hotair--2020-05-15--CNBC: Get ready for new Trump EO to force essential-drug production in US

Will Donald Trump use his pen and phone to close up a gaping strategic vulnerability on pharmaceuticals ?
Congress has initiatives in process to incentive and pressure pharmaceutical manufacturers to relocate supply chains to the US , but Trump might beat them to the punch .
An executive order to force domestic production of “ essential drugs ” could come as early as today , CNBC reported late yesterday : The White House is preparing an executive order which will require certain essential drugs be made in the U.S. , two sources familiar with the matter told CNBC on Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Kayla Tausche the order could come out as soon as Friday .
The applicable time frame for reviewing the order will be 90 days , the sources said .
The administration has a wide-ranging supply chain effort underway for products in a variety of sectors seen as national security issues , including drugs , medical supplies , semiconductors and defense equipment , the sources said .
Clearly the main target for this policy would be China , whose control of supply chains for medicines and medical gear has already created headaches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just for the US .
This order might impact other trading partners , however , depending on how “ essential ” gets defined .
While China produces a significant amount of our drugs , it may not be quite as large a share as some assume : Bloomberg reported separately that the draft EO hasn ’ t yet been reviewed by Trump , but that it could go out quickly once he sees it .
It does have one caveat on cost that could turn into a loophole : The draft order is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t gotten sign off from the president .
It has reached other federal agencies for review and coordination , including the Pentagon and the Department of Health and Human Services .
A Pentagon official Thursday said the draft order was being reviewed and coordinated within the relevant office .
The executive order would limit any federal contracts for those supplies to manufacturers in the U.S. and would require that production be divided among multiple companies to ensure price competition .
The drugs and devices covered by the order include anything used to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ biohazard attack .
The list of “ essential medicines ” will be later determined , according to the executive order .
The exceptions would be if U.S. production isn ’ t in the public interest , the treatment or device isn ’ t produced in sufficient quantities in the U.S. , or if it raises prices by more than 25 % .
The exception review process on that should be interesting .
Pharma manufacturers who have a vested interest in cheap labor could game this out by claiming that costs will rise more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearly anything , and they might not even have to game much to prove that .
The labor costs between China and the US have to be at least 25 % different , if not more so .
Manufacturers have managed to stave off action for two months , but their luck is running out , apparently .
Trade advisor Peter Navarro pushed for a similar EO in March at the beginning of the shutdown , which ended up going nowhere .
With job losses now approached 23 million or more , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now than it did in mid-March : When asked about the push by lobbying group PhRMA against the executive order , Peter Navvaro told CNBC , “ This Big Pharma spin is simply a desperate attempt to stop President Donald J. Trump from moving the production of our essential medicines and medical equipment and supplies to the U.S. ” Navarro , known for his hawkish views on China , told CNBC earlier this week that he is bringing an executive order to Trump that would aim to reduce United States dependency on foreign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturers supplying the U.S. are located overseas , including 13 % in China , according to October congressional testimony by Janet Woodcock , director of the Food and Drug Administration ’ s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research .
The executive order Navarro is planning will streamline regulatory approvals for “ American-made ” products and look to impose similar FDA restrictions on U.S. facilities as those abroad .
It will also encourage the U.S. government , including the Department of Defense , Department of Health and Human Services and Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American-made medical products .
Sounds like the same proposal , or close enough for government work .
Trump has some authority to order this in the short term through the Defense Production Act , although manufacturers could challenge that in court .
The administration can put more pressure on manufacturers through the FDA ’ s regulatory process with or without a formal EO by forcing all outsourced production to meet FDA standards in all facilities , not just those in the US .
However , the likelier long-term solution will be to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for relocating supply chains back to the US .
That also happens to be the proper solution for any long-term policy choices .
This pandemic has shown the strategic vulnerabilities of our globalized supply chain , especially those in hostile nations , and we need a long-term plan to ensure better security for critical needs in times of emergency .

Will Donald Trump use his pen and phone to close up a gaping strategic vulnerability on pharmaceuticals? Congress has initiatives in process to incentive and pressure pharmaceutical manufacturers to relocate supply chains to the US, but Trump might beat them to the punch. An executive order to force domestic production of “essential drugs” could come as early as today, CNBC reported late yesterday:
The White House is preparing an executive order which will require certain essential drugs be made in the U.S., two sources familiar with the matter told CNBC on Thursday. One of the sources told CNBC’s Kayla Tausche the order could come out as soon as Friday. The applicable time frame for reviewing the order will be 90 days, the sources said. The administration has a wide-ranging supply chain effort underway for products in a variety of sectors seen as national security issues, including drugs, medical supplies, semiconductors and defense equipment, the sources said.
Clearly the main target for this policy would be China, whose control of supply chains for medicines and medical gear has already created headaches in the COVID-19 pandemic, and not just for the US. This order might impact other trading partners, however, depending on how “essential” gets defined. While China produces a significant amount of our drugs, it may not be quite as large a share as some assume:
About 72% of pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturers supplying the U.S. are located overseas, including 13% in China, according to an October congressional testimony by Janet Woodcock, director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Bloomberg reported separately that the draft EO hasn’t yet been reviewed by Trump, but that it could go out quickly once he sees it. It does have one caveat on cost that could turn into a loophole:
The draft order is still in the preliminary stages and hasn’t gotten sign off from the president. It has reached other federal agencies for review and coordination, including the Pentagon and the Department of Health and Human Services. A Pentagon official Thursday said the draft order was being reviewed and coordinated within the relevant office. The executive order would limit any federal contracts for those supplies to manufacturers in the U.S. and would require that production be divided among multiple companies to ensure price competition. The drugs and devices covered by the order include anything used to respond to a public health emergency or biohazard attack. The list of “essential medicines” will be later determined, according to the executive order. The exceptions would be if U.S. production isn’t in the public interest, the treatment or device isn’t produced in sufficient quantities in the U.S., or if it raises prices by more than 25%.
The exception review process on that should be interesting. Pharma manufacturers who have a vested interest in cheap labor could game this out by claiming that costs will rise more than 25% with American production on nearly anything, and they might not even have to game much to prove that. The labor costs between China and the US have to be at least 25% different, if not more so.
Manufacturers have managed to stave off action for two months, but their luck is running out, apparently. Trade advisor Peter Navarro pushed for a similar EO in March at the beginning of the shutdown, which ended up going nowhere. With job losses now approached 23 million or more, the buy-American argument must have have more traction now than it did in mid-March:
When asked about the push by lobbying group PhRMA against the executive order, Peter Navvaro told CNBC, “This Big Pharma spin is simply a desperate attempt to stop President Donald J. Trump from moving the production of our essential medicines and medical equipment and supplies to the U.S.” Navarro, known for his hawkish views on China, told CNBC earlier this week that he is bringing an executive order to Trump that would aim to reduce United States dependency on foreign manufacturers for medicine. About 72% of pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturers supplying the U.S. are located overseas, including 13% in China, according to October congressional testimony by Janet Woodcock, director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. The executive order Navarro is planning will streamline regulatory approvals for “American-made” products and look to impose similar FDA restrictions on U.S. facilities as those abroad. It will also encourage the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense, Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Veterans Affairs, to only buy American-made medical products.
Sounds like the same proposal, or close enough for government work. Trump has some authority to order this in the short term through the Defense Production Act, although manufacturers could challenge that in court. The administration can put more pressure on manufacturers through the FDA’s regulatory process with or without a formal EO by forcing all outsourced production to meet FDA standards in all facilities, not just those in the US.
However, the likelier long-term solution will be to get Congress to provide subsidies and tax incentives for relocating supply chains back to the US. That also happens to be the proper solution for any long-term policy choices. This pandemic has shown the strategic vulnerabilities of our globalized supply chain, especially those in hostile nations, and we need a long-term plan to ensure better security for critical needs in times of emergency.


hotair--2020-05-15--Florida Man wonders: Why does Cuomo get better COVID-19 press than DeSantis, when Florida has done s

Florida Man wonders: Why does Cuomo get better COVID-19 press than DeSantis, when Florida has done so much better?

Er … three guesses , and the first two don ’ t count .
This question doesn ’ t come from just any Florida Man either , but Politico ’ s Marc Caputo , who argues that the New York-based media made a villain out of Ron DeSantis out of political and regional bias .
In a pointed , almost angry dispatch last night from the Sunshine State , Caputo starts off with that theme and backs it up with outcomes : Good evening , and greetings from Florida , where we feel the need to inform you that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus infection and cadavers stacked like cordwood .
That is , Florida just doesn ’ t look nearly as bad as the national news media and sky-is-falling critics have been predicting for about two months now .
But then , the national news media is mostly based in New York and loves to love its Democratic governor , Andrew Cuomo , about as much as it loves to hate on Florida ’ s Republican Gov .
Ron DeSantis .
First , let ’ s just come out and say it : DeSantis looks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunshine State ’ s coronavirus response .
According to the latest Florida figures , fewer than 2,000 have died , and around 43,000 have been infected .
That ’ s a fraction of the dire predictions made for Florida when spring breakers swarmed the beaches , and those numbers are dwarfed by similarly sized New York , which has seen 12 times more deaths and nearly eight times more infections .
( Check out POLITICO ’ s coronavirus tracker for more . )
More people reportedly died in New York nursing homes than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event was still stupid , though , and likely provided unnecessary vectors for spreading COVID-19 .
That wouldn ’ t have been from “ swarming the beaches ” as much as crowding the bars and restaurants , as we now know , but the restaurants and bars were still open because DeSantis hadn ’ t ordered them closed .
( Caputo acknowledges that error , too . )
That order wouldn ’ t come until April 1 , after spring-break season had effectively ended — and few people were traveling any more anyway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s no doubt that the doomsday scenarios for Florida haven ’ t played out .
They certainly have in New York , which has driven much of the national death numbers .
Some of which is due to urban density in New York City that is greater than anywhere in Florida , even Miami , a point raised by Cuomo ’ s defenders , but it ’ s not the entire answer either .
Some of it ’ s also true because of colossally stupid decisions by Cuomo and Mayor Bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subways in operation and putting COVID-19-positive patients and nurses back into nursing homes .
So why does the national media portray DeSantis as a rube while elevating Cuomo to the status of hero ?
Caputo has a couple of notions as to what ’ s in play : Yes , there ’ s media bias , too .
Cuomo also has something else DeSantis doesn ’ t : a press that defers to him , one that preferred to cover “ Florida Morons ” at the beach ( where it ’ s relatively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yorkers riding cramped subway cars ( where it ’ s easy to get infected ) .
In fact , people can still ride the subways for most hours of the day in New York , but Miami Beach ’ s sands remain closed .
Maybe things would be different if DeSantis had a brother who worked in cable news and interviewed him for a “ sweet moment ” in primetime .
The beach closings have become harder and harder to justify .
The data has shown for some time that outdoor venues are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus , and that ’ s probably more true the sunnier and warmer outdoor venues get .
Floridians ( and everyone else ) are likely safer on the beach with basic social-distancing protocols than they are in supermarkets .
And they ’ re certainly a lot safer on the beaches than they would be in New York City ’ s subways , which continue operating even with evidence that they are providing new vectors for disease on every run .
The political bias that Caputo explicitly cites is traditional partisanship .
Another component @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the regional bias through which New York-based media covers the rest of the country .
We see it when writers call Minneapolis “ the middle of nowhere ” for having the temerity to host a Super Bowl , references to “ flyover country , ” and a general tone of sneering indifference to valid regional concerns and interests .
Whatever it is , Caputo ’ s correct to call it out in this instance .
We should be learning from Florida ’ s successes ( and missteps too ) , not mischaracterizing outcomes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ editors .
Some of us are very , very used to that from the national media , of course , but we ’ re always happy to welcome the more recently enlightened .

Er … three guesses, and the first two don’t count. This question doesn’t come from just any Florida Man either, but Politico’s Marc Caputo, who argues that the New York-based media made a villain out of Ron DeSantis out of political and regional bias. In a pointed, almost angry dispatch last night from the Sunshine State, Caputo starts off with that theme and backs it up with outcomes:
Good evening, and greetings from Florida, where we feel the need to inform you that it’s not a post-apocalyptic hellscape of coronavirus infection and cadavers stacked like cordwood. That is, Florida just doesn’t look nearly as bad as the national news media and sky-is-falling critics have been predicting for about two months now. But then, the national news media is mostly based in New York and loves to love its Democratic governor, Andrew Cuomo, about as much as it loves to hate on Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. First, let’s just come out and say it: DeSantis looks more right than those who criticized the Sunshine State’s coronavirus response. According to the latest Florida figures, fewer than 2,000 have died, and around 43,000 have been infected. That’s a fraction of the dire predictions made for Florida when spring breakers swarmed the beaches, and those numbers are dwarfed by similarly sized New York, which has seen 12 times more deaths and nearly eight times more infections. (Check out POLITICO’s coronavirus tracker for more.) More people reportedly died in New York nursing homes than in all of Florida.
The spring-breakers event was still stupid, though, and likely provided unnecessary vectors for spreading COVID-19. That wouldn’t have been from “swarming the beaches” as much as crowding the bars and restaurants, as we now know, but the restaurants and bars were still open because DeSantis hadn’t ordered them closed. (Caputo acknowledges that error, too.) That order wouldn’t come until April 1, after spring-break season had effectively ended — and few people were traveling any more anyway.
Still, even with that, there’s no doubt that the doomsday scenarios for Florida haven’t played out. They certainly have in New York, which has driven much of the national death numbers. Some of which is due to urban density in New York City that is greater than anywhere in Florida, even Miami, a point raised by Cuomo’s defenders, but it’s not the entire answer either. Some of it’s also true because of colossally stupid decisions by Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio, such as keeping the subways in operation and putting COVID-19-positive patients and nurses back into nursing homes. So why does the national media portray DeSantis as a rube while elevating Cuomo to the status of hero?
Caputo has a couple of notions as to what’s in play:
Yes, there’s media bias, too. Cuomo also has something else DeSantis doesn’t: a press that defers to him, one that preferred to cover “Florida Morons” at the beach (where it’s relatively hard to get infected) over New Yorkers riding cramped subway cars (where it’s easy to get infected). In fact, people can still ride the subways for most hours of the day in New York, but Miami Beach’s sands remain closed. Maybe things would be different if DeSantis had a brother who worked in cable news and interviewed him for a “sweet moment” in primetime.
The beach closings have become harder and harder to justify. The data has shown for some time that outdoor venues are not particularly conducive to transmission of the virus, and that’s probably more true the sunnier and warmer outdoor venues get. Floridians (and everyone else) are likely safer on the beach with basic social-distancing protocols than they are in supermarkets. And they’re certainly a lot safer on the beaches than they would be in New York City’s subways, which continue operating even with evidence that they are providing new vectors for disease on every run.
The political bias that Caputo explicitly cites is traditional partisanship. Another component, one has to suspect, is the regional bias through which New York-based media covers the rest of the country. We see it when writers call Minneapolis “the middle of nowhere” for having the temerity to host a Super Bowl, references to “flyover country,” and a general tone of sneering indifference to valid regional concerns and interests.
Whatever it is, Caputo’s correct to call it out in this instance. We should be learning from Florida’s successes (and missteps too), not mischaracterizing outcomes to suit the personal taste of media editors. Some of us are very, very used to that from the national media, of course, but we’re always happy to welcome the more recently enlightened.


hotair--2020-05-15--Dining out has changed in the era of the virus

Texas is in the process of reopening for business , and that includes bars and restaurants .
Most eateries have either been closed for the past couple of months or restricted to curbside takeout service .
But as diners venture out for their first restaurant experience in many weeks , they ’ re discovering that the old practices are no longer in place .
NBC News talked to some of the wait staff at Coltivare , a popular Italian restaurant in Houston , about some of the changes that have been made .
They also interviewed one couple who went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her husband , Ted Mellen , about how the experience differed from the pre-virus era .
After making a phone reservation — prior to the pandemic , Coltivare was well-known for refusing to take them — Oza and Mellen were instructed to wait in their car when they arrived .
A restaurant staff member texted them when their table was ready , so they could go straight there and avoid bumping into other customers .
Once seated , a waiter in a cloth mask and plastic gloves arrived and explained that “ things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different.
” The waiter would be taking the entire order — drinks , appetizers , dinner — all at once , to avoid additional interactions .
After eating , customers were asked to set any empty plates onto a cart next to their table , so workers wouldn ’ t have to lean over them to grab dirty dishes .
In addition to those safety protocols , when any diner needs to use the restroom they have to notify a member of the wait staff .
That person then accompanies them to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the restroom is unoccupied and is freshly sanitized .
Only then is the customer allowed to go in and attend to their business .
It sounds a bit like being back in grade school , doesn ’ t it ?
Occupancy indoors is limited to 25 % of previous levels with tables spaced further apart .
( Personally , I wouldn ’ t have minded that change even if we weren ’ t experiencing a pandemic . )
To get around that restriction , many restaurants , including Coltivare , are moving many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s still going to cut way down on traffic for them any time that the weather gets unpleasant .
Salt and pepper shakers are a thing of the past , as are sugar dispensers and individual bottles of ketchup , mustard , and other condiments .
It would be far too time-consuming and expensive to disinfect all of those containers in between every meal .
Now there will be a boom in sales of individual paper or foil packets of all those products .
Freshly washed silverware is being delivered in plastic ziplock @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hands don ’ t touch them prior to use .
And of course , there are the facemasks .
Texas doesn ’ t require a facemask for customers , but they are encouraged .
Obviously you can ’ t wear one while eating or drinking , but the rest of the time most of us will wind up wearing them from the time we arrive at a restaurant until we ’ re back in our cars .
The chefs , wait staff , busboys , greeters and the rest of the employees will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ along with some form of protective gloves .
So is this the “ new normal ” when it comes to dining out ?
And more to the point , is this a permanent change ?
When are we supposed to feel comfortable enough that the virus is “ gone ” to go back to the old way of doing things ?
I ’ m starting to wonder if we ’ re ever going to reach that point .
For all I know , the old social order is disappearing before our eyes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , shallow bowing at the waist .
( We ’ re all suddenly turning Japanese .
Cue the Vapors . )
Instead of looking forward to receiving a package in the mail , many of us end up staring suspiciously at the parcel and wondering how many people handled it in the past three days .
When the restaurants reopen in my state I ’ m honestly not sure that I ’ ll go back to visiting them .
Our entire social order has begun to mutate as much as the virus has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be necessary , that doesn ’ t mean we ’ re all going to enjoy it .

Texas is in the process of reopening for business, and that includes bars and restaurants. Most eateries have either been closed for the past couple of months or restricted to curbside takeout service. But as diners venture out for their first restaurant experience in many weeks, they’re discovering that the old practices are no longer in place. NBC News talked to some of the wait staff at Coltivare, a popular Italian restaurant in Houston, about some of the changes that have been made. They also interviewed one couple who went to dinner there, Nisha Oza and her husband, Ted Mellen, about how the experience differed from the pre-virus era.
After making a phone reservation — prior to the pandemic, Coltivare was well-known for refusing to take them — Oza and Mellen were instructed to wait in their car when they arrived. A restaurant staff member texted them when their table was ready, so they could go straight there and avoid bumping into other customers. Once seated, a waiter in a cloth mask and plastic gloves arrived and explained that “things are going to be a little bit different.” The waiter would be taking the entire order — drinks, appetizers, dinner — all at once, to avoid additional interactions. After eating, customers were asked to set any empty plates onto a cart next to their table, so workers wouldn’t have to lean over them to grab dirty dishes.
In addition to those safety protocols, when any diner needs to use the restroom they have to notify a member of the wait staff. That person then accompanies them to the restrooms and checks first to make sure the restroom is unoccupied and is freshly sanitized. Only then is the customer allowed to go in and attend to their business. It sounds a bit like being back in grade school, doesn’t it?
Occupancy indoors is limited to 25% of previous levels with tables spaced further apart. (Personally, I wouldn’t have minded that change even if we weren’t experiencing a pandemic.) To get around that restriction, many restaurants, including Coltivare, are moving many tables outdoors. Unfortunately, that’s still going to cut way down on traffic for them any time that the weather gets unpleasant.
Salt and pepper shakers are a thing of the past, as are sugar dispensers and individual bottles of ketchup, mustard, and other condiments. It would be far too time-consuming and expensive to disinfect all of those containers in between every meal. Now there will be a boom in sales of individual paper or foil packets of all those products. Freshly washed silverware is being delivered in plastic ziplock bags so the wait staff’s hands don’t touch them prior to use.
And of course, there are the facemasks. Texas doesn’t require a facemask for customers, but they are encouraged. Obviously you can’t wear one while eating or drinking, but the rest of the time most of us will wind up wearing them from the time we arrive at a restaurant until we’re back in our cars. The chefs, wait staff, busboys, greeters and the rest of the employees will be wearing them pretty much constantly, along with some form of protective gloves.
So is this the “new normal” when it comes to dining out? And more to the point, is this a permanent change? When are we supposed to feel comfortable enough that the virus is “gone” to go back to the old way of doing things? I’m starting to wonder if we’re ever going to reach that point. For all I know, the old social order is disappearing before our eyes. Shaking hands has been replaced with polite, shallow bowing at the waist. (We’re all suddenly turning Japanese. Cue the Vapors.) Instead of looking forward to receiving a package in the mail, many of us end up staring suspiciously at the parcel and wondering how many people handled it in the past three days.
When the restaurants reopen in my state I’m honestly not sure that I’ll go back to visiting them. Our entire social order has begun to mutate as much as the virus has. And while all of this may be necessary, that doesn’t mean we’re all going to enjoy it.


hotair--2020-05-16--The new Beto: Washington Post and NY Times publish flattering profiles of Stacey Abrams

The flattering profiles of Stacey Abrams are coming so fast now that it ’ s hard to keep up .
Two days ago the Washington Post Magazine published a piece titled “ The Power of Stacey Abrams.
” The best way to summarize the piece is probably by showing you this photo that was published with it : It looks like she ’ s trying out for a Harry Potter stage show .
All that ’ s missing is a magic wand .
But it really does match the glowing tone of the piece : When she is finally introduced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feet .
Young women stand on chairs , camera phones flash .
Abrams , who appears both amused and slightly disturbed by the fuss over her , takes control of the chaotic scene… Pandemonium ensues as she walks to the far left of the stage , like a runway supermodel , stops on a dime , poses , tilts her head slightly and smiles .
Camera flashes explode .
She next pivots and walks slowly to the center of the stage , freezes there and repeats the pose .
Again , the flashes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actress , and she is both enjoying the moment and getting through it to get to the conversation .
She then pivots and walks to the far right of the stage , same .
Today the NY Times published another profile of Abrams titled , “ Stacey Abrams Wants More Than the Vice Presidency.
” This one is slightly less glowing but still opens with the same kind of Beatlemania for Stacey , albeit online in this case : The clapping hands appeared on the screen — one , two , a flurry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Live feed of the former minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives , Stacey Abrams .
It was the socially distanced derivative of the applause she has often encountered in the past year or so , since her narrow loss in the race for governor of Georgia in 2018 .
Ms. Abrams was addressing the virtual audience of the New Hampshire Democratic Party convention .
She was there last Saturday to talk voter suppression , the focal point of her work since 2018 , and by the looks of the comments , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Go Stacey !
” popped one , then , 13 seconds later : “ Stacy for VP !
” The one big hurdle every Abrams piece has to contend with is the fact that she lost the 2018 election for Governor in Georgia .
The Post profile takes this head on and suggests she was robbed : Abrams is the first black woman in U.S. history to have won the gubernatorial nomination of either major party .
She garnered more votes than any Democrat who has run statewide in Georgia .
She lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Secretary of State Brian Kemp .
Kemp was not only her opponent , but his office oversaw everything to do with voting , including how the voter registration rolls were purged .
It would be like Tom Brady not only being the quarterback of his team , but the referee and the scorekeeper as well .
Kemp ’ s office cut nearly 700,000 names from the rolls in the two years leading to the election , and more than 200 polling places were closed , primarily in poor and minority neighborhoods .
Abrams @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because she believes voters were disenfranchised .
What the Post profile doesn ’ t mention is that the paper ’ s own fact-checker looked at these claims and pointed out there are pretty strong rebuttals to these points .
• Even if every provisional ballot not counted and every rejected absentee ballot had been awarded to Abrams , it would not have necessitated a runoff , much less overcome Abrams ’ s vote deficit .
• The 2018 turnout was far greater than any previous midterm , according to FiveThirtyEight , and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 .
• Even if 54,000 to 84,000 had not voted because precinct closings , “ Abrams would have had to have won between 82 % and 100 % of those additional votes to close the gap , ” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution said .
• Georgia purges lots of voters because of death , moving or not voting in recent elections , but it also makes it very easy to register because of automatic voter registration ( AVR ) when people obtain driver ’ s licenses .
Registration has grown 94 percent in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to the Brennan Center .
So , at best , the profile is giving half the story .
As for the NY Times ’ profile , it takes the opposite approach , breezing over her loss and the months she spent refusing to say she had lost [ emphasis added ] : That ’ s it .
The Times doesn ’ t really explain how far out she ’ s been on this much less try to defend her .
How long has Stacey Abrams been campaigning to be Vice President ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it began but I know that Allahpundit wrote about her appearance on the View three full months ago when she said she was ready to be VP for whoever wound up being the nominee .
“ It would be doing a disservice to every woman of color , every woman of ambition…for me to say no , ” she said at the time .
Last month she told Elle magazine she would be an “ excellent running mate.
” She also went on the View again to suggest that it would be problematic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black woman as his running mate .
Toward the end of the month there was a report that she was calling up other Democrats asking them to push her to Biden .
She also dismissed Tara Reade ’ s allegations against Biden .
Is all of this shameless self-promotion and sucking up going to work ?
According to a separate Washington Post story published yesterday , it still looks like a stretch to many Biden supporters : Many of his top allies do not see her as his best choice , especially at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a premium on governing experience .
“ Stacey Abrams — is she ready on Day 1 ?
I don ’ t know .
I don ’ t think so , ” said John Morgan , a Florida trial lawyer and top Biden donor .
Biden , 77 , would be the oldest president in history .
Many Democrats are openly questioning whether he would seek a second term , and they say his running mate should be someone who can ease concerns about his longevity and reassure voters she could instantly step into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offered an answer to that in the Times piece published today : “ Asked if she was prepared to be president on Day 1 if needed , amid a pandemic no less , she answered with an unequivocal ‘ yes . '
” It ’ s just that simple for Abrams .
And the media keeps offering her these profiles in which she can keep making her case .
She really has become the media ’ s new darling , their new Beto O ’ Rourke .
And before O ’ Rourke there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cottage industry in media puff pieces .
Has a conservative ever had this many outlets tripping over themselves to publish flattering profiles ?

The flattering profiles of Stacey Abrams are coming so fast now that it’s hard to keep up. Two days ago the Washington Post Magazine published a piece titled “The Power of Stacey Abrams.” The best way to summarize the piece is probably by showing you this photo that was published with it:
It looks like she’s trying out for a Harry Potter stage show. All that’s missing is a magic wand. But it really does match the glowing tone of the piece:
When she is finally introduced the women shout and leap to their feet. Young women stand on chairs, camera phones flash. Abrams, who appears both amused and slightly disturbed by the fuss over her, takes control of the chaotic scene… Pandemonium ensues as she walks to the far left of the stage, like a runway supermodel, stops on a dime, poses, tilts her head slightly and smiles. Camera flashes explode. She next pivots and walks slowly to the center of the stage, freezes there and repeats the pose. Again, the flashes explode. Abrams is summoning her inner actress, and she is both enjoying the moment and getting through it to get to the conversation. She then pivots and walks to the far right of the stage, same.
Today the NY Times published another profile of Abrams titled, “Stacey Abrams Wants More Than the Vice Presidency.” This one is slightly less glowing but still opens with the same kind of Beatlemania for Stacey, albeit online in this case:
The clapping hands appeared on the screen — one, two, a flurry of emojis — flashing under the Facebook Live feed of the former minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives, Stacey Abrams. It was the socially distanced derivative of the applause she has often encountered in the past year or so, since her narrow loss in the race for governor of Georgia in 2018. Ms. Abrams was addressing the virtual audience of the New Hampshire Democratic Party convention. She was there last Saturday to talk voter suppression, the focal point of her work since 2018, and by the looks of the comments, had found a receptive crowd. “Go Stacey!” popped one, then, 13 seconds later: “Stacy for VP!”
The one big hurdle every Abrams piece has to contend with is the fact that she lost the 2018 election for Governor in Georgia. The Post profile takes this head on and suggests she was robbed:
Abrams is the first black woman in U.S. history to have won the gubernatorial nomination of either major party. She garnered more votes than any Democrat who has run statewide in Georgia. She lost by just over 50,000 votes to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp. Kemp was not only her opponent, but his office oversaw everything to do with voting, including how the voter registration rolls were purged. It would be like Tom Brady not only being the quarterback of his team, but the referee and the scorekeeper as well. Kemp’s office cut nearly 700,000 names from the rolls in the two years leading to the election, and more than 200 polling places were closed, primarily in poor and minority neighborhoods. Abrams chose not to concede to Kemp, because she believes voters were disenfranchised.
What the Post profile doesn’t mention is that the paper’s own fact-checker looked at these claims and pointed out there are pretty strong rebuttals to these points.
Even if every provisional ballot not counted and every rejected absentee ballot had been awarded to Abrams, it would not have necessitated a runoff, much less overcome Abrams’s vote deficit.
The 2018 turnout was far greater than any previous midterm, according to FiveThirtyEight, and more African Americans voted in 2018 than in 2016.
Even if 54,000 to 84,000 had not voted because precinct closings, “Abrams would have had to have won between 82% and 100% of those additional votes to close the gap,” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution said.
Georgia purges lots of voters because of death, moving or not voting in recent elections, but it also makes it very easy to register because of automatic voter registration (AVR) when people obtain driver’s licenses. Registration has grown 94 percent in Georgia because of automatic voter registration, according to the Brennan Center.
So, at best, the profile is giving half the story. As for the NY Times’ profile, it takes the opposite approach, breezing over her loss and the months she spent refusing to say she had lost [emphasis added]:
As the first black woman to run as either major party’s candidate for governor in any state, Ms. Abrams became the face of the issue of voting rights in 2018, after narrowly losing her race to Brian Kemp, a Republican. She argued that racially motivated voter suppression had sealed Mr. Kemp’s victory, and shortly after launched Fair Fight, a PAC dedicated to expanding voter education and ballot access across the United States.
That’s it. The Times doesn’t really explain how far out she’s been on this much less try to defend her.
How long has Stacey Abrams been campaigning to be Vice President? I’m not actually sure when it began but I know that Allahpundit wrote about her appearance on the View three full months ago when she said she was ready to be VP for whoever wound up being the nominee. “It would be doing a disservice to every woman of color, every woman of ambition…for me to say no,” she said at the time.
Last month she told Elle magazine she would be an “excellent running mate.” She also went on the View again to suggest that it would be problematic if Biden didn’t pick a black woman as his running mate. Toward the end of the month there was a report that she was calling up other Democrats asking them to push her to Biden. She also dismissed Tara Reade’s allegations against Biden.
Is all of this shameless self-promotion and sucking up going to work? According to a separate Washington Post story published yesterday, it still looks like a stretch to many Biden supporters:
Many of his top allies do not see her as his best choice, especially at a time when the pandemic has put a premium on governing experience. “Stacey Abrams — is she ready on Day 1? I don’t know. I don’t think so,” said John Morgan, a Florida trial lawyer and top Biden donor. Biden, 77, would be the oldest president in history. Many Democrats are openly questioning whether he would seek a second term, and they say his running mate should be someone who can ease concerns about his longevity and reassure voters she could instantly step into the presidency.
But Abrams has already offered an answer to that in the Times piece published today: “Asked if she was prepared to be president on Day 1 if needed, amid a pandemic no less, she answered with an unequivocal ‘yes.'”
It’s just that simple for Abrams. And the media keeps offering her these profiles in which she can keep making her case. She really has become the media’s new darling, their new Beto O’Rourke. And before O’Rourke there was Wendy Davis who also spawned a cottage industry in media puff pieces. Has a conservative ever had this many outlets tripping over themselves to publish flattering profiles?


hotair--2020-05-16--A tobacco-based COVID vaccine?

A tobacco-based COVID vaccine?

In the race to come up with a viable vaccine for the novel coronavirus , many groups around the world have been diving into the effort with a great sense of urgency .
Various hospitals , universities and even bio-tech companies ( some of whom have never produced a vaccine before ) have gotten in on the action .
But I ’ ll confess that I didn ’ t anticipate hearing about tobacco companies entering the competition .
And yet , here we are .
One of the biggest tobacco companies in the world , British American Tobacco , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows great promise and they ’ re ready to begin limited human testing .
( Bloomberg ) An experimental Covid-19 vaccine developed by cigarette maker British American Tobacco Plc is poised to begin testing in humans .
Pre-clinical tests of the vaccine showed a positive immune response , the London-based tobacco company said Friday in a statement .
The first phase of human trials could begin as soon as late June if authorized by drug regulators , BAT said .
Drugmakers from around the world have jumped into the vaccine race , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. , Europe , China and other regions .
BAT rival Philip Morris International Inc. is also testing an immunization .
Smoking cigarettes , the two companies ’ main products , may raise the risk of severe Covid symptoms , according to the World Health Organization .
Okay , so it wasn ’ t the main tobacco producing company BAT who developed the vaccine .
It was a one of their subsidiaries , Kentucky BioProcessing , that ’ s been doing the development work .
The company is described as a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plants… to express , extract and purify proteins for use as vaccines and other pharmaceuticals.
” Huh .
Who knew ?
It appears that they ’ ve been in the field of creating vaccines for a while now .
When I first saw the headline , I was reminded of some stories we ’ ve seen this year indicating that smokers may be less likely to contract COVID-19 .
There was even talk of treating patients with nicotine patches and the French began experimenting with that idea .
But later studies suggested that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ smokers wind up at greater risk if they end up becoming infected anyway because of their decreased lung capacity .
But none of the vaccine work being done at BAT appears to revolve around nicotine at all .
In order to develop a vaccine , researchers need to generate specialized proteins that allow them to grow the test virus ( in this case , Sars-CoV-2 ) in a fashion allowing it to be transferred into humans to stimulate an immune response .
Traditionally this has been done using the cells of various animals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ viruses might be “ hitching a ride ” in the vaccine and causing other problems downstream .
But using plant cells has the potential to eliminate some of those possible issues .
Apparently BAT has found that modified strains of the tobacco plant are highly effective in this process .
Hey , it sounds good to me .
I don ’ t care if they ’ re using dandelions as long as it results in a viable , safe and effective vaccine .
Now , who wants to be among the first people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into them as a test subject ?
I think I ’ ll leave that task to some of you younger , healthier ( and preferably non-smoking ) heroes .

In the race to come up with a viable vaccine for the novel coronavirus, many groups around the world have been diving into the effort with a great sense of urgency. Various hospitals, universities and even bio-tech companies (some of whom have never produced a vaccine before) have gotten in on the action. But I’ll confess that I didn’t anticipate hearing about tobacco companies entering the competition. And yet, here we are. One of the biggest tobacco companies in the world, British American Tobacco, has somehow developed a vaccine that they say shows great promise and they’re ready to begin limited human testing. (Bloomberg)
An experimental Covid-19 vaccine developed by cigarette maker British American Tobacco Plc is poised to begin testing in humans. Pre-clinical tests of the vaccine showed a positive immune response, the London-based tobacco company said Friday in a statement. The first phase of human trials could begin as soon as late June if authorized by drug regulators, BAT said. Drugmakers from around the world have jumped into the vaccine race, with more than 100 candidates in development in the U.S., Europe, China and other regions. BAT rival Philip Morris International Inc. is also testing an immunization. Smoking cigarettes, the two companies’ main products, may raise the risk of severe Covid symptoms, according to the World Health Organization.
Okay, so it wasn’t the main tobacco producing company BAT who developed the vaccine. It was a one of their subsidiaries, Kentucky BioProcessing, that’s been doing the development work. The company is described as a “leading producer of recombinant proteins using tobacco plants… to express, extract and purify proteins for use as vaccines and other pharmaceuticals.”
Huh. Who knew? It appears that they’ve been in the field of creating vaccines for a while now. When I first saw the headline, I was reminded of some stories we’ve seen this year indicating that smokers may be less likely to contract COVID-19. There was even talk of treating patients with nicotine patches and the French began experimenting with that idea. But later studies suggested that may not be true. And habitual smokers wind up at greater risk if they end up becoming infected anyway because of their decreased lung capacity.
But none of the vaccine work being done at BAT appears to revolve around nicotine at all. In order to develop a vaccine, researchers need to generate specialized proteins that allow them to grow the test virus (in this case, Sars-CoV-2) in a fashion allowing it to be transferred into humans to stimulate an immune response. Traditionally this has been done using the cells of various animals, leading to concerns that other animal viruses might be “hitching a ride” in the vaccine and causing other problems downstream. But using plant cells has the potential to eliminate some of those possible issues. Apparently BAT has found that modified strains of the tobacco plant are highly effective in this process.
Hey, it sounds good to me. I don’t care if they’re using dandelions as long as it results in a viable, safe and effective vaccine. Now, who wants to be among the first people to volunteer to have this concoction injected into them as a test subject? I think I’ll leave that task to some of you younger, healthier (and preferably non-smoking) heroes.


hotair--2020-05-16--Top golfer blasts Trump's COVID-19 response: "campaign rally"

It ’ s a presidential election year so people from the world of sports are asked to comment on President Trump .
It used to be a rarity when sports figures weighed in with personal political opinions but not so anymore .
Now they freely spout their political opinions as a tool to do some self-promotion .
When a top-ranked sports figure weighs in , that person is pretty much assured of a headline , or at the very least , an article in publications .
The latest example is Rory Mcllroy , the world ’ s top-ranked golfer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ making headlines during the coronavirus pandemic , you are not alone .
I had the same question , especially since the story was based on a round of golf played in 2017 .
As it turns out , McIlroy was a guest on the McKellar Golf Podcast .
In a 90 minute interview , the golfer from Northern Ireland first acknowledged what a terrific time he had when he played a round of golf with President Trump at Trump International Golf Club in Florida back in February 2017 .
In a write-up of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , Trump wasn ’ t the person publicizing playing with the top golfer .
Apparently , it was McIlroy who put a picture up on social media the next day about playing golf with the president .
McIlroy also told a golf website , nolayingup.com , about playing 18 holes with President Trump .
Unfortunately for him , McIlroy was on the receiving end of lots of criticism from people on social media .
He should have been prepared for an anti-Trump backlash before he hit the publish button with a picture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the trolls canceled him for daring to accept an invitation from the most powerful man on earth to play golf , he decided he would not accept any more invitations from Trump .
McIlroy was called a bigot and a fascist by the trolls .
Those words seem tame in comparison to what is lobbed Trump ’ s way these days , right ?
And now he wants to make it perfectly clear that he does not share Trump ’ s politics .
Podcast hosts Lawrence Donegan and John Huggan asked him about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Florida besides one in Northern Ireland , so it probably wasn ’ t a huge surprise to be asked to play with Trump .
He said the president was very nice to everyone from the golf players to the workers at the club .
“ I ’ ll sit here and say the day that I did spend with him and others was very enjoyable .
He ’ s very charismatic , he was nice to everyone — it didn ’ t matter whether you were me or guys in the cart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ club .
“ He has something .
He obviously has something or he wouldn ’ t be in the White House , right ?
He has something .
… Whatever it is , it ’ s an X factor or it ’ s charisma , I don ’ t know .
Whatever you call it but most people that he came across that day , he was cordial , he was nice , he was personable and that ’ s my only real interaction with him.
” Then McIlroy allowed the podcast hosts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He had to make the Orange Man bad , you know .
“ So I will sit here and say that day I had with him I enjoyed , ” McIlroy said .
“ But that doesn ’ t mean I agree with everything — or , in fact , anything — that he says.
” “ Like it ’ s a contest , ” he said of Trump ’ s claim that the U.S. has administered more tests than any other nation .
“ We ’ re in the midst of something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the fact that he ’ s trying to politicize it and make it a campaign rally .
There ’ s some stuff that just is terrible .
It ’ s not the way a leader should act .
There is a bit of diplomacy that you need to show , and I just don ’ t think he ’ s showing that , especially in these times.
” He sounds a lot like CBS White House correspondent Weijia Jiang , doesn ’ t he ?
So , McIlroy , who likely isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elections weighed in on his thoughts about how Trump is handling the pandemic .
I assume he did so in order to help publicize a golf event he is participating in with some other top golfers and sports figures to help open up what is left of the PGA Tour season .
They will be carrying their own bags , putting to flagsticks that likely won ’ t be tended and retrieving their golf balls from a cup prepped for safety .
But they also are four professional golfers who compete at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shown competing live on television .
The TaylorMade Driving Relief event on Sunday at Seminole Golf Club in Juno Beach , Florida , is the first televised event of PGA Tour golfers competing since the Players Championship was canceled on March 12 .
“ Just been trying to stay as patient as possible , ” said Rory McIlroy , who headlines the event along with Dustin Johnson , Rickie Fowler and Matthew Wolff .
“ For a tour player to spend this prolonged length of time at home … you ’ re just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
I think if anything , just appreciate the little things , the things that we took for granted before this all happened.
” That ’ s why the TaylorMade Driving Relief event and the match on May 24 involving Tiger Woods , Phil Mickelson , Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are so welcome .
It is finally an opportunity to see a live sporting event , even if the outcome is of no consequence .
All the money raised will go to charities .
McIlroy and Johnson are playing for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are playing for the CDC Foundation .
I don ’ t watch golf .
I think it ’ s boring .
I imagine it will please golf fans , though , that the sport is beginning to be televised again .
Too bad McIlroy had to be such a jerk in order to publicize it .
Perhaps he thinks Trump supporters don ’ t watch golf .
Or maybe he ’ s waiting on an invitation from the Biden campaign .

It’s a presidential election year so people from the world of sports are asked to comment on President Trump. It used to be a rarity when sports figures weighed in with personal political opinions but not so anymore. Now they freely spout their political opinions as a tool to do some self-promotion.
When a top-ranked sports figure weighs in, that person is pretty much assured of a headline, or at the very least, an article in publications. The latest example is Rory Mcllroy, the world’s top-ranked golfer. If you wondered why a golfer is making headlines during the coronavirus pandemic, you are not alone. I had the same question, especially since the story was based on a round of golf played in 2017.
As it turns out, McIlroy was a guest on the McKellar Golf Podcast. In a 90 minute interview, the golfer from Northern Ireland first acknowledged what a terrific time he had when he played a round of golf with President Trump at Trump International Golf Club in Florida back in February 2017. In a write-up of that golf game at the time of it, Trump wasn’t the person publicizing playing with the top golfer. Apparently, it was McIlroy who put a picture up on social media the next day about playing golf with the president. McIlroy also told a golf website, nolayingup.com, about playing 18 holes with President Trump.
Unfortunately for him, McIlroy was on the receiving end of lots of criticism from people on social media. He should have been prepared for an anti-Trump backlash before he hit the publish button with a picture but he wasn’t. After the trolls canceled him for daring to accept an invitation from the most powerful man on earth to play golf, he decided he would not accept any more invitations from Trump. McIlroy was called a bigot and a fascist by the trolls. Those words seem tame in comparison to what is lobbed Trump’s way these days, right? And now he wants to make it perfectly clear that he does not share Trump’s politics.
Podcast hosts Lawrence Donegan and John Huggan asked him about that day. McIlroy has a residence in Florida besides one in Northern Ireland, so it probably wasn’t a huge surprise to be asked to play with Trump. He said the president was very nice to everyone from the golf players to the workers at the club.
“I’ll sit here and say the day that I did spend with him and others was very enjoyable. He’s very charismatic, he was nice to everyone — it didn’t matter whether you were me or guys in the cart barn or the pro at the golf club. “He has something. He obviously has something or he wouldn’t be in the White House, right? He has something. … Whatever it is, it’s an X factor or it’s charisma, I don’t know. Whatever you call it but most people that he came across that day, he was cordial, he was nice, he was personable and that’s my only real interaction with him.”
Then McIlroy allowed the podcast hosts to take him into political territory. He had to make the Orange Man bad, you know.
“So I will sit here and say that day I had with him I enjoyed,” McIlroy said. “But that doesn’t mean I agree with everything — or, in fact, anything — that he says.” “Like it’s a contest,” he said of Trump’s claim that the U.S. has administered more tests than any other nation. “We’re in the midst of something that’s pretty serious right now and the fact that he’s trying to politicize it and make it a campaign rally. There’s some stuff that just is terrible. It’s not the way a leader should act. There is a bit of diplomacy that you need to show, and I just don’t think he’s showing that, especially in these times.”
He sounds a lot like CBS White House correspondent Weijia Jiang, doesn’t he?
So, McIlroy, who likely isn’t even a voter in American elections weighed in on his thoughts about how Trump is handling the pandemic. I assume he did so in order to help publicize a golf event he is participating in with some other top golfers and sports figures to help open up what is left of the PGA Tour season.
They will be carrying their own bags, putting to flagsticks that likely won’t be tended and retrieving their golf balls from a cup prepped for safety. But they also are four professional golfers who compete at the highest level, and they will be shown competing live on television. It’s a start. The TaylorMade Driving Relief event on Sunday at Seminole Golf Club in Juno Beach, Florida, is the first televised event of PGA Tour golfers competing since the Players Championship was canceled on March 12. “Just been trying to stay as patient as possible,” said Rory McIlroy, who headlines the event along with Dustin Johnson, Rickie Fowler and Matthew Wolff. “For a tour player to spend this prolonged length of time at home … you’re just trying to find ways to fill your time. I think if anything, just appreciate the little things, the things that we took for granted before this all happened.” That’s why the TaylorMade Driving Relief event and the match on May 24 involving Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are so welcome. It is finally an opportunity to see a live sporting event, even if the outcome is of no consequence.
All the money raised will go to charities. McIlroy and Johnson are playing for the American Nurses Foundation. Fowler and Wolff are playing for the CDC Foundation.
I don’t watch golf. I think it’s boring. I imagine it will please golf fans, though, that the sport is beginning to be televised again. Too bad McIlroy had to be such a jerk in order to publicize it. Perhaps he thinks Trump supporters don’t watch golf. Or maybe he’s waiting on an invitation from the Biden campaign.


hotair--2020-05-16--Must read: How Cuomo and de Blasio botched New York's response to coronavirus

I strongly encourage you to read this very-long-but-worth-it Pro Publica investigation if you can spare the time , as it attempts to solve two of the great mysteries of the coronavirus crisis .
One : Why did New York City get hit with the viral equivalent of an atomic bomb while San Francisco escaped almost unscathed ?
Two : Why do people remain under the impression that Andrew Cuomo has done a good job handling the epidemic ?
Right , sure , it ’ s no easy feat for a governor to hold down the death toll from a highly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ among a population of 20 million people .
But Gavin Newsom had to manage a population twice that size and did pretty well , and yet there ’ s no chatter about swapping out ol ’ Joe Biden for Newsom as the party ’ s nominee as there is with Cuomo .
If fans want to qualify Cuomo ’ s failure by acknowledging that he had a herculean task , that ’ s perfectly fine and fair .
But let ’ s at least acknowledge the failure .
Here ’ s a tease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In some respects Cuomo was in even deeper denial about the threat from COVID-19 than Bill de Blasio was , and de Blasio was in deep denial .
So deep , the story notes , that by mid-March de Blasio ’ s own health department was sufficiently enraged by his dawdling on shutting things down that they hatched a plot to stage a sort of coup , in which “ one of the department ’ s most senior leaders [ would ] effectively dare the mayor to fire him by going live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to close schools and issue more serious restrictions immediately.
” It turns out that even de Blasio grasped the need for a lockdown before Cuomo did , though .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo , however , reacted to de Blasio ’ s idea for closing down New York City with derision .
It was dangerous , he said , and served only to scare people .
Language mattered , Cuomo said , and “ shelter-in-place ” sounded like it was a response to a nuclear apocalypse .
Moreover , Cuomo said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order such a measure… “ No city in the state can quarantine itself without state approval , ” Cuomo said of de Blasio ’ s call for a shelter-in-place order .
“ I have no plan whatsoever to quarantine any city.
” Cuomo ’ s conviction didn ’ t last .
On March 22 , he , too , shuttered his state .
The action came six days after San Francisco had shut down , five days after de Blasio suggested doing similarly and three days after all of California had been closed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York faced a raging epidemic , with the number of confirmed cases at 15,000 doubling every three or four days .
Had Cuomo and de Blasio moved even a week or two earlier to shut things down , the death toll might have turned out to be half of what it ended up being according to one model .
But that ’ s the tip of the iceberg .
Pro Publica describes other mystifying failures , from poor advance planning in keeping New York State ’ s PPE stockpile full ( Cuomo ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , remember ) to his state health department cutting off information-sharing with NYC ’ s health department to Cuomo treating the early outbreak in Westchester County as some sort of freak isolated incident instead of a harbinger of how bad things were about to get in NYC .
But Cuomo ’ s incredulity at the urgency of the situation as the crisis deepened stands out : With New York City ’ s schools closed , de Blasio on March 17 raised the possibility of asking everyone in the city to shelter in place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s talk was “ freaking people out.
” If the most drastic sorts of constraints on the public were to be ordered , it would be done with deliberation .
On March 19 , Cuomo announced what he called “ the ultimate step.
” He issued an executive order requiring “ that all nonessential businesses statewide must close in-office personnel functions.
” Cuomo said he was temporarily banning “ all nonessential gatherings of individuals of any size for any reason.
” It would be another two days before the order went into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New Yorkers that the panic we are seeing is outpacing the reality of the virus , ” he said at the time , shortly before the city became the global epicenter of COVID-19 .
He ’ s done a lot of buck-passing too since then , Pro Publica notes , grumbling that it ’ s not his fault that travelers from Europe continued to arrive in New York until Trump banned travel in mid-March .
Fair enough — but the fact that he and de Blasio couldn ’ t control who was arriving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to control what was under their control by shutting down sooner .
The bottom line , per genomic analysis : NYC ended up being the “ primary gateway ” for coronavirus outbreaks across the United States .
Bear in mind , there are many other failures that the Pro Publica story doesn ’ t touch on .
There ’ s the baffling delay in ordering NYC ’ s subway system sanitized daily , a move that didn ’ t come until the very end of April .
And there ’ s the insane @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to readmit residents who had tested positive for coronavirus , a “ fatal error ” that ’ s now been reversed but not before costing many thousands of lives .
At last check the state department of health had begun to massage the numbers on nursing-home deaths in New York by deciding not to count anyone in the official toll who didn ’ t die *on the premises* of a nursing home .
I.e .
if an ambulance showed up to whisk away a resident dying of COVID-19 to the hospital before they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ nursing-home death.
” How did Cuomo overcome all of that to earn a stellar job approval rating and press adulation ?
Three reasons .
One , obviously , is his partisan affiliation .
Two is the public ’ s willingness to cut most political leaders a ton of slack in handling a crisis that represents uncharted territory in modern American life .
Three , as superficial as it may be , is that he frequently finds the right “ tone ” in his daily briefings .
For all the hype about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s another politician from New York who ’ s succeeding right now primarily because he ’ s good on television .
Here again is the link to the Pro Publica piece .
One last thought before you go read : Although the delay in issuing the stay-at-home order is viewed as Cuomo ’ s primary failure , bear in mind that various data has shown that Americans across the country began self-isolating voluntarily before their local officials started ordering lockdowns .
That ’ s one of the best arguments the “ reopen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in fact — lockdown orders don ’ t actually influence behavior much , so why keep them in place ?
Case in point , here ’ s a piece from all the way back on March 14 , before NYC shut down , studying the trend in restaurant reservations through the OpenTable app as public awareness of the threat from COVID-19 grew .
Quote : “ Reservations in New York state fell off a cliff last week , declining 54 % there as the government took increasingly serious action to prevent large @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decline in New York City on Friday as many locals worked from home and Broadway ’ s shows went dark.
” Given that New Yorkers and San Franciscans had access to the same national information about coronavirus and were presumably behaving similarly in response , there would seem to be more behind the disparate outcomes in the two cities than just “ Cuomo sucks.
” Was New York seeded with many more cases early ?
Was the strain in New York especially deadly and/or infectious , as at least one study suggests ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ delay in issuing a stay-at-home order was primarily an informational failure more so than a policy failure .
That is , although lockdowns may not directly influence people ’ s behavior much , they ’ re an unusually stark way for the government to communicate to the public that it ’ s facing an unprecedented threat that requires immediate adaptation .
Although New Yorkers were abandoning restaurants by early March , San Franciscans may have been scaling back even earlier due to the emergency order issued there in February .
A week or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might have made all — or at least some of — the difference .

I strongly encourage you to read this very-long-but-worth-it Pro Publica investigation if you can spare the time, as it attempts to solve two of the great mysteries of the coronavirus crisis.
One: Why did New York City get hit with the viral equivalent of an atomic bomb while San Francisco escaped almost unscathed?
Two: Why do people remain under the impression that Andrew Cuomo has done a good job handling the epidemic?
Right, sure, it’s no easy feat for a governor to hold down the death toll from a highly infectious novel disease while shutting down commerce among a population of 20 million people. But Gavin Newsom had to manage a population twice that size and did pretty well, and yet there’s no chatter about swapping out ol’ Joe Biden for Newsom as the party’s nominee as there is with Cuomo.
If fans want to qualify Cuomo’s failure by acknowledging that he had a herculean task, that’s perfectly fine and fair. But let’s at least acknowledge the failure.
Here’s a tease for you from the Pro Publica piece. In some respects Cuomo was in even deeper denial about the threat from COVID-19 than Bill de Blasio was, and de Blasio was in deep denial. So deep, the story notes, that by mid-March de Blasio’s own health department was sufficiently enraged by his dawdling on shutting things down that they hatched a plot to stage a sort of coup, in which “one of the department’s most senior leaders [would] effectively dare the mayor to fire him by going live on television and expressing the urgent need to close schools and issue more serious restrictions immediately.” It turns out that even de Blasio grasped the need for a lockdown before Cuomo did, though.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, however, reacted to de Blasio’s idea for closing down New York City with derision. It was dangerous, he said, and served only to scare people. Language mattered, Cuomo said, and “shelter-in-place” sounded like it was a response to a nuclear apocalypse. Moreover, Cuomo said, he alone had the power to order such a measure… “No city in the state can quarantine itself without state approval,” Cuomo said of de Blasio’s call for a shelter-in-place order. “I have no plan whatsoever to quarantine any city.” Cuomo’s conviction didn’t last. On March 22, he, too, shuttered his state. The action came six days after San Francisco had shut down, five days after de Blasio suggested doing similarly and three days after all of California had been closed by Newsom. By then, New York faced a raging epidemic, with the number of confirmed cases at 15,000 doubling every three or four days.
Had Cuomo and de Blasio moved even a week or two earlier to shut things down, the death toll might have turned out to be half of what it ended up being according to one model. But that’s the tip of the iceberg. Pro Publica describes other mystifying failures, from poor advance planning in keeping New York State’s PPE stockpile full (Cuomo’s been governor for nearly 10 years, remember) to his state health department cutting off information-sharing with NYC’s health department to Cuomo treating the early outbreak in Westchester County as some sort of freak isolated incident instead of a harbinger of how bad things were about to get in NYC.
But Cuomo’s incredulity at the urgency of the situation as the crisis deepened stands out:
With New York City’s schools closed, de Blasio on March 17 raised the possibility of asking everyone in the city to shelter in place. The Cuomo official said de Blasio’s talk was “freaking people out.” If the most drastic sorts of constraints on the public were to be ordered, it would be done with deliberation. On March 19, Cuomo announced what he called “the ultimate step.” He issued an executive order requiring “that all nonessential businesses statewide must close in-office personnel functions.” Cuomo said he was temporarily banning “all nonessential gatherings of individuals of any size for any reason.” It would be another two days before the order went into effect.
“I want to remind New Yorkers that the panic we are seeing is outpacing the reality of the virus,” he said at the time, shortly before the city became the global epicenter of COVID-19. He’s done a lot of buck-passing too since then, Pro Publica notes, grumbling that it’s not his fault that travelers from Europe continued to arrive in New York until Trump banned travel in mid-March. Fair enough — but the fact that he and de Blasio couldn’t control who was arriving should have made them move more urgently to control what was under their control by shutting down sooner.
The bottom line, per genomic analysis: NYC ended up being the “primary gateway” for coronavirus outbreaks across the United States.
Bear in mind, there are many other failures that the Pro Publica story doesn’t touch on. There’s the baffling delay in ordering NYC’s subway system sanitized daily, a move that didn’t come until the very end of April. And there’s the insane, infuriating decision to require nursing homes to readmit residents who had tested positive for coronavirus, a “fatal error” that’s now been reversed but not before costing many thousands of lives. At last check the state department of health had begun to massage the numbers on nursing-home deaths in New York by deciding not to count anyone in the official toll who didn’t die *on the premises* of a nursing home. I.e. if an ambulance showed up to whisk away a resident dying of COVID-19 to the hospital before they expired, that would no longer be a “nursing-home death.”
How did Cuomo overcome all of that to earn a stellar job approval rating and press adulation? Three reasons. One, obviously, is his partisan affiliation. Two is the public’s willingness to cut most political leaders a ton of slack in handling a crisis that represents uncharted territory in modern American life. Three, as superficial as it may be, is that he frequently finds the right “tone” in his daily briefings. For all the hype about Trump having mastered the media, it’s another politician from New York who’s succeeding right now primarily because he’s good on television.
Here again is the link to the Pro Publica piece. One last thought before you go read: Although the delay in issuing the stay-at-home order is viewed as Cuomo’s primary failure, bear in mind that various data has shown that Americans across the country began self-isolating voluntarily before their local officials started ordering lockdowns. That’s one of the best arguments the “reopen now” crowd has in their favor, in fact — lockdown orders don’t actually influence behavior much, so why keep them in place? Case in point, here’s a piece from all the way back on March 14, before NYC shut down, studying the trend in restaurant reservations through the OpenTable app as public awareness of the threat from COVID-19 grew. Quote: “Reservations in New York state fell off a cliff last week, declining 54% there as the government took increasingly serious action to prevent large gatherings. That includes a 61% decline in New York City on Friday as many locals worked from home and Broadway’s shows went dark.”
Given that New Yorkers and San Franciscans had access to the same national information about coronavirus and were presumably behaving similarly in response, there would seem to be more behind the disparate outcomes in the two cities than just “Cuomo sucks.” Was New York seeded with many more cases early? Was the strain in New York especially deadly and/or infectious, as at least one study suggests? It could be that Cuomo’s delay in issuing a stay-at-home order was primarily an informational failure more so than a policy failure. That is, although lockdowns may not directly influence people’s behavior much, they’re an unusually stark way for the government to communicate to the public that it’s facing an unprecedented threat that requires immediate adaptation. Although New Yorkers were abandoning restaurants by early March, San Franciscans may have been scaling back even earlier due to the emergency order issued there in February. A week or two of urgent signaling from local leaders might have made all — or at least some of — the difference.


hotair--2020-05-16--Tucker Carlson: Funding to W.H.O. will be restored by Trump administration

If a draft of a letter obtained by FNC ’ s Tucker Carlson show is legitimate , it looks like funding for the World Health Organization ( WHO ) will be restored by the Trump administration .
A five-page draft letter to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus states that the administration will agree to pay what China pays to the organization .
Tucker Carlson Tonight staff say the White House has confirmed the contents of the draft letter and the plan for payment .
Fox News broke the news Friday night during Tucker ’ s show .
This is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on April 14 when he announced that funding for the WHO would be cut off in response to the organization ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic .
Carlson took a moment to remind his audience about the reason for that decision – Director-General Tedros and other officials of the WHO spread Chinese propaganda rather than working transparently to stop the spread of the coronavirus .
The draft letter says that the Trump administration will restore at the level that China pays the WHO .
In previous years , the United States paid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s contributions will only restore about 1/10 of funding by the U.S. from previous years .
So , it ’ s really only partially restoring a financial commitment to the WHO by the Trump administration .
That amount is subject to change if China decides to raise its commitment .
Trump is open to raising his administration ’ s commitment , too .
“ Despite [ its ] shortcomings , I believe that the WHO still has tremendous potential , and want to see the WHO live up to this potential , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the draft letter reads , apparently in President Trump ’ s voice .
“ That is why I ’ ve decided the United States will continue to partner and work with the WHO … ” it adds .
“ China owes a massive debt to the entire world , and it can start with paying its fair share to the WHO.
” “ If China increases its funding to the WHO , ” the letter adds , “ we will consider matching those increases.
” Carlson says he is interested to know who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offering any funding at all .
Trump calls for “ commonsense reforms ” in the letter and “ a universal review mechanism to publicly report on member state compliance with International Health Regulations … including timely and effective declarations of Public Health Emergencies of International Concern.
” Tedros must also agree to stop allowing political pressure to influence public health decisions .
Dr. Marc Siegel , Fox News medical contributor , expressed his opposition to this development .
He wants Trump to reconsider this decision , calling the top officials at the WHO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
He was clear to separate the top officials from the “ worker bees ” , as was Carlson .
He also pointed out that Tedros isn ’ t a medical doctor .
Siegel wants Trump to insist on a huge overhaul at the WHO before signing on to payments to the organization .
Siegel called for Dr. Anthony Fauci to consider re-thinking his friendship with Tedros , of whom he speaks favorably .
Carlson and Siegel weren ’ t ganging up on Fauci , though .
Tucker said he thinks Fauci @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this pandemic but noted that Fauci speaks of his long friendship with Tedros , dating back to the days Tedros was the Minister of Health in Ethiopia .
Carlson reminded the viewing audience that during that time , Tedros was busy covering up multiple cholera outbreaks .
So , there ’ s that .
Tedros apparently doesn ’ t have a problem with manipulating the distribution of public health information which ultimately only makes people sicker .
A public health official should be working to keep people healthy , not bowing to political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the WHO on the coronavirus pandemic on behalf of China .
He thinks officials should be prosecuted in an international court .
They “ aided and abetted the spread of the virus ” .
It ’ s hard to argue with that , isn ’ t it ?
“ On January 21 , German intelligence reported , [ Chinese Communist Party ] Chairman Xi [ Jinping ] called him [ Tedros ] and said ‘ delay warning the world ’ [ about coronavirus ] , ” the NYU Langone physician went on .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ who ’ s not a physician by the way , praised … Chairman Xi ’ s commitment to stopping this outbreak , and then on February 15 , he actually said at the Munich Security Conferences — Tedros said that the World Health Organization believed that China ’ s attempts to control this outbreak had bought the world time.
” Carlson remarked that it appears those in charge of international public health have instead “ made us sicker , ” and said Fauci should have been wary of Ghebreyesus given his purported “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ethiopia when he was a senior health official there .
Siegel claimed that those officials should be prosecuted in an international court for what he called their “ unbelievable disgrace.
” “ The World Health Organization , ” he said , “ aided and abetted the spread of this virus around the world.
” The spread of the coronavirus pandemic is a good example of why people are skeptical about the effectiveness of large bureaucratic organizations .
They become corrupted with millions of dollars floating around and nefarious actors , like the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaders .
We ’ ll see if Trump can get anywhere with some much-needed reforms now .

If a draft of a letter obtained by FNC’s Tucker Carlson show is legitimate, it looks like funding for the World Health Organization (WHO) will be restored by the Trump administration. A five-page draft letter to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus states that the administration will agree to pay what China pays to the organization.
Tucker Carlson Tonight staff say the White House has confirmed the contents of the draft letter and the plan for payment. Fox News broke the news Friday night during Tucker’s show. This is a change from the decision President Trump made on April 14 when he announced that funding for the WHO would be cut off in response to the organization’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic. Carlson took a moment to remind his audience about the reason for that decision – Director-General Tedros and other officials of the WHO spread Chinese propaganda rather than working transparently to stop the spread of the coronavirus.
“Dr. Tedros Adhanom has thoroughly disgraced himself and his organization for four years, but particularly throughout this virus epidemic,” Carlson said. “Remember, the World Health Organization attacked travel restrictions … as unnecessary and, needless to say, racist. They then spread the baldest kind of Chinese propaganda, [saying] the virus could not spread person-to-person. “That killed people.”
The draft letter says that the Trump administration will restore at the level that China pays the WHO. In previous years, the United States paid $400M each year. Matching China’s contributions will only restore about 1/10 of funding by the U.S. from previous years. So, it’s really only partially restoring a financial commitment to the WHO by the Trump administration. That amount is subject to change if China decides to raise its commitment. Trump is open to raising his administration’s commitment, too.
“Despite [its] shortcomings, I believe that the WHO still has tremendous potential, and want to see the WHO live up to this potential, particularly now during this global crisis” the draft letter reads, apparently in President Trump’s voice. “That is why I’ve decided the United States will continue to partner and work with the WHO …” it adds. “China owes a massive debt to the entire world, and it can start with paying its fair share to the WHO.” “If China increases its funding to the WHO,” the letter adds, “we will consider matching those increases.”
Carlson says he is interested to know who convinced Trump to change his mind about offering any funding at all. Trump calls for “commonsense reforms” in the letter and “a universal review mechanism to publicly report on member state compliance with International Health Regulations … including timely and effective declarations of Public Health Emergencies of International Concern.” Tedros must also agree to stop allowing political pressure to influence public health decisions.
Dr. Marc Siegel, Fox News medical contributor, expressed his opposition to this development. He wants Trump to reconsider this decision, calling the top officials at the WHO “thugs” and “international villains”. He was clear to separate the top officials from the “worker bees”, as was Carlson. He also pointed out that Tedros isn’t a medical doctor. Siegel wants Trump to insist on a huge overhaul at the WHO before signing on to payments to the organization.
Siegel called for Dr. Anthony Fauci to consider re-thinking his friendship with Tedros, of whom he speaks favorably.
Siegel added that although he respects American virologist Dr. Tony Fauci — who Carlson noted offered effusive praise for Ghebreyesus during a White House event earlier this year — the NIH official has a poor “choice of friends” if he likes Ghebreyesus. “…especially a friend who is running an organization like the World Health Organization with what’s happened here,” Siegel remarked.
Carlson and Siegel weren’t ganging up on Fauci, though. Tucker said he thinks Fauci is doing the best he can during this pandemic but noted that Fauci speaks of his long friendship with Tedros, dating back to the days Tedros was the Minister of Health in Ethiopia. Carlson reminded the viewing audience that during that time, Tedros was busy covering up multiple cholera outbreaks. So, there’s that. Tedros apparently doesn’t have a problem with manipulating the distribution of public health information which ultimately only makes people sicker. A public health official should be working to keep people healthy, not bowing to political pressure.
Seigel addressed the cover-up by the WHO on the coronavirus pandemic on behalf of China. He thinks officials should be prosecuted in an international court. They “aided and abetted the spread of the virus”. It’s hard to argue with that, isn’t it?
“On January 21, German intelligence reported, [Chinese Communist Party] Chairman Xi [Jinping] called him [Tedros] and said ‘delay warning the world’ [about coronavirus],” the NYU Langone physician went on. “On February 3. Tedros, who’s not a physician by the way, praised … Chairman Xi’s commitment to stopping this outbreak, and then on February 15, he actually said at the Munich Security Conferences — Tedros said that the World Health Organization believed that China’s attempts to control this outbreak had bought the world time.” Carlson remarked that it appears those in charge of international public health have instead “made us sicker,” and said Fauci should have been wary of Ghebreyesus given his purported “cover-up” of a cholera outbreak in Ethiopia when he was a senior health official there. Siegel claimed that those officials should be prosecuted in an international court for what he called their “unbelievable disgrace.” “The World Health Organization,” he said, “aided and abetted the spread of this virus around the world.”
The spread of the coronavirus pandemic is a good example of why people are skeptical about the effectiveness of large bureaucratic organizations. They become corrupted with millions of dollars floating around and nefarious actors, like the government of China, take advantage of weak leaders. We’ll see if Trump can get anywhere with some much-needed reforms now.