hotair--2020-03-31--Trump: Prepare for a very painful two weeks

Yep .
Longer than two weeks , really , but since NYC will peak in two weeks or so and NYC will — hopefully — be the worst single local outbreak America has to endure , the most gruesome single-day death tolls are probably around two weeks away .
Word is that the projections being used by the White House track closely with the projections made by the IHME , which are available online .
Peak deaths in the U.S. should arrive in exactly two weeks , to the tune of 2,200 dead — per day : That won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Orleans will be accelerating around that time , as will the unfolding disaster in Florida , where there still isn ’ t a statewide stay-at-home order .
If the projections are right , around 15,000 Americans will die in a single week in mid-April .
That ’ s around four times the total number of Americans killed in action in eight years of the Iraq war .
Via Axios , here ’ s the graph that appeared behind Trump at today ’ s briefing .
Fauci and Birx are all-in on 100,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re holding out a glimmer of hope that we ’ ll do better at social distancing and hold that number down : It will be a small comfort to see daily death tolls begin to decline in mid-April , but I think we ’ re all preparing ourselves inadequately for what the second half of the month will look like .
The epidemic curve is a bell curve ; it doesn ’ t decline steeply once you hit peak deaths .
If IHME is accurate , we should be reaching a total U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ April 15 .
By the end of the month , that number will double to 60,000 .
Given Fauci ’ s optimism that the second wave of the outbreak this fall will be much better contained than the current one thanks to advances in U.S. capabilities , it makes me wonder when he and Birx imagine the bulk of American deaths will occur to produce the 100,000 ( or 240,000 ) deaths he ’ s imagining .
Do they think the second wave could be very bad even with the expected medical advances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toll this month could be far greater than imagined ?
It ’ s one thing to imagine , say , 150,000 people dying over the next eight months .
It ’ s another to imagine 150,000 people dying over the next eight weeks .
Which is it ?
Things will get better eventually , after a very bad spell… …but we ’ d be fooling ourselves if we think progress here is a straight line upward in every respect : Is that because we ’ re running short again on tests , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very basic implements needed to perform the tests , like nasal swabs ?
I ’ ll leave you with this , one of the most dramatic Trump reversals yet .
It was 22 days ago that he tweeted , “ So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu .
It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year .
Nothing is shut down , life & the economy go on .
At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus , with 22 deaths .
Think about that !
” Here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m glad he ’ s got it now , even if it ’ s late .

Yep. Longer than two weeks, really, but since NYC will peak in two weeks or so and NYC will — hopefully — be the worst single local outbreak America has to endure, the most gruesome single-day death tolls are probably around two weeks away.
"I want every American to be prepared for the hard days that lie ahead," President Trump says. "We are going to go through a very tough two weeks." https://t.co/GkInFxQK4R pic.twitter.com/or0heWcvub — CBS News (@CBSNews) March 31, 2020
Word is that the projections being used by the White House track closely with the projections made by the IHME, which are available online. Peak deaths in the U.S. should arrive in exactly two weeks, to the tune of 2,200 dead — per day:
That won’t all come from New York. New Orleans will be accelerating around that time, as will the unfolding disaster in Florida, where there still isn’t a statewide stay-at-home order. If the projections are right, around 15,000 Americans will die in a single week in mid-April. That’s around four times the total number of Americans killed in action in eight years of the Iraq war.
Via Axios, here’s the graph that appeared behind Trump at today’s briefing. Fauci and Birx are all-in on 100,000 to 240,000 deaths, although they’re holding out a glimmer of hope that we’ll do better at social distancing and hold that number down:
It will be a small comfort to see daily death tolls begin to decline in mid-April, but I think we’re all preparing ourselves inadequately for what the second half of the month will look like. The epidemic curve is a bell curve; it doesn’t decline steeply once you hit peak deaths. If IHME is accurate, we should be reaching a total U.S. death toll of 30,000 or so by April 15. By the end of the month, that number will double to 60,000. Given Fauci’s optimism that the second wave of the outbreak this fall will be much better contained than the current one thanks to advances in U.S. capabilities, it makes me wonder when he and Birx imagine the bulk of American deaths will occur to produce the 100,000 (or 240,000) deaths he’s imagining. Do they think the second wave could be very bad even with the expected medical advances? Or do they think the death toll this month could be far greater than imagined?
It’s one thing to imagine, say, 150,000 people dying over the next eight months. It’s another to imagine 150,000 people dying over the next eight weeks. Which is it?
Things will get better eventually, after a very bad spell…
Continued “good” news from Italy. Understanding good is relative. The data from Italy has been tracking with NY, which bodes well as it could mean 2 more weeks of climbing cases followed by 2 weeks of falling down the other side of the curve. pic.twitter.com/6WvZPfIBO5 — Thomas P. Bossert (@TomBossert) March 31, 2020
…but we’d be fooling ourselves if we think progress here is a straight line upward in every respect:
U.S. coronavirus testing fell again today. Safe to say it's no longer on an upward trend, despite a rising number of cases. This is not going to get it done, folks. We're back in the danger zone as far as testing is concerned.https://t.co/aIgWCudPbx pic.twitter.com/oPNnkX6Z9q — Noah Smith 🐇 (@Noahpinion) March 31, 2020
Is that because we’re running short again on tests, or because we’re running short on very basic implements needed to perform the tests, like nasal swabs?
I’ll leave you with this, one of the most dramatic Trump reversals yet. It was 22 days ago that he tweeted, “So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year. Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 deaths. Think about that!” Here he is 22 days later. I’m glad he’s got it now, even if it’s late.
https://twitter.com/alx/status/1245119382944178176


hotair--2020-04-01--Chinese doctor who attempted to warn others about coronavirus has disappeared

A doctor who may have been the first person in China to try to spread the word about the coronvirus was reprimanded and told to remain silent .
Earlier this month she disobeyed that order and gave an interview to a Chinese magazine .
Ai Fen , director of the emergency department at Wuhan Central Hospital , told Chinese magazine People that she posted an image of a diagnostic report on social network WeChat on December 30 , showing that the patient had a pneumonia infection caused by a Sars-like coronavirus… Ai told the magazine she alerted the hospital ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease control department immediately .
“ I even grabbed our hospital respiratory department director , who happened to be passing my office , and told him that one of his patients was confirmed to have been infected with a Sars-like virus , ” she said .
The same day she posted the screenshot online , she was reprimanded for “ spreading rumors.
” Ai said she was told by superiors the day she sounded the alarm that Wuhan ’ s health commission had issued a directive that medical workers were not to disclose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease it caused , to avoid sparking a panic .
Soon after , the hospital reminded all staff that public disclosure related to the illness was forbidden .
Two days later , an official in charge of the hospital ’ s supervision department gave Ai a dressing down for “ spreading rumours ” – a reference to the photograph she had posted online .
She told the magazine , “ If I had known what was to happen , I would not have cared about the reprimand .
I would have f**king talked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I could.
” Shortly after her interview was published it was pulled down by Chinese censors .
This week , 60 Minutes Australia reported that Dr. Ai has disappeared .
You can see the full report below .
The NY Post says that after the 60 Minutes report Dr. Ai ’ s social media account was updated , however it ’ s not clear if she ’ s the one doing it .
Soon after the program aired , Ai posted a cryptic message to her page on the Chinese social media site @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shared a post captioned , “ Happy April Fools Day , ” showing her wearing a lab coat and mask , apparently at work at the hospital .
But RFA reported that detainees in custody in China have been known to either update their own social media accounts under authorities ’ orders , or police may do so after gaining access to their devices .
April Fools Day is something Chinese people celebrate , however I noticed that the CCP apparently banned it in 2016 .
In fact , the kind of restrictions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dr. Li both ran afoul of were also used to attempt to stamp out April Fools Day : Here ’ s the full 60 Minutes Australia report .
The bit about Dr. Ai ’ s disappearance comes about eight and a half minutes in .
There ’ s a fair amount of Trump bashing in the latter half of this clip ( including a Trump impersonator reading his tweets ) but the bulk of it is about China ’ s culpability and attempted cover up .

A doctor who may have been the first person in China to try to spread the word about the coronvirus was reprimanded and told to remain silent. Earlier this month she disobeyed that order and gave an interview to a Chinese magazine.
Ai Fen, director of the emergency department at Wuhan Central Hospital, told Chinese magazine People that she posted an image of a diagnostic report on social network WeChat on December 30, showing that the patient had a pneumonia infection caused by a Sars-like coronavirus… Ai told the magazine she alerted the hospital’s community health service centre and infectious disease control department immediately. “I even grabbed our hospital respiratory department director, who happened to be passing my office, and told him that one of his patients was confirmed to have been infected with a Sars-like virus,” she said.
The same day she posted the screenshot online, she was reprimanded for “spreading rumors.”
Ai said she was told by superiors the day she sounded the alarm that Wuhan’s health commission had issued a directive that medical workers were not to disclose anything about the virus, or the disease it caused, to avoid sparking a panic. Soon after, the hospital reminded all staff that public disclosure related to the illness was forbidden. Two days later, an official in charge of the hospital’s supervision department gave Ai a dressing down for “spreading rumours” – a reference to the photograph she had posted online.
She told the magazine, “If I had known what was to happen, I would not have cared about the reprimand. I would have f**king talked about it to whoever, where ever I could.” Shortly after her interview was published it was pulled down by Chinese censors.
This week, 60 Minutes Australia reported that Dr. Ai has disappeared. You can see the full report below. The NY Post says that after the 60 Minutes report Dr. Ai’s social media account was updated, however it’s not clear if she’s the one doing it.
Soon after the program aired, Ai posted a cryptic message to her page on the Chinese social media site Weibo. “A river. A bridge. A road. A clock chime,” read the post, coupled with a Wuhan cityscape photo… And on Wednesday, she shared a post captioned, “Happy April Fools Day,” showing her wearing a lab coat and mask, apparently at work at the hospital. But RFA reported that detainees in custody in China have been known to either update their own social media accounts under authorities’ orders, or police may do so after gaining access to their devices.
April Fools Day is something Chinese people celebrate, however I noticed that the CCP apparently banned it in 2016. In fact, the kind of restrictions on spreading rumors that Dr. Ai and Dr. Li both ran afoul of were also used to attempt to stamp out April Fools Day:
As part of a long-running effort to win control of the narrative on social media and deter dissent, China’s Communist Party launched a campaign three years ago to criminalize the spreading of rumors. Xinhua’s post suggests an April Fools’ Day prank that mocked or undermined the party could have potentially serious consequences.
Here’s the full 60 Minutes Australia report. The bit about Dr. Ai’s disappearance comes about eight and a half minutes in. There’s a fair amount of Trump bashing in the latter half of this clip (including a Trump impersonator reading his tweets) but the bulk of it is about China’s culpability and attempted cover up.


hotair--2020-04-01--FiveThirtyEight: What gives with Trump's approval-ratings boost?

Is it real , and under the circumstances , is it spectacular ?
The sudden improvement in Donald Trump ’ s overall approval ratings has now appeared in most of the political polling series , even if one or two of them shows a bit of plateauing now .
Today ’ s aggregate average chart from RealClearPolitics makes the point clearly : Trump currently enjoys the smallest gap in approval/disapproval since inauguration .
His approval rating on its own is the highest it ’ s ever been .
So what gives ?
FiveThirtyEight ’ s Nathaniel Rakich does a deep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and mainly comes up with the correct answer — a rally effect limited by existing partisan boundaries : Trump may be experiencing what political scientists call the “ rally-around-the-flag ” effect , when national leaders temporarily get more popular amid international crises .
Usually , you hear about people rallying around the flag after terrorist attacks or outbreaks of war , but the coronavirus pandemic could qualify in that it too poses an imminent threat to American safety .
… Despite Trump ’ s solid approval numbers on his handling of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as enthusiastic about it as residents of some other countries are about their leaders ’ responses .
That could explain why Trump ’ s overall approval rating hasn ’ t risen nearly as much as some other world leaders ’ .
According to Morning Consult , Trump ’ s net approval rating rose 5 percentage points from March 11 ( the day the World Health Organization officially declared the coronavirus crisis a pandemic ) to March 24,1 ranking sixth among the nine major world leaders Morning Consult polled .
British Prime Minister Boris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau all experienced increases of more than 20 points in their net approval ratings .
One possible explanation for Trump ’ s relatively small popularity boost is that he ’ s been criticized for not taking the pandemic seriously , especially in the early going — which could also be the reason for his good-but-still-below-average approval ratings on the coronavirus specifically .
Another ( related ) explanation is our old friend partisan polarization .
Throughout his presidency , Trump ’ s approval rating has proven extremely difficult to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put simply , Americans know Donald Trump , and they ’ ve made up their minds about him .
And because he already enjoys virtually the maximum possible support among Republicans , he would have to make headway among Democrats and independents to further increase his approval rating .
But Democrats ’ antipathy toward Trump is well documented , and genuine , persuadable independent voters make up only a small share of the population .
“ My guess is that Trump could get a limited rally if he were to act truly presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It seems unlikely , though , that he will get the large rally that accompanied the start of the Gulf War or the attacks on 9/11.
” This is probably the clearest-eyed view of the limits of this boost .
In a few of the polls where crosstabs are accessible , Trump gained mainly from demos where he normally performs more poorly .
His strong demos are solid enough to barely budge , but the crisis appears to have some people at least temporarily rethinking previous rock-solid Trump opposition .
That has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ normal approval rating from ~44 % to the 47-48 % range , but likely won ’ t go much above that .
On the other hand , it might not need to go much above that , either .
Trump won with historically low approval ratings and sky-high enthusiasm — against a weak opponent , to be sure , but still .
A couple of points upward in approval , if sustained , and especially in those demographics , and Trump has a shot at a 40-state win against another weak opponent .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ It really depends on Trump , Rakich concludes : At this point , though , the long-term effects of the pandemic on Trump ’ s political prospects are far from clear .
As long as Trump is seen as responding effectively to the threat of COVID-19 , he will reap the political benefits .
But if Americans come to see him as bungling the crisis — if they blame him for high death tolls or widespread unemployment , for instance — Trump could wind up even less popular than he was before .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ tactics during the crisis .
Rather than give in to temptation to operate as a bare-knuckled political brawler as is his usual mien , Trump now has to act presidential and rise above the fray .
That is the advantages presidents have in genuine crises — they can act like leaders who work with anyone and everyone to beat whatever crisis emerges .
After initially failing to realize that , Trump has embraced that role .
As I write in my column at The Week , the media hasn ’ t — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The media ’ s negative ratings from a public are even more remarkable , coming from Americans clearly in the mood to support its national institutions in this crisis .
The media ’ s focus on itself and its existing antagonisms with Trump rather than on the urgent issues at has created a further gulf between the industry and its consumers .
They failed to grasp the moment that Trump belatedly recognized , and they still have not quite come to terms with it .
… The media ’ s reaction to such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been instructive .
While outlets ’ ratings have soared , some reporters want their employers to stop covering the briefings , ostensibly because of Trump ’ s proclivity for spreading misinformation , but also perhaps because of the briefings ’ effectiveness at boosting Trump ’ s popularity ; as CNN ’ s Daniel Dale complained , they had “ replace [ d ] campaign rallies.
” That attitude might puzzle viewers who are locked in their homes and desperate to find out what ’ s happening with the coronavirus crisis .
Coming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lamented ( for good reason ) the end of the daily briefings during normal , non-crisis periods , these complaints sound hypocritical .
Furthermore , they have a strong whiff of bias , especially when reporters spend too much time trying to interrogate Trump over his past statements rather than on what is happening at the moment .
Voters appear to be signaling that these fights are of little interest to them .
Rightly or wrongly , what Americans see is the media feuding with the president while the president takes action to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words , the media acts as though their feud with Trump is the real story , and the most important news is what Trump said at the beginning of last month .
Trump acts as though the crisis itself is the real story , and is much more focused on what is happening today and tomorrow in these daily briefings .
As long as that continues , expect Trump ’ s ratings to remain at their new ceiling … and the media ’ s to continue their decline .

Is it real, and under the circumstances, is it spectacular? The sudden improvement in Donald Trump’s overall approval ratings has now appeared in most of the political polling series, even if one or two of them shows a bit of plateauing now. Today’s aggregate average chart from RealClearPolitics makes the point clearly:
Trump currently enjoys the smallest gap in approval/disapproval since inauguration. His approval rating on its own is the highest it’s ever been. So what gives? FiveThirtyEight’s Nathaniel Rakich does a deep dive on the numbers and the context, and mainly comes up with the correct answer — a rally effect limited by existing partisan boundaries:
Trump may be experiencing what political scientists call the “rally-around-the-flag” effect, when national leaders temporarily get more popular amid international crises. Usually, you hear about people rallying around the flag after terrorist attacks or outbreaks of war, but the coronavirus pandemic could qualify in that it too poses an imminent threat to American safety. … Despite Trump’s solid approval numbers on his handling of the coronavirus pandemic, Americans aren’t as enthusiastic about it as residents of some other countries are about their leaders’ responses. That could explain why Trump’s overall approval rating hasn’t risen nearly as much as some other world leaders’. According to Morning Consult, Trump’s net approval rating rose 5 percentage points from March 11 (the day the World Health Organization officially declared the coronavirus crisis a pandemic) to March 24,1 ranking sixth among the nine major world leaders Morning Consult polled. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau all experienced increases of more than 20 points in their net approval ratings. One possible explanation for Trump’s relatively small popularity boost is that he’s been criticized for not taking the pandemic seriously, especially in the early going — which could also be the reason for his good-but-still-below-average approval ratings on the coronavirus specifically. Another (related) explanation is our old friend partisan polarization. Throughout his presidency, Trump’s approval rating has proven extremely difficult to dislodge from its usual 39-to-44-percent range; put simply, Americans know Donald Trump, and they’ve made up their minds about him. And because he already enjoys virtually the maximum possible support among Republicans, he would have to make headway among Democrats and independents to further increase his approval rating. But Democrats’ antipathy toward Trump is well documented, and genuine, persuadable independent voters make up only a small share of the population. “My guess is that Trump could get a limited rally if he were to act truly presidential and nonpartisan,” Murray concluded. “It seems unlikely, though, that he will get the large rally that accompanied the start of the Gulf War or the attacks on 9/11.”
This is probably the clearest-eyed view of the limits of this boost. In a few of the polls where crosstabs are accessible, Trump gained mainly from demos where he normally performs more poorly. His strong demos are solid enough to barely budge, but the crisis appears to have some people at least temporarily rethinking previous rock-solid Trump opposition. That has raised the ceiling on Trump’s normal approval rating from ~44% to the 47-48% range, but likely won’t go much above that.
On the other hand, it might not need to go much above that, either. Trump won with historically low approval ratings and sky-high enthusiasm — against a weak opponent, to be sure, but still. A couple of points upward in approval, if sustained, and especially in those demographics, and Trump has a shot at a 40-state win against another weak opponent. But can the boost be sustained? It really depends on Trump, Rakich concludes:
At this point, though, the long-term effects of the pandemic on Trump’s political prospects are far from clear. As long as Trump is seen as responding effectively to the threat of COVID-19, he will reap the political benefits. But if Americans come to see him as bungling the crisis — if they blame him for high death tolls or widespread unemployment, for instance — Trump could wind up even less popular than he was before.
To succeed, Trump has to change tactics during the crisis. Rather than give in to temptation to operate as a bare-knuckled political brawler as is his usual mien, Trump now has to act presidential and rise above the fray. That is the advantages presidents have in genuine crises — they can act like leaders who work with anyone and everyone to beat whatever crisis emerges. After initially failing to realize that, Trump has embraced that role.
As I write in my column at The Week, the media hasn’t — and is paying the price for it:
The media’s negative ratings from a public are even more remarkable, coming from Americans clearly in the mood to support its national institutions in this crisis. The media’s focus on itself and its existing antagonisms with Trump rather than on the urgent issues at has created a further gulf between the industry and its consumers. They failed to grasp the moment that Trump belatedly recognized, and they still have not quite come to terms with it. … The media’s reaction to such access [of the daily briefings] has been instructive. While outlets’ ratings have soared, some reporters want their employers to stop covering the briefings, ostensibly because of Trump’s proclivity for spreading misinformation, but also perhaps because of the briefings’ effectiveness at boosting Trump’s popularity; as CNN’s Daniel Dale complained, they had “replace[d] campaign rallies.” That attitude might puzzle viewers who are locked in their homes and desperate to find out what’s happening with the coronavirus crisis. Coming from the same media outlets that have lamented (for good reason) the end of the daily briefings during normal, non-crisis periods, these complaints sound hypocritical. Furthermore, they have a strong whiff of bias, especially when reporters spend too much time trying to interrogate Trump over his past statements rather than on what is happening at the moment. Voters appear to be signaling that these fights are of little interest to them. Rightly or wrongly, what Americans see is the media feuding with the president while the president takes action to meaningfully address the crisis.
In other words, the media acts as though their feud with Trump is the real story, and the most important news is what Trump said at the beginning of last month. Trump acts as though the crisis itself is the real story, and is much more focused on what is happening today and tomorrow in these daily briefings. As long as that continues, expect Trump’s ratings to remain at their new ceiling … and the media’s to continue their decline.


hotair--2020-04-01--Czech prime minister to Trump: May I recommend masks for everyone, Mr. President?

He shouldn ’ t be pitching this at Trump .
Trump seems pretty convinced already that masks can be useful , as he should be .
He talked yesterday at his briefing about people using scarves as a form of crude protection .
Several layers of cotton fabric would be better but he ’ s got the right idea .
Anything that might conceivably catch infected droplets on their way in — or out — of your nose or mouth will be useful in reducing transmission rates .
The Czechs know .
They ’ re such fans of masks that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mask-wearing on social media .
At the highest levels .
Babiš has been prime minister since late 2017 .
There are more than 3,000 known cases of coronavirus in the Czech Republic but that ’ s significantly lower per capita than nearby Germany and Austria .
Conceivably that ’ s attributable to different rates of testing , but Babiš seems to be a true believer in masks — so much so that his government has made them mandatory , triggering a national effort among citizens to make their own at home .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a mandate , of course , but a recommendation .
Federal officials debating whether to recommend that face coverings be routinely worn in public are responding to increasing evidence that infected people without symptoms can spread the coronavirus , according to internal memos provided to the White House by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .
Simple cloth masks that cover the mouth and nose can prevent virus transmission from such individuals when they are out buying groceries or seeking medical care , according to the memos obtained by The Washington Post… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be an additional community mitigation tool , according to the memos .
Social distancing of at least six feet is still recommended even when wearing a mask .
The memos emphasize that a cloth facial mask is intended not so much to protect the wearer but to help prevent the spread of the virus to others .
A memo dated Thursday noted that people “ generate respiratory aerosols when speaking , coughing and sneezing ” that can be inhaled by nearby individuals… The Monday document suggested promotional “ tag lines ” the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the public : “ COVID ends with me , ” “ My mask protects you and your mask protects me ” and “ I wear my mask to protect my community.
” “ My mask protects you and your mask protects me ” is exactly the message of the widely viewed Czech PSA embedded below .
The feds ’ anxiety about mask-wearing , apparently , is that we ’ re all a bunch of big dummies who ’ ll treat our facial covering as license to give up on social distancing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Part of me feels insulted by that assumption ; another part of me remembers those imbecile college kids partying on spring break while much of the country was shutting down and thinks , yeah , there are a lot of dummies around .
So long as gathering places like bars and restaurants remain closed , though , the cultural pressure to continue social distancing should abide .
Plus , Michael Bennet made a good point about why official sanction for mask-wearing could be important : “ I know from my own personal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around wearing a mask when everybody else is not wearing one .
That ’ s another reason why I think it ’ s important for the CDC to weigh in here.
” Western culture doesn ’ t look brightly at masks .
Men especially might have trouble getting into the habit of wearing masks lest doing so be seen as an admission of fear .
That ’ s why it ’ s key that the feds frame their recommendation as something the mask-wearer does to protect others , not himself .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the particles from going in , it ’ s about an infected but asymptomatic person stopping the particles from going out .
There are a lot of people like that walking around right now .
“ Patient Z , ” for example , a 26-year-old man in Guangdong , China , was a close contact of a Wuhan traveler infected with the coronavirus in February .
But he felt no signs of anything amiss , not on Day 7 after the contact , nor on Day 10 or 11 .
Already by Day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bloomed in his nose and throat , just as copiously as in those who did become ill .
Patient Z might have felt fine , but he was infected just the same .
Researchers now say that people like Patient Z are not merely anecdotes .
For example , as many as 18 percent of people infected with the virus on the Diamond Princess cruise ship never developed symptoms , according to one analysis .
A team in Hong Kong suggests that from 20 to 40 percent of transmissions in China occurred before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is what makes this virus so diabolical .
Imagine how much easier it ’ d be to contain if people weren ’ t infectious until they had a cough or a fever , some clue that they needed to self-isolate .
In the absence of that , universal mask-wearing is one thing we can do to reduce spread by asymptomatics .
It ’ s a cinch that the CDC will end up recommending masks , however softly , specially given the continued lag in testing in some states .
If people don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we still can ’ t quickly identify those who are sick diagnostically , the no-brainer move is to have everyone assume that they ’ re sick and act accordingly .
If you don ’ t need to be outside for a good reason , don ’ t be .
If you do need to be , wear a mask .
The CDC will end up doing the smart thing , albeit much later than they should have .
Which is the story of the government response to COVID-19 in nearly every aspect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctors are forced to start making their own masks and protective gear too ?
I ’ m not joking .

He shouldn’t be pitching this at Trump. Trump seems pretty convinced already that masks can be useful, as he should be. He talked yesterday at his briefing about people using scarves as a form of crude protection. Several layers of cotton fabric would be better but he’s got the right idea. Anything that might conceivably catch infected droplets on their way in — or out — of your nose or mouth will be useful in reducing transmission rates.
The Czechs know. They’re such fans of masks that they’re lobbying internationally for more mask-wearing on social media. At the highest levels.
Mr. President @realDonaldTrump, try tackling virus the Czech way. Wearing a simple cloth mask, decreases the spread of the virus by 80 %! Czech Republic has made it OBLIGATORY for its citizens to wear a mask in the public. Pls retweet. God bless America!https://t.co/BATFV8l3ob — Andrej Babiš (@AndrejBabis) March 29, 2020
Babiš has been prime minister since late 2017. There are more than 3,000 known cases of coronavirus in the Czech Republic but that’s significantly lower per capita than nearby Germany and Austria. Conceivably that’s attributable to different rates of testing, but Babiš seems to be a true believer in masks — so much so that his government has made them mandatory, triggering a national effort among citizens to make their own at home.
The CDC is thinking about it. Not a mandate, of course, but a recommendation.
Federal officials debating whether to recommend that face coverings be routinely worn in public are responding to increasing evidence that infected people without symptoms can spread the coronavirus, according to internal memos provided to the White House by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Simple cloth masks that cover the mouth and nose can prevent virus transmission from such individuals when they are out buying groceries or seeking medical care, according to the memos obtained by The Washington Post… Wearing cloth masks in public places would be an additional community mitigation tool, according to the memos. Social distancing of at least six feet is still recommended even when wearing a mask. The memos emphasize that a cloth facial mask is intended not so much to protect the wearer but to help prevent the spread of the virus to others. A memo dated Thursday noted that people “generate respiratory aerosols when speaking, coughing and sneezing” that can be inhaled by nearby individuals… The Monday document suggested promotional “tag lines” the government could use if it recommended face coverings for the public: “COVID ends with me,” “My mask protects you and your mask protects me” and “I wear my mask to protect my community.”
“My mask protects you and your mask protects me” is exactly the message of the widely viewed Czech PSA embedded below. The feds’ anxiety about mask-wearing, apparently, is that we’re all a bunch of big dummies who’ll treat our facial covering as license to give up on social distancing, which remains crucial to stopping the spread. Part of me feels insulted by that assumption; another part of me remembers those imbecile college kids partying on spring break while much of the country was shutting down and thinks, yeah, there are a lot of dummies around. So long as gathering places like bars and restaurants remain closed, though, the cultural pressure to continue social distancing should abide.
Plus, Michael Bennet made a good point about why official sanction for mask-wearing could be important: “I know from my own personal experience that it is awkward to walk around wearing a mask when everybody else is not wearing one. That’s another reason why I think it’s important for the CDC to weigh in here.” Western culture doesn’t look brightly at masks. Men especially might have trouble getting into the habit of wearing masks lest doing so be seen as an admission of fear. That’s why it’s key that the feds frame their recommendation as something the mask-wearer does to protect others, not himself. It’s not about an uninfected person stopping the particles from going in, it’s about an infected but asymptomatic person stopping the particles from going out.
There are a lot of people like that walking around right now.
“Patient Z,” for example, a 26-year-old man in Guangdong, China, was a close contact of a Wuhan traveler infected with the coronavirus in February. But he felt no signs of anything amiss, not on Day 7 after the contact, nor on Day 10 or 11. Already by Day 7, though, the virus had bloomed in his nose and throat, just as copiously as in those who did become ill. Patient Z might have felt fine, but he was infected just the same. Researchers now say that people like Patient Z are not merely anecdotes. For example, as many as 18 percent of people infected with the virus on the Diamond Princess cruise ship never developed symptoms, according to one analysis. A team in Hong Kong suggests that from 20 to 40 percent of transmissions in China occurred before symptoms appeared.
Asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission is what makes this virus so diabolical. Imagine how much easier it’d be to contain if people weren’t infectious until they had a cough or a fever, some clue that they needed to self-isolate. In the absence of that, universal mask-wearing is one thing we can do to reduce spread by asymptomatics.
It’s a cinch that the CDC will end up recommending masks, however softly, specially given the continued lag in testing in some states. If people don’t know when they’re sick and we still can’t quickly identify those who are sick diagnostically, the no-brainer move is to have everyone assume that they’re sick and act accordingly. If you don’t need to be outside for a good reason, don’t be. If you do need to be, wear a mask. The CDC will end up doing the smart thing, albeit much later than they should have. Which is the story of the government response to COVID-19 in nearly every aspect.
Exit question: How soon before doctors are forced to start making their own masks and protective gear too? I’m not joking.


hotair--2020-04-01--Second wave: A county in central China is locked down because of new coronavirus cases

Earlier today Allahpundit wrote about the classified report which apparently claims China has been lying about its coronavirus numbers .
He mentioned the fact that Shanghai which had reopened last month are now closed again .
Today the South China Morning Post reports a county in central China which has been put on complete lock down .
Henan province in central China has taken the drastic measure of putting a mid-sized county in total lockdown as authorities try to fend off a second coronavirus wave in the midst of a push to revive the economy .
Curfew-like measures came into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ near the city of Pingdingshan , with the area ’ s roughly 600,000 residents told to stay home , according to a notice on the country ’ s official microblog account… All businesses have been shut down , except utilities , medical suppliers , logistics companies and food processing firms .
All shops except supermarkets , hospitals , food markets , petrol stations , pharmacies and hotels have been closed .
This is just one of several places where the government ’ s Fugong fuchan ( return to work ) message is being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus is not completely under control : Cinemas , briefly reopened with plans to lure customers back with Harry Potter in 3D , were ordered to shut again .
In Shanghai , indoor tourist attractions have again been suspended .
The city of Jinzhou , in Liaoning province , said on Monday that clubs , karaoke bars , internet cafes and any cultural venue “ where people gather ” could not reopen .
Businesses that had opened their doors again were told to suspend operations immediately .
Sichuan province abruptly ordered all entertainment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patrons mid-song .
One resident wrote online of the experience : “ I was halfway through before I was told to stop immediately .
At least I got to sing for a bit.
” Even when the government orders things to return to normal , many citizens wary of being lied to by authorities are hesitant to comply .
Last week China finally lifted travel restrictions on Hubei province where the outbreak had started .
But when some workers tried to cross a bridge into a nearby province they were stopped by police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mob scene with mobs overturning cars : On Friday that opposition erupted into violence as thousands of Hubei migrant workers tried to cross over a bridge linking Huangmei in Hubei to Jiujiang in neighbouring Jiangxi province… Hours after the incident took place , police from Jiujiang and Huangmei issued statements online , which were deleted shortly afterwards , accusing each other of causing trouble .
A commentary subsequently published in the People ’ s Daily , the mouthpiece of the Communist party , that “ some places are discriminating against Hubei people without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , suggesting that Beijing ’ s plan to end its nationwide lockdown will take longer than it hoped .
Here ’ s what that looked like .
These videos were censored on Chinese social media but can still be found on Twitter and YouTube .
So people are angry and afraid , in part because they don ’ t trust authorities to tell them what is really going on .
Meanwhile in the U.S. we ’ ve had umpteen reports about China ’ s amazing ability to completely stop the coronavirus .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. media seems eager to run with Chinese propaganda .
Are they going to get a little more skeptical about the CCP ’ s pronouncements at some point ?

Earlier today Allahpundit wrote about the classified report which apparently claims China has been lying about its coronavirus numbers. He mentioned the fact that Shanghai which had reopened last month are now closed again. Today the South China Morning Post reports a county in central China which has been put on complete lock down.
Henan province in central China has taken the drastic measure of putting a mid-sized county in total lockdown as authorities try to fend off a second coronavirus wave in the midst of a push to revive the economy. Curfew-like measures came into effect on Tuesday in Jia county, near the city of Pingdingshan, with the area’s roughly 600,000 residents told to stay home, according to a notice on the country’s official microblog account… All businesses have been shut down, except utilities, medical suppliers, logistics companies and food processing firms. All shops except supermarkets, hospitals, food markets, petrol stations, pharmacies and hotels have been closed.
This is just one of several places where the government’s Fugong fuchan (return to work) message is being delayed because of the reality that the virus is not completely under control:
Cinemas, briefly reopened with plans to lure customers back with Harry Potter in 3D, were ordered to shut again. In Shanghai, indoor tourist attractions have again been suspended. The city of Jinzhou, in Liaoning province, said on Monday that clubs, karaoke bars, internet cafes and any cultural venue “where people gather” could not reopen. Businesses that had opened their doors again were told to suspend operations immediately. Sichuan province abruptly ordered all entertainment venues to shut, interrupting karaoke bar patrons mid-song. One resident wrote online of the experience: “I was halfway through before I was told to stop immediately. At least I got to sing for a bit.”
Even when the government orders things to return to normal, many citizens wary of being lied to by authorities are hesitant to comply. Last week China finally lifted travel restrictions on Hubei province where the outbreak had started. But when some workers tried to cross a bridge into a nearby province they were stopped by police. The whole scene erupted into a mob scene with mobs overturning cars:
On Friday that opposition erupted into violence as thousands of Hubei migrant workers tried to cross over a bridge linking Huangmei in Hubei to Jiujiang in neighbouring Jiangxi province… Hours after the incident took place, police from Jiujiang and Huangmei issued statements online, which were deleted shortly afterwards, accusing each other of causing trouble. A commentary subsequently published in the People’s Daily, the mouthpiece of the Communist party, that “some places are discriminating against Hubei people without purpose” was condemned online on Sunday, suggesting that Beijing’s plan to end its nationwide lockdown will take longer than it hoped.
Here’s what that looked like. These videos were censored on Chinese social media but can still be found on Twitter and YouTube.
There are MASSIVE protests developing right now on the Jiujiang Yangtze River Bridge that joins the Hubei and Jiangxi provinces in Eastern China. The situation is rapidly evolving. THREAD 👇 pic.twitter.com/4J2LCdssDd — Things China Doesn't Want You To Know (@TruthAbtChina) March 27, 2020
…and another. pic.twitter.com/9c4Y8qjs3i — Things China Doesn't Want You To Know (@TruthAbtChina) March 27, 2020
The protests are becoming violent as more police arrive. Word on the street is the residents are upset about their treatment by the government during the #coronavirus lockdown. pic.twitter.com/mmemVIgSMD — Things China Doesn't Want You To Know (@TruthAbtChina) March 27, 2020
The civilians from Hubei stole a riot shield from Jiangxi police and are beating them with it! pic.twitter.com/NQstRTooHS — Things China Doesn't Want You To Know (@TruthAbtChina) March 27, 2020
So people are angry and afraid, in part because they don’t trust authorities to tell them what is really going on. Meanwhile in the U.S. we’ve had umpteen reports about China’s amazing ability to completely stop the coronavirus. This is just the latest example where the U.S. media seems eager to run with Chinese propaganda. Are they going to get a little more skeptical about the CCP’s pronouncements at some point?


hotair--2020-04-01--The calls to empty the jails continue. Don't be fooled by the hype

This has become one of the recurring themes we ’ ve heard since the coronavirus pandemic really started picking up steam .
We should be emptying the jails as much as possible .
The reasons given vary considerably , but the end objective remains the same .
We are told that this is no time to be locking human beings up for minor crimes .
And besides , what harm could it do ?
Shouldn ’ t we all just focus on stopping the spread of the disease and deal with the other details later ?
Yet another example of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Atlantic under the byline of Conor Friedersdorf .
As with many others over the past month or so , he focuses on the public safety aspect of the question .
A COVID-19 outbreak at a jail or prison will eventually impact not just the prisoners , but everyone associated with the facility .
A COVID-19 outbreak in a jail first harms the men or women locked up there , innocent and guilty alike , then staff and their families , then , ultimately , the public .
Prisoners with serious symptoms wind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shortages of doctors , nurses , masks , ICU beds , and ventilators .
People who have never seen a city jail could die because too many others were kept in one .
Sprawling state prisons in rural areas could flood tiny country hospitals with patients .
Michigan ’ s governor , Gretchen Whitmer , is the latest state official to take action , issuing an order on Sunday that urges the release of “ inmates who are aging or those with chronic conditions , pregnant women or people nearing their release date @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violation and failure to appear [ in court ] or failure to pay.
” Philadelphia is among the major cities that has worked to avert a worst-case scenario .
“ Police Chief Danielle Outlaw told officers on March 17 to stop bringing people arrested for non-violent crimes like burglary and vandalism to police stations and jails , ” the Marshall Project reported .
“ Instead , they would be issued arrest warrants to be served later ‘ as conditions dictate.
’ ” It ’ s easy to see why so many progressives are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it actually starts to make some sense if you don ’ t think about it for too long .
Jails full of prisoners who all dine in a communal hall and mix together certainly don ’ t lend themselves to social distancing , right ?
And talk about “ density , ” as Governor Cuomo is so fond of saying about New York City .
But Friedersdorf isn ’ t telling the whole story here .
He somewhat ironically goes on to mock a recent interview between Tucker Carlson and U.S. Attorney Bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignorant.
” The reason ?
Because Tucker and his guest were discussing the fact that there are plenty of liberals who are using this pandemic as an excuse to push forward their “ criminal justice reform ” agenda and empty the jails .
Friedersdorf obviously considers this to be malarkey , instead describing the situation as being a case of “ making thorny trade-offs forced on them by an emergency.
” That argument might carry some weight if you knew nothing else of the players involved .
You ’ ll note above that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their relatively new police chief , Danielle Outlaw .
She ’ s quoted at length , along with the new District Attorney , saying “ Safely and swiftly depopulating corrections facilities is a matter of life or death.
” So this is all about preventing an outbreak of the virus at the jail , right ?
Sure , provided you don ’ t know Chief Outlaw ’ s history and we ’ ve dealt with her here before .
Long before anyone had every heard the phrase novel coronavirus , Danielle Outlaw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put an end to the “ incarceration nation ” mentality in Philadelphia and stop locking up people for many offense .
And also long before Wuhan China started to blow up , she was already doing it , leading to significant spikes in all manner of crimes since she took charge .
So pardon us if we ’ re not terribly impressed with Ms.
Outlaw ’ s urgent concern about the health of the prisoners and the guards .
This looks more like opportunism than activism .
And the reality of the rising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well should speak to the larger question that ’ s unrelated to the virus .
If you believe that you can simply start releasing people from jail after they commit relatively “ minor ” crimes and suffer no ill effects , why were we locking them up in the first place ?
We already know why .
We saw what happened in New York City when their new “ bail reform ” law went into effect and criminals were being dumped back out onto the streets .
Recidivism rates went through the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in all major categories except ( thankfully ) murder and rape .
You can definitely create a significant effect on society by “ emptying the jails.
” Only the effect is to accelerate the rush toward Mad Max territory .
This isn ’ t to say that concern over the spread of COVID-19 in jails isn ’ t a valid issue to address .
But every place where people gather together in groups has had to deal with these questions .
Until the pandemic passes , our jails and prisons almost certainly need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe .
There needs to be less mixing of the inmates , tighter restrictions on visitation and better PPE for the guards and other staff .
Remember , these are people who are living in locked cells .
If you can ’ t control their movements , how do you ever expect to get the idiotic college students showing up at spring break to act in a safer manner ?

This has become one of the recurring themes we’ve heard since the coronavirus pandemic really started picking up steam. We should be emptying the jails as much as possible. The reasons given vary considerably, but the end objective remains the same. We are told that this is no time to be locking human beings up for minor crimes. And besides, what harm could it do? Shouldn’t we all just focus on stopping the spread of the disease and deal with the other details later?
Yet another example of this reaches us from the pages of The Atlantic under the byline of Conor Friedersdorf. As with many others over the past month or so, he focuses on the public safety aspect of the question. A COVID-19 outbreak at a jail or prison will eventually impact not just the prisoners, but everyone associated with the facility.
A COVID-19 outbreak in a jail first harms the men or women locked up there, innocent and guilty alike, then staff and their families, then, ultimately, the public. Prisoners with serious symptoms wind up in the local hospitals, worsening shortages of doctors, nurses, masks, ICU beds, and ventilators. People who have never seen a city jail could die because too many others were kept in one. Sprawling state prisons in rural areas could flood tiny country hospitals with patients. Michigan’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer, is the latest state official to take action, issuing an order on Sunday that urges the release of “inmates who are aging or those with chronic conditions, pregnant women or people nearing their release date, and anyone incarcerated for a traffic violation and failure to appear [in court] or failure to pay.” Philadelphia is among the major cities that has worked to avert a worst-case scenario. “Police Chief Danielle Outlaw told officers on March 17 to stop bringing people arrested for non-violent crimes like burglary and vandalism to police stations and jails,” the Marshall Project reported. “Instead, they would be issued arrest warrants to be served later ‘as conditions dictate.’”
It’s easy to see why so many progressives are making this argument. I mean, it actually starts to make some sense if you don’t think about it for too long. Jails full of prisoners who all dine in a communal hall and mix together certainly don’t lend themselves to social distancing, right? And talk about “density,” as Governor Cuomo is so fond of saying about New York City.
But Friedersdorf isn’t telling the whole story here. He somewhat ironically goes on to mock a recent interview between Tucker Carlson and U.S. Attorney Bill McSwain, which he calls “willfully ignorant.” The reason? Because Tucker and his guest were discussing the fact that there are plenty of liberals who are using this pandemic as an excuse to push forward their “criminal justice reform” agenda and empty the jails. Friedersdorf obviously considers this to be malarkey, instead describing the situation as being a case of “making thorny trade-offs forced on them by an emergency.”
That argument might carry some weight if you knew nothing else of the players involved. You’ll note above that the author cites the City of Philadelphia and their relatively new police chief, Danielle Outlaw. She’s quoted at length, along with the new District Attorney, saying “Safely and swiftly depopulating corrections facilities is a matter of life or death.” So this is all about preventing an outbreak of the virus at the jail, right?
Sure, provided you don’t know Chief Outlaw’s history and we’ve dealt with her here before. Long before anyone had every heard the phrase novel coronavirus, Danielle Outlaw came into office on a promise to put an end to the “incarceration nation” mentality in Philadelphia and stop locking up people for many offense. And also long before Wuhan China started to blow up, she was already doing it, leading to significant spikes in all manner of crimes since she took charge.
So pardon us if we’re not terribly impressed with Ms. Outlaw’s urgent concern about the health of the prisoners and the guards. This looks more like opportunism than activism. And the reality of the rising crime rate in Philadelphia and other cities as well should speak to the larger question that’s unrelated to the virus. If you believe that you can simply start releasing people from jail after they commit relatively “minor” crimes and suffer no ill effects, why were we locking them up in the first place? We already know why. We saw what happened in New York City when their new “bail reform” law went into effect and criminals were being dumped back out onto the streets. Recidivism rates went through the roof and the crime rates rose significantly in all major categories except (thankfully) murder and rape.
You can definitely create a significant effect on society by “emptying the jails.” Only the effect is to accelerate the rush toward Mad Max territory.
This isn’t to say that concern over the spread of COVID-19 in jails isn’t a valid issue to address. But every place where people gather together in groups has had to deal with these questions. Until the pandemic passes, our jails and prisons almost certainly need to implement new policies to keep people safe. There needs to be less mixing of the inmates, tighter restrictions on visitation and better PPE for the guards and other staff. Remember, these are people who are living in locked cells. If you can’t control their movements, how do you ever expect to get the idiotic college students showing up at spring break to act in a safer manner?


hotair--2020-04-01--Trump to DeSantis: COVID-plagued cruise liners can't be allowed to become "ghost ships"

Will Florida allow two Holland America cruise ships to disembark passengers , including American citizens , as a coronavirus outbreak spreads on board ?
Governor Ron DeSantis initially refused to allow them to dock in Florida , insisting that the state already had an explosion of COVID-19 cases on its hands .
That raised eyebrows , considering the reluctance of DeSantis to close beaches and impose the same kind of state-wide shelter-in-place orders other governors have used : DeSantis told Fox on Monday that the state couldn ’ t use its limited resources on “ people who are not even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than 1,400 other passengers , are now pleading with Florida to allow them in , but officials , including Gov .
Ron DeSantis , say the state simply does not have the resources to take on an extra burden amid a growing health crisis .
“ We can not afford to have people who are not even Floridians dumped into South Florida using up those valuable resources , ” DeSantis told Fox News on Monday .
Four people have died on the ship , at least two from the coronavirus , nine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are experiencing flu-like symptoms .
… While the governor has expressed staunch disapproval with the ship disembarking , the final say lies in the hands of the Broward County Commission who was not able to come to a decision on Tuesday .
The commission is still waiting for clear and proper protocols for disembarkation by the cruise line .
Yesterday , though , Donald Trump sent a very different message to DeSantis .
“ We have people who are dying on the ship , ” Trump said in his briefing last night .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ what ’ s right , not only for us , but for humanity .
… I ’ ll be speaking to the governor , ” Trump promised : That puts a considerable amount of pressure on DeSantis .
At the very same press briefing , Trump had nothing but praise for Democratic governors in Michigan , New York , and California .
This barely-veiled criticism of DeSantis stands in stark contrast , especially in a state Trump has adopted as his home turf .
The final decision won ’ t be in DeSantis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make that call , and Broward County appears ready to roll out a docking plan with Holland America to get the passengers off the ship .
They need Holland America parent Carnival to come up with a mitigation plan to contain the risk , but they sound eager to help out : Broward County Sheriff Gregory Tony called the situation a “ humanitarian crisis ” and asked commissioners at the Tuesday meeting not to decide based on emotion .
Allowing the ship to dock would burden the local health care system and put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he warned .
“ This ship has been turned away from several countries already , ” Tony said .
“ We are in some very , very critical circumstances where we as a county are going to have to determine are we willing to take on this responsibility.
” William Burke , chief maritime officer for Carnival , which owns Holland America , told commissioners “ we are coming to the place of last resort , ” and that his staff had worked through the night on a docking plan .
Four people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said he hopes two others who are severely ill “ will survive the transit.
” Many of the commissioners were sympathetic about the passengers ’ plight , including Broward County Commissioner Nan Rich , who urged officials to quickly hammer out a plan .
“ These people have been turned away from so many countries , one after the other .
We are their last hope .
What are we going to do ?
Let this ship go back out to sea and float around and let people die ?
I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The problem for Florida and other ports of call is that it ’ s not just the Zaandam and Rotterdam .
Carnival tells the Miami Herald that they had 40 ships at sea when they stopped sailing new cruises .
Most of those have returned , but three more still have yet to finish their cruises .
There has been no word on infections on the last three ships , but one can expect that they will also struggle to find welcomes in this current pandemic situation .
Who will step up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what will it take to contain it ?
For those answers , people will pay very close attention to the Zaandam and Rotterdam in the coming days .
However , the US Coast Guard has a different direction to these ships — return to your registered home countries .
An order signed three days ago declares that the USCG wants such ships sequestered “ indefinitely ” if they remain in US waters : The U.S. Coast Guard has directed all cruise ships to prepare to treat any sick passengers and crew on board @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during the coronavirus pandemic .
The new rules require daily updates on each ship ’ s coronavirus caseload for vessels in U.S. waters , and come with a stiff warning : Any foreign-flagged vessels “ that loiter beyond U.S. territorial seas ” should try first to medically evacuate the very sick to those countries instead .
Many of South Florida ’ s cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas , where hospital capacity is limited and people are still recovering from last year ’ s Hurricane Dorian .
The rules , which apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , were issued in a March 29 safety bulletin signed by Coast Guard Rear Admiral E.C .
Jones , whose district includes Florida , Georgia , South Carolina and Puerto Rico .

Will Florida allow two Holland America cruise ships to disembark passengers, including American citizens, as a coronavirus outbreak spreads on board? Governor Ron DeSantis initially refused to allow them to dock in Florida, insisting that the state already had an explosion of COVID-19 cases on its hands. That raised eyebrows, considering the reluctance of DeSantis to close beaches and impose the same kind of state-wide shelter-in-place orders other governors have used:
DeSantis told Fox on Monday that the state couldn’t use its limited resources on “people who are not even Floridians”:
Anderson, along with more than 1,400 other passengers, are now pleading with Florida to allow them in, but officials, including Gov. Ron DeSantis, say the state simply does not have the resources to take on an extra burden amid a growing health crisis. “We cannot afford to have people who are not even Floridians dumped into South Florida using up those valuable resources,” DeSantis told Fox News on Monday. Four people have died on the ship, at least two from the coronavirus, nine others have tested positive and 179 others are experiencing flu-like symptoms. … While the governor has expressed staunch disapproval with the ship disembarking, the final say lies in the hands of the Broward County Commission who was not able to come to a decision on Tuesday. The commission is still waiting for clear and proper protocols for disembarkation by the cruise line.
Yesterday, though, Donald Trump sent a very different message to DeSantis. “We have people who are dying on the ship,” Trump said in his briefing last night. “I’m going to do what’s right, not only for us, but for humanity. … I’ll be speaking to the governor,” Trump promised:
That puts a considerable amount of pressure on DeSantis. At the very same press briefing, Trump had nothing but praise for Democratic governors in Michigan, New York, and California. This barely-veiled criticism of DeSantis stands in stark contrast, especially in a state Trump has adopted as his home turf.
The final decision won’t be in DeSantis’ hands anyway. County commissioners actually make that call, and Broward County appears ready to roll out a docking plan with Holland America to get the passengers off the ship. They need Holland America parent Carnival to come up with a mitigation plan to contain the risk, but they sound eager to help out:
Broward County Sheriff Gregory Tony called the situation a “humanitarian crisis” and asked commissioners at the Tuesday meeting not to decide based on emotion. Allowing the ship to dock would burden the local health care system and put residents at risk of additional exposure, he warned. “This ship has been turned away from several countries already,” Tony said. “We are in some very, very critical circumstances where we as a county are going to have to determine are we willing to take on this responsibility.” William Burke, chief maritime officer for Carnival, which owns Holland America, told commissioners “we are coming to the place of last resort,” and that his staff had worked through the night on a docking plan. Four people on board have already died. Burke said he hopes two others who are severely ill “will survive the transit.” Many of the commissioners were sympathetic about the passengers’ plight, including Broward County Commissioner Nan Rich, who urged officials to quickly hammer out a plan. “These people have been turned away from so many countries, one after the other. We are their last hope. What are we going to do? Let this ship go back out to sea and float around and let people die? I don’t think so,” Rich said.
The problem for Florida and other ports of call is that it’s not just the Zaandam and Rotterdam. Carnival tells the Miami Herald that they had 40 ships at sea when they stopped sailing new cruises. Most of those have returned, but three more still have yet to finish their cruises. There has been no word on infections on the last three ships, but one can expect that they will also struggle to find welcomes in this current pandemic situation. Who will step up to deal with the situation, and what will it take to contain it? For those answers, people will pay very close attention to the Zaandam and Rotterdam in the coming days.
However, the US Coast Guard has a different direction to these ships — return to your registered home countries. An order signed three days ago declares that the USCG wants such ships sequestered “indefinitely” if they remain in US waters:
The U.S. Coast Guard has directed all cruise ships to prepare to treat any sick passengers and crew on board while being sequestered “indefinitely” offshore during the coronavirus pandemic. The new rules require daily updates on each ship’s coronavirus caseload for vessels in U.S. waters, and come with a stiff warning: Any foreign-flagged vessels “that loiter beyond U.S. territorial seas” should try first to medically evacuate the very sick to those countries instead. Many of South Florida’s cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, where hospital capacity is limited and people are still recovering from last year’s Hurricane Dorian. The rules, which apply to any vessel carrying more than 50 people, were issued in a March 29 safety bulletin signed by Coast Guard Rear Admiral E.C. Jones, whose district includes Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Puerto Rico.
Will Trump overrule the USCG? Stay tuned.


hotair--2020-04-01--Carlson: A Chinese research paper suggests the coronavirus may have been released accidentally from

Carlson: A Chinese research paper suggests the coronavirus may have been released accidentally from a lab

Tucker Carlson has been ahead of the curve on coronavirus coverage .
Earlier this month he did a segment arguing that , contrary to what some other Fox hosts were saying at the time , the coronavirus was much worse than the flu .
He was right .
More recently , Carlson argued that it was obvious everyone should start wearing masks to protect themselves and others , contrary to the word from health officials .
On last night ’ s show , Carlson raised another hot topic related to the virus : It ’ s origin .
The story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that the virus arose from bats in a wet market in Wuhan .
Carlson points out a Chinese research paper which suggested it ’ s more likely the virus arose from one of two nearby labs .
It ’ s important to note what the Chinese paper ( and Carlson ) are not saying .
They are not saying that this was a ) intentional or b ) some kind of escaped bio-weapon .
What the Chinese paper claims , based on interviews with dozens of people who frequented the wet market @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were not available for sale there .
The paper also claims there are no natural colonies of those bats within 900 miles of the market .
However , two labs in the same city were using those bats for research .
So the suggestion is that the virus may have made its way to the market from someone who had initially been exposed to blood and tissue of the bats in one of those labs .
Carlson admits it is impossible to confirm any of this at this point .
China is still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unknown or perhaps that it arose in the U.S .
So getting a straight answer from the CCP is not an option .
And since the market was shut down back in January , there ’ s really no way to go and see what is for sale there .
There have been leaked images from the market which show that many wild animals including bats were for sale there .
But if the Chinese paper is correct then these specific bats , where the virus almost certainly originated , weren ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there has been a lot of push back to internet claims that the virus was some kind of escaped bio-weapon .
As Live Science reported in March , the evidence suggests this is not the case .
SARS-CoV-2 is very closely related to the virus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome ( SARS ) , which fanned across the globe nearly 20 years ago .
Scientists have studied how SARS-CoV differs from SARS-CoV-2 — with several key letter changes in the genetic code .
Yet in computer simulations , the mutations in SARS-CoV-2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well at helping the virus bind to human cells .
If scientists had deliberately engineered this virus , they wouldn ’ t have chosen mutations that computer models suggest won ’ t work .
But it turns out , nature is smarter than scientists , and the novel coronavirus found a way to mutate that was better — and completely different— from anything scientists could have created , the study found .
Another nail in the “ escaped from evil lab ” theory ?
The overall molecular structure of this virus is distinct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closely resembles viruses found in bats and pangolins that had been little studied and never known to cause humans any harm .
“ If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen , they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness , ” according to a statement from Scripps .
So the “ evil lab ” theory doesn ’ t hold up , but again that ’ s not what the Chinese paper claimed .
It claimed the virus escaped accidentally from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exist in the area , a lab using them for research .
A story published by the New York Post in March pointed out that viruses have escaped from Chinese labs before .
And some scientists have been convicted in the past of selling their experimental animals to wildlife markets when they are done with them as a way to make extra money : Some Chinese researchers are in the habit of selling their laboratory animals to street vendors after they have finished experimenting on them .
Instead of properly disposing of infected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requires , they sell them on the side to make a little extra cash .
Or , in some cases , a lot of extra cash .
One Beijing researcher , now in jail , made a million dollars selling his monkeys and rats on the live animal market , where they eventually wound up in someone ’ s stomach .
There was a rumor that something similar may have happened in this case but the people involved have denied it .
According to Chinese officials , the first person who is believed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ December was a man named Chen who denied having gone to the market : Wuhan ’ s government announced last month that the first confirmed case was a person surnamed Chen who fell sick on Dec. 8 but had fully recovered and been discharged from the hospital .
The person denied going to the Hua ’ nan market , it said .
Wu Wenjuan , a doctor at Wuhan ’ s Jinyintan Hospital , which specializes in infectious diseases and handled many of the early cases , confirmed in a phone interview that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the same family , including a 49-year-old Hua ’ nan market vendor and his father-in-law .
The vendor got sick on Dec. 12 , while the father-in-law , who had no exposure to the market , fell ill seven days later , according to a study by Chinese disease control researchers .
Ms. Wei , the market vendor who fell sick on Dec. 10 , first sought help at a small private clinic across the street from her home .
What is clear is that the virus originated from a specific type @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was spreading among people at the Wuhan wet market .
Exactly how and when the first leap from animal to human happened is still not completely clear .
There ’ s no reason to think it was designed or intentionally released but it ’ s worth asking if it could have happened by accident .
Another thing we can be sure of is that we can ’ t take China ’ s word for anything .
If covering up an accident serves their PR goals , they will lie .

Tucker Carlson has been ahead of the curve on coronavirus coverage. Earlier this month he did a segment arguing that, contrary to what some other Fox hosts were saying at the time, the coronavirus was much worse than the flu. He was right. More recently, Carlson argued that it was obvious everyone should start wearing masks to protect themselves and others, contrary to the word from health officials.
On last night’s show, Carlson raised another hot topic related to the virus: It’s origin. The story we’ve all heard many times is that the virus arose from bats in a wet market in Wuhan. Carlson points out a Chinese research paper which suggested it’s more likely the virus arose from one of two nearby labs.
It’s important to note what the Chinese paper (and Carlson) are not saying. They are not saying that this was a) intentional or b) some kind of escaped bio-weapon. What the Chinese paper claims, based on interviews with dozens of people who frequented the wet market in Wuhan, is that horseshoe bats were not available for sale there. The paper also claims there are no natural colonies of those bats within 900 miles of the market. However, two labs in the same city were using those bats for research. So the suggestion is that the virus may have made its way to the market from someone who had initially been exposed to blood and tissue of the bats in one of those labs.
Carlson admits it is impossible to confirm any of this at this point. China is still claiming the origin of the virus is unknown or perhaps that it arose in the U.S. So getting a straight answer from the CCP is not an option. And since the market was shut down back in January, there’s really no way to go and see what is for sale there. There have been leaked images from the market which show that many wild animals including bats were for sale there. But if the Chinese paper is correct then these specific bats, where the virus almost certainly originated, weren’t among them.
As Carlson notes, there has been a lot of push back to internet claims that the virus was some kind of escaped bio-weapon. As Live Science reported in March, the evidence suggests this is not the case.
SARS-CoV-2 is very closely related to the virus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which fanned across the globe nearly 20 years ago. Scientists have studied how SARS-CoV differs from SARS-CoV-2 — with several key letter changes in the genetic code. Yet in computer simulations, the mutations in SARS-CoV-2 don’t seem to work very well at helping the virus bind to human cells. If scientists had deliberately engineered this virus, they wouldn’t have chosen mutations that computer models suggest won’t work. But it turns out, nature is smarter than scientists, and the novel coronavirus found a way to mutate that was better — and completely different— from anything scientists could have created, the study found. Another nail in the “escaped from evil lab” theory? The overall molecular structure of this virus is distinct from the known coronaviruses and instead most closely resembles viruses found in bats and pangolins that had been little studied and never known to cause humans any harm. “If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness,” according to a statement from Scripps.
So the “evil lab” theory doesn’t hold up, but again that’s not what the Chinese paper claimed. It claimed the virus escaped accidentally from the only source of such bats known to exist in the area, a lab using them for research. A story published by the New York Post in March pointed out that viruses have escaped from Chinese labs before. And some scientists have been convicted in the past of selling their experimental animals to wildlife markets when they are done with them as a way to make extra money:
Some Chinese researchers are in the habit of selling their laboratory animals to street vendors after they have finished experimenting on them. You heard me right. Instead of properly disposing of infected animals by cremation, as the law requires, they sell them on the side to make a little extra cash. Or, in some cases, a lot of extra cash. One Beijing researcher, now in jail, made a million dollars selling his monkeys and rats on the live animal market, where they eventually wound up in someone’s stomach.
There was a rumor that something similar may have happened in this case but the people involved have denied it. According to Chinese officials, the first person who is believed to have had the coronavirus in early December was a man named Chen who denied having gone to the market:
Wuhan’s government announced last month that the first confirmed case was a person surnamed Chen who fell sick on Dec. 8 but had fully recovered and been discharged from the hospital. The person denied going to the Hua’nan market, it said. Wu Wenjuan, a doctor at Wuhan’s Jinyintan Hospital, which specializes in infectious diseases and handled many of the early cases, confirmed in a phone interview that among the earliest cases were four people in the same family, including a 49-year-old Hua’nan market vendor and his father-in-law. The vendor got sick on Dec. 12, while the father-in-law, who had no exposure to the market, fell ill seven days later, according to a study by Chinese disease control researchers. Ms. Wei, the market vendor who fell sick on Dec. 10, first sought help at a small private clinic across the street from her home.
What is clear is that the virus originated from a specific type of bat and in early December it was spreading among people at the Wuhan wet market. Exactly how and when the first leap from animal to human happened is still not completely clear. There’s no reason to think it was designed or intentionally released but it’s worth asking if it could have happened by accident. Another thing we can be sure of is that we can’t take China’s word for anything. If covering up an accident serves their PR goals, they will lie.
Here’s the Tucker Carlson segment:


hotair--2020-04-01--Harvard realizes people noticed their hypocrisy

Last week we looked at the situation at Harvard , where the lords and masters of the wokest of the woke were looking decidedly unenlightened after they laid off all of their hourly subcontractors working in the dining halls .
Of course , all of the tenured professors and administrators were getting their salaries and benefits whether they were on campus or not .
It was also noted at the time that Harvard has the largest endowment of any university in the country , valued in the tens of billions of dollars .
They couldn ’ t afford to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 18 bucks an hour on the payroll for a while during the lockdown ?
Particularly when they lecture the rest of the nation about the need to take care of those on the losing end of the whole income inequality thing ?
Apparently , the public pressure was a bit too much and the optics were awful .
It turns out that Harvard has reconsidered their decision and will now continue to keep the paychecks flowing to the little people… at least for a while .
( Free Beacon ) Facing pressure and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off campus , Harvard University on Friday agreed to pay its contract dining hall employees and other workers through the end of the semester .
Student groups launched a call-in campaign last Friday aimed at administrators after the university said it planned to pay its direct-hire dining employees for just 30 days after their jobs were eliminated and did not extend the paid leave to contract workers… Jason Newton , a spokesman for the university , told the Washington Free Beacon that Harvard had agreed to provide “ pay and benefits to direct-hire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and also financial relief to keep the childcare centers on Harvard ’ s campus open through June 30 , ensuring pay and benefits for their 180 employees.
” Well , that was nice of them I suppose .
Of course , it probably would have been nicer if they hadn ’ t needed to be publicly shamed into doing it before making the call .
If you ’ re going to talk the talk you need to walk the walk , as the saying goes .
But was this even the right thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their school wasn ’ t always indoctrinating its students on subjects of social justice and income inequality all the time , I ’ d have been more understanding of the fact that Harvard is a private university .
While they are eligible to receive certain federal funding available to all institutions of higher education , they primarily rely on their tuition and donations to run their operation , much like a private business .
When you think of it in those terms , all of the cafeteria workers should have been eligible for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the stimulus bill .
That would have left them temporarily out of a job , but collecting the equivalent of 25 bucks per hour .
I get the feeling that most of them weren ’ t making that kind of money working in the dining hall , so it ’ s not as if they ’ d have been shoved into the poor house .
Also , we ’ re seeing yet another case of students who are ostensibly supposed to be in one of the highest-rated universities in the world to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phone drives and protests and being able to influence the administration of the school to change their policies .
This has happened over more subjects than you can count , from Black Lives Matter to canceling appearances by conservative speakers .
As long as the administrators of colleges and universities continue to allow the inmates to run the asylum , they ’ re pretty much getting what they deserve .
And they ’ re the ones filling the students ’ heads with all this wokeness to begin with , so administrators are truly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Last week we looked at the situation at Harvard, where the lords and masters of the wokest of the woke were looking decidedly unenlightened after they laid off all of their hourly subcontractors working in the dining halls. Of course, all of the tenured professors and administrators were getting their salaries and benefits whether they were on campus or not. It was also noted at the time that Harvard has the largest endowment of any university in the country, valued in the tens of billions of dollars. They couldn’t afford to keep a relatively small force of people making 18 bucks an hour on the payroll for a while during the lockdown? Particularly when they lecture the rest of the nation about the need to take care of those on the losing end of the whole income inequality thing?
Apparently, the public pressure was a bit too much and the optics were awful. It turns out that Harvard has reconsidered their decision and will now continue to keep the paychecks flowing to the little people… at least for a while. (Free Beacon)
Facing pressure and protests from employment rights advocates on and off campus, Harvard University on Friday agreed to pay its contract dining hall employees and other workers through the end of the semester. Student groups launched a call-in campaign last Friday aimed at administrators after the university said it planned to pay its direct-hire dining employees for just 30 days after their jobs were eliminated and did not extend the paid leave to contract workers… Jason Newton, a spokesman for the university, told the Washington Free Beacon that Harvard had agreed to provide “pay and benefits to direct-hire and contract workers through May 28, and also financial relief to keep the childcare centers on Harvard’s campus open through June 30, ensuring pay and benefits for their 180 employees.”
Well, that was nice of them I suppose. Of course, it probably would have been nicer if they hadn’t needed to be publicly shamed into doing it before making the call. If you’re going to talk the talk you need to walk the walk, as the saying goes.
But was this even the right thing to do to begin with? If their school wasn’t always indoctrinating its students on subjects of social justice and income inequality all the time, I’d have been more understanding of the fact that Harvard is a private university. While they are eligible to receive certain federal funding available to all institutions of higher education, they primarily rely on their tuition and donations to run their operation, much like a private business.
When you think of it in those terms, all of the cafeteria workers should have been eligible for the newly expanded unemployment programs funded by the stimulus bill. That would have left them temporarily out of a job, but collecting the equivalent of 25 bucks per hour. I get the feeling that most of them weren’t making that kind of money working in the dining hall, so it’s not as if they’d have been shoved into the poor house.
Also, we’re seeing yet another case of students who are ostensibly supposed to be in one of the highest-rated universities in the world to get an education spending their time ginning up phone drives and protests and being able to influence the administration of the school to change their policies. This has happened over more subjects than you can count, from Black Lives Matter to canceling appearances by conservative speakers.
As long as the administrators of colleges and universities continue to allow the inmates to run the asylum, they’re pretty much getting what they deserve. And they’re the ones filling the students’ heads with all this wokeness to begin with, so administrators are truly just reaping what they’ve sown.


hotair--2020-04-01--House Dems: Who's up for a "commission" to probe Trump's coronavirus response?

To paraphrase Lord of the Rings , a day will come when we can conduct a fair and impartial look at our pandemic preparation , but … today is not that day .
Nor will it be tomorrow , or next month , for that matter .
Rather than focus on the crisis at hand , however , Democrats in Congress want to kick-start an investigation into Donald Trump ’ s response to the coronavirus pandemic .
Perhaps that November election date is getting too close for comfort ?
Informal discussions have begun on Capitol Hill about the possibility of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration ’ s response to the coronavirus pandemic that would be modeled on the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 , 2001 , according to four people familiar with the discussions .
They described the discussions as “ very preliminary ” and involving mostly congressional Democrats .
One option could be a plan to review the administration ’ s response in the annual National Defense Authorization Act , two of the people said .
The review would focus on lessons learned about the government ’ s preparedness and what the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , adding that the goal would be to come up with a better plan to handle a pandemic in the future .
Maaayyybeeee this could be done sooner rather than later if the people involved are seen as relatively fair and non-partisan .
If the effort gets led by someone with significant credibility when it comes to crises and controversial issues , who can — ah , never mind : If there ’ s one person in Congress who shouldn ’ t be any part of such an effort , it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of two years fueling conspiracy theories about the Russia-collusion hysteria , including making factually false statements about having evidence of specific collusion between Trump ’ s campaign and Russian intelligence .
Schiff drove the impeachment over Ukraine-Gate as well , a ridiculous exercise over swampy politics , whose pettiness is now fairly well established in the light of a true national crisis .
For the record , the 9/11 Commission didn ’ t even get started until fourteen months after the 9/11 attack .
Why ?
The actual prosecution of a war on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well as the broader war against Islamist terror networks around the world , was a much higher priority .
The last thing the country needed at that time was to have the Bush administration hamstrung by investigators demanding documents and testimony from officials who had more acute and pressing matters to handle .
That is precisely where we are at now in this pandemic .
This is not a moment in which we should be demanding documents and testimony .
If the point of such a commission is to better prepare for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s wait to see what works and doesn ’ t work over the course of this pandemic .
At that point , after an election and with the perspective that time and distance provides , then we can assess what happened before and during the crisis .
Besides , this is particularly rich coming from members of Congress currently on a three-week-plus break from work .
Schiff & Co won ’ t even be back until April 20 , and didn ’ t bother to put into place contingency plans for remote deliberation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crisis was in full swing .
Maybe we need a commission to determine why the House didn ’ t even hold its first hearing on COVID-19 until March 3rd ?
We could put Sean Hannity in as co-chair , who would be every bit as non-partisan and serious about it as Schiff .
Puh-leeeze .

To paraphrase Lord of the Rings, a day will come when we can conduct a fair and impartial look at our pandemic preparation, but … today is not that day. Nor will it be tomorrow, or next month, for that matter. Rather than focus on the crisis at hand, however, Democrats in Congress want to kick-start an investigation into Donald Trump’s response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Perhaps that November election date is getting too close for comfort?
Informal discussions have begun on Capitol Hill about the possibility of creating a panel to scrutinize the Trump administration’s response to the coronavirus pandemic that would be modeled on the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to four people familiar with the discussions. They described the discussions as “very preliminary” and involving mostly congressional Democrats. One option could be a plan to review the administration’s response in the annual National Defense Authorization Act, two of the people said. The review would focus on lessons learned about the government’s preparedness and what the administration could have handled better, they said, adding that the goal would be to come up with a better plan to handle a pandemic in the future.
Maaayyybeeee this could be done sooner rather than later if the people involved are seen as relatively fair and non-partisan. If the effort gets led by someone with significant credibility when it comes to crises and controversial issues, who can — ah, never mind:
After Pearl Harbor and 9/11, we looked at what went wrong to learn from our mistakes. Once we've recovered, we need a nonpartisan commission to review our response and how we can better prepare for the next pandemic. I’m working on a bill to do that.https://t.co/uqO3BwVldN — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) April 1, 2020
If there’s one person in Congress who shouldn’t be any part of such an effort, it’s Adam Schiff. He spent most of two years fueling conspiracy theories about the Russia-collusion hysteria, including making factually false statements about having evidence of specific collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russian intelligence. Schiff drove the impeachment over Ukraine-Gate as well, a ridiculous exercise over swampy politics, whose pettiness is now fairly well established in the light of a true national crisis.
For the record, the 9/11 Commission didn’t even get started until fourteen months after the 9/11 attack. Why? The actual prosecution of a war on al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, as well as the broader war against Islamist terror networks around the world, was a much higher priority. The last thing the country needed at that time was to have the Bush administration hamstrung by investigators demanding documents and testimony from officials who had more acute and pressing matters to handle.
That is precisely where we are at now in this pandemic. This is not a moment in which we should be demanding documents and testimony. If the point of such a commission is to better prepare for the next pandemic, then let’s wait to see what works and doesn’t work over the course of this pandemic. At that point, after an election and with the perspective that time and distance provides, then we can assess what happened before and during the crisis.
Besides, this is particularly rich coming from members of Congress currently on a three-week-plus break from work. Schiff & Co won’t even be back until April 20, and didn’t bother to put into place contingency plans for remote deliberation and voting on an emergency basis while the crisis was in full swing. Maybe we need a commission to determine why the House didn’t even hold its first hearing on COVID-19 until March 3rd? We could put Sean Hannity in as co-chair, who would be every bit as non-partisan and serious about it as Schiff. Puh-leeeze.