motherjones--2020-12-12--The Paris Agreement Is 5 Years Old. Is It Strong Enough to Prevent Climate Catastrophe?

This story was originally published by The Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration .
No one who was in the hall that winter evening in a gloomy conference centre on the outskirts of the French capital will ever forget it .
Tension had been building throughout the afternoon , as after two weeks of fraught talks the expected resolution was delayed and then delayed yet again .
Rumours swirled—had the French got it wrong ?
Was another climate failure approaching , the latest botched attempt at solving the world ’ s global heating crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the hall was growing twitchy , the UN security guards cleared the platform and the top officials of the landmark Paris climate talks took to the podium .
For two weeks , 196 countries had huddled in countless meetings , wrangling over dense pages of text , scrutinising every semicolon .
And they had finally reached agreement .
Laurent Fabius , the French foreign minister in charge of the gruelling talks , looking exhausted but delighted , reached for his gavel and brought it down with a resounding crack .
The Paris agreement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the climate economist , found himself hugging Xia Zhenhua , the normally reserved Chinese minister , while whoops and shouts echoed round the hall .
“ I felt that the Paris agreement was the moment when the world decided it really had to manage climate change in a serious way , ” he said .
“ We were all in it together , that ’ s what people realized.
” At Paris , for the first time rich and poor countries joined together in a legally binding treaty pledging to hold global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the scientifically-advised limit of safety , with an aspiration not to breach 1.5C above pre-industrial levels .
Those two weeks of tense talks in the French capital were the climax of 25 years of tortuous negotiations on the climate , since governments were warned of the dangers of climate chaos in 1990 .
The failure , discord and recriminations of those decades were left behind as delegates from 196 countries hugged , wept and cheered in Paris .
Todd Stern , climate envoy to President Barack Obama , recalls : “ My team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for seven years … and the story of climate negotiations had so often been one of disappointment .
And yet here we were and we knew that we had—all together—done a really big thing .
A very special moment .
An unforgettable one.
” The accord itself has proved remarkably resilient .
Bringing together 196 nations in 2015 was not easy—even as Fabius brought down the gavel on the agreement , there was a little chicanery as Nicaragua had planned to object to the required consensus , but was ignored .
Yet that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US—the world ’ s biggest economy and second biggest emitter—began the process of withdrawal from Paris , under President Donald Trump in 2017 , a disaster might have been expected .
The Kyoto 1997 protocol fell apart after the US signed but failed to ratify the agreement , leaving climate negotiations in limbo for a decade .
If Trump was hoping to wreck Paris , he was disappointed : the rest of the world shrugged and carried on .
There was no exodus of other countries , although some did pursue more aggressive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The key axis of China and the EU remained intact , deliberately underlined by China ’ s President Xi Jinping when he chose to surprise the world with a net zero emissions target at the UN general assembly in September , just as the UN election race was hotting up .
Remy Rioux , one of the French government team who led the talks , now chief executive of the French Development Agency , said : “ The Paris agreement has proven to be inclusive and at scale , with the participation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as well as that of non-state actors such as businesses , local government and financial institutions—and very resilient , precisely because it is inclusive .
The Paris agreement is a powerful signal of hope in the face of the climate emergency.
” On some measures , Paris could be judged a failure .
Emissions in 2015 were about 50 bn tons .
By 2019 , they had risen to about 55bn tons , according to the UN Environment Program ( UNEP ) .
Carbon output fell dramatically , by about 17 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in this spring ’ s coronavirus lockdowns , but the plunge also revealed an uncomfortable truth : even when transport , industry and commerce grind to a halt , the majority of emissions remain intact .
Far greater systemic change is needed , particularly in energy generation around the world , to meet the Paris goals .
Ban Ki-moon , former UN secretary-general , told the Guardian : “ We have lost a lot of time .
Five years after the agreement in Paris was adopted with huge expectations and commitment by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough.
” What ’ s more , we are still digging up and burning fossil fuels at a frantic rate .
UNEP reported last week that production of fossil fuels is planned to increase by 2 % a year .
Meanwhile , we continue to destroy the world ’ s carbon sinks , by cutting down forests—the world is still losing an area of forest the size of the UK each year , despite commitments to stop deforestation—as well as drying out peatlands and wetlands , and reducing the ocean ’ s capacity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Global temperatures have already risen by more than 1C above pre-industrial levels , and the results in extreme weather are evident around the world .
Wildfires raged across Australia and the US this year , more than 30 hurricanes struck , heatwaves blasted Siberia , and the Arctic ice is melting faster .
António Guterres , secretary-general of the UN , put it in stark terms : “ Humanity is waging war on nature .
This is suicidal .
Nature always strikes back—and it is already doing so with growing force and fury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ species are at risk of extinction .
Ecosystems are disappearing before our eyes.
” But to judge Paris solely by these portents of disaster would be to lose sight of the remarkable progress that has been made on climate change since .
This year , renewable energy will make up about 90 % of the new energy generation capacity installed around the world , according to the International Energy Agency , and by 2025 will be the biggest source of power , displacing coal .
That massive increase reflects rapid falls in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which are now competitive or cheaper than fossil fuel generation in many countries , even without subsidy .
“ We never expected to see prices come down so fast , ” said Adair Turner , chair of the Energy Transitions Commission and former chief of the UK ’ s committee on climate change .
“ We have done better than the most optimistic forecasts.
” Oil prices plunged this spring as coronavirus lockdowns grounded planes and swept cities free of cars , and some analysts predict that the oil business will never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies , including BP and Shell , now plan to become carbon-neutral .
Electric vehicles have also improved much faster than expected , reflected in the stunning share price rise of Tesla .
The rise of low-carbon technology has meant that when the Covid-19 crisis struck , leading figures quickly called for a green recovery , and set out plans for ensuring the world “ builds back better ” .
Most importantly , the world has coalesced around a new target , based on the Paris goals but not explicit in the accord @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last two years , first a trickle and now a flood of countries have come forward with long-term goals to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to a fraction of their current amount , to the point where they are equal to or outweighed by carbon sinks , such as forests .
The UK , EU member states , Norway , Chile and a host of developing nations led the way in adopting net zero targets .
In September , China ’ s president surprised the world by announcing his country would achieve net @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South Korea quickly followed suit .
US president-elect Joe Biden has also pledged to adopt a target of net zero emissions by 2050 .
That puts more than two thirds of the global economy under pledges to reach net zero carbon around mid-century .
If all of these countries meet their targets , the world will be almost on track to meet the upper limit of the Paris agreement .
Climate Action Tracker , which analyses carbon data , has calculated that the current pledges would lead to a temperature rise of 2.1C @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distance ” of fulfilling the 2015 promise .
Niklas Hohne of NewClimate Institute , one of the partner organisations behind Climate Action Tracker , said : “ Five years on , it ’ s clear the Paris agreement is driving climate action .
Now we ’ re seeing a wave of countries signing up [ to net zero emissions ] .
Can anyone really afford to miss catching this wave ?
” The key issue , though , is whether countries will meet these long-term targets .
Making promises for 2050 is one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needed now to shift national economies on to a low-carbon footing .
“ None of these [ net zero ] targets will be meaningful without very aggressive action in this decade of the 2020s , ” said Todd Stern .
“ I think there is growing , but not yet broad enough , understanding of that reality.
” Renewing the shorter term commitments in the Paris agreement will be key .
As well as the overarching and legally binding limit of 1.5C or 2C , governments submitted non-binding national plans at Paris to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the projected rise in their emissions , in the case of smaller developing countries .
The first round of those national plans – called nationally determined contributions – in 2015 were inadequate , however , and would lead to a disastrous 3C of heating .
The accord also contained a ratchet mechanism , by which countries must submit new national plans every five years , to bring them in line with the long-term goal , and the first deadline is now looming on 31 December .
UN climate talks were supposed to take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had to be postponed because of the pandemic .
The UK will host the COP26 summit next November instead , and that will be the crucial meeting .
The signs for that decisive moment are good , according to Laurent Fabius .
The election of Biden in the US means it will be aligned with the EU and China in pushing for net zero emissions to be fully implemented .
“ We shall have the conjunction of the planets which made possible the Paris agreement , ” Fabius told the Guardian .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came together for the Paris agreement .
We are looking at the same conjunction of the planets now with the US , the EU , China , Japan—if the big ones are going in the right direction , there will be a very strong incentive for all countries to go in the right direction.
” As host of the COP26 talks , the UK is redoubling its diplomatic efforts towards next year ’ s conference .
The French government brought all of its diplomatic might to bear on Paris , instructing its ambassadors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their top priority , and sending out ministers around the globe to drum up support .
Laurence Tubiana , France ’ s top diplomat at the talks , said another key innovation was what she termed “ 360 degree diplomacy ” .
That means not just working through the standard government channels , with ministerial meetings and chats among officials , but reaching out far beyond , making businesses , local government and city mayors , civil society , academics and citizens part of the talks .
“ That was a very important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paris , ” she said .
The UK has taken up a similar stance , with a civil society forum to ensure people ’ s voices are heard , and a specially convened council of young people advising the UN secretary-general .
The UK ’ s high-level champion , Nigel Topping , is also coordinating a “ race to zero ” by which companies , and non-state actors such as cities , states and sub-national governments are also committing to reach net zero emissions .
One massive issue outstanding ahead of COP26 is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have suffered the brunt of a problem that they did little to cause , into the Paris agreement was essential .
Key to that , said Fabius , was the pledge of financial assistance The French government had to reassure poorer nations at the talks that $ 100bn a year in financial assistance , for poor countries to cut their emissions and cope with the impacts of the climate crisis , would be forthcoming .
“ Money , money , money , ” Fabius insisted , was at the heart of the talks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have that $ 100bn [ the talks will fail ] .
” For the UK as hosts of COP26 , the question of money presents more of a problem since the chancellor , Rishi Sunak , swung his axe at the overseas aid budget in the recent spending review .
Although the £11bn designated for climate aid will be ringfenced , persuading other developed countries to part with cash—and showing developing countries that the UK is on their side—has suddenly become more difficult .
Amber Rudd , the former UK energy and climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paris talks , said : “ A country that understood the seriousness of COP26 would not be cutting international aid right now.
” Alok Sharma , president of COP26 and the UK ’ s business secretary , will draw on his experience as the UK ’ s former international development minister in dealing with developing countries ’ expectations .
He said : “ I completely recognise making sure we have the finance for climate change action is very important .
That ’ s why we have protected international climate finance .
I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic situation .
We have said when the economy recovers we would look to restore [ overseas aid as 0.7 % of GDP ] .
I do think when it comes to climate change we are putting our best foot forward.
” Boris Johnson will be hoping to smooth over these tricky issues when he , alongside the French government and the UN , presides over a virtual meeting of world leaders this weekend , on 12 December , the fifth anniversary of the Paris accord .
At least 70 world leaders are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be pushed to bring forward new NDCs and other policy commitments , as a staging post toward the COP26 summit .
Johnson kicked off preparations for the meeting last Friday by announcing the UK ’ s own NDC , setting out a 68 % cut in emissions compared with 1990 levels , by 2030 .
That would put the UK ahead of other developed economies , cutting emissions further and faster than any G20 country has yet committed to do .
Critics pointed out , however , that the UK is not on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ targets , for 2023 .
Far more detailed policy measures are likely to be required , some of them involving major changes and economic losers as well as winners , before the path to net zero is clear .
The world is facing the task of a global economic reboot after the ravages of the coronavirus pandemic .
The green recovery from that crisis is itself in need of rescue , Guardian analysis has shown , as countries are still pouring money into fossil fuel bailouts .
But with so many countries now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an increasing number coming forward with short term targets for 2030 to set us on that path , there are still grounds for optimism .
This week ’ s climate ambition summit will be an important milestone , but the COP26 summit next year will be the key test .
The Paris agreement five years on still provides the best hope of avoiding the worst ravages of climate breakdown : the question is whether countries are prepared to back it up with action , rather than more hot air .

This story was originally published by The Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.
No one who was in the hall that winter evening in a gloomy conference centre on the outskirts of the French capital will ever forget it. Tension had been building throughout the afternoon, as after two weeks of fraught talks the expected resolution was delayed and then delayed yet again. Rumours swirled—had the French got it wrong? Was another climate failure approaching, the latest botched attempt at solving the world’s global heating crisis?
Finally, as the mood in the hall was growing twitchy, the UN security guards cleared the platform and the top officials of the landmark Paris climate talks took to the podium. For two weeks, 196 countries had huddled in countless meetings, wrangling over dense pages of text, scrutinising every semicolon. And they had finally reached agreement. Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister in charge of the gruelling talks, looking exhausted but delighted, reached for his gavel and brought it down with a resounding crack. The Paris agreement was approved at last.
Nicholas Stern, the climate economist, found himself hugging Xia Zhenhua, the normally reserved Chinese minister, while whoops and shouts echoed round the hall. “I felt that the Paris agreement was the moment when the world decided it really had to manage climate change in a serious way,” he said. “We were all in it together, that’s what people realized.”
“I felt that the Paris agreement was the moment when the world decided it really had to manage climate change in a serious way.”
At Paris, for the first time rich and poor countries joined together in a legally binding treaty pledging to hold global heating to heating well below 2C, the scientifically-advised limit of safety, with an aspiration not to breach 1.5C above pre-industrial levels. Those two weeks of tense talks in the French capital were the climax of 25 years of tortuous negotiations on the climate, since governments were warned of the dangers of climate chaos in 1990. The failure, discord and recriminations of those decades were left behind as delegates from 196 countries hugged, wept and cheered in Paris.
Todd Stern, climate envoy to President Barack Obama, recalls: “My team and I had been working toward this for seven years … and the story of climate negotiations had so often been one of disappointment. And yet here we were and we knew that we had—all together—done a really big thing. A very special moment. An unforgettable one.”
The accord itself has proved remarkably resilient. Bringing together 196 nations in 2015 was not easy—even as Fabius brought down the gavel on the agreement, there was a little chicanery as Nicaragua had planned to object to the required consensus, but was ignored. Yet that consensus has remained robust. When the US—the world’s biggest economy and second biggest emitter—began the process of withdrawal from Paris, under President Donald Trump in 2017, a disaster might have been expected. The Kyoto 1997 protocol fell apart after the US signed but failed to ratify the agreement, leaving climate negotiations in limbo for a decade.
If Trump was hoping to wreck Paris, he was disappointed: the rest of the world shrugged and carried on. There was no exodus of other countries, although some did pursue more aggressive tactics at the annual UN talks. The key axis of China and the EU remained intact, deliberately underlined by China’s President Xi Jinping when he chose to surprise the world with a net zero emissions target at the UN general assembly in September, just as the UN election race was hotting up.
Remy Rioux, one of the French government team who led the talks, now chief executive of the French Development Agency, said: “The Paris agreement has proven to be inclusive and at scale, with the participation of countries representing 97% of global emissions, as well as that of non-state actors such as businesses, local government and financial institutions—and very resilient, precisely because it is inclusive. The Paris agreement is a powerful signal of hope in the face of the climate emergency.”
On some measures, Paris could be judged a failure. Emissions in 2015 were about 50 bn tons. By 2019, they had risen to about 55bn tons, according to the UN Environment Program (UNEP). Carbon output fell dramatically, by about 17% overall and far more in some regions, in this spring’s coronavirus lockdowns, but the plunge also revealed an uncomfortable truth: even when transport, industry and commerce grind to a halt, the majority of emissions remain intact. Far greater systemic change is needed, particularly in energy generation around the world, to meet the Paris goals.
Ban Ki-moon, former UN secretary-general, told the Guardian: “We have lost a lot of time. Five years after the agreement in Paris was adopted with huge expectations and commitment by world leaders, we have not done enough.”
What’s more, we are still digging up and burning fossil fuels at a frantic rate. UNEP reported last week that production of fossil fuels is planned to increase by 2% a year. Meanwhile, we continue to destroy the world’s carbon sinks, by cutting down forests—the world is still losing an area of forest the size of the UK each year, despite commitments to stop deforestation—as well as drying out peatlands and wetlands, and reducing the ocean’s capacity to absorb carbon from the air.
Global temperatures have already risen by more than 1C above pre-industrial levels, and the results in extreme weather are evident around the world. Wildfires raged across Australia and the US this year, more than 30 hurricanes struck, heatwaves blasted Siberia, and the Arctic ice is melting faster.
António Guterres, secretary-general of the UN, put it in stark terms: “Humanity is waging war on nature. This is suicidal. Nature always strikes back—and it is already doing so with growing force and fury. Biodiversity is collapsing. One million species are at risk of extinction. Ecosystems are disappearing before our eyes.”
But to judge Paris solely by these portents of disaster would be to lose sight of the remarkable progress that has been made on climate change since. This year, renewable energy will make up about 90% of the new energy generation capacity installed around the world, according to the International Energy Agency, and by 2025 will be the biggest source of power, displacing coal. That massive increase reflects rapid falls in the price of wind turbines and solar panels, which are now competitive or cheaper than fossil fuel generation in many countries, even without subsidy.
“We never expected to see prices come down so fast,” said Adair Turner, chair of the Energy Transitions Commission and former chief of the UK’s committee on climate change. “We have done better than the most optimistic forecasts.”
Oil prices plunged this spring as coronavirus lockdowns grounded planes and swept cities free of cars, and some analysts predict that the oil business will never recover its old hegemony. Some oil companies, including BP and Shell, now plan to become carbon-neutral.
Electric vehicles have also improved much faster than expected, reflected in the stunning share price rise of Tesla. The rise of low-carbon technology has meant that when the Covid-19 crisis struck, leading figures quickly called for a green recovery, and set out plans for ensuring the world “builds back better”.
Most importantly, the world has coalesced around a new target, based on the Paris goals but not explicit in the accord: net zero emissions. In the last two years, first a trickle and now a flood of countries have come forward with long-term goals to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to a fraction of their current amount, to the point where they are equal to or outweighed by carbon sinks, such as forests.
The UK, EU member states, Norway, Chile and a host of developing nations led the way in adopting net zero targets. In September, China’s president surprised the world by announcing his country would achieve net zero emissions in 2060. Japan and South Korea quickly followed suit. US president-elect Joe Biden has also pledged to adopt a target of net zero emissions by 2050. That puts more than two thirds of the global economy under pledges to reach net zero carbon around mid-century.
If all of these countries meet their targets, the world will be almost on track to meet the upper limit of the Paris agreement. Climate Action Tracker, which analyses carbon data, has calculated that the current pledges would lead to a temperature rise of 2.1C, bringing the world within “striking distance” of fulfilling the 2015 promise.
Niklas Hohne of NewClimate Institute, one of the partner organisations behind Climate Action Tracker, said: “Five years on, it’s clear the Paris agreement is driving climate action. Now we’re seeing a wave of countries signing up [to net zero emissions]. Can anyone really afford to miss catching this wave?”
“Can anyone really afford to miss catching this wave?”
The key issue, though, is whether countries will meet these long-term targets. Making promises for 2050 is one thing, but major policy changes are needed now to shift national economies on to a low-carbon footing. “None of these [net zero] targets will be meaningful without very aggressive action in this decade of the 2020s,” said Todd Stern. “I think there is growing, but not yet broad enough, understanding of that reality.”
Renewing the shorter term commitments in the Paris agreement will be key. As well as the overarching and legally binding limit of 1.5C or 2C, governments submitted non-binding national plans at Paris to reduce their emissions, or to curb the projected rise in their emissions, in the case of smaller developing countries. The first round of those national plans – called nationally determined contributions – in 2015 were inadequate, however, and would lead to a disastrous 3C of heating.
The accord also contained a ratchet mechanism, by which countries must submit new national plans every five years, to bring them in line with the long-term goal, and the first deadline is now looming on 31 December. UN climate talks were supposed to take place this November in Glasgow, but had to be postponed because of the pandemic. The UK will host the COP26 summit next November instead, and that will be the crucial meeting.
The signs for that decisive moment are good, according to Laurent Fabius. The election of Biden in the US means it will be aligned with the EU and China in pushing for net zero emissions to be fully implemented. “We shall have the conjunction of the planets which made possible the Paris agreement,” Fabius told the Guardian. “Civil society, politics, business all came together for the Paris agreement. We are looking at the same conjunction of the planets now with the US, the EU, China, Japan—if the big ones are going in the right direction, there will be a very strong incentive for all countries to go in the right direction.”
As host of the COP26 talks, the UK is redoubling its diplomatic efforts towards next year’s conference. The French government brought all of its diplomatic might to bear on Paris, instructing its ambassadors in every country to make climate change their top priority, and sending out ministers around the globe to drum up support.
Laurence Tubiana, France’s top diplomat at the talks, said another key innovation was what she termed “360 degree diplomacy”. That means not just working through the standard government channels, with ministerial meetings and chats among officials, but reaching out far beyond, making businesses, local government and city mayors, civil society, academics and citizens part of the talks.
“That was a very important part of [the success] of Paris,” she said. The UK has taken up a similar stance, with a civil society forum to ensure people’s voices are heard, and a specially convened council of young people advising the UN secretary-general. The UK’s high-level champion, Nigel Topping, is also coordinating a “race to zero” by which companies, and non-state actors such as cities, states and sub-national governments are also committing to reach net zero emissions.
One massive issue outstanding ahead of COP26 is finance. Bringing developing countries, which have suffered the brunt of a problem that they did little to cause, into the Paris agreement was essential. Key to that, said Fabius, was the pledge of financial assistance The French government had to reassure poorer nations at the talks that $100bn a year in financial assistance, for poor countries to cut their emissions and cope with the impacts of the climate crisis, would be forthcoming. “Money, money, money,” Fabius insisted, was at the heart of the talks. “If you don’t have that $100bn [the talks will fail].”
For the UK as hosts of COP26, the question of money presents more of a problem since the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, swung his axe at the overseas aid budget in the recent spending review. Although the £11bn designated for climate aid will be ringfenced, persuading other developed countries to part with cash—and showing developing countries that the UK is on their side—has suddenly become more difficult. Amber Rudd, the former UK energy and climate minister who represented the UK at the Paris talks, said: “A country that understood the seriousness of COP26 would not be cutting international aid right now.”
Alok Sharma, president of COP26 and the UK’s business secretary, will draw on his experience as the UK’s former international development minister in dealing with developing countries’ expectations. He said: “I completely recognise making sure we have the finance for climate change action is very important. That’s why we have protected international climate finance. I think people understand we are in a difficult economic situation. We have said when the economy recovers we would look to restore [overseas aid as 0.7% of GDP]. I do think when it comes to climate change we are putting our best foot forward.”
Boris Johnson will be hoping to smooth over these tricky issues when he, alongside the French government and the UN, presides over a virtual meeting of world leaders this weekend, on 12 December, the fifth anniversary of the Paris accord. At least 70 world leaders are expected to attend, and they will be pushed to bring forward new NDCs and other policy commitments, as a staging post toward the COP26 summit.
Johnson kicked off preparations for the meeting last Friday by announcing the UK’s own NDC, setting out a 68% cut in emissions compared with 1990 levels, by 2030. That would put the UK ahead of other developed economies, cutting emissions further and faster than any G20 country has yet committed to do.
Critics pointed out, however, that the UK is not on track to meet its own current climate targets, for 2023. Far more detailed policy measures are likely to be required, some of them involving major changes and economic losers as well as winners, before the path to net zero is clear.
The world is facing the task of a global economic reboot after the ravages of the coronavirus pandemic. The green recovery from that crisis is itself in need of rescue, Guardian analysis has shown, as countries are still pouring money into fossil fuel bailouts. But with so many countries now committed to net zero emissions, and an increasing number coming forward with short term targets for 2030 to set us on that path, there are still grounds for optimism. This week’s climate ambition summit will be an important milestone, but the COP26 summit next year will be the key test. The Paris agreement five years on still provides the best hope of avoiding the worst ravages of climate breakdown: the question is whether countries are prepared to back it up with action, rather than more hot air.


motherjones--2020-12-13--FDA Chief Denies Trump’s Accusations That the Agency Slowed Vaccine Approval

FDA commissioner Stephen Hahn is pushing back against claims by the Trump administration that his agency slowed down the COVID-19 vaccine approval .
Hahn said Sunday morning that there were “ no external pressures other than the science ” when it came to the rollout of the vaccine .
Hahn was responding to a tweet from President Trump that suggested the FDA could have greenlit the Pfizer vaccine sooner than Friday , but instead was “ playing games.
” The Washington Post reported that White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows told Hahn on Friday “ to be prepared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not clear the vaccine by day ’ s end.
” Hahn went on the Sunday morning news shows and said Meadows didn ’ t threaten to fire him .
Meadows did call him , Hahn said , but he would not discuss the content of that private conversation .
“ Of course we ’ ve been asked to speed up this process as much as possible , ” Hahn said on ABC News This Week .
“ We do not feel that this could ’ ve been out a week earlier.
” Hahn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people we would do a thorough review of the application , ” and that ’ s what they did .
The lead scientist for the White House Operation Warp Speed said Trump ’ s claims were not helpful for building public trust in the much anticipated vaccine .
Moncef Slaoui said that if the Meadows call to Hahn happened , “ I think it was useless and unfortunate , so are some of the tweets.
” The back and forth between Hahn and the White House is happening as the first trucks full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday , marking the start of the biggest vaccine distribution effort in US history .

FDA commissioner Stephen Hahn is pushing back against claims by the Trump administration that his agency slowed down the COVID-19 vaccine approval. Hahn said Sunday morning that there were “no external pressures other than the science” when it came to the rollout of the vaccine.
Hahn was responding to a tweet from President Trump that suggested the FDA could have greenlit the Pfizer vaccine sooner than Friday, but instead was “playing games.”
While my pushing the money drenched but heavily bureaucratic @US_FDA saved five years in the approval of NUMEROUS great new vaccines, it is still a big, old, slow turtle. Get the dam vaccines out NOW, Dr. Hahn @SteveFDA. Stop playing games and start saving lives!!! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 11, 2020
The Washington Post reported that White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows told Hahn on Friday “to be prepared to submit his resignation if the agency did not clear the vaccine by day’s end.” Hahn went on the Sunday morning news shows and said Meadows didn’t threaten to fire him. Meadows did call him, Hahn said, but he would not discuss the content of that private conversation.
“Of course we’ve been asked to speed up this process as much as possible,” Hahn said on ABC News This Week. “We do not feel that this could’ve been out a week earlier.” Hahn said the FDA “promised the American people we would do a thorough review of the application,” and that’s what they did.
NEW: "We do not feel that this could have been out a week earlier," FDA chief Stephen Hahn tells @MarthaRaddatz when asked about President Trump's claim that the COVID-19 vaccine could have been approved earlier. https://t.co/kEzanF2Ysi pic.twitter.com/cAtcDjWuVv — ABC News (@ABC) December 13, 2020
The lead scientist for the White House Operation Warp Speed said Trump’s claims were not helpful for building public trust in the much anticipated vaccine. Moncef Slaoui said that if the Meadows call to Hahn happened, “I think it was useless and unfortunate, so are some of the tweets.”
The back and forth between Hahn and the White House is happening as the first trucks full of COVID-19 vaccines left a manufacturing facility Sunday, marking the start of the biggest vaccine distribution effort in US history.


motherjones--2020-12-13--Watch the First COVID-19 Vaccine Shipments Leave the Warehouse

As the United States ends its deadliest week since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic , the first trucks full of COVID-19 vaccines have left a manufacturing facility Sunday morning , marking the start of the biggest vaccine distribution effort in US history .
Many people awoke this morning to images and videos of UPS semi trucks full of vaccines pulling out of a Kalamazoo , Mich. , warehouse just two days after the Food and Drug Administration ’ s emergency approval of the Pfizer vaccine .
The first batch of about 3 million vaccines is expected to reach high-risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The New York Times reports that after vaccines were packed in dry ice and loaded on to the trucks Sunday , “ workers applauded as the first truck left the plant carrying a load of the vaccine.
” UPS and Fedex are working together to handle the staggered distribution of the vaccine getting it 636 locations across the country .
The two shipping giants ( who usually compete instead of working hand in hand ) will monitor and track all vaccine shipments closely , and also alert all delivery drivers and pilots so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine package .
The FAA alerted airports nationwide that they should be fully prepared for aircraft carrying the vaccines .
“ This includes both those airports identified for shipments that will transition at airports as well as those that that may serve as alternate/divert airports , even if they will not be a primary destination for aircraft carrying COVID-19 vaccines.
” Pfizer ’ s vaccine is estimated to be about 95 percent effective , and it has already been approved in the United Kingdom and Canada .
It ’ s one of several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus pandemic expected to be approved for use in the United States .
Almost 300,000 people have died of COVID-19 in the United States and more than 16 million have been infected .
In the last few weeks the numbers spiked in many states as millions of people continued to ignore CDC recommendations against traveling for the holidays .
This morning , former CDC director Tom Frieden took to Twitter to warn that while help is on the way , Americans must still work hard to prevent the spread of the virus :

As the United States ends its deadliest week since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, the first trucks full of COVID-19 vaccines have left a manufacturing facility Sunday morning, marking the start of the biggest vaccine distribution effort in US history.
Many people awoke this morning to images and videos of UPS semi trucks full of vaccines pulling out of a Kalamazoo, Mich., warehouse just two days after the Food and Drug Administration’s emergency approval of the Pfizer vaccine. The first batch of about 3 million vaccines is expected to reach high-risk health care workers and nursing homes.
Watch: Workers at a Pfizer plant in Kalamazoo, Mich., packed boxes of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on Sunday morning and loaded them onto trucks. Nearly 3 million doses are expected to reach all 50 states this week. https://t.co/WYGjsPE0Yk pic.twitter.com/XaleBwgfxJ — The New York Times (@nytimes) December 13, 2020
The New York Times reports that after vaccines were packed in dry ice and loaded on to the trucks Sunday, “workers applauded as the first truck left the plant carrying a load of the vaccine.”
UPS and Fedex are working together to handle the staggered distribution of the vaccine getting it 636 locations across the country. The two shipping giants (who usually compete instead of working hand in hand) will monitor and track all vaccine shipments closely, and also alert all delivery drivers and pilots so they know they’re carrying a vaccine package.
The FAA alerted airports nationwide that they should be fully prepared for aircraft carrying the vaccines. “This includes both those airports identified for shipments that will transition at airports as well as those that that may serve as alternate/divert airports, even if they will not be a primary destination for aircraft carrying COVID-19 vaccines.”
Pfizer’s vaccine is estimated to be about 95 percent effective, and it has already been approved in the United Kingdom and Canada. It’s one of several vaccines developed in record speed as the coronavirus pandemic expected to be approved for use in the United States. Almost 300,000 people have died of COVID-19 in the United States and more than 16 million have been infected. In the last few weeks the numbers spiked in many states as millions of people continued to ignore CDC recommendations against traveling for the holidays. This morning, former CDC director Tom Frieden took to Twitter to warn that while help is on the way, Americans must still work hard to prevent the spread of the virus:


motherjones--2020-12-15--What Biden Can Do to Boost the Economy Without Any Help From Congress

When Joe Biden is inaugurated in January , he ’ ll have twin crises on his hands : a coronavirus surge and the economic damage the pandemic has wrought , including business closures , high unemployment , and rising poverty .
Unless Democrats win both Georgia Senate runoffs in January , Biden will also be the first president in more than three decades to enter office without both houses of Congress under his party ’ s control .
There ’ s little indication that congressional Republicans will cooperate with Biden on big economic relief initiatives : The two parties have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relief proposals , and the GOP has even less incentive to boost the economy under a Democratic president .
That means Biden will probably have to tackle what looks to be the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression without much help from Congress .
So what exactly can the Biden administration do to help the economy without the Senate ?
A fair amount , it turns out .
To be clear , there ’ s little that the Biden administration can do administratively that would have the same impact on the economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shierholz , senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute .
But the administration can set in motion changes—on worker protections , student debt , the Federal Reserve ’ s lending to state and local governments , and more—that could “ lead to a more equitable economy , ” Shierholz says , boosting consumer spending and hopefully giving the overall economy “ a shot in the arm.
” Here are a few of the options in Biden ’ s toolbox , according to economists : One of the main disagreements in negotiations between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aid to give to struggling state and local governments that lost billions in tax revenue during coronavirus-related lockdowns .
In the absence of this direct aid , the Biden administration will have to find another way to help cash-crunched municipalities .
Enter the Federal Reserve .
The $ 2.2 trillion CARES Act authorized the Federal Reserve to help stabilize the finances of state and local governments hit by the pandemic by buying up their debt .
It gave the Treasury Department up to $ 454 billion to back this lending by the Fed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Fed might incur if some loans aren ’ t paid back .
Soon , Treasury invested $ 35 billion , allowing the Federal Reserve to lend up to $ 500 billion to struggling municipalities .
But as of mid-November , more than $ 498 billion of that $ 500 billion was sitting unused .
Some economists say that ’ s because the Fed is being too picky about whom it is willing to lend to , and the loan terms it imposes on municipalities are too strict .
For instance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 10 most populous cities and 15 most populous counties , thus cutting out most majority-Black cities as well as loads of smaller cities and towns .
The Fed also capped these loans at three years .
When it comes to relaxing these loan terms , the Fed ’ s hands are tied by the treasury secretary , who oversees the rules by which money can be doled out .
A Biden-appointed secretary could loosen the rules , making it easier to get the money where it needs to be .
But there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to resolve first : In November , Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin asked the Fed to return all its unused coronavirus relief funds , rather than extending the emergency relief program , which is set to expire on December 31 .
The move was seen by Democrats as an effort to complicate the economic recovery ahead of Biden ’ s inauguration .
But the terms of this funding are such that a Biden Treasury and the Fed can still restart the municipal lending program , explains Bharat Ramamurti , a member of the congressional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CARES Act , by structuring any new lending as a modification of the investments Treasury has already made .
Then in January , the Biden administration can ask the Treasury and the Fed to restart their lending program , giving them the authority to lend out that remaining $ 498 billion—or even more .
And Biden ’ s treasury secretary could then loosen the loan criteria to make it easier to get funds to municipalities .
On the campaign trail , Biden proposed forgiving $ 10,000 of federally backed student loans for all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone who attended public colleges or historically Black colleges and universities .
Even before Biden won the election , Chuck Schumer , the Democratic Senate leader , and Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
called on the next president to forgive up to $ 50,000 of student debt .
No matter the amount , Biden can likely use an executive order to make these changes , loosening the grip that this debt has on some 45 million people and goosing the economy in turn .
So far , the Occupational Safety and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandatory rule for employers to protect workers from COVID on the job .
Failing to do so , says Shierholz , hurts the economy , not to mention posing a heightened risk to Black and Brown people who predominantly do front-line work .
“ The strength of the economy is tied to the ability to contain the virus , ” she says .
OSHA has the authority to issue these mandatory standards in extreme situations .
But under Trump , it hasn ’ t done so .
Trump has also reduced OSHA ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the office without an acting director throughout his entire presidency—a historical first .
That ’ s why the Biden administration should lean on OSHA to implement stricter rules for employers , says Shierholz .
“ Health and safety measures that also have meaningful enforcement behind them will help contain surges , and that is not a sufficient condition but a necessary one for real recovery in the labor market.
” In September , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a broad moratorium on evictions , asserting that kicking tenants out during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The move did not provide rent relief—any unpaid rent will still eventually be due .
But resurrecting the eviction ban after it expires on December 31 would give renters more time to wait out a new wave of COVID infections and get on more stable financial footing as the labor market slowly recovers .
The latest bipartisan stimulus proposal circulating in Congress includes an extension of the moratorium until February 2021 , as well as $ 25 billion in rental assistance to aid some tenants in covering their back rent .
During @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Protection Bureau—the Wall Street watchdog agency established after the 2008 financial crisis—became a locus of financial deregulation , easing restrictions on predatory payday lenders and other debt collectors as well as weakening protections for borrowers of color .
But the bureau could swing in a different direction under Biden , thanks to a Supreme Court ruling last June that made it much easier for the president to fire the CFPB director .
Biden can appoint leadership that steers the bureau toward the more rigorous consumer protection it was originally intended for : helping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loan delinquencies during the economic crisis , and monitoring debt collectors for abuse at a time when many Americans are going into debt or falling behind on payments to make ends meet .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
When Joe Biden is inaugurated in January, he’ll have twin crises on his hands: a coronavirus surge and the economic damage the pandemic has wrought, including business closures, high unemployment, and rising poverty.
Unless Democrats win both Georgia Senate runoffs in January, Biden will also be the first president in more than three decades to enter office without both houses of Congress under his party’s control. There’s little indication that congressional Republicans will cooperate with Biden on big economic relief initiatives: The two parties have spent seven months deadlocked over competing COVID relief proposals, and the GOP has even less incentive to boost the economy under a Democratic president. That means Biden will probably have to tackle what looks to be the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression without much help from Congress.
So what exactly can the Biden administration do to help the economy without the Senate? A fair amount, it turns out.
To be clear, there’s little that the Biden administration can do administratively that would have the same impact on the economy as a stimulus package, says Heidi Shierholz, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute. But the administration can set in motion changes—on worker protections, student debt, the Federal Reserve’s lending to state and local governments, and more—that could “lead to a more equitable economy,” Shierholz says, boosting consumer spending and hopefully giving the overall economy “a shot in the arm.” Here are a few of the options in Biden’s toolbox, according to economists:
Use the Federal Reserve
One of the main disagreements in negotiations between the GOP and Democrats has been how much aid to give to struggling state and local governments that lost billions in tax revenue during coronavirus-related lockdowns. In the absence of this direct aid, the Biden administration will have to find another way to help cash-crunched municipalities.
Enter the Federal Reserve. The $2.2 trillion CARES Act authorized the Federal Reserve to help stabilize the finances of state and local governments hit by the pandemic by buying up their debt. It gave the Treasury Department up to $454 billion to back this lending by the Fed, by providing money to cover losses that the Fed might incur if some loans aren’t paid back. Soon, Treasury invested $35 billion, allowing the Federal Reserve to lend up to $500 billion to struggling municipalities.
But as of mid-November, more than $498 billion of that $500 billion was sitting unused. Some economists say that’s because the Fed is being too picky about whom it is willing to lend to, and the loan terms it imposes on municipalities are too strict. For instance, the initial rules effectively excluded all but the 10 most populous cities and 15 most populous counties, thus cutting out most majority-Black cities as well as loads of smaller cities and towns. The Fed also capped these loans at three years. When it comes to relaxing these loan terms, the Fed’s hands are tied by the treasury secretary, who oversees the rules by which money can be doled out.
A Biden-appointed secretary could loosen the rules, making it easier to get the money where it needs to be. But there is a hiccup the administration would have to resolve first: In November, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin asked the Fed to return all its unused coronavirus relief funds, rather than extending the emergency relief program, which is set to expire on December 31. The move was seen by Democrats as an effort to complicate the economic recovery ahead of Biden’s inauguration. But the terms of this funding are such that a Biden Treasury and the Fed can still restart the municipal lending program, explains Bharat Ramamurti, a member of the congressional commission tasked with overseeing administration of the CARES Act, by structuring any new lending as a modification of the investments Treasury has already made.
Then in January, the Biden administration can ask the Treasury and the Fed to restart their lending program, giving them the authority to lend out that remaining $498 billion—or even more. And Biden’s treasury secretary could then loosen the loan criteria to make it easier to get funds to municipalities.
Cancel student debt
On the campaign trail, Biden proposed forgiving $10,000 of federally backed student loans for all borrowers and canceling all undergraduate debt for anyone who attended public colleges or historically Black colleges and universities. Even before Biden won the election, Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate leader, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called on the next president to forgive up to $50,000 of student debt. No matter the amount, Biden can likely use an executive order to make these changes, loosening the grip that this debt has on some 45 million people and goosing the economy in turn.
Protect workers from COVID
So far, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has refused to issue a mandatory rule for employers to protect workers from COVID on the job. Failing to do so, says Shierholz, hurts the economy, not to mention posing a heightened risk to Black and Brown people who predominantly do front-line work. “The strength of the economy is tied to the ability to contain the virus,” she says.
OSHA has the authority to issue these mandatory standards in extreme situations. But under Trump, it hasn’t done so. Trump has also reduced OSHA’s staffing and budget and has left the office without an acting director throughout his entire presidency—a historical first.
That’s why the Biden administration should lean on OSHA to implement stricter rules for employers, says Shierholz. “Health and safety measures that also have meaningful enforcement behind them will help contain surges, and that is not a sufficient condition but a necessary one for real recovery in the labor market.”
Extend the eviction moratorium
In September, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a broad moratorium on evictions, asserting that kicking tenants out during a pandemic presented a public health risk. The move did not provide rent relief—any unpaid rent will still eventually be due. But resurrecting the eviction ban after it expires on December 31 would give renters more time to wait out a new wave of COVID infections and get on more stable financial footing as the labor market slowly recovers.
The latest bipartisan stimulus proposal circulating in Congress includes an extension of the moratorium until February 2021, as well as $25 billion in rental assistance to aid some tenants in covering their back rent.
Ramp up consumer protection
During the Trump administration, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—the Wall Street watchdog agency established after the 2008 financial crisis—became a locus of financial deregulation, easing restrictions on predatory payday lenders and other debt collectors as well as weakening protections for borrowers of color.
But the bureau could swing in a different direction under Biden, thanks to a Supreme Court ruling last June that made it much easier for the president to fire the CFPB director. Biden can appoint leadership that steers the bureau toward the more rigorous consumer protection it was originally intended for: helping families avoid foreclosure, evictions, and loan delinquencies during the economic crisis, and monitoring debt collectors for abuse at a time when many Americans are going into debt or falling behind on payments to make ends meet.


motherjones--2020-12-15--Donald Trump Just Retweeted a Seth Rich Conspiracy Theorist

Donald Trump has shown he is hardly discerning when it comes to retweeting devotees who are on his side .
He has RTed a video of a supporter shouting “ white power !
” He did the same with a video falsely linking Black Lives Matter to a 2019 crime in New York City .
He retweeted an anti-Semitic Twitter user .
As long as you ’ re with him , Trump doesn ’ t care who or what you are .
On Tuesday , Trump did it again : he thrice put his stamp of approval on tweets from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who for years has pushed a discredited story .
Couch has been an advocate of the false claim that Seth Rich , a Democratic Party staffer murdered in an apparent botched robbery in Washington , DC , was the source of the stolen Democratic emails released by WikiLeaks during the 2016 election .
This bizarre notion has been championed by conservatives and fringe players—and hinted at by Julian Assange—to show that Russia did not attack the 2016 election and that it was an inside job .
Prominent pro-Trump conspiracy theorists Roger Stone and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about Rich .
( Corsi later retracted and apologized for a story promoting the Rich conpsiracy theory . )
As Michael Isikoff , my co-author on Russian Roulette , has reported , Couch went even further than other Seth Rich conspiracy theorists and maintained that Rich ’ s brother , Aaron , an IT specialist in Colorado , had plotted with Seth Rich to steal the DNC documents and sell them to WikiLeaks .
( All this disinformation-pushing about Seth Rich has caused great anguish for his family . )
Of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Russian hackers pilfered the material , according to reports from the US intelligence community , Special Counsel Robert Mueller , and the Republican-led intelligence committees of the House and Senate .
And Moscow dumped this material as part of an operation to help Trump win the presidency .
One goal of the Seth Rich conspiracy theorists has been to remove the Russian stain from Trump ’ s 2016 victory—to show the Trump-Russia scandal was a hoax .
But after promoting this bogus tale—repeatedly highlighted by host Sean Hannity—Fox News had to retract @ @ @ @ @ @ @ settled a lawsuit brought by Rich ’ s parents , who had claimed that the conservative cable network had engaged in “ extreme and outrageous ” conduct regarding its coverage of their son ’ s death .
Couch , though , persisted .
He hounded Rich ’ s brother and others who had known Rich .
He demanded they turn over information and laptops to his independent investigators .
In 2019 , facing litigation from Aaron Rich , he told a federal judge he would remove all content from his websites relating to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issue an apology to Mr. Rich.
” Afterward , Couch said that he would pursue a book deal and a video series on the Seth Rich case .
( Aaron Rich ’ s lawsuit is still pending . )
These days—no shocker—Couch is one of those pro-Trumpers claiming the 2020 election was stolen from Trump .
On Saturday , he appeared at a rally of Trump supporters in Washington , DC .
He assailed the Justice Department , the US Senate , and various state legislatures as “ corrupt ” for their supposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He referenced a famous Thomas Jefferson quote— ” The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants ” —and called for the American public to “ rise now ” in this fight of “ good versus evil.
” On Tuesday morning , Trump retweeted three tweets that Couch had sent out the previous night .
Couch had been spreading conspiracy theories about the election , and he had offered advice to Trump : “ The President needs to hold a press conference right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remind them he ’ s the rightful President and Winner !
” Apparently , Trump thought bird-dogging Biden this way was a good idea .
He amplified this tweet and also shared Couch ’ s other tweets with his massive audience .
Twitter placed a warning on these other two tweets , noting their claims about election fraud was “ disputed.
” By now , there is not much surprising about Trump ’ s reckless crusade to subvert American democracy in order to overturn the election results so he can retain power .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ relied on lawyers and lieutenants who have peddled an assortment of fake and deceptive contentions .
He has railed against reality-based Republican officials who have declared the election fair and sound .
He even appears to have given Bill Barr the boot from the Justice Department after Barr , who has violated so many norms for Trump , declined to back up Trump ’ s claim that the election was fraudulent .
So who is Trump left with ?
People like Matt Couch and other leaders ( if you can call him that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Couch ’ s website sells a t-shirt with the logo “ Cult 45 , ” and he explains , “ Since Liberals want to call anyone who supports President Trump a Cult member , we ’ ll just embrace it and Trigger them even more !
” ) Trump ’ s relationship with these sorts is dangerous .
Not because they are going to succeed in their mission to undo an election .
It is because Trump is amplifying and legitimizing sources of profound disinformation .
Couch has half a million Twitter followers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a video of him at Mount Vernon , the home of George Washington , discussing the “ significance ” of the Rich case On Monday , Couch tweeted , “ Seth Rich Isn ’ t Going Away !
!
!
” Now he has the cult leader ’ s imprimatur for his continued efforts to sling conspiracy swill .
Couch did not respond to requests for comment sent to his website and Twitter account .
In his narcissistic quest to hold on to the White House and deny his defeat , Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is adding to the poison he has been inserting into the national discourse for years .
But Trump has little choice .
After all , as he pushes a false and divisive narrative to serve his own political and psychological needs , his only allies are those who share his disregard for the truth .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Donald Trump has shown he is hardly discerning when it comes to retweeting devotees who are on his side. He has RTed a video of a supporter shouting “white power!” He did the same with a video falsely linking Black Lives Matter to a 2019 crime in New York City. He retweeted an anti-Semitic Twitter user. As long as you’re with him, Trump doesn’t care who or what you are. On Tuesday, Trump did it again: he thrice put his stamp of approval on tweets from a known conspiracy theorist named Matt Couch who for years has pushed a discredited story.
Couch has been an advocate of the false claim that Seth Rich, a Democratic Party staffer murdered in an apparent botched robbery in Washington, DC, was the source of the stolen Democratic emails released by WikiLeaks during the 2016 election. This bizarre notion has been championed by conservatives and fringe players—and hinted at by Julian Assange—to show that Russia did not attack the 2016 election and that it was an inside job. Prominent pro-Trump conspiracy theorists Roger Stone and Jerome Corsi have echoed the baseless allegations about Rich. (Corsi later retracted and apologized for a story promoting the Rich conpsiracy theory.) As Michael Isikoff, my co-author on Russian Roulette, has reported, Couch went even further than other Seth Rich conspiracy theorists and maintained that Rich’s brother, Aaron, an IT specialist in Colorado, had plotted with Seth Rich to steal the DNC documents and sell them to WikiLeaks. (All this disinformation-pushing about Seth Rich has caused great anguish for his family.)
Of course, there is no evidence for these stories. Russian hackers pilfered the material, according to reports from the US intelligence community, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and the Republican-led intelligence committees of the House and Senate. And Moscow dumped this material as part of an operation to help Trump win the presidency. One goal of the Seth Rich conspiracy theorists has been to remove the Russian stain from Trump’s 2016 victory—to show the Trump-Russia scandal was a hoax. But after promoting this bogus tale—repeatedly highlighted by host Sean Hannity—Fox News had to retract its story. In November, Fox settled a lawsuit brought by Rich’s parents, who had claimed that the conservative cable network had engaged in “extreme and outrageous” conduct regarding its coverage of their son’s death.
Couch, though, persisted. He hounded Rich’s brother and others who had known Rich. He demanded they turn over information and laptops to his independent investigators. In 2019, facing litigation from Aaron Rich, he told a federal judge he would remove all content from his websites relating to Aaron Rich and was “willing to issue an apology to Mr. Rich.” Afterward, Couch said that he would pursue a book deal and a video series on the Seth Rich case. (Aaron Rich’s lawsuit is still pending.)
These days—no shocker—Couch is one of those pro-Trumpers claiming the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. On Saturday, he appeared at a rally of Trump supporters in Washington, DC. He assailed the Justice Department, the US Senate, and various state legislatures as “corrupt” for their supposed role in the supposed plot against Trump. He referenced a famous Thomas Jefferson quote—”The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants”—and called for the American public to “rise now” in this fight of “good versus evil.”
On Tuesday morning, Trump retweeted three tweets that Couch had sent out the previous night. Couch had been spreading conspiracy theories about the election, and he had offered advice to Trump: “The President needs to hold a press conference right after Biden speaks every single time and remind them he’s the rightful President and Winner!”
Apparently, Trump thought bird-dogging Biden this way was a good idea. He amplified this tweet and also shared Couch’s other tweets with his massive audience. Twitter placed a warning on these other two tweets, noting their claims about election fraud was “disputed.”
By now, there is not much surprising about Trump’s reckless crusade to subvert American democracy in order to overturn the election results so he can retain power. He has repeatedly lied. He has relied on lawyers and lieutenants who have peddled an assortment of fake and deceptive contentions. He has railed against reality-based Republican officials who have declared the election fair and sound. He even appears to have given Bill Barr the boot from the Justice Department after Barr, who has violated so many norms for Trump, declined to back up Trump’s claim that the election was fraudulent.
So who is Trump left with? People like Matt Couch and other leaders (if you can call him that) of the paranoid right. (Couch’s website sells a t-shirt with the logo “Cult 45,” and he explains, “Since Liberals want to call anyone who supports President Trump a Cult member, we’ll just embrace it and Trigger them even more!”) Trump’s relationship with these sorts is dangerous. Not because they are going to succeed in their mission to undo an election. It is because Trump is amplifying and legitimizing sources of profound disinformation. Couch has half a million Twitter followers. On Saturday night, he posted a video of him at Mount Vernon, the home of George Washington, discussing the “significance” of the Rich case On Monday, Couch tweeted, “Seth Rich Isn’t Going Away!!!” Now he has the cult leader’s imprimatur for his continued efforts to sling conspiracy swill.
Couch did not respond to requests for comment sent to his website and Twitter account.
In his narcissistic quest to hold on to the White House and deny his defeat, Trump is elevating conspiracy theorists and disinformation purveyors. This is adding to the poison he has been inserting into the national discourse for years. But Trump has little choice. After all, as he pushes a false and divisive narrative to serve his own political and psychological needs, his only allies are those who share his disregard for the truth.