hotair--2020-03-12--SCOTUS rules in favor of Trump administration's asylum policy

The Wednesday deadline for the Supreme Court to rule on the legality of the Migrant Protection Protocols ( MPP ) program was met .
The court ruled in favor of the Trump administration ’ s policy , also known as Remain in Mexico .
The program has been successful in containing the flow of asylum-seekers flooding the southern border .
In order to ease the burden which overwhelms the Border Patrol and immigration judges , the Trump administration struck an agreement with Mexico .
MPP was put in place to deal with the thousands of migrants traveling through Central America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on foot in large groups .
The Mexican president has been a real partner with President Trump in dealing with the crisis at the border .
Migrants are sent back over the Mexican border to wait for their day in court instead of being released in the United States to move about freely until their court date .
No more catch and release , as it is called .
Liberal activists objected to bringing the southern border under control and proceeded to use the court system to stop it .
The Ninth Circuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is illegal .
As expected , asylum-seekers began to rush the southern border and measures were taken , like closing the Paso Del Norte international bridge in El Paso .
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals placed a temporary stay on its own ruling and gave the Supreme Court the deadline .
The Department of Defense sent additional troops to the border to handle any chaos that might happen if the Supreme Court agreed with the Ninth Circuit Court .
The Ninth Circuit only has jurisdiction over the border with California and Arizona @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Supreme Court ruling doesn ’ t end the other legal challenges to the program in the courts .
The decision to overturn the Ninth Circuit ruling was almost unanimous .
Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only dissenting vote .
The MPP program can end up in the Supreme Court again to determine if it violates federal statutes .
The Justice Department expressed its gratitude for the Supreme Court ruling .
The ACLU isn ’ t so happy .
The open-borders crowd prefers that liberal judges make immigration policy , not the administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ruling was the right decision to make .
It will also help as the Trump administration works to contain the threat of the COVID-19 virus spreading in the United States .
The program is working .
The mutual agreement promotes a good relationship with Mexico , which is crucial for southern border states .
The U.S. and Mexico are intertwined – especially as trading partners .
Last fiscal year , more than 470,000 migrants — including parents and children — crossed into the United States illegally .
The massive immigration court backlog @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unsustainable .
In the thirteen months that MPP has been in place , nearly 60,000 migrants have been sent back to Mexico to await asylum hearings .

The Wednesday deadline for the Supreme Court to rule on the legality of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program was met. The court ruled in favor of the Trump administration’s policy, also known as Remain in Mexico.
The program has been successful in containing the flow of asylum-seekers flooding the southern border. In order to ease the burden which overwhelms the Border Patrol and immigration judges, the Trump administration struck an agreement with Mexico. MPP was put in place to deal with the thousands of migrants traveling through Central America to the U.S.-Mexican border in caravans and on foot in large groups. The Mexican president has been a real partner with President Trump in dealing with the crisis at the border. Migrants are sent back over the Mexican border to wait for their day in court instead of being released in the United States to move about freely until their court date. No more catch and release, as it is called.
Liberal activists objected to bringing the southern border under control and proceeded to use the court system to stop it. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the program is illegal. As expected, asylum-seekers began to rush the southern border and measures were taken, like closing the Paso Del Norte international bridge in El Paso. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals placed a temporary stay on its own ruling and gave the Supreme Court the deadline. The Department of Defense sent additional troops to the border to handle any chaos that might happen if the Supreme Court agreed with the Ninth Circuit Court. The Ninth Circuit only has jurisdiction over the border with California and Arizona.
So, here we are. The Supreme Court ruling doesn’t end the other legal challenges to the program in the courts. The decision to overturn the Ninth Circuit ruling was almost unanimous. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only dissenting vote. The MPP program can end up in the Supreme Court again to determine if it violates federal statutes.
The Justice Department expressed its gratitude for the Supreme Court ruling.
“The Migrant Protection Protocols, implemented pursuant to express authority granted by Congress decades ago, have been critical to restoring the government’s ability to manage the Southwest border and to work cooperatively with the Mexican government to address illegal immigration,” the department’s statement said.
The ACLU isn’t so happy. The open-borders crowd prefers that liberal judges make immigration policy, not the administration.
After the ruling, ACLU lawyer Judy Rabinovitz said in a statement: “The Court of Appeals unequivocally declared this policy to be illegal. The Supreme Court should as well. Asylum seekers face grave danger and irreversible harm every day this depraved policy remains in effect.”
BREAKING: The Supreme Court has allowed Trump's forced Return to Mexico policy to remain in effect while our case proceeds.
The Court of Appeals declared it illegal and SCOTUS should as well. Asylum seekers face grave danger and irreversible harm every day from this policy. — ACLU (@ACLU) March 11, 2020
Senator Ted Cruz pointed out that the ruling was the right decision to make. It will also help as the Trump administration works to contain the threat of the COVID-19 virus spreading in the United States.
Important SCOTUS victory for securing the border. The “remain in Mexico” policy agreement w/ Mexican govt has had a major impact reducing illegal border crossings—especially critical as we work to contain spread of the Coronavirus pandemic. https://t.co/okjOECCM53 — Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) March 11, 2020
The program is working. The mutual agreement promotes a good relationship with Mexico, which is crucial for southern border states. The U.S. and Mexico are intertwined – especially as trading partners. Last fiscal year, more than 470,000 migrants — including parents and children — crossed into the United States illegally. The massive immigration court backlog that resulted from the illegal activity is unsustainable. In the thirteen months that MPP has been in place, nearly 60,000 migrants have been sent back to Mexico to await asylum hearings.


hotair--2020-03-12--The NY Times issues a long-overdue correction to the 1619 Project

Wednesday the NY Times Magazine issued a correction to the opening essay of the 1619 Project along with an explanation of the correction : Today we are making a clarification to a passage in an essay from The 1619 Project that has sparked a great deal of online debate .
The passage in question states that one primary reason the colonists fought the American Revolution was to protect the institution of slavery .
This assertion has elicited criticism from some historians and support from others .
We stand behind the basic point , which is that among the various motivations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a concern that the British would seek or were already seeking to disrupt in various ways the entrenched system of American slavery… If the scholarship of the past several decades has taught us anything , it is that we should be careful not to assume unanimity on the part of the colonists , as many previous interpretive histories of the patriot cause did .
We recognize that our original language could be read to suggest that protecting slavery was a primary motivation for all of the colonists .
The passage has been changed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary motivation for some of the colonists .
A note has been appended to the story as well .
Here ’ s how the contested paragraph of the essay now reads : On Twitter , author Nikole Hannah-Jones described the change as small but important .
To her credit she admitted her previous claim , which she has defended for weeks , lacked “ important context and nuance.
” Well , it ’ s doesn ’ t always pay to double down when you are wrong and in this case , as she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That sounds like a veiled shot at the critics of the Project who presumably did not engage in good faith .
Last year , five historians sent the Times a letter arguing that some of the errors in the piece , including the part about the Revolution suggested ideology was trumping history .
They wrote “ These errors , which concern major events , can not be described as interpretation or “ framing.
” They are matters of verifiable fact , which are the foundation of both honest scholarship and honest journalism .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by ideology.
” In December , the NY Times issued a response to that letter flatly refusing to make any correction regarding the claim about the Revolutionary War .
While we welcome criticism , we don ’ t believe that the request for corrections to The 1619 Project is warranted… Within the world of academic history , differing views exist , if not over what precisely happened , then about why it happened , who made it happen , how to interpret the motivations of historical actors and what it all means .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ regarding the causes of the American Revolution and the attitudes toward black equality of Abraham Lincoln , are good examples of this .
It ’ s not clear what prompted the belated change of heart but if I had to guess it was , at least in part , the piece Politico published March 6 by Northwestern historian Leslie Harris who said she had objected to the same passage about the revolution prior to publication .
Here ’ s a bit of what she wrote : On August 19 of last year I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a reporter for the New York Times , repeated an idea that I had vigorously argued against with her fact-checker : that the patriots fought the American Revolution in large part to preserve slavery in North America… Weeks before , I had received an email from a New York Times research editor .
Because I ’ m an historian of African American life and slavery , in New York , specifically , and the pre-Civil War era more generally , she wanted me to verify some statements for the project .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assertion : “ One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies , which had produced tremendous wealth .
At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire , which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.
” I vigorously disputed the claim .
Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution , the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was making the same point about the Revolution that previous critics had made .
In fact , it ’ s fair to ask if the change made yesterday will satisfy the critics .
Pulitzer Prize winning historian Gordon Wood wrote , in his response to the NY Times refusal to issue a correction , that there was no evidence any significant group of American colonists were motivated by the desire to protect slavery : I have spent my career studying the American Revolution and can not accept the view that “ one of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.
” I don ’ t know of any colonist who said that they wanted independence in order to preserve their slaves .
No colonist expressed alarm that the mother country was out to abolish slavery in 1776 .
If southerners were concerned about losing their slaves , why didn ’ t they make efforts to ally with the slaveholding planters in the British West Indies ?
Perhaps some southern slaveholders were alarmed by news of the Somerset decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any evidence of that .
Besides , that decision was not known in the colonies until the fall of 1772 and by that date the colonists were well along in their drive to independence .
Remember , it all started in 1765 with the Stamp Act .
The same is true of Dunmore ’ s proclamation of 1775 .
It may have tipped the scales for some hesitant Virginia planters , but by then the revolutionary movement was already well along in Virginia .
There is no evidence in 1776 of a rising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as the 1619 Project erroneously asserts , nor is there any evidence the British government was eager to do so .
But even if either were the case , ending the Atlantic slave trade would have been welcomed by the Virginia planters , who already had more slaves than they needed .
Indeed , the Virginians in the years following independence took the lead in moving to abolish the despicable international slave trade .
Finally , the other factor in why the NY Times finally issued this correction may be a live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Asked directly about that passage of the 1619 Project , some argue that some colonists in the south may have been motivated by this but none seemed to believe it was a primary motive for all colonists .
Here ’ s the event queued up to that question .
The answer goes on for about 20 minutes .

Wednesday the NY Times Magazine issued a correction to the opening essay of the 1619 Project along with an explanation of the correction:
Today we are making a clarification to a passage in an essay from The 1619 Project that has sparked a great deal of online debate. The passage in question states that one primary reason the colonists fought the American Revolution was to protect the institution of slavery. This assertion has elicited criticism from some historians and support from others. We stand behind the basic point, which is that among the various motivations that drove the patriots toward independence was a concern that the British would seek or were already seeking to disrupt in various ways the entrenched system of American slavery… If the scholarship of the past several decades has taught us anything, it is that we should be careful not to assume unanimity on the part of the colonists, as many previous interpretive histories of the patriot cause did. We recognize that our original language could be read to suggest that protecting slavery was a primary motivation for all of the colonists. The passage has been changed to make clear that this was a primary motivation for some of the colonists. A note has been appended to the story as well.
Here’s how the contested paragraph of the essay now reads:
Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons some of the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.
On Twitter, author Nikole Hannah-Jones described the change as small but important. To her credit she admitted her previous claim, which she has defended for weeks, lacked “important context and nuance.”
https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1238122289041997824
https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1238124517345628163
Well, it’s doesn’t always pay to double down when you are wrong and in this case, as she belatedly admits, she was wrong.
https://twitter.com/nhannahjones/status/1238125806637002752
That sounds like a veiled shot at the critics of the Project who presumably did not engage in good faith. Last year, five historians sent the Times a letter arguing that some of the errors in the piece, including the part about the Revolution suggested ideology was trumping history. They wrote “These errors, which concern major events, cannot be described as interpretation or “framing.” They are matters of verifiable fact, which are the foundation of both honest scholarship and honest journalism. They suggest a displacement of historical understanding by ideology.”
In December, the NY Times issued a response to that letter flatly refusing to make any correction regarding the claim about the Revolutionary War.
While we welcome criticism, we don’t believe that the request for corrections to The 1619 Project is warranted… Within the world of academic history, differing views exist, if not over what precisely happened, then about why it happened, who made it happen, how to interpret the motivations of historical actors and what it all means. The passages cited in the letter, regarding the causes of the American Revolution and the attitudes toward black equality of Abraham Lincoln, are good examples of this.
It’s not clear what prompted the belated change of heart but if I had to guess it was, at least in part, the piece Politico published March 6 by Northwestern historian Leslie Harris who said she had objected to the same passage about the revolution prior to publication. Here’s a bit of what she wrote:
On August 19 of last year I listened in stunned silence as Nikole Hannah-Jones, a reporter for the New York Times, repeated an idea that I had vigorously argued against with her fact-checker: that the patriots fought the American Revolution in large part to preserve slavery in North America… Weeks before, I had received an email from a New York Times research editor. Because I’m an historian of African American life and slavery, in New York, specifically, and the pre-Civil War era more generally, she wanted me to verify some statements for the project. At one point, she sent me this assertion: “One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.” I vigorously disputed the claim. Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution, the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war.
Harris was making the same point about the Revolution that previous critics had made. In fact, it’s fair to ask if the change made yesterday will satisfy the critics. Pulitzer Prize winning historian Gordon Wood wrote, in his response to the NY Times refusal to issue a correction, that there was no evidence any significant group of American colonists were motivated by the desire to protect slavery:
I have spent my career studying the American Revolution and cannot accept the view that “one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.” I don’t know of any colonist who said that they wanted independence in order to preserve their slaves. No colonist expressed alarm that the mother country was out to abolish slavery in 1776. If southerners were concerned about losing their slaves, why didn’t they make efforts to ally with the slaveholding planters in the British West Indies? Perhaps some southern slaveholders were alarmed by news of the Somerset decision, but we don’t have any evidence of that. Besides, that decision was not known in the colonies until the fall of 1772 and by that date the colonists were well along in their drive to independence. Remember, it all started in 1765 with the Stamp Act. The same is true of Dunmore’s proclamation of 1775. It may have tipped the scales for some hesitant Virginia planters, but by then the revolutionary movement was already well along in Virginia. There is no evidence in 1776 of a rising movement to abolish the Atlantic slave trade, as the 1619 Project erroneously asserts, nor is there any evidence the British government was eager to do so. But even if either were the case, ending the Atlantic slave trade would have been welcomed by the Virginia planters, who already had more slaves than they needed. Indeed, the Virginians in the years following independence took the lead in moving to abolish the despicable international slave trade.
Finally, the other factor in why the NY Times finally issued this correction may be a live event held last week featuring five historians. Asked directly about that passage of the 1619 Project, some argue that some colonists in the south may have been motivated by this but none seemed to believe it was a primary motive for all colonists. Here’s the event cued up to that question. The answer goes on for about 20 minutes.


hotair--2020-03-13--Trump: "I don't take responsibility at all" for the failure in widespread testing

There ’ s no good way for a politician to spin a full-spectrum failure .
If he manned up here as head of the executive branch and took responsibility for his deputies ’ failures , Democrats would use that soundbite in a million attack ads against him .
If he denied responsibility , as he did in the clip below , Democrats would use that soundbite in a million attack ads against him .
And they will .
The reason so many pols resort to some variation of “ the buck stops here ” when asked about a failure by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and pays lip service to accountability .
Most voters are savvy enough to understand that a bureaucracy , especially the federal bureaucracy , is so enormously complicated that the person on top is rarely directly responsible for their underlings ’ logistical screw-ups .
Certainly Trump isn ’ t responsible for the CDC ’ s catastrophic failure to develop a functioning test at a decisive moment in this process when the virus could have been contained .
But as a political matter , showing humility and personal remorse for a mistake earns back some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s basic good leadership , and good character .
But he ’ ll never take the fall for someone else , even if it ’ s to his benefit to do so .
I don ’ t quite follow Anthony Fauci ’ s point at the end there .
What he ’ s saying , I think , is that the CDC ’ s testing system was never designed for huge numbers of people .
No one plans for a once-in-a-century pandemic that ’ ll require 50 million tests in a matter of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we ’ re being forced to assemble a fire truck on the fly to try to put it out before it spreads further .
I get that .
But the whole point of the CDC ’ s failure , I thought , is that they weren ’ t ready to test small numbers of people at the earliest stages of the outbreak , when quickly identifying and quarantining those people would have contained the disease .
Everyone understands the difficulty of building a fire truck quickly in order to fight a raging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though , is why the CDC ’ s household fire extinguisher didn ’ t function back when the inferno was just a small fire on one burner of the kitchen stove .
Trump was asked later in the briefing if he took responsibility for disbanding the global health response team on the National Security Council in 2018 .
That housecleaning was ordered by new National Security Advisor John Bolton , a ripe target for blame given the impeachment-related antagonism between him and Trump .
The president doesn ’ t mention him , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t know or remember why the pandemic team was purged .
Instead he shrugs it off by saying it ’ s a “ nasty question ” before trying to drag Fauci into it .
Real talk , though : His own soundbites will be used against him more or less effectively by Biden and the Democrats depending on how well managed the rest of the outbreak is .
If , against all odds , we look back at the epidemic in a few months and conclude that it wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a major policy success in putting out the fire .
No soundbite will hurt him .
If instead we look back at it as a rolling disaster , no soundbite will help him .
Speaking of which : That poll was conducted more than a week ego , before coronavirus anxiety really began to spread among the population .
If you think the result is a fluke , another poll of Arizona today that includes “ leaners ” finds Biden ahead 50/42 .
It ’ s certainly in play ; Trump won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points in 2016 against a weaker candidate .
That ’ s 11 electoral votes suddenly at risk in a state that ’ s only gone blue once since 1952 .
Maybe six months of exposure to Joe Biden ’ s obvious mental deterioration will convince swing voters to stick with the guy who ’ s in charge now .
But a bad stretch from coronavirus is apt to make the election a pure referendum on Trump , with the alternative nothing more clearly defined than “ a team of center-left technocrats with Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
By the way , Trump told reporters that he ’ ll “ most likely ” be tested for coronavirus soon , which is good .
He shook a lot of hands at the podium today and was in close quarters with a lot of important people .
If someone in that group gets infected , the entire coronavirus brain trust is at risk .
Exit question from citizen Donald Trump , 2013 :

There’s no good way for a politician to spin a full-spectrum failure. If he manned up here as head of the executive branch and took responsibility for his deputies’ failures, Democrats would use that soundbite in a million attack ads against him.
If he denied responsibility, as he did in the clip below, Democrats would use that soundbite in a million attack ads against him. And they will.
The reason so many pols resort to some variation of “the buck stops here” when asked about a failure by their team is because it communicates authority and pays lip service to accountability. Most voters are savvy enough to understand that a bureaucracy, especially the federal bureaucracy, is so enormously complicated that the person on top is rarely directly responsible for their underlings’ logistical screw-ups. Certainly Trump isn’t responsible for the CDC’s catastrophic failure to develop a functioning test at a decisive moment in this process when the virus could have been contained. But as a political matter, showing humility and personal remorse for a mistake earns back some trust and goodwill. And it’s basic good leadership, and good character.
But he’ll never take the fall for someone else, even if it’s to his benefit to do so.
Q: Dr. Fauci said earlier this week that the lag in testing was, in fact, a failing. Do you take responsibility for that? President Trump: “I don't take responsibility at all … It wasn't meant for this kind of an event” https://t.co/saigTlZ9Rd pic.twitter.com/qayoALD9dd — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) March 13, 2020
I don’t quite follow Anthony Fauci’s point at the end there. What he’s saying, I think, is that the CDC’s testing system was never designed for huge numbers of people. No one plans for a once-in-a-century pandemic that’ll require 50 million tests in a matter of months. Our home is on fire and we’re being forced to assemble a fire truck on the fly to try to put it out before it spreads further.
I get that. But the whole point of the CDC’s failure, I thought, is that they weren’t ready to test small numbers of people at the earliest stages of the outbreak, when quickly identifying and quarantining those people would have contained the disease. Everyone understands the difficulty of building a fire truck quickly in order to fight a raging inferno. The question being asked, though, is why the CDC’s household fire extinguisher didn’t function back when the inferno was just a small fire on one burner of the kitchen stove.
Trump was asked later in the briefing if he took responsibility for disbanding the global health response team on the National Security Council in 2018. That housecleaning was ordered by new National Security Advisor John Bolton, a ripe target for blame given the impeachment-related antagonism between him and Trump. The president doesn’t mention him, though, which makes me think he probably doesn’t know or remember why the pandemic team was purged. Instead he shrugs it off by saying it’s a “nasty question” before trying to drag Fauci into it.
Yamiche questions the President on not taking responsibility vs. his decision to disband the White House pandemic team… The President pleads ignorance as a defense pic.twitter.com/LmTZUPc0Y5 — Acyn (@Acyn) March 13, 2020
Real talk, though: His own soundbites will be used against him more or less effectively by Biden and the Democrats depending on how well managed the rest of the outbreak is. If, against all odds, we look back at the epidemic in a few months and conclude that it wasn’t that bad, Trump will be credited for a major policy success in putting out the fire. No soundbite will hurt him. If instead we look back at it as a rolling disaster, no soundbite will help him. Speaking of which:
#OHPI #POLL @POTUS may be facing an uphill battle in #Arizona if @JoeBiden becomes the democratic nominee check out these head to head match-ups– Biden 49% / Trump 43%
Sanders 38% / Trump 45% Read more on the general election AZ polling here– https://t.co/Jkm0vP9KoS pic.twitter.com/hC6mIzfwu5 — OHPI (@OHPredictive) March 13, 2020
That poll was conducted more than a week ego, before coronavirus anxiety really began to spread among the population. If you think the result is a fluke, another poll of Arizona today that includes “leaners” finds Biden ahead 50/42. It’s certainly in play; Trump won it by just three and a half points in 2016 against a weaker candidate. That’s 11 electoral votes suddenly at risk in a state that’s only gone blue once since 1952. Maybe six months of exposure to Joe Biden’s obvious mental deterioration will convince swing voters to stick with the guy who’s in charge now. But a bad stretch from coronavirus is apt to make the election a pure referendum on Trump, with the alternative nothing more clearly defined than “a team of center-left technocrats with Joe Biden as figurehead.” Who wins that?
By the way, Trump told reporters that he’ll “most likely” be tested for coronavirus soon, which is good. He shook a lot of hands at the podium today and was in close quarters with a lot of important people. If someone in that group gets infected, the entire coronavirus brain trust is at risk. Exit question from citizen Donald Trump, 2013:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/398887965302091776


hotair--2020-03-13--Late-night shows are going dark for at least two weeks (and lots of scripted series are too)

Earlier this week a number of television shows that usually have a studio audience announced they would be filming without an audience out of concern about the spread of the coronavirus : “ It feels like we ’ re auditioning , ” a dazed Ryan Seacrest said on live television Wednesday morning , before a sea of empty seats .
Two hours later , in another bare studio , Whoopi Goldberg sat at a table with her four co-hosts on “ The View ” and put it plainly : “ For the first time ever , as you can see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made the decision not to have a studio audience .
This is unprecedented.
” And later on Wednesday , several late-night shows in New York , including “ The Late Show With Stephen Colbert ” on CBS , and “ The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon ” on NBC , announced that they , too , would film without studio audiences starting on Monday .
But in a sign of just how quickly things are changing , most of the late-night shows which had planned to film without an audience starting next week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down for at least the next two weeks : “ The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon , ” “ The Late Show With Stephen Colbert ” and “ Late Night With Seth Meyers ” are all suspending production next week , NBC and CBS said Thursday , making them the biggest daily American television series to go off the air because of concerns surrounding the coronavirus pandemic .
The earliest date that the three shows would return with new episodes is March 30 , the networks said… “ God forbid you stay on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the building gets hurt by this , ” Rob Burnett , an executive producer of David Letterman ’ s former late-night show , said in an interview on Thursday .
“ That transcends anything you might be doing on television .
It ’ s a very challenging situation.
” How will America get along without the razor sharp wit of Stephen Colbert ?
Okay , that was sarcastic because I never watch his show anyway .
But it turns out a lot of scripted TV series have also shut down production for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shut down of sports leagues , the shut down of TV shows may not be noticed immediately by people stuck at home because shows are usually a few weeks ahead .
But the production shutdown will probably be noticed eventually and that has content producers worried : From traditional cable programs and networks to streaming services like Netflix and Amazon , television production has been halted or , if the show was filmed in front of a live audience , altered .
“ They all suffer from a drought of content in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ content producers who need to hang on to users and their recurring attention , ” Eric Schiffer , CEO and chairman of Patriarch Organization and Reputation Management Consultants , said… On traditional cable channels and networks there is a fear that a lack of new content , compounded with sports leagues suspending their seasons , will result in advertisers pulling out .
Among the shows that are now shut down : Riverdale , The Flash , Batwoman , Supergirl , Grey ’ s Anatomy , The Falcon and the Winter Soldier , The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Law & Order : SVU and all three of Dick Wolf ’ s Chicago-based shows ( Chicago Med , Chicago Fire and Chicago PD ) .
Survivor and the Amazing Race have also shut down or postponed their seasons .
Sadly , even Stranger Things has shut down production of season four .
There ’ s a full list here but the bottom line is that just as we ’ re all likely to be stuck at home and need TV the most , it ’ s going to become all reruns all @ @ @

Earlier this week a number of television shows that usually have a studio audience announced they would be filming without an audience out of concern about the spread of the coronavirus:
“It feels like we’re auditioning,” a dazed Ryan Seacrest said on live television Wednesday morning, before a sea of empty seats. Two hours later, in another bare studio, Whoopi Goldberg sat at a table with her four co-hosts on “The View” and put it plainly: “For the first time ever, as you can see, if you looked around, we made the decision not to have a studio audience. This is unprecedented.” And later on Wednesday, several late-night shows in New York, including “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” on CBS, and “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” on NBC, announced that they, too, would film without studio audiences starting on Monday.
But in a sign of just how quickly things are changing, most of the late-night shows which had planned to film without an audience starting next week have now announced they will be shutting down for at least the next two weeks:
“The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon,” “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” and “Late Night With Seth Meyers” are all suspending production next week, NBC and CBS said Thursday, making them the biggest daily American television series to go off the air because of concerns surrounding the coronavirus pandemic. The earliest date that the three shows would return with new episodes is March 30, the networks said… “God forbid you stay on the air too long and someone in the building gets hurt by this,” Rob Burnett, an executive producer of David Letterman’s former late-night show, said in an interview on Thursday. “That transcends anything you might be doing on television. It’s a very challenging situation.”
How will America get along without the razor sharp wit of Stephen Colbert? Okay, that was sarcastic because I never watch his show anyway. But it turns out a lot of scripted TV series have also shut down production for the next couple of weeks. Unlike the shut down of sports leagues, the shut down of TV shows may not be noticed immediately by people stuck at home because shows are usually a few weeks ahead. But the production shutdown will probably be noticed eventually and that has content producers worried:
From traditional cable programs and networks to streaming services like Netflix and Amazon, television production has been halted or, if the show was filmed in front of a live audience, altered. “They all suffer from a drought of content in the pipeline and that is extremely dangerous for content producers who need to hang on to users and their recurring attention,” Eric Schiffer, CEO and chairman of Patriarch Organization and Reputation Management Consultants, said… On traditional cable channels and networks there is a fear that a lack of new content, compounded with sports leagues suspending their seasons, will result in advertisers pulling out.
Among the shows that are now shut down: Riverdale, The Flash, Batwoman, Supergirl, Grey’s Anatomy, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, The Good Fight, Dynasty, Bull, Law & Order: SVU and all three of Dick Wolf’s Chicago-based shows (Chicago Med, Chicago Fire and Chicago PD). Survivor and the Amazing Race have also shut down or postponed their seasons. Sadly, even Stranger Things has shut down production of season four.
There’s a full list here but the bottom line is that just as we’re all likely to be stuck at home and need TV the most, it’s going to become all reruns all the time.


hotair--2020-03-13--Cruz extends self-quarantine, Gohmert makes a different decision

Two Texas lawmakers have chosen two different courses of action after both received confirmation of exposure to the COVID-19 virus .
Senator Ted Cruz chose to self-quarantine at home in Houston after learning he was exposed to the COVID-19 virus at CPAC .
Rep. Louie Gohmert chose to not do that after the same exposure .
Gohmert is carrying on with his life as usual .
On March 8 , Cruz released a statement explaining his decision to self-quarantine after being contacted 10 days after his exposure .
He had a brief conversation with the person at CPAC and shook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Houston Health Department , the Harris County Public Health Department , the CDC , and HHS .
He spoke with this personal physician .
And , he spoke with Vice-President Pence , Senate Majority Leader McConnell , and Mark Meadows .
Cruz exhibited no symptoms and said he felt fine .
He was told that testing isn ’ t done until symptoms present themselves and since his interaction with the infected person was for maybe one minute or so , it was unlikely he would develop symptoms .
He decided to go ahead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ passed since his exposure .
His rationale was that since he is a public figure and interacts with many people every day , he wanted to use an abundance of caution in his decision-making .
Louie Gohmert went the other way .
He said a doctor at the CDC cleared him to return to Washington , so he did .
Not only did Gohmert return to Washington , but he also began conducting tours around the Capitol .
On the day after Senator Cruz announced his self-quarantine , Gohmert was leading a group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a tour .
Mark Meadows , Reps. Doug Collins and Matt Gaetz all decided to self-quarantine after contact with the same person at CPAC .
Gohmert is 66 years old , and Meadows is 60 years old .
The CDC uses the age of 60 as a marker for older adults who may be more susceptible to the virus .
I have to say , I would be in the camp of the self-quarantined if I was told I had been exposed to COVID-19 .
It ’ s my nature to operate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to me to isolate myself from the possibility of coming in contact with anyone else carrying the virus .
I have the luxury of working from home and it wouldn ’ t pose a hardship .
Today Ted Cruz announced that he is extending his self-quarantine for a few more days .
He was contacted last night and told that he was exposed to COVID-19 earlier this month as he met with Santiago Abascal , the leader of the Vox Party in Spain .
“ Unfortunately , last night I was informed I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who yesterday tested positive for COVID-19 , ” he said in a statement .
“ On March 3 , I met in my D.C. office with Santiago Abascal , the leader of the Vox Party in Spain .
We met for about 20 minutes , sitting together at a conference table .
We shook hands twice and took pictures together.
” Cruz added that he does not feel any symptoms of the new coronavirus , which includes fever , cough and difficulty breathing .
He is consulting with medical officials and decided to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abundance of caution and to give everyone peace of mind.
” As the COVID-19 virus runs its course and lawmakers continue to do their work , we can expect to see more of them under self-quarantine .
Senator Lindsay Graham is the latest to announce such action .
He spent time at Mar-a-Lago last weekend where the President of Brazil was also visiting .
The president ’ s spokesperson tested positive for the virus .

Two Texas lawmakers have chosen two different courses of action after both received confirmation of exposure to the COVID-19 virus. Senator Ted Cruz chose to self-quarantine at home in Houston after learning he was exposed to the COVID-19 virus at CPAC. Rep. Louie Gohmert chose to not do that after the same exposure. Gohmert is carrying on with his life as usual.
On March 8, Cruz released a statement explaining his decision to self-quarantine after being contacted 10 days after his exposure. He had a brief conversation with the person at CPAC and shook his hand. Cruz consulted with the Houston Health Department, the Harris County Public Health Department, the CDC, and HHS. He spoke with this personal physician. And, he spoke with Vice-President Pence, Senate Majority Leader McConnell, and Mark Meadows. Cruz exhibited no symptoms and said he felt fine. He was told that testing isn’t done until symptoms present themselves and since his interaction with the infected person was for maybe one minute or so, it was unlikely he would develop symptoms. He decided to go ahead and self-quarantine until a full 14 days passed since his exposure. His rationale was that since he is a public figure and interacts with many people every day, he wanted to use an abundance of caution in his decision-making.
Today I released the following statement: pic.twitter.com/XGXEa4ozcg — Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) March 8, 2020
Louie Gohmert went the other way. He said a doctor at the CDC cleared him to return to Washington, so he did.
Gohmert did not say which CDC doctor called him on Sunday, but on Monday, the CDC advised Americans that “the novel coronavirus is capable of spreading easily and sustainably from person to person,” and as it spreads to throughout the country, “it’s likely many will become sick but most people likely will have mild illness.”
Not only did Gohmert return to Washington, but he also began conducting tours around the Capitol. On the day after Senator Cruz announced his self-quarantine, Gohmert was leading a group of students estimated to be about 100 on a tour.
This is an enormous group, well over 100 kids pic.twitter.com/BxQx944Rhu — Mike DeBonis (@mikedebonis) March 10, 2020
Mark Meadows, Reps. Doug Collins and Matt Gaetz all decided to self-quarantine after contact with the same person at CPAC. Gohmert is 66 years old, and Meadows is 60 years old. The CDC uses the age of 60 as a marker for older adults who may be more susceptible to the virus. I have to say, I would be in the camp of the self-quarantined if I was told I had been exposed to COVID-19. It’s my nature to operate cautiously and it would just make sense to me to isolate myself from the possibility of coming in contact with anyone else carrying the virus. I have the luxury of working from home and it wouldn’t pose a hardship.
Today Ted Cruz announced that he is extending his self-quarantine for a few more days. He was contacted last night and told that he was exposed to COVID-19 earlier this month as he met with Santiago Abascal, the leader of the Vox Party in Spain.
“Unfortunately, last night I was informed I had a second interaction with an individual who yesterday tested positive for COVID-19,” he said in a statement. “On March 3, I met in my D.C. office with Santiago Abascal, the leader of the Vox Party in Spain. We met for about 20 minutes, sitting together at a conference table. We shook hands twice and took pictures together.” Cruz added that he does not feel any symptoms of the new coronavirus, which includes fever, cough and difficulty breathing. He is consulting with medical officials and decided to extend his self-quarantine “out of an abundance of caution and to give everyone peace of mind.”
Today I released the following statement on my decision to extend my self-quarantine until March 17 out of an abundance of caution and to give everyone peace of mind: pic.twitter.com/BfleLLXAfz — Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) March 13, 2020
As the COVID-19 virus runs its course and lawmakers continue to do their work, we can expect to see more of them under self-quarantine. Senator Lindsay Graham is the latest to announce such action. He spent time at Mar-a-Lago last weekend where the President of Brazil was also visiting. The president’s spokesperson tested positive for the virus.


hotair--2020-03-13--No, senior citizens, it's definitely not "the safest time to fly"

Take 65 seconds to watch the president ’ s own top science advisor last night on CNN declare that people , especially seniors , shouldn ’ t be flying except for reasons of absolute necessity .
Visit the CDC ’ s webpage devoted to “ People at Risk for Serious Illness from COVID-19 ” and you ’ ll find six bullet points right at the top , the fifth of which is “ Avoid cruise travel and non-essential air travel.
” Now take 30 seconds and watch Ainsley Earhardt , an anchor on the president ’ s favorite show on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ old viewership that flying has never been more awesome .
She ’ s not the only Fox anchor encouraging people to buy tickets : If you ’ re not in the at-risk population , flying ’ s unlikely to kill you .
But it can certainly pass the virus along to you , and you ’ ll then pass it along to someone who is in the at-risk population .
The more people opt out of “ social distancing , ” the more intense the epidemic will be .
Laura Ingraham , Dartmouth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is Fox doing ?
They ’ ve had some worthwhile coverage of coronavirus this week .
Tucker Carlson warned viewers a few days ago not to kid themselves that the disease is just some flu that ’ ll go away .
Anthony Fauci was a guest on Sean Hannity ’ s show to reiterate that point .
Martha MacCallum ably grilled Seema Verma last night about the coming shortage of ICU beds and ventilators .
Contributors have been beating the drum about ramping up testing .
I don ’ t get to watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m sure Chris Wallace and the news side are doing a fine job of delivering the facts , and will now have the chance to do so overnight as live programming continues into the wee hours .
Fox management is taking it seriously too : The top executives at Fox News Channel told employees Thursday to cut back on studio bookings and to expect possible programming changes as a result of precautions being taken against the spread of coronavirus , the latest media outlet to unveil new procedures as the disease complicates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ limit personal interaction , reduce the chance of exposure wherever possible and maintain the health and safety of those employees who are unable to telecommute , ” Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott and Fox News President Jay Wallace told employees in a memo Thursday .
And they suggested they may have to tweak the way content is presented .
“ Programming changes will be enacted in the coming days on some of our platforms — our programming leadership team is working on this now and will communicate that accordingly , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fox News executives urged employees in the memo to “ keep in mind that viewers rely on us to stay informed during a crisis of this magnitude and we are providing an important public service to our audience by functioning as a resource for all Americans.
” They have provided a public service this week in some ways , as I just said .
But telling old people that it ’ s never been safer to fly when in reality it ’ s never been less safe for them to fly isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hell this is , it isn ’ t a public service : Coronavirus is a Chinese-North Korean bioweapon aimed at the United States — that was unleashed on China first , for some reason ?
And we shouldn ’ t “ overreact ” to this … bioweapon attack ?
It would be unconscionable but cynically understandable to air this sort of thing if Trump were still in “ it ’ ll blow over ” mode .
If the task is to provide cover for the president at all costs , up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ll get people killed , then happy talk about air travel and not “ overreacting ” to a disease that ’ s about to swamp American emergency rooms would have a certain cynical logic .
But Trump is declaring a national emergency as I write this .
He ’ s past “ it ’ ll blow over ” mode .
He understands now that this is a mortal threat to Americans and to his chances of a second term .
The time for business as usual and “ don ’ t overreact ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media .
I … think ?
There are polls going around this week showing that Republicans are much more likely to say the threat from coronavirus is exaggerated , for complicated reasons .
Partly , I think , it ’ s geographic .
The country ’ s biggest hot spots for the virus thus far are Seattle , New York , and L.A. , all deeply Democratic areas .
Dems are living with a more immediate threat than Republicans are for the moment .
Partly too there ’ s a “ boy who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Republicans have spent the past three years listening to how Russiagate and then the Ukraine matter were going to end Trump ’ s presidency .
Now they ’ re hearing it about COVID-19 and tuning it out .
And partly it ’ s partisan wishcasting .
Righties know that if the media *is* right in this case about the extent of the epidemic , Trump ’ s odds at a second term will dwindle .
But partly it ’ s a reaction to the denialism in some of the rhetoric in righty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump spent six weeks insisting that this is no big deal .
As you ’ ve just seen in the clips up top , some Foxies continue to insist that it ’ s fine to carry on as normal against the advice of the CDC .
Take an audience that ’ s predisposed to do that in the first place and reinforce their skepticism of the threat with scoffing comments from political and media authority figures they trust and of course they ’ re going to conclude that this is overblown .
With @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there ’ s no media outlet capable of doing more good — or harm — in shaping Republican opinion than Fox .
Which makes it that much more important that all of Fox ’ s messaging on coronavirus encourages good practices to contain the outbreak .
At the end of the day , they ’ re saving the lives of their own viewership .
There may be another reason why Republicans are more skeptical of the threat .
Republicans skew older , and for whatever grim reason , older people generally seem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
At her home in The Villages , a sprawling central Florida retirement community that overlaps three counties , Alicia Przybylowicz still greets neighbors with a big smile and an outstretched hand .
“ I ’ m a hand-shaker .
I think I will always be a hand-shaker and a hugger , ” the 64-year-old said .
Worries about the coronavirus aren ’ t going to stop that .
“ It seems that it ’ s been blown out of proportion.
” … The Villages is one of the largest retirement developments in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living on more than 15,000 acres .
When asked on the “ Villages Friendly Folks ” Facebook page how they were managing the coronavirus , a majority of people sided with Przybylowicz , saying the crisis is being overblown .
Against mounting advice from federal and private health experts , many expressed a determination to move forward with travel excursions , such as cruises .
We could spitball theories why older people , the group most at risk from the virus , seem to be taking it more in stride .
They ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing fazes them .
They ’ ve also lived through many scares that haven ’ t panned out .
They ’ re complacent .
But I ’ d bet there ’ s a Trump/Fox component that ’ s feeding their organic skepticism .
It would be good to disabuse them of it at some point before we have news crews filming senior citizens sick with the virus collapsing in hospital parking lots because there ’ s no room inside .
Which is less than a month away .
Here ’ s our Treasury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commercial air travel seems like a perfectly chill thing to do right now .
Fun fact : A man has been banned from flying Jet Blue in the future because he boarded his last flight with the company knowing he had coronavirus .
Enjoy the friendly skies .

Take 65 seconds to watch the president’s own top science advisor last night on CNN declare that people, especially seniors, shouldn’t be flying except for reasons of absolute necessity.
Visit the CDC’s webpage devoted to “People at Risk for Serious Illness from COVID-19” and you’ll find six bullet points right at the top, the fifth of which is “Avoid cruise travel and non-essential air travel.” Now take 30 seconds and watch Ainsley Earhardt, an anchor on the president’s favorite show on his favorite network, advise its famously old viewership that flying has never been more awesome.
https://twitter.com/revrrlewis/status/1238411195968892931
She’s not the only Fox anchor encouraging people to buy tickets:
https://twitter.com/IngrahamAngle/status/1238473876868411392
If you’re not in the at-risk population, flying’s unlikely to kill you. But it can certainly pass the virus along to you, and you’ll then pass it along to someone who is in the at-risk population. The more people opt out of “social distancing,” the more intense the epidemic will be. Laura Ingraham, Dartmouth grad, surely understands that.
What is Fox doing?
They’ve had some worthwhile coverage of coronavirus this week. Tucker Carlson warned viewers a few days ago not to kid themselves that the disease is just some flu that’ll go away. Anthony Fauci was a guest on Sean Hannity’s show to reiterate that point. Martha MacCallum ably grilled Seema Verma last night about the coming shortage of ICU beds and ventilators. Contributors have been beating the drum about ramping up testing. I don’t get to watch it much during the day but I’m sure Chris Wallace and the news side are doing a fine job of delivering the facts, and will now have the chance to do so overnight as live programming continues into the wee hours. Fox management is taking it seriously too:
The top executives at Fox News Channel told employees Thursday to cut back on studio bookings and to expect possible programming changes as a result of precautions being taken against the spread of coronavirus, the latest media outlet to unveil new procedures as the disease complicates the logistics of newsgathering. Executives want to “limit personal interaction, reduce the chance of exposure wherever possible and maintain the health and safety of those employees who are unable to telecommute,” Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott and Fox News President Jay Wallace told employees in a memo Thursday. And they suggested they may have to tweak the way content is presented. “Programming changes will be enacted in the coming days on some of our platforms — our programming leadership team is working on this now and will communicate that accordingly,” the executives said in the memo… The Fox News executives urged employees in the memo to “keep in mind that viewers rely on us to stay informed during a crisis of this magnitude and we are providing an important public service to our audience by functioning as a resource for all Americans.”
They have provided a public service this week in some ways, as I just said. But telling old people that it’s never been safer to fly when in reality it’s never been less safe for them to fly isn’t providing a public service. Whatever the hell this is, it isn’t a public service:
https://twitter.com/revrrlewis/status/1238446956793528320
Coronavirus is a Chinese-North Korean bioweapon aimed at the United States — that was unleashed on China first, for some reason? And we shouldn’t “overreact” to this … bioweapon attack?
What?
It would be unconscionable but cynically understandable to air this sort of thing if Trump were still in “it’ll blow over” mode. If the task is to provide cover for the president at all costs, up to and including encouraging reckless behavior that’ll get people killed, then happy talk about air travel and not “overreacting” to a disease that’s about to swamp American emergency rooms would have a certain cynical logic. But Trump is declaring a national emergency as I write this. He’s past “it’ll blow over” mode. He understands now that this is a mortal threat to Americans and to his chances of a second term. The time for business as usual and “don’t overreact” is over for him and for righty media. I … think?
After urging from President Trump, Dana White says he'll keep holding UFC events despite the coronavirus.pic.twitter.com/is1bw1nRTl — Yahoo Sports (@YahooSports) March 13, 2020
There are polls going around this week showing that Republicans are much more likely to say the threat from coronavirus is exaggerated, for complicated reasons. Partly, I think, it’s geographic. The country’s biggest hot spots for the virus thus far are Seattle, New York, and L.A., all deeply Democratic areas. Dems are living with a more immediate threat than Republicans are for the moment. Partly too there’s a “boy who cried wolf” effect in media coverage. Republicans have spent the past three years listening to how Russiagate and then the Ukraine matter were going to end Trump’s presidency. Now they’re hearing it about COVID-19 and tuning it out. And partly it’s partisan wishcasting. Righties know that if the media *is* right in this case about the extent of the epidemic, Trump’s odds at a second term will dwindle.
But partly it’s a reaction to the denialism in some of the rhetoric in righty media and from the president himself. Trump spent six weeks insisting that this is no big deal. As you’ve just seen in the clips up top, some Foxies continue to insist that it’s fine to carry on as normal against the advice of the CDC. Take an audience that’s predisposed to do that in the first place and reinforce their skepticism of the threat with scoffing comments from political and media authority figures they trust and of course they’re going to conclude that this is overblown. With the possible exception of conservative talk radio, there’s no media outlet capable of doing more good — or harm — in shaping Republican opinion than Fox. Which makes it that much more important that all of Fox’s messaging on coronavirus encourages good practices to contain the outbreak.
At the end of the day, they’re saving the lives of their own viewership.
There may be another reason why Republicans are more skeptical of the threat. Republicans skew older, and for whatever grim reason, older people generally seem to be fairly sanguine about the threat.
At her home in The Villages, a sprawling central Florida retirement community that overlaps three counties, Alicia Przybylowicz still greets neighbors with a big smile and an outstretched hand. “I’m a hand-shaker. I think I will always be a hand-shaker and a hugger,” the 64-year-old said. Worries about the coronavirus aren’t going to stop that. “It seems that it’s been blown out of proportion.”… The Villages is one of the largest retirement developments in the United States, with 125,000 residents living on more than 15,000 acres. When asked on the “Villages Friendly Folks” Facebook page how they were managing the coronavirus, a majority of people sided with Przybylowicz, saying the crisis is being overblown. Against mounting advice from federal and private health experts, many expressed a determination to move forward with travel excursions, such as cruises.
We could spitball theories why older people, the group most at risk from the virus, seem to be taking it more in stride. They’ve already lived through many hardships; nothing fazes them. They’ve also lived through many scares that haven’t panned out. They’re complacent. But I’d bet there’s a Trump/Fox component that’s feeding their organic skepticism. It would be good to disabuse them of it at some point before we have news crews filming senior citizens sick with the virus collapsing in hospital parking lots because there’s no room inside. Which is less than a month away.
Here’s our Treasury secretary echoing the imbecilic talking point that commercial air travel seems like a perfectly chill thing to do right now. Fun fact: A man has been banned from flying Jet Blue in the future because he boarded his last flight with the company knowing he had coronavirus. Enjoy the friendly skies.


hotair--2020-03-13--Trump's emergency declaration announcement includes plans for drive-thru coronavirus testing (Update

Trump's emergency declaration announcement includes plans for drive-thru coronavirus testing (Update)

As Ed anticipated earlier today , President Trump has announced a national emergency to combat the spread of the coronavirus .
He did this at a White House news conference which included representatives from major industries in addition to government officials .
“ To unleash the full power of the federal government in this effort , today I am officially declaring a national emergency , ” Trump said .
He added , “ Two very big words.
” He then went on to outline a plan to offer as many as 5 million coronavirus tests to Americans , including through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up in the parking lots of major retailers .
To pre-screen people for testing and direct people who need a test where to go , Google will be helping to set up a website to identify those who may be at risk : Flanked by Vice President Mike Pence , Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and other top federal officials and corporate executives , Trump announced that 1.4 million new tests for coronavirus would be available next week and that 5 million would be available within the next month — although @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll need that ” quantity .
He also announced plans for a large-scale drive-thru protocol for testing for the virus .
Under the protocol , Trump and other officials explained , individuals who suspect they may be infected can fill out a screening questionnaire set up by Google , and if they have the appropriate symptoms or risk factors , they will be directed to nearby drive-thru testing centers .
Those centers , officials explained , will deliver the tests to laboratory automated machines , and test result will be produced in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus test that will make all of this possible runs on automated testing machines which are already in place at more than 100 labs around the country : The test was developed by diagnostics giant Roche Holding AG and is designed to run on the company ’ s automated machines , which are already installed in more than 100 laboratories across the U.S .
It will be available immediately .
It is only the third coronavirus diagnostic to receive emergency-use authorization from the FDA , following a test developed by the Centers for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the New York State Department of Health… Currently , all testing is based on identifying unique portions of the new coronavirus ’ s genetic sequence .
But Roche ’ s tests can be conducted faster than manual laboratory tests .
Its machines provide results in three and a half hours and can run many tests in parallel—though as they are located in laboratories , it will take additional time for samples to be sent for testing .
Its most advanced machine can process around 4,128 samples every 24 hours .
All of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week .
It ’ s certainly an ambitious plan .
Implementing it in hundreds of locations across the country won ’ t be simple .
I ’ m sure we ’ ll hear a lot about that next week .
The plan itself will undoubtedly have plenty of critics but the markets did react positively , ending a very tough week on a significant upswing .
You may need to scroll in about halfway to view the press conference : Update : Google Communications just put out a statement suggesting the website they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing soon but will only roll out nationwide “ over time.
” That ’ s not very specific but based on the presentation above the website is a part of the whole drive-thru testing scheme .
Here ’ s a screenshot of Dr. Deborah Birx explaining how it ’ s supposed to work .
That top blue box reads “ Screening Website .
”

As Ed anticipated earlier today, President Trump has announced a national emergency to combat the spread of the coronavirus. He did this at a White House news conference which included representatives from major industries in addition to government officials.
“To unleash the full power of the federal government in this effort, today I am officially declaring a national emergency,” Trump said. He added, “Two very big words.”
He then went on to outline a plan to offer as many as 5 million coronavirus tests to Americans, including through drive-thru testing facilities that would be set up in the parking lots of major retailers. To pre-screen people for testing and direct people who need a test where to go, Google will be helping to set up a website to identify those who may be at risk:
Flanked by Vice President Mike Pence, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and other top federal officials and corporate executives, Trump announced that 1.4 million new tests for coronavirus would be available next week and that 5 million would be available within the next month — although he added that “I doubt we’ll need that” quantity. He also announced plans for a large-scale drive-thru protocol for testing for the virus. Under the protocol, Trump and other officials explained, individuals who suspect they may be infected can fill out a screening questionnaire set up by Google, and if they have the appropriate symptoms or risk factors, they will be directed to nearby drive-thru testing centers. Those centers, officials explained, will deliver the tests to laboratory automated machines, and test result will be produced in 24 to 36 hours.
The new coronavirus test that will make all of this possible runs on automated testing machines which are already in place at more than 100 labs around the country:
The test was developed by diagnostics giant Roche Holding AG and is designed to run on the company’s automated machines, which are already installed in more than 100 laboratories across the U.S. It will be available immediately. It is only the third coronavirus diagnostic to receive emergency-use authorization from the FDA, following a test developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and one from the New York State Department of Health… Currently, all testing is based on identifying unique portions of the new coronavirus’s genetic sequence. But Roche’s tests can be conducted faster than manual laboratory tests. Its machines provide results in three and a half hours and can run many tests in parallel—though as they are located in laboratories, it will take additional time for samples to be sent for testing. Its most advanced machine can process around 4,128 samples every 24 hours.
All of this is supposed to be available starting next week. It’s certainly an ambitious plan. Implementing it in hundreds of locations across the country won’t be simple. I’m sure we’ll hear a lot about that next week. The plan itself will undoubtedly have plenty of critics but the markets did react positively, ending a very tough week on a significant upswing.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average soared into the 4 p.m. trading close with a gain of about 1,980 points, or about 9.4%, to 23182, concluding a topsy-turvy session. The S&P 500 rose 9.2%, and the Nasdaq Composite jumped 9.3%.
Those moves recovered some ground on the heels of Wall Street’s worst day in more than three decades, when the Dow plunged 10% as the rapidly spreading coronavirus drove fears of a global slowdown despite action from the Federal Reserve and attempts by lawmakers and the White House to reassure investors and the public.
You may need to scroll in about halfway to view the press conference:
Update: Google Communications just put out a statement suggesting the website they are working on will be ready for testing soon but will only roll out nationwide “over time.”
“We appreciate the support of government officials and industry partners and thank the Google engineers who have volunteered to be part of this effort." — Google Communications (@Google_Comms) March 13, 2020
That’s not very specific but based on the presentation above the website is a part of the whole drive-thru testing scheme. Here’s a screenshot of Dr. Deborah Birx explaining how it’s supposed to work. That top blue box reads “Screening Website.”
Update: The Verge has confirmed the statement above.
Carolyn Wang, communications lead for Verily, told The Verge that the “triage website” was initially only going to be made available to health care workers instead of the general public. Now that it has been announced the way it was, however, anybody will be able to visit it, she said. But the tool will only be able to direct people to “pilot sites” for testing in the Bay Area, though Wang says Verily hopes to expand it beyond California “over time.” The triage site should be put live within a few days, and it will be hosted at Project Baseline, the Verily website where people can sign up to take part in clinical trials… As for the 1,700 Google engineers Trump referenced in the press conference, that appears to be related to a call for volunteers Google and Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai put out in a company-wide memo earlier this week. In all, the difference between the reality of what is being built and what was promised during the press conference is very large.
I mean…this is just not helpful. You don’t have the President and Vice President announce a plan to the nation (complete with a flow-chart graphic) only to have the company explain afterwards that nothing like that is really happening. I honestly don’t understand how it’s possible Google and the White House hadn’t communicated on this before the press conference. Just to be sure I wasn’t imagining things, I re-watched the announcement above. Here’s what VP Pence said about the website that would soon be available:
On the plus side, it sounds like the White House really does have some of the testing and retail pieces of this plan on board. Based on Pence saying information about the website would be available Sunday, I guess they have two days to figure out how a site currently intended for the Bay Area can be expanded to the entire country very, very fast.


hotair--2020-03-13--HHS official ducks whether there'll be enough ICU beds and ventilators available for coronavirus pat

HHS official ducks whether there'll be enough ICU beds and ventilators available for coronavirus patients

Four times Martha MacCallum asked Seema Verma last night whether she ’ s confident hospitals will have the capacity they need to meet a surge of COVID-19 patients , and four times Verma ducked her .
For good reason : “ It ’ s estimated that we have about 45,000 intensive care unit beds in the United States .
In a moderate outbreak , about 200,000 Americans would need one , ” per the Times .
So , no .
The answer ’ s no .
As for ventilators , one recent study estimated that the U.S. has 160,000 of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough , since other less aggressive forms of breathing support like nebulizers can ’ t be used on coronavirus patients .
The risk that they ’ ll release particles into the air is too high .
The news is not all bad today , but … this is pretty bad , if not unexpected .
Watch two minutes , then read on .
Some good news : More testing is coming online .
More good news : Trump is set to declare a national emergency , which will free up money for states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House is working with retail and pharmaceutical companies to build a web portal that would direct people locally to drive-through facilities for coronavirus testing .
Testing that way avoids the risk of further infection by sparing patients from having to sit in a waiting room somewhere before the test .
All of that would have been great news two weeks ago and fabulous news a month ago .
We are where we are .
Testing remains the key problem , of course .
Many who fear they have the virus have faced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get tested , according to interviews with dozens of people across the country .
Some have been rejected because they had no symptoms , even though they had been in proximity to someone who tested positive .
Others were told no because they had not traveled to a hot spot abroad , even though they had fevers and hacking coughs and lived in cities with growing outbreaks .
Still others were told a bitter truth : There simply were not enough tests to go around .
“ The system is not really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , what you are asking for .
That is a failing , ” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci , who leads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , in testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform on Thursday .
“ It is a failing .
I mean , let ’ s admit it.
” The most comprehensive piece I ’ ve seen addressing the breakdown in testing is this one today at the Atlantic , which blames a combination of red tape , lack of virus samples , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the deficit — about as full-spectrum a failure by the feds as one could conceivably fear at a moment when the country is facing a dire threat .
( Here ’ s an example of red tape , if you ’ re curious . )
The failures extend beyond testing too .
Trump deserves credit for banning travel from Europe , which will slightly limit the number of new vectors for the disease ’ s spread here in the U.S. , but it ’ s hard to square his insistence on strong borders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the cursory screening of people entering the United States for many weeks now : Maggie McDow , 46 , said she had swollen glands when she landed at Dulles International Airport outside Washington , one of 11 airports where travelers who have recently been in China or Iran are being funneled .
Ms. McDow had flown from London , but before that , she had stopped in South Korea , a coronavirus hot spot .
Ms. McDow said she heard plenty of instructions from airport officials for those feeling ill in airports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States , she said , “ There was none of that.
” A customs officer stamped her passport , and she was on her way… William Yates , 28 , said that did not happen to him .
He did not undergo any medical screening before he left Rome , with a layover in London , or before boarding his flight from London to Phoenix .
While he experienced no symptoms , he believed he might be stopped since he visited Emilia-Romagna , a region in Italy where provinces have been locked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he arrived in Phoenix , he was asked only if he had visited Milan .
Full-spectrum failure .
NPR published this ominous claim yesterday , which I ’ m guessing isn ’ t true just because we ’ d … surely have heard more about it by now if it were .
For the sake of my own sanity , I need to believe that someone in the inner circle like Anthony Fauci would have leaked to the media if Trump were deliberately slow-walking testing .
Hard to believe .
Not that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk in suppressing testing for the sake of “ lower numbers ” and good PR ; I can believe that .
I just can ’ t believe the medical experts around him would tolerate it and keep mum .
Presumably the allegation was fed to NPR by Azar or some other CDC/HHS bureaucrat to try to scapegoat Trump for their own bureaucratic failures .
Then again , this news from a few days ago was suspicious : Four sources is a lot of people leaking all at once .
One of them claimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to attend meetings because they lack security clearances .
Why would you want anyone needlessly out of the loop during a massive , multifaceted bureaucratic endeavor like the feds ’ coronavirus response ?
The obvious suspicion is that HHS has a better idea about the scale of infections then they ’ re letting on , even if it ’ s just epidemiological estimates , and they ’ re trying to cover up that info for now in order to hide the sheer scope of the failure .
Something to chew on in relation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a former homeland security adviser to Mr. Trump , has tried repeatedly in recent days to be patched through to the president or Vice President Mike Pence to warn them just how dire the coronavirus pandemic really is , only to be blocked by White House officials , according to two people familiar with the events.
” While Bossert is being stonewalled , Jared Kushner ’ s getting advice from his brother ’ s father-in-law via a Facebook group of fellow ER doctors .
Full-spectrum failure .
It ’ s not going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now .
I think at the moment the country ’ s been lulled into a false ( and fleeting ) sense of optimism about the outbreak by the wave of massive shutdowns this past week .
Sports are gone , big cultural events are gone , colleges are shutting down , schools are closing , parades are canceled , on and on .
Surely that ’ ll dramatically slow the spread of the disease , no ?
Yep , it will — but not so much at this point that we avoid an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ late for that , it appears .
In fact , according to this expert , because of the lack of testing we might be lucky if it ’ s “ only ” as bad here as it is in Italy .

Four times Martha MacCallum asked Seema Verma last night whether she’s confident hospitals will have the capacity they need to meet a surge of COVID-19 patients, and four times Verma ducked her. For good reason: “It’s estimated that we have about 45,000 intensive care unit beds in the United States. In a moderate outbreak, about 200,000 Americans would need one,” per the Times.
So, no. The answer’s no. As for ventilators, one recent study estimated that the U.S. has 160,000 of those. Hopefully that’ll be enough, since other less aggressive forms of breathing support like nebulizers can’t be used on coronavirus patients. The risk that they’ll release particles into the air is too high.
The news is not all bad today, but … this is pretty bad, if not unexpected. Watch two minutes, then read on.
Some good news: More testing is coming online. More good news: Trump is set to declare a national emergency, which will free up money for states. Even more good news: The White House is working with retail and pharmaceutical companies to build a web portal that would direct people locally to drive-through facilities for coronavirus testing. Testing that way avoids the risk of further infection by sparing patients from having to sit in a waiting room somewhere before the test.
All of that would have been great news two weeks ago and fabulous news a month ago. We are where we are.
Testing remains the key problem, of course.
Many who fear they have the virus have faced one roadblock after another as they try to get tested, according to interviews with dozens of people across the country. Some have been rejected because they had no symptoms, even though they had been in proximity to someone who tested positive. Others were told no because they had not traveled to a hot spot abroad, even though they had fevers and hacking coughs and lived in cities with growing outbreaks. Still others were told a bitter truth: There simply were not enough tests to go around. “The system is not really geared to what we need right now, what you are asking for. That is a failing,” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, who leads the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform on Thursday. “It is a failing. I mean, let’s admit it.”
The most comprehensive piece I’ve seen addressing the breakdown in testing is this one today at the Atlantic, which blames a combination of red tape, lack of virus samples, an equipment shortage, and poor leadership for the deficit — about as full-spectrum a failure by the feds as one could conceivably fear at a moment when the country is facing a dire threat. (Here’s an example of red tape, if you’re curious.) The failures extend beyond testing too. Trump deserves credit for banning travel from Europe, which will slightly limit the number of new vectors for the disease’s spread here in the U.S., but it’s hard to square his insistence on strong borders to try to keep out the virus with the cursory screening of people entering the United States for many weeks now:
Maggie McDow, 46, said she had swollen glands when she landed at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, one of 11 airports where travelers who have recently been in China or Iran are being funneled. Ms. McDow had flown from London, but before that, she had stopped in South Korea, a coronavirus hot spot. Ms. McDow said she heard plenty of instructions from airport officials for those feeling ill in airports abroad. But when she reached the United States, she said, “There was none of that.” A customs officer stamped her passport, and she was on her way… William Yates, 28, said that did not happen to him. He did not undergo any medical screening before he left Rome, with a layover in London, or before boarding his flight from London to Phoenix. While he experienced no symptoms, he believed he might be stopped since he visited Emilia-Romagna, a region in Italy where provinces have been locked down because of the outbreak. When he arrived in Phoenix, he was asked only if he had visited Milan.
Full-spectrum failure. NPR published this ominous claim yesterday, which I’m guessing isn’t true just because we’d … surely have heard more about it by now if it were. For the sake of my own sanity, I need to believe that someone in the inner circle like Anthony Fauci would have leaked to the media if Trump were deliberately slow-walking testing.
A previous tweet of this quote did not make it adequately clear that it is Trump who did not push for adequate testing, not Secretary of Health and Human Services Azar. Here is the whole quote for context. @ddiamond pic.twitter.com/ZZ2aPF53m6 — Fresh Air (@nprfreshair) March 12, 2020
Hard to believe. Not that he’d fail to grasp the catastrophic risk in suppressing testing for the sake of “lower numbers” and good PR; I can believe that. I just can’t believe the medical experts around him would tolerate it and keep mum. Presumably the allegation was fed to NPR by Azar or some other CDC/HHS bureaucrat to try to scapegoat Trump for their own bureaucratic failures.
Then again, this news from a few days ago was suspicious:
The White House has ordered federal health officials to treat top-level coronavirus meetings as classified, an unusual step that has restricted information and hampered the U.S. government’s response to the contagion, according to four Trump administration officials. The officials said that dozens of classified discussions about such topics as the scope of infections, quarantines and travel restrictions have been held since mid-January in a high-security meeting room at the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), a key player in the fight against the coronavirus. Staffers without security clearances, including government experts, were excluded from the interagency meetings, which included video conference calls, the sources said.
Four sources is a lot of people leaking all at once. One of them claimed that “critical” advisors were unable to attend meetings because they lack security clearances. Why would you want anyone needlessly out of the loop during a massive, multifaceted bureaucratic endeavor like the feds’ coronavirus response? The obvious suspicion is that HHS has a better idea about the scale of infections then they’re letting on, even if it’s just epidemiological estimates, and they’re trying to cover up that info for now in order to hide the sheer scope of the failure. Something to chew on in relation to that: “Thomas P. Bossert, a former homeland security adviser to Mr. Trump, has tried repeatedly in recent days to be patched through to the president or Vice President Mike Pence to warn them just how dire the coronavirus pandemic really is, only to be blocked by White House officials, according to two people familiar with the events.” While Bossert is being stonewalled, Jared Kushner’s getting advice from his brother’s father-in-law via a Facebook group of fellow ER doctors.
Full-spectrum failure. It’s not going to be good a few weeks from now.
Italy suffered 250 deaths due to coronavirus in just ONE DAY. More than 2,500 new cases were diagnosed in that 24 hours. Spread in the U.S. has been roughly mirroring the spread seen in Italy, tracking about 10 days behind it. — Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) March 13, 2020
I think at the moment the country’s been lulled into a false (and fleeting) sense of optimism about the outbreak by the wave of massive shutdowns this past week. Sports are gone, big cultural events are gone, colleges are shutting down, schools are closing, parades are canceled, on and on. Surely that’ll dramatically slow the spread of the disease, no? Yep, it will — but not so much at this point that we avoid an Italy scenario. It’s too late for that, it appears. In fact, according to this expert, because of the lack of testing we might be lucky if it’s “only” as bad here as it is in Italy.


hotair--2020-03-13--Miami's mayor tests positive for coronavirus after meeting with Brazil's president (Should Trump be

Miami's mayor tests positive for coronavirus after meeting with Brazil's president (Should Trump be tested?)

The mayor of Miami , Francis Suarez , revealed today that he tested positive for COVID-19 .
In a video released this morning , Suarez explained that anyone who was in the viscinity when he coughed or sneezed in the last few days should “ self-isolate for 14 days.
” Here ’ s his announcement : What ’ s especially concerning about this development is that mayor Suarez got the infection from an official traveling with Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro .
As Allahpundit pointed out yesterday , both Bolsonaro and the infected official also met with other U.S. elected officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what is currently a point of confusion , there was a report earlier today in the Brazilian media that Bolsonaro himself had tested positive for the virus .
But Bolsonaro and his son have since disputed that saying he was in fact tested but the test was negative : Bolsonaro ’ s son Eduardo quickly denied the diagnosis on social media and then in an interview on Fox News , but late Friday morning the Brazilian president himself posted on his social media accounts that he had tested negative for the disease .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ FAKE NEWS MEDIA !
” he wrote in Portuguese .
“ THEY ’ RE THE ONES THAT NEED YOU !
” … In the interview on Fox , the Brazilian president ’ s son said that his father was not exhibiting symptoms of the respiratory illness and that “ the information I have is the results that just came up , telling that he is negative for coronavirus , ” clarifying that those were the results of his father ’ s first test .
So it appears that Bolsonaro does not have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definitely does and he was the one who apparently spread it to mayor Suarez .
Yesterday CNN reported that Wajngarten was in close proximity to Trump during a visit to Mar-a-Lago last Saturday : The Brazilian press secretary attended the dinner Trump hosted at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida , took a photo with the US President and later stood feet away from Trump as he spoke during Kimberly Guilfoyle ’ s birthday , the sources said .
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham issued a statement Thursday saying : “ Both the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interactions with the individual who tested positive and do not require being tested at this time.
” Here ’ s a photo Wajngarten posted to his Instagram account showing him standing next to Trump for a picture ( wearing the hat ) : And here ’ s a video he posted which suggests he was only a few feet away from Trump : Trump said yesterday that he wasn ’ t concerned about his close proximity to someone who had the virus : But he said that before mayor Suarez tested positive based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At a minimum this whole story reinforces the message about the importance of social distancing .
But the potential danger is serious enough that earlier today Dr. Marc Siegel suggested on Fox Business that maybe the president should be tested or consider self-quarantine ( Note : This went up before the situation about Bolsonaro ’ s test had been clarified ) :

The mayor of Miami, Francis Suarez, revealed today that he tested positive for COVID-19. In a video released this morning, Suarez explained that anyone who was in the viscinity when he coughed or sneezed in the last few days should “self-isolate for 14 days.” Here’s his announcement:
My message to our residents in light of the news that I have tested positive for COVID-19. pic.twitter.com/gW9IziifQm — Mayor Francis Suarez (@FrancisSuarez) March 13, 2020
What’s especially concerning about this development is that mayor Suarez got the infection from an official traveling with Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. As Allahpundit pointed out yesterday, both Bolsonaro and the infected official also met with other U.S. elected officials including President Trump.
Suarez was one of several politicians, including Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez, Sen. Rick Scott and President Donald Trump, who interacted with Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and his staff during a visit to South Florida last week. The mayor went into isolation Thursday after learning that one of Boslonaro’s staffers tested positive. Fabio Wajngarten, press secretary to Bolsonaro, tested positive on Thursday.
Just to clarify what is currently a point of confusion, there was a report earlier today in the Brazilian media that Bolsonaro himself had tested positive for the virus. But Bolsonaro and his son have since disputed that saying he was in fact tested but the test was negative:
Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo quickly denied the diagnosis on social media and then in an interview on Fox News, but late Friday morning the Brazilian president himself posted on his social media accounts that he had tested negative for the disease. “DON’T BELIEVE IN THE FAKE NEWS MEDIA!” he wrote in Portuguese. “THEY’RE THE ONES THAT NEED YOU!”… In the interview on Fox, the Brazilian president’s son said that his father was not exhibiting symptoms of the respiratory illness and that “the information I have is the results that just came up, telling that he is negative for coronavirus,” clarifying that those were the results of his father’s first test.
So it appears that Bolsonaro does not have the virus but his press secretary Fabio Wajngarten definitely does and he was the one who apparently spread it to mayor Suarez. Yesterday CNN reported that Wajngarten was in close proximity to Trump during a visit to Mar-a-Lago last Saturday:
The Brazilian press secretary attended the dinner Trump hosted at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, took a photo with the US President and later stood feet away from Trump as he spoke during Kimberly Guilfoyle’s birthday, the sources said. White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham issued a statement Thursday saying: “Both the President and Vice President had almost no interactions with the individual who tested positive and do not require being tested at this time.”
Here’s a photo Wajngarten posted to his Instagram account showing him standing next to Trump for a picture (wearing the hat):
https://www.instagram.com/p/B9c_wc3nFKT/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
And here’s a video he posted which suggests he was only a few feet away from Trump:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B9eFjguHhSq/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Trump said yesterday that he wasn’t concerned about his close proximity to someone who had the virus:
President Donald Trump Thursday said he is “not concerned” about reports that Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s press secretary has tested positive for coronavirus, just days after the two met at Mar-a Lago. “Let’s put it this way: I’m not concerned,” Trump told reporters at the White House.
But he said that before mayor Suarez tested positive based on transmission from the same individual. At a minimum this whole story reinforces the message about the importance of social distancing. But the potential danger is serious enough that earlier today Dr. Marc Siegel suggested on Fox Business that maybe the president should be tested or consider self-quarantine (Note: This went up before the situation about Bolsonaro’s test had been clarified):