Azar , were mostly checking the box in keeping Congress informed and didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem .
Which is … not a good narrative for Trump and the GOP .
Partisan recriminations about COVID-19 will be ferocious this fall .
If the idea catches on among voters that Trump and his team bungled the period when the epidemic might have been contained , that could flip the White House and the Senate .
Senate Republicans got to work today on Hugh Hewitt ’ s show with a counter-narrative .
Of course Trump and the GOP were distracted .
They were bogged down with the Democrats ’ impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : I hope you are right that we could do it and that we do do it .
Let me talk to you a little bit about Senator Cotton .
Political yesterday recognized him as the first to the bell .
In your experience in the Senate , was Senator Cotton the first one to say hey , Leader , hey Mitch , this is a deadly situation that I do not trust to the Chinese ?
Was he first ?
MM : He was first , and I think Tom was right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up while we were tied down on the impeachment trial .
And I think it diverted the attention of the government , because everything every day was all about impeachment .
But Tom figured this out early , and he was absolutely right .
Tom Cotton was a guest on Hewitt ’ s show today as well .
He had the same message : I ’ ve seen a dozen people , right and left , on political Twitter make the same point in response to that .
Are Senate Republicans now agreeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ switch on coronavirus ?
Trump gave himself a 10 out of 10 recently when a reporter asked him to grade his team ’ s response thus far .
I don ’ t blame Senate GOPers for finding that ludicrous and wanting to pivot to a less ridiculous spin , but there is in fact an obvious pivot here .
It reminds me of the pivot during impeachment from “ no quid pro quo ” to “ bad but not impeachable , ” in that once again we have the president pushing a defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emerge , forcing Republicans in Congress to shift to a more plausible one .
There was a quid pro quo — but it ’ s not a high crime or misdemeanor .
The administration did bungle the COVID-19 response — but you can ’ t blame them , they were preoccupied with impeachment .
Were Tony Fauci and Alex Azar and Robert Redfield and other members of the public health team , which would have been in the lead on preparations , really preoccupied with impeachment ?
Why would they have been more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
There are other reasons why “ preoccupied with impeachment ” is hard to believe .
Trump famously insisted at every turn that the epidemic was well in hand until early March .
If he had been sounding alarms about it throughout the impeachment period , that would be one thing .
Instead he continually minimized the threat , evidence that he wasn ’ t “ distracted ” from it , he was in denial about it .
Ten days ago U.S. officials whispered to WaPo that they had warned the president and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the virus was a threat but never made headway : Intelligence agencies “ have been warning on this since January , ” said a U.S. official who had access to intelligence reporting that was disseminated to members of Congress and their staffs as well as to officials in the Trump administration , and who , along with others , spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive information .
“ Donald Trump may not have been expecting this , but a lot of other people in the government were — they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do anything about it , ” this official said .
“ The system was blinking red.
” … On Jan. 27 , White House aides huddled with then-acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney in his office , trying to get senior officials to pay more attention to the virus , according to people briefed on the meeting .
Joe Grogan , the head of the White House Domestic Policy Council , argued that the administration needed to take the virus seriously or it could cost the president his reelection , and that dealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life in the United States for many months .
Mulvaney then began convening more regular meetings .
In early briefings , however , officials said Trump was dismissive because he did not believe that the virus had spread widely throughout the United States .
Intel officials weren ’ t distracted by impeachment , at least in their telling .
Tom Cotton wasn ’ t distracted either .
He sent a letter to Alex Azar on January 22 , in the thick of the impeachment process , to encourage Trump to ban travel between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ credit , Trump complied — partially — on January 31 , banning travel by foreigners who ’ d been in China during the previous two weeks .
Cotton and Trump proved that they were capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time , taking an early step to limit the spread of COVID-19 while impeachment was raging .
If their attention wasn ’ t so “ diverted ” to prevent that first , basic step from being taken , why couldn ’ t further steps have been taken ?
And remember @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why wasn ’ t there an immediate announcement by the White House and/or Senate that , with this terrible distraction finally behind them , they could and would now devote their full attention to the looming pandemic ?
In reality , more than a month later , Trump was still tweeting stuff like this : He didn ’ t even discontinue his golf outings ( of which there were seven after mid-January ) until March 8 , the day before that tweet was sent .
These are all bad facts that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GOP this fall , but that ’ s exactly why McConnell and Cotton are scrambling early to head off Murphy ’ s ( and Joe Biden ’ s ) attacks now .
There ’ s a vanishingly small array of good excuses that might conceivably justify the massive CDC/FDA screw-up in testing and the feds ’ failure to supply hospitals with protective gear and ventilators in a timely way .
One obvious one , which is true , is “ China lied to us and the world about the threat.
” Another obvious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Doesn ’ t matter whether it ’ s true ; what matters is whether people can be led to believe it .
With a dogged enough PR effort , it ’ s possible .
It just might save the Senate majority this fall .
The weird quirk in this messaging , though , is that I don ’ t believe I ’ ve heard it from Trump himself yet as I write this at 5 p.m .
ET .
Maybe he ’ ll mention it at today ’ s coronavirus press conference — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking point is coordinated — but it ’ s curious that someone who ’ s so eager in most cases to find scapegoats hasn ’ t already settled on blaming Pelosi for “ distracting ” him with impeachment .
I assume the reason is the same as the reason that he never could bring himself to drop the “ no quid pro quo ” defense even after many Senate Republicans abandoned it .
To say that Democrats distracted him for responding effectively to COVID-19 would require him to admit that he hasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like saying there was a quid pro quo in the Ukraine matter but it wasn ’ t impeachable would require him to admit wrongdoing in the Ukraine matter .
He ’ s not going to do that .
The phone call between him and Zelensky was “ perfect ” and his response to coronavirus is a 10 out of 10 .
He ’ ll leave it to lesser officials to shift blame in ways that require finding fault with him .
Update : Well , here he is this afternoon .
He can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ impeachment distracted me ” claim .
It would require admitting fault .

If Trump’s impeachment trial were such a distraction from COVID-19, it’s strange that Mitch and Senate Republicans didn’t bang that drum at the time. They weren’t shy about using pragmatic arguments against the process. Lindsey Graham, for instance, made the point repeatedly that impeachment is always bitterly divisive and would hurt the country, which is why he wanted the trial over ASAP. If he and his colleagues thought coronavirus were a calamity descending upon America and feared that their trial duties were hampering their and Trump’s ability to respond to it, I feel like we would have heard that from them in January and February.
A lot. Like, every four minutes. Not “no quid pro quo” or “bad, but not impeachable” every four minutes. “WE ARE FACING A ONCE-IN-A-CENTURY THREAT AND NEED TO DEVOTE OUR FULL ATTENTION TO IT” every four minutes.
McConnell has been forced to play defense, though. Democrat Chris Murphy took a hard shot at Trump administration’s yesterday, pointing back to a tweet he sent on February 5 — the day of Trump’s acquittal, coincidentally — warning that the White House seemed unprepared based on a briefing on coronavirus that was given to the Senate that same day.
On February 5th, I sat in a meeting with top Administration officials as Senators pressed them to request emergency funding to hire staff and stockpile supplies for the coming crisis. They said they had it covered. Didn’t need any additional funding. What a fatal screw up. https://t.co/SGrH9q7QS7 — Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) March 30, 2020
“That briefing was chilling to me,” Murphy elaborated to WaPo about the briefing. “It was crystal clear that the administration was not taking this seriously.” He said he thought that officials who attended, including Anthony Fauci and Alex Azar, were mostly checking the box in keeping Congress informed and didn’t yet appreciate the potential scope of the problem. Which is … not a good narrative for Trump and the GOP. Partisan recriminations about COVID-19 will be ferocious this fall. If the idea catches on among voters that Trump and his team bungled the period when the epidemic might have been contained, that could flip the White House and the Senate.
Senate Republicans got to work today on Hugh Hewitt’s show with a counter-narrative. Of course Trump and the GOP were distracted. They were bogged down with the Democrats’ impeachment obsession. McConnell to Hewitt:
HH: I hope you are right that we could do it and that we do do it. Let me talk to you a little bit about Senator Cotton. Political yesterday recognized him as the first to the bell. In your experience in the Senate, was Senator Cotton the first one to say hey, Leader, hey Mitch, this is a deadly situation that I do not trust to the Chinese? Was he first? MM: He was first, and I think Tom was right on the mark. And it came up while we were tied down on the impeachment trial. And I think it diverted the attention of the government, because everything every day was all about impeachment. But Tom figured this out early, and he was absolutely right.
Tom Cotton was a guest on Hewitt’s show today as well. He had the same message:
TC: Well Hugh, the first time I recall talking about the China virus in the media was on your show, probably late in January after I had started studying the problem in mid-January. And I have to tell you that in mid-January and late-January, unfortunately, Washington, especially the Congress, was consumed with another matter – you may recall the partisan impeachment of the President. But I was focused on the time on what I thought was going to be a growing crisis coming out Wuhan. And unfortunately, it’s been proven correct.
I’ve seen a dozen people, right and left, on political Twitter make the same point in response to that. Are Senate Republicans now agreeing that the government was asleep at the switch on coronavirus? Trump gave himself a 10 out of 10 recently when a reporter asked him to grade his team’s response thus far. I don’t blame Senate GOPers for finding that ludicrous and wanting to pivot to a less ridiculous spin, but there is in fact an obvious pivot here. It reminds me of the pivot during impeachment from “no quid pro quo” to “bad but not impeachable,” in that once again we have the president pushing a defense that becomes increasingly far-fetched as more facts emerge, forcing Republicans in Congress to shift to a more plausible one. There was a quid pro quo — but it’s not a high crime or misdemeanor. The administration did bungle the COVID-19 response — but you can’t blame them, they were preoccupied with impeachment.
Were Tony Fauci and Alex Azar and Robert Redfield and other members of the public health team, which would have been in the lead on preparations, really preoccupied with impeachment? Why would they have been more interested in that than in the virus?
There are other reasons why “preoccupied with impeachment” is hard to believe. Trump famously insisted at every turn that the epidemic was well in hand until early March. If he had been sounding alarms about it throughout the impeachment period, that would be one thing. Instead he continually minimized the threat, evidence that he wasn’t “distracted” from it, he was in denial about it. Ten days ago U.S. officials whispered to WaPo that they had warned the president and his staff repeatedly in January and February that the virus was a threat but never made headway:
Intelligence agencies “have been warning on this since January,” said a U.S. official who had access to intelligence reporting that was disseminated to members of Congress and their staffs as well as to officials in the Trump administration, and who, along with others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive information. “Donald Trump may not have been expecting this, but a lot of other people in the government were — they just couldn’t get him to do anything about it,” this official said. “The system was blinking red.”… On Jan. 27, White House aides huddled with then-acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney in his office, trying to get senior officials to pay more attention to the virus, according to people briefed on the meeting. Joe Grogan, the head of the White House Domestic Policy Council, argued that the administration needed to take the virus seriously or it could cost the president his reelection, and that dealing with the virus was likely to dominate life in the United States for many months. Mulvaney then began convening more regular meetings. In early briefings, however, officials said Trump was dismissive because he did not believe that the virus had spread widely throughout the United States.
Intel officials weren’t distracted by impeachment, at least in their telling. Tom Cotton wasn’t distracted either. He sent a letter to Alex Azar on January 22, in the thick of the impeachment process, to encourage Trump to ban travel between the U.S. and China. To his credit, Trump complied — partially — on January 31, banning travel by foreigners who’d been in China during the previous two weeks. Cotton and Trump proved that they were capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time, taking an early step to limit the spread of COVID-19 while impeachment was raging. If their attention wasn’t so “diverted” to prevent that first, basic step from being taken, why couldn’t further steps have been taken?
And remember, impeachment was over by February 5. Why wasn’t there an immediate announcement by the White House and/or Senate that, with this terrible distraction finally behind them, they could and would now devote their full attention to the looming pandemic? In reality, more than a month later, Trump was still tweeting stuff like this:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1237027356314869761
He didn’t even discontinue his golf outings (of which there were seven after mid-January) until March 8, the day before that tweet was sent. These are all bad facts that’ll be used against him and the GOP this fall, but that’s exactly why McConnell and Cotton are scrambling early to head off Murphy’s (and Joe Biden’s) attacks now. There’s a vanishingly small array of good excuses that might conceivably justify the massive CDC/FDA screw-up in testing and the feds’ failure to supply hospitals with protective gear and ventilators in a timely way. One obvious one, which is true, is “China lied to us and the world about the threat.” Another obvious one is “impeachment distracted us.” Doesn’t matter whether it’s true; what matters is whether people can be led to believe it. With a dogged enough PR effort, it’s possible. It just might save the Senate majority this fall.
The weird quirk in this messaging, though, is that I don’t believe I’ve heard it from Trump himself yet as I write this at 5 p.m. ET. Maybe he’ll mention it at today’s coronavirus press conference — that would be further evidence that the talking point is coordinated — but it’s curious that someone who’s so eager in most cases to find scapegoats hasn’t already settled on blaming Pelosi for “distracting” him with impeachment. I assume the reason is the same as the reason that he never could bring himself to drop the “no quid pro quo” defense even after many Senate Republicans abandoned it. To say that Democrats distracted him for responding effectively to COVID-19 would require him to admit that he hasn’t responded effectively to COVID-19, just like saying there was a quid pro quo in the Ukraine matter but it wasn’t impeachable would require him to admit wrongdoing in the Ukraine matter. He’s not going to do that. The phone call between him and Zelensky was “perfect” and his response to coronavirus is a 10 out of 10. He’ll leave it to lesser officials to shift blame in ways that require finding fault with him.
Update: Well, here he is this afternoon. He can’t quite pull the trigger on the “impeachment distracted me” claim. It would require admitting fault.


hotair--2020-03-31--Rick Scott: Why are we paying WHO to "willfully parrot" China's COVID-19 propaganda?

Is this the time to cut funding to the World Health Organization ?
That would be a bold suggestion , one that might attract an avalanche of criticism during a pandemic — if WHO had the pandemic as its primary and independent focus , but that ’ s the question that will face Congress when they return next month .
Sen. Rick Scott ( R-FL ) fired this shot across WHO ’ s bow earlier today , and demanded an in-depth investigation into WHO ’ s willingness to “ parrot propaganda ” from Beijing : “ The mission of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the world so every country can make the best decisions to keep their citizens safe .
When it comes to coronavirus , the WHO failed , ” Scott said , accusing the global health organization of willfully spreading misinformation .
“ We know Communist China is lying about how many cases and deaths they have , what they knew and when they knew it — and the WHO never bothered to investigate further , ” Scott added .
“ Their inaction cost lives.
” He said the WHO “ willfully parroted propaganda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and he called for hearings and a full investigation when Congress returns to Washington next month .
It ’ s not just that WHO spent its time toting the Beijing party line rather than deal with the reality of the outbreak .
The issue also includes evidence that WHO prioritized the Communist Party ’ s political and diplomatic ambitions rather than medical care and pandemic response .
Their treatment of Taiwan ’ s data and their refusal to even acknowledge Taiwan has become a major point of contention for WHO ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where the pandemic started , Taiwan ’ s Centres for Disease Control has reported just over 300 cases of coronavirus .
Only two people have died .
By contrast , Australia — which has a similar population — has reported 4,359 cases and 19 deaths .
But despite this , Taiwan ’ s foreign ministry has complained that official data and prevention methods it has provided to the World Health Organisation ( WHO ) are not being shared with the international body ’ s member states .
… “ Therefore , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand the current situation of Taiwan ’ s epidemic situation , preventive policies and border quarantine measures from the information provided by the WHO , ” foreign ministry spokeswoman Joanne Ou said .
As a UN agency , WHO normally engages on a formal basis only with members — and Taiwan lost its membership nearly 50 years ago .
However , when dealing with a pandemic , an organization focused on health rather than politics would have been very interested to know how any state mitigated the pandemic .
Instead , WHO has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t exist , another form of propaganda parroting that seems to be the bigger priority .
Even when focused on health , WHO seems more interested in protecting Xi Jinping than other UN member-states .
WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus owes his job to Xi ’ s support , and critics argue that Tedros is paying Xi back by covering up his catastrophic cover-up .
In late January , when it became clear that China had suppressed warnings about the coronavirus outbreak , Tedros praised China ’ s “ seriousness ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Scott cites this tweet from mid-January as just one example of WHO ’ s corruption : China knew damned well at that time that this was not true .
Had they warned WHO and the world , the outbreak could have been contained earlier , but that would have made China look bad — and so WHO didn ’ t bother to confirm this claim from Beijing .
We aren ’ t the only ones growing skeptical of data from China and WHO , either .
This weekend , the UK government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be forty times higher than what China admits : There is fury at the top of government about the Chinese Communist Party ’ s misinformation blitz around the virus , restrictions on vast amounts of protective medical equipment being exported , and animal rights abuses blamed by experts for the outbreak .
There is particular irritation in Downing Street about attempts to falsely blame a US Army delegation to the city of Wuhan , the outbreak ’ s epicentre , for causing the crisis .
A source said : ‘ There is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is unacceptable .
They [ the Chinese government ] know they have got this badly wrong and rather than owning it they are spreading lies.
’ Mr Johnson has been warned by scientific advisers that China ’ s officially declared statistics on the number of cases of coronavirus could be ‘ downplayed by a factor of 15 to 40 times ’ .
And No 10 believes China is seeking to build its economic power during the pandemic with ‘ predatory offers of help ’ countries around the world .
A major review of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Covid-19 outbreak and will not report until the impact of the virus can be assessed .
A Government source close to the review said : ‘ It is going to be back to the diplomatic drawing board after this .
Rethink is an understatement.
’ Another source said : ‘ There has to be a reckoning when this is over.
’ Yet another added : ‘ The anger goes right to the top.
’ We should redirect our resources to efforts based on science rather than Communist China ’ s propaganda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be put to better use , under the circumstances .
Perhaps cutting them off will force WHO to stop prioritizing Xi ’ s political career over a pandemic .

Is this the time to cut funding to the World Health Organization? That would be a bold suggestion, one that might attract an avalanche of criticism during a pandemic — if WHO had the pandemic as its primary and independent focus, but that’s the question that will face Congress when they return next month. Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) fired this shot across WHO’s bow earlier today, and demanded an in-depth investigation into WHO’s willingness to “parrot propaganda” from Beijing:
“The mission of the WHO is to get public health information to the world so every country can make the best decisions to keep their citizens safe. When it comes to coronavirus, the WHO failed,” Scott said, accusing the global health organization of willfully spreading misinformation. “We know Communist China is lying about how many cases and deaths they have, what they knew and when they knew it — and the WHO never bothered to investigate further,” Scott added. “Their inaction cost lives.” He said the WHO “willfully parroted propaganda” from China’s Communist Party, and he called for hearings and a full investigation when Congress returns to Washington next month.
It’s not just that WHO spent its time toting the Beijing party line rather than deal with the reality of the outbreak. The issue also includes evidence that WHO prioritized the Communist Party’s political and diplomatic ambitions rather than medical care and pandemic response. Their treatment of Taiwan’s data and their refusal to even acknowledge Taiwan has become a major point of contention for WHO’s critics:
Despite its proximity to China, where the pandemic started, Taiwan’s Centres for Disease Control has reported just over 300 cases of coronavirus. Only two people have died. By contrast, Australia — which has a similar population — has reported 4,359 cases and 19 deaths. But despite this, Taiwan’s foreign ministry has complained that official data and prevention methods it has provided to the World Health Organisation (WHO) are not being shared with the international body’s member states. … “Therefore, the health bodies of various countries cannot understand the current situation of Taiwan’s epidemic situation, preventive policies and border quarantine measures from the information provided by the WHO,” foreign ministry spokeswoman Joanne Ou said.
As a UN agency, WHO normally engages on a formal basis only with members — and Taiwan lost its membership nearly 50 years ago. However, when dealing with a pandemic, an organization focused on health rather than politics would have been very interested to know how any state mitigated the pandemic. Instead, WHO has spent most of its time pretending Taiwan doesn’t exist, another form of propaganda parroting that seems to be the bigger priority.
Even when focused on health, WHO seems more interested in protecting Xi Jinping than other UN member-states. WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus owes his job to Xi’s support, and critics argue that Tedros is paying Xi back by covering up his catastrophic cover-up. In late January, when it became clear that China had suppressed warnings about the coronavirus outbreak, Tedros praised China’s “seriousness” and “transparency” in the crisis.
Scott cites this tweet from mid-January as just one example of WHO’s corruption:
Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China🇨🇳. pic.twitter.com/Fnl5P877VG — World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) January 14, 2020
China knew damned well at that time that this was not true. Had they warned WHO and the world, the outbreak could have been contained earlier, but that would have made China look bad — and so WHO didn’t bother to confirm this claim from Beijing.
We aren’t the only ones growing skeptical of data from China and WHO, either. This weekend, the UK government think the number of COVID-19 cases could be forty times higher than what China admits:
There is fury at the top of government about the Chinese Communist Party’s misinformation blitz around the virus, restrictions on vast amounts of protective medical equipment being exported, and animal rights abuses blamed by experts for the outbreak. There is particular irritation in Downing Street about attempts to falsely blame a US Army delegation to the city of Wuhan, the outbreak’s epicentre, for causing the crisis. A source said: ‘There is a disgusting disinformation campaign going on and it is unacceptable. They [the Chinese government] know they have got this badly wrong and rather than owning it they are spreading lies.’ Mr Johnson has been warned by scientific advisers that China’s officially declared statistics on the number of cases of coronavirus could be ‘downplayed by a factor of 15 to 40 times’. And No 10 believes China is seeking to build its economic power during the pandemic with ‘predatory offers of help’ countries around the world. A major review of British foreign policy has been shelved due to the Covid-19 outbreak and will not report until the impact of the virus can be assessed. A Government source close to the review said: ‘It is going to be back to the diplomatic drawing board after this. Rethink is an understatement.’ Another source said: ‘There has to be a reckoning when this is over.’ Yet another added: ‘The anger goes right to the top.’
We should redirect our resources to efforts based on science rather than Communist China’s propaganda, Scott argues:
As soon as Congress is back in session, there should be a hearing, along with a full investigation, to review whether American taxpayers should continue to spend millions of dollars every year to fund an organization that willfully parroted propaganda from the Chinese Communist Party.
Those funds could be put to better use, under the circumstances. Perhaps cutting them off will force WHO to stop prioritizing Xi’s political career over a pandemic.