theintercept--2020-05-04--Brazil’s President Goes to War With Democratic Institutions — and Hopes the Military Has His B

Brazil’s President Goes to War With Democratic Institutions — and Hopes the Military Has His Back

Supreme Court saboteurs !
New anti-communist constitution !
Criminalize communism !
” read one banner .
“ Military intervention with Bolsonaro , ” read another .
A protester waved a sign outside the window of a car : “ Weapons for upstanding citizens.
” Hundreds of diehard , far-right protesters were gathered on Sunday in Brasília , the capital of Brazil , to rally against the quarantine imposed to slow the spread of the coronavirus and in support of what would amount to a military coup against the legislature and judiciary .
Multiple journalists were physically attacked .
Among the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bolsonaro himself , who was also present at a similar protest two weeks earlier .
Bolsonaro and his allies have repeatedly insisted that these protests in favor of overthrowing the legislature and undermining the Supreme Court are “ spontaneous movements ” by average supporters , but the Supreme Court has opened an investigation into who is behind them .
Multiple members of Congress aligned with the president are suspected of organizing the events , including Bolsonaro ’ s sons .
Bolsonaro , who favors reopening the country against the advice of public health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone in the government who does not bend their knee to him , which includes representatives of almost every democratic institution in the country — stoking fears that Brazil is accelerating its slide toward another dictatorship .
Meanwhile , the Federal Police are investigating Bolsonaro and his politician sons for multiple suspected crimes ; his former political party has called for his impeachment ; his former Justice Minister Sergio Moro gave an eight-hour deposition to investigators alleging that the president politically interfered in law enforcement institutions ; the public prosecutor — a recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigation into Moro ’ s allegations against Bolsonaro ; Supreme Court ministers have blocked multiple actions he has attempted to take in recent days ; and the commander of the army has publicly contradicted his coronavirus denialism .
That ’ s just a sampling of the battles underway .
With the deck stacked so high against him , Bolsonaro is not signaling defeat or moderation , but rather that he is willing to go all out on his war against Brazilian democracy .
“ I pray to God that we have no problems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ limit .
There is no more conversation , from now on we will not only demand , we will make them follow the Constitution .
It will be enforced at any price , ” Bolsonaro told the admiring crowd in Brasília on Sunday , standing at the entrance of the Planalto presidential palace .
Brazilian , American , and Israeli flags flew behind him .
Bolsonaro has complained about what he feels is undue interference in his constitutionally mandated executive domain — particularly by the Supreme Court .
He later added , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to allow for any more interference .
No more patience.
” Bolsonaro addressed protesters who are explicitly advocating for the overthrow of democratic institutions , which is a crime in Brazil , where a string of military presidents ruled from 1964 to 1985 after a coup backed by the U.S. Bolsonaro and his vice president , retired Gen. Hamilton Mourão , have praised the military dictatorship throughout their careers , but Bolsonaro has gone further to even openly celebrate its widespread use of torture .
Whipped into a fervor at the rally , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assaulted journalists who were covering the protest .
Dida Sampaio , a photojournalist for O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper , was pushed to the ground , kicked , and punched by protesters who yelled , “ Trash , ” “ Get out , ” and obscenities .
Marco Pereira , a driver for the newspaper , had his legs kicked out from under him during the attack , and other journalists were verbally harassed .
The incident provoked widespread condemnation from the national journalists ’ union , news organizations , and political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not witness the attack but denied that his supporters were responsible .
“ If there was aggression , it was an infiltrator , some crazy person who should be punished , ” he said .
A political crisis erupted in Brazil late last month when Moro , the justice minister , resigned .
Leaked chats between Moro and Bolsonaro suggested that the president wanted to replace Mauricio Valeixo as head of the Federal Police to halt investigations into presidential allies .
Against Moro ’ s wishes , Bolsonaro fired Valeixo and appointed Alexandre @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligence agency , ABIN , and a close friend of his sons .
That appointment was blocked by a decision from Supreme Court Minister Alexandre de Moraes before Ramagem could be sworn in .
On Monday , Bolsonaro announced that Ramagem ’ s righthand man , Rolando Souza , would take the position and had him sworn in 20 minutes later .
Souza ’ s first act in office was to replace the superintendent of the Federal Police in Rio de Janeiro , lending credence to Moro ’ s accusations ; Rio de @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the jurisdiction where multiple investigations into his family are underway .
During the 15 months of the Bolsonaro administration , eight ministers have been fired or resigned — two in the past three weeks .
Finance Minister Paulo Guedes was also recently on the defensive after publicly disagreeing with a Bolsonaro-backed economic plan that was put forward by the military .
The president and allies are also currently pressuring Culture Minister Regina Duarte to resign .
The president is also reportedly considering the removal of the army ’ s top general , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a younger and less qualified general named Luiz Eduardo Ramos , a close adviser to Bolsonaro who is reportedly very loyal to him .
The news has rankled some in the military and led Ramos to publicly deny that the plan is being considered .
Such a move is within his power as president , but would usually entail a serious justification , not purely political considerations .
Pujol has put himself at odds with the president by calling the coronavirus pandemic “ one of the greatest challenges in our history ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its spread .
Separately , a legislative agency responsible for oversight of the executive branch requested an investigation into Bolsonaro for political interference into the military for revoking three decisions that would have increased oversight into weapons and munitions produced in Brazil , which is entirely under the purview of the military .
The day before the protest , Bolsonaro held an unscheduled meeting with top military leaders and the former military men in his cabinet to discuss the current political morass .
According to the Folha de S.Paulo newspaper , many of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overstepping its constitutional authority .
However , President of the Court José Antonio Dias Toffoli reportedly also felt that some of the rulings issued monocratically by his colleagues crossed the line into “ judicial activism.
” Bolsonaro ’ s defense minister , a retired army general , issued a statement on Monday in which he reiterated the coronavirus ’ s threat to the population and disavowed attacks on journalists , but signaled that — speaking on behalf of the organizations he oversees — he agrees that the Supreme Court is overstepping its authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and harmony between the [ branches of government ] to be essential to the governability of the country , ” the statement said .
Brazil is quickly becoming one of the global hot spots of coronavirus infections .
On Sunday , Brazil had the third-highest number of new deaths of any country in the world .
Official statistics , which are widely understood to be dramatically underreported , show that Brazil has more than 105,000 cases and 7,321 deaths from Covid-19 .
In São Paulo , black Brazilians are 62 percent more likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white peers , a clear measure of the nation ’ s rampant inequality and government ’ s failures to address it .
As The Intercept reported , due to flawed certification procedures by federal authorities , 75 percent of Covid-19 tests available in Brazil are unreliable , many of which were even denied approval to be sold in the countries in which they are manufactured .
Public health systems in many states are collapsing , and doctors are being forced to ration care .
When questioned about the situation last week , Bolsonaro @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lament it .
What do you want me to do ?
” Last month , Bolsonaro fired Health Minister Henrique Mandetta for publicly challenging him on the government ’ s response to the coronavirus pandemic and replaced him with the more complacent Nelson Teich , a health care executive and doctor .
Sen. Kátia Abreu recently said in a press conference that Teich has proven to be “ a little lost ” in his job .
“ Where is the general planning ?
” Abreu remarked .
Teich himself has admitted that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Covid-19 response and angered public health officials by limiting the already scarce access to data on the public health situation .
“ The general sentiment is frustration , ” said Rui Costa , governor of Bahia state , after a virtual meeting between governors and the new health minister .
Despite being widely criticized for his perceived inaction , Teich was able to push through an illegal measure to block Cuban doctors from returning to Brazil to help prop up collapsing regional health care systems .
In 2013 , the presidential administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of Cuban doctors to serve communities in the most remote reaches of the country , where it was difficult to attract Brazilian professionals .
Bolsonaro , who campaigned heavily against an imaginary communist threat , made clear that he would end the program after he won the presidential election in 2018 , so Cuba canceled the contract and recalled its doctors .
Some of the Cuban health care professionals stuck around , hoping to be able to continue working in Brazil outside of the intergovernmental program , but the administration has repeatedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasons .
“ I ’ m sure of one thing : We have the people on our side , we have the Armed Forces on the side of the people in the name of law , order , democracy , and freedom .
And most importantly , we have God with us , ” Bolsonaro told supporters Sunday .
At least part of the claim is false : The president ’ s approval rating has dropped to 27 percent , down 24 percentage points since he took office last January .
In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Forces and God — usually more abstruse — will have to reveal which side they are on .

“Out with Congress, Supreme Court saboteurs! New anti-communist constitution! Criminalize communism!” read one banner. “Military intervention with Bolsonaro,” read another. A protester waved a sign outside the window of a car: “Weapons for upstanding citizens.” Hundreds of diehard, far-right protesters were gathered on Sunday in Brasília, the capital of Brazil, to rally against the quarantine imposed to slow the spread of the coronavirus and in support of what would amount to a military coup against the legislature and judiciary. Multiple journalists were physically attacked. Among the speakers at the rally was President Jair Bolsonaro himself, who was also present at a similar protest two weeks earlier.
Bolsonaro and his allies have repeatedly insisted that these protests in favor of overthrowing the legislature and undermining the Supreme Court are “spontaneous movements” by average supporters, but the Supreme Court has opened an investigation into who is behind them. Multiple members of Congress aligned with the president are suspected of organizing the events, including Bolsonaro’s sons.
Bolsonaro, who favors reopening the country against the advice of public health experts, is increasingly at war with anyone in the government who does not bend their knee to him, which includes representatives of almost every democratic institution in the country — stoking fears that Brazil is accelerating its slide toward another dictatorship.
Meanwhile, the Federal Police are investigating Bolsonaro and his politician sons for multiple suspected crimes; his former political party has called for his impeachment; his former Justice Minister Sergio Moro gave an eight-hour deposition to investigators alleging that the president politically interfered in law enforcement institutions; the public prosecutor — a recent Bolsonaro appointee — has asked for an investigation into Moro’s allegations against Bolsonaro; Supreme Court ministers have blocked multiple actions he has attempted to take in recent days; and the commander of the army has publicly contradicted his coronavirus denialism. That’s just a sampling of the battles underway. With the deck stacked so high against him, Bolsonaro is not signaling defeat or moderation, but rather that he is willing to go all out on his war against Brazilian democracy.
Bolsonaro is signaling that he is willing to go all out on his war against Brazilian democracy.
“I pray to God that we have no problems this week. We have reached the limit. There is no more conversation, from now on we will not only demand, we will make them follow the Constitution. It will be enforced at any price,” Bolsonaro told the admiring crowd in Brasília on Sunday, standing at the entrance of the Planalto presidential palace. Brazilian, American, and Israeli flags flew behind him. Bolsonaro has complained about what he feels is undue interference in his constitutionally mandated executive domain — particularly by the Supreme Court. He later added, “Enough interference. We are not going to allow for any more interference. No more patience.”
Bolsonaro addressed protesters who are explicitly advocating for the overthrow of democratic institutions, which is a crime in Brazil, where a string of military presidents ruled from 1964 to 1985 after a coup backed by the U.S. Bolsonaro and his vice president, retired Gen. Hamilton Mourão, have praised the military dictatorship throughout their careers, but Bolsonaro has gone further to even openly celebrate its widespread use of torture.
Whipped into a fervor at the rally, some of Bolsonaro’s supporters physically assaulted journalists who were covering the protest. Dida Sampaio, a photojournalist for O Estado de S. Paulo newspaper, was pushed to the ground, kicked, and punched by protesters who yelled, “Trash,” “Get out,” and obscenities. Marco Pereira, a driver for the newspaper, had his legs kicked out from under him during the attack, and other journalists were verbally harassed. The incident provoked widespread condemnation from the national journalists’ union, news organizations, and political leaders. Bolsonaro later said he did not witness the attack but denied that his supporters were responsible. “If there was aggression, it was an infiltrator, some crazy person who should be punished,” he said.
Secure Power and Stifle Dissent
A political crisis erupted in Brazil late last month when Moro, the justice minister, resigned. Leaked chats between Moro and Bolsonaro suggested that the president wanted to replace Mauricio Valeixo as head of the Federal Police to halt investigations into presidential allies. Against Moro’s wishes, Bolsonaro fired Valeixo and appointed Alexandre Ramagem, director of Brazil’s intelligence agency, ABIN, and a close friend of his sons. That appointment was blocked by a decision from Supreme Court Minister Alexandre de Moraes before Ramagem could be sworn in. On Monday, Bolsonaro announced that Ramagem’s righthand man, Rolando Souza, would take the position and had him sworn in 20 minutes later. Souza’s first act in office was to replace the superintendent of the Federal Police in Rio de Janeiro, lending credence to Moro’s accusations; Rio de Janeiro is Bolsonaro’s home state and the jurisdiction where multiple investigations into his family are underway.
During the 15 months of the Bolsonaro administration, eight ministers have been fired or resigned — two in the past three weeks. Finance Minister Paulo Guedes was also recently on the defensive after publicly disagreeing with a Bolsonaro-backed economic plan that was put forward by the military. The president and allies are also currently pressuring Culture Minister Regina Duarte to resign.
During the 15 months of the Bolsonaro administration, eight ministers have been fired or resigned — two in the past three weeks.
The president is also reportedly considering the removal of the army’s top general, Edson Leal Pujol, to replace him with a younger and less qualified general named Luiz Eduardo Ramos, a close adviser to Bolsonaro who is reportedly very loyal to him. The news has rankled some in the military and led Ramos to publicly deny that the plan is being considered. Such a move is within his power as president, but would usually entail a serious justification, not purely political considerations. Pujol has put himself at odds with the president by calling the coronavirus pandemic “one of the greatest challenges in our history” and defending social isolation measures to limit its spread.
Separately, a legislative agency responsible for oversight of the executive branch requested an investigation into Bolsonaro for political interference into the military for revoking three decisions that would have increased oversight into weapons and munitions produced in Brazil, which is entirely under the purview of the military.
The day before the protest, Bolsonaro held an unscheduled meeting with top military leaders and the former military men in his cabinet to discuss the current political morass. According to the Folha de S.Paulo newspaper, many of the generals agreed that the court was overstepping its constitutional authority. However, President of the Court José Antonio Dias Toffoli reportedly also felt that some of the rulings issued monocratically by his colleagues crossed the line into “judicial activism.”
Bolsonaro’s defense minister, a retired army general, issued a statement on Monday in which he reiterated the coronavirus’s threat to the population and disavowed attacks on journalists, but signaled that — speaking on behalf of the organizations he oversees — he agrees that the Supreme Court is overstepping its authority. The Armed Forces “consider independence and harmony between the [branches of government] to be essential to the governability of the country,” the statement said.
Flat-Footed Response
Brazil is quickly becoming one of the global hot spots of coronavirus infections. On Sunday, Brazil had the third-highest number of new deaths of any country in the world. Official statistics, which are widely understood to be dramatically underreported, show that Brazil has more than 105,000 cases and 7,321 deaths from Covid-19. In São Paulo, black Brazilians are 62 percent more likely to die from the disease than their white peers, a clear measure of the nation’s rampant inequality and government’s failures to address it.
As The Intercept reported, due to flawed certification procedures by federal authorities, 75 percent of Covid-19 tests available in Brazil are unreliable, many of which were even denied approval to be sold in the countries in which they are manufactured. Public health systems in many states are collapsing, and doctors are being forced to ration care. When questioned about the situation last week, Bolsonaro said, “So what? I lament it. What do you want me to do?”
Share Your Coronavirus Story Click here to learn about contacting a reporter securely, or email us at coronavirus@theintercept.com
Last month, Bolsonaro fired Health Minister Henrique Mandetta for publicly challenging him on the government’s response to the coronavirus pandemic and replaced him with the more complacent Nelson Teich, a health care executive and doctor. Sen. Kátia Abreu recently said in a press conference that Teich has proven to be “a little lost” in his job. “Where is the general planning?” Abreu remarked. Teich himself has admitted that the country is “navigating blind” in its Covid-19 response and angered public health officials by limiting the already scarce access to data on the public health situation. “The general sentiment is frustration,” said Rui Costa, governor of Bahia state, after a virtual meeting between governors and the new health minister.
Despite being widely criticized for his perceived inaction, Teich was able to push through an illegal measure to block Cuban doctors from returning to Brazil to help prop up collapsing regional health care systems. In 2013, the presidential administration of Dilma Rousseff began to bring in thousands of Cuban doctors to serve communities in the most remote reaches of the country, where it was difficult to attract Brazilian professionals. Bolsonaro, who campaigned heavily against an imaginary communist threat, made clear that he would end the program after he won the presidential election in 2018, so Cuba canceled the contract and recalled its doctors. Some of the Cuban health care professionals stuck around, hoping to be able to continue working in Brazil outside of the intergovernmental program, but the administration has repeatedly blocked them from getting certified for ideological reasons.
“I’m sure of one thing: We have the people on our side, we have the Armed Forces on the side of the people in the name of law, order, democracy, and freedom. And most importantly, we have God with us,” Bolsonaro told supporters Sunday. At least part of the claim is false: The president’s approval rating has dropped to 27 percent, down 24 percentage points since he took office last January. In the coming weeks and months, the Armed Forces and God — usually more abstruse — will have to reveal which side they are on.


theintercept--2020-05-04--Trump Fires Inspector General Ahead of Damning Whistleblower Complaint About Bogus Coronavirus Cures

Rick Bright was in the process of filing what promises to be a damning whistleblower complaint to the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services , President Donald Trump announced that he was firing the inspector general , Christi Grimm , and nominating a handpicked replacement .
Two weeks ago , Bright , who , as deputy assistant secretary for preparedness and response for HHS , oversaw the government ’ s purchase and funding of vaccines , treatments , and tests for the coronavirus , said he had been forced out of his job because he refused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unproven treatments for Covid-19 .
“ I believe this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically vetted solutions , and not in drugs , vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit , ” wrote in a statement released by his lawyers , as The Intercept reported at the time .
Grimm became inspector general in January and came under attack from Trump after her office published a report pointing out severe shortages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a tweet , Trump called the report , which was based on interviews with hospital administrators from 323 hospitals in 46 states , the District of Columbia , and Puerto Rico , “ another Fake Dossier ” because Grimm had worked for the Obama administration .
In fact , while she did serve under Barack Obama , Grimm , who been in the IG ’ s office since 1999 , has also worked for the administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush .
Trump ’ s nominee to replace Grimm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anticipated whistleblower report from Bright is expected to focus on hydroxychloroquine , a drug that Trump hyped as a “ game changer ” but that was found in a Veterans Affairs study to be of no clinical benefit to coronavirus patients , and actually increased their chances of death .
While Trump ’ s enthusiasm , which sent online demand for the drug surging 1,000 percent , has since fizzled , he has now put his faith in another drug : Gilead Pharmaceutical ’ s remdesivir .
On Friday , Trump met with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announce that the Food and Drug Administration would be giving the drug emergency use authorization as a treatment for Covid-19 .
“ We ’ re going to be having some really incredible results , ” Trump predicted .
While incredible results usually precede FDA authorization , with remdesivir , that has changed .
The decision was made based on a single study , the results of which have yet to be made public in their entirety but are said to show that Covid-19 patients who received the drug tended to recover more quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it was modest and only about the amount of time it took patients to recover ; those who took the drug recovered in 11 days as opposed to 15 for those who didn ’ t take the drug .
There was no significant improvement in survival rates , as some virologists have pointed out : Eight percent of patients on the drug died , compared to 11.6 percent of patients who didn ’ t take it .
And while several other trials of the drug have yet to be made public , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was no benefit either in terms of mortality or the length of time it took for patient to recover .
In the Chinese study , 12 percent of patients who were taking remdesivir had to stop because of adverse reactions to the drug , some of which were life-threatening .
The approval comes as Gilead , which paid out $ 874 million in cash dividends to shareholders and made $ 1.3 billion in stock buybacks in the first quarter of this year , has sharply increased its lobbying .
The company , whose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a member of the White House coronavirus task force , spent $ 2.45 million on lobbying in the first quarter of 2020 , up from $ 1.86 million in the first quarter of last year .
In March , Gilead sought and was granted orphan drug status for remdesivir , a designation reserved for treatments of rare diseases that would have given several benefits , including the ability to profit exclusively from the product for seven years .
The company later reversed course .
On Friday , Gilead announced that it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drug to the government .
According to tax law , tax deductions for such charitable donations are generally capped at 10 percent of a corporation ’ s income .
Gilead did not respond to an inquiry about whether it would seek a deduction for its contribution .
Now that remdesivir has emergency approval , questions have turned to its pricing .
While the cost of producing a 10-day course of the drug is estimated at $ 9.32 , according to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review , it could be priced at @ @ @ @ @

On Friday, while Rick Bright was in the process of filing what promises to be a damning whistleblower complaint to the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services, President Donald Trump announced that he was firing the inspector general, Christi Grimm, and nominating a handpicked replacement.
Two weeks ago, Bright, who, as deputy assistant secretary for preparedness and response for HHS, oversaw the government’s purchase and funding of vaccines, treatments, and tests for the coronavirus, said he had been forced out of his job because he refused to cave to pressure to adopt scientifically unproven treatments for Covid-19.
“I believe this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically vetted solutions, and not in drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit,” wrote in a statement released by his lawyers, as The Intercept reported at the time.
Grimm became inspector general in January and came under attack from Trump after her office published a report pointing out severe shortages of testing supplies and personal protective equipment. In a tweet, Trump called the report, which was based on interviews with hospital administrators from 323 hospitals in 46 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, “another Fake Dossier” because Grimm had worked for the Obama administration. In fact, while she did serve under Barack Obama, Grimm, who been in the IG’s office since 1999, has also worked for the administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Trump’s nominee to replace Grimm is attorney Jason Weida.
The highly anticipated whistleblower report from Bright is expected to focus on hydroxychloroquine, a drug that Trump hyped as a “game changer.”
The highly anticipated whistleblower report from Bright is expected to focus on hydroxychloroquine, a drug that Trump hyped as a “game changer” but that was found in a Veterans Affairs study to be of no clinical benefit to coronavirus patients, and actually increased their chances of death. While Trump’s enthusiasm, which sent online demand for the drug surging 1,000 percent, has since fizzled, he has now put his faith in another drug: Gilead Sciences’ remdesivir. On Friday, Trump met with Gilead CEO Dan O’Day to announce that the Food and Drug Administration would be giving the drug emergency use authorization as a treatment for Covid-19.
“We’re going to be having some really incredible results,” Trump predicted.
While incredible results usually precede FDA authorization, with remdesivir, that has changed. The decision was made based on a single study, the results of which have yet to be made public in their entirety but are said to show that Covid-19 patients who received the drug tended to recover more quickly. While the study showed a benefit, it was modest and only about the amount of time it took patients to recover; those who took the drug recovered in 11 days as opposed to 15 for those who didn’t take the drug. There was no significant improvement in survival rates, as some virologists have pointed out: Eight percent of patients on the drug died, compared to 11.6 percent of patients who didn’t take it. And while several other trials of the drug have yet to be made public, a recent Chinese study found that there was no benefit either in terms of mortality or the length of time it took for patient to recover. In the Chinese study, 12 percent of patients who were taking remdesivir had to stop because of adverse reactions to the drug, some of which were life-threatening.
The approval comes as Gilead, which paid out $874 million in cash dividends to shareholders and made $1.3 billion in stock buybacks in the first quarter of this year, has sharply increased its lobbying. The company, whose former top lobbyist, Joe Grogan, is a member of the White House coronavirus task force, spent $2.45 million on lobbying in the first quarter of 2020, up from $1.86 million in the first quarter of last year.
In March, Gilead sought and was granted orphan drug status for remdesivir, a designation reserved for treatments of rare diseases that would have given several benefits, including the ability to profit exclusively from the product for seven years. The company later reversed course. On Friday, Gilead announced that it would be donating 1.5 million doses of the drug to the government. According to tax law, tax deductions for such charitable donations are generally capped at 10 percent of a corporation’s income. Gilead did not respond to an inquiry about whether it would seek a deduction for its contribution.
Now that remdesivir has emergency approval, questions have turned to its pricing. While the cost of producing a 10-day course of the drug is estimated at $9.32, according to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, it could be priced at $4,500 or more.


theintercept--2020-05-04--Ocasio-Cortez Challenger Left Her Job as CNBC Anchor to Serve on Board of Company That Profits From

Ocasio-Cortez Challenger Left Her Job as CNBC Anchor to Serve on Board of Company That Profits From Death

Caruso-Cabrera explained her decision to join GWG ’ s board in a farewell segment on CNBC .
“ We talk so much about corporate governance on CNBC ; we criticize it a lot , right ?
” she said .
“ And I have thought , you know , the next step should maybe be corporate governance because boards need help.
” Last April , GWG Holdings announced that it was expanding its partnership with Beneficent , replacing most of its board with Beneficient ’ s current board of directors .
An SEC filing shows that Caruso-Cabrera joined GWG ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couple months later , she was awarded 8,169 restricted stock units of GWG Holdings , according to filings .
In September 2018 , Caruso-Cabrera left her full-time position as an anchor at CNBC to join the board of directors at Beneficient Group , a Dallas-based company that lends money to ultrawealthy Americans who need it fast by turning nonliquid assets into cash .
Beneficient is funded by GWG Holdings , a Minneapolis-based life insurance investor that poured nearly $ 1 billion into the company in a 2018 transaction .
Before Michelle Caruso-Cabrera launched @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York , she was on the board of directors of GWG Holdings , a life settlement company that makes money off life insurance policies purchased primarily from seniors , the terminally ill , and those unable to afford it for less than face value , turning a profit when the beneficiary dies .
On February 21 , Caruso-Cabrera resigned from her board positions to run for Congress , according to SEC filings .
She has positioned herself as a moderate , pro-business Democrat in the race , accusing Ocasio-Cortez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with her constituents and not actually being working class .
Caruso-Cabrera , who lived in a high-priced apartment in Trump International Hotel and Tower in Manhattan for years , told Business Insider that Ocasio-Cortez “ doesn ’ t know what it takes to put food on the table and to put a roof over the head of a family.
” Ocasio-Cortez , in fact , took on multiple jobs after graduating college to help her family make ends meet , working 18-hour days to supplement her mother ’ s income as a housecleaner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawmaker has described .
Caruso-Cabrera ’ s campaign quickly picked up support among corporate interests , receiving early donations from dozens of prominent private-equity executives and investment bankers , as The Intercept previously reported .
Notably , her bid is being backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce , a powerful conservative lobbying group that has poured millions into electing Republicans .
( Caruso-Cabrera was herself a Republican until a few years ago . )
Caruso-Cabrera was making public appearances on behalf of Beneficient as recently as this year .
In January , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remained a contributor after quitting her staff job , as a Beneficient board member , discussing Goldman Sachs Group Inc. ’ s pledge to increase diversity on corporate boards on “ Squawk Box.
” known as “ viatical settlements , ” grew in the 1980s during the height of the AIDS epidemic .
The New York Times described the niche industry in a 2017 article as such : If a life-settlement company likes its odds of turning a profit , it will buy the policy , paying out more than the policy ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the policy were canceled — but less than the face value , or death benefit .
The firm acquires the policy and continues paying the premiums .
Then the company ( or a big investor who buys bundles of policies ) collects when the seller dies .
It ’ s something like a reverse mortgage , but on your life instead of your house .
GWG Holdings , which has a portfolio of more than $ 2 billion , entered the life settlement business in 2006 .
The firm reported in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hold a portfolio of life insurance policies , but would no longer be purchasing additional policies .
Its subsidiary , GWG Life told the New York Times that it “ works with nursing homes and assisted living chains to reach people contemplating the daunting costs of long-term care.
” Life settlement companies offer larger payments to people they expect will die soon — the sooner they die , the quicker the payout .
( GWG has referred to profits from policy holder deaths as “ policy realizations ” and portfolio “ seasoning.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Holdings has used biological specimens to reach more accurate life expectancy estimates .
“ GWG has been sending out cheek-swabbing kits , to capture saliva , to prospective policy sellers since February , ” a 2017 Forbes article said .
Life Epigenetics , which is owned by GWG Holdings , is “ working to commercialize epigenetic technology for the life insurance and related industries , ” according to the company ’ s website .
In 2018 , GWG collected DNA from Minneapolis residents , paying $ 100 for blood , urine , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life expectancy .
The Star Tribune reported at the time that Scientific Testing Partners , which is owned by Life Epigenetics , sought 1,000 participants for its collection of genetic information .
A company spokesperson told The Intercept that the subsidiary of GWG that was involved in epigenetic research was spun out last year and is operating as a separate company .
The firm also endorsed a 2018 bill that would have allowed seniors , regardless of health status , to sell their life insurance policies and set aside the proceeds in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care costs , including long-term care .
In a press release , GWG , which stood to benefit from incentivizing seniors to sell their life insurance policies , suggested that by keeping seniors off Medicaid for their long-term care , the bill would potentially “ save taxpayers as much as $ 2 billion over the next nine years.
” The bill floundered in the House with only two sponsors .
Asked about Caruso-Cabrera ’ s involvement with GWG , and whether she supports that bill , campaign spokesperson Katy Delgado said , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first Latinas to serve on the board of a financial services company .
When elected to Congress , Michelle will work with all of her congressional colleagues to write and pass bills to ensure seniors are not forgotten .
”

Before Michelle Caruso-Cabrera launched a conservative primary challenge against Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York, she was on the board of directors of GWG Holdings, a life settlement company that makes money off life insurance policies purchased primarily from seniors, the terminally ill, and those unable to afford it for less than face value, turning a profit when the beneficiary dies.
In September 2018, Caruso-Cabrera left her full-time position as an anchor at CNBC to join the board of directors at Beneficient Group, a Dallas-based company that lends money to ultrawealthy Americans who need it fast by turning nonliquid assets into cash. Beneficient is funded by GWG Holdings, a Minneapolis-based life insurance investor that poured nearly $1 billion into the company in a 2018 transaction.
Last April, GWG Holdings announced that it was expanding its partnership with Beneficent, replacing most of its board with Beneficient’s current board of directors. An SEC filing shows that Caruso-Cabrera joined GWG’s board that same day. A couple months later, she was awarded 8,169 restricted stock units of GWG Holdings, according to filings.
Caruso-Cabrera explained her decision to join GWG’s board in a farewell segment on CNBC. “We talk so much about corporate governance on CNBC; we criticize it a lot, right?” she said. “And I have thought, you know, the next step should maybe be corporate governance because boards need help.”
On February 21, Caruso-Cabrera resigned from her board positions to run for Congress, according to SEC filings. She has positioned herself as a moderate, pro-business Democrat in the race, accusing Ocasio-Cortez of being “out of touch” with her constituents and not actually being working class. Caruso-Cabrera, who lived in a high-priced apartment in Trump International Hotel and Tower in Manhattan for years, told Business Insider that Ocasio-Cortez “doesn’t know what it takes to put food on the table and to put a roof over the head of a family.” Ocasio-Cortez, in fact, took on multiple jobs after graduating college to help her family make ends meet, working 18-hour days to supplement her mother’s income as a housecleaner and bus driver, as the freshman lawmaker has described.
Caruso-Cabrera’s campaign quickly picked up support among corporate interests, receiving early donations from dozens of prominent private-equity executives and investment bankers, as The Intercept previously reported. Notably, her bid is being backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a powerful conservative lobbying group that has poured millions into electing Republicans. (Caruso-Cabrera was herself a Republican until a few years ago.)
Caruso-Cabrera was making public appearances on behalf of Beneficient as recently as this year. In January, she appeared on CNBC, where she remained a contributor after quitting her staff job, as a Beneficient board member, discussing Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s pledge to increase diversity on corporate boards on “Squawk Box.”
Life settlements, also known as “viatical settlements,” grew in the 1980s during the height of the AIDS epidemic. The New York Times described the niche industry in a 2017 article as such:
If a life-settlement company likes its odds of turning a profit, it will buy the policy, paying out more than the policy’s cash value — the amount received if the policy were canceled — but less than the face value, or death benefit. The firm acquires the policy and continues paying the premiums. Then the company (or a big investor who buys bundles of policies) collects when the seller dies. It’s something like a reverse mortgage, but on your life instead of your house.
GWG Holdings, which has a portfolio of more than $2 billion, entered the life settlement business in 2006. The firm reported in a 2019 SEC filing that it continues to hold a portfolio of life insurance policies, but would no longer be purchasing additional policies. Its subsidiary, GWG Life told the New York Times that it “works with nursing homes and assisted living chains to reach people contemplating the daunting costs of long-term care.” Life settlement companies offer larger payments to people they expect will die soon — the sooner they die, the quicker the payout. (GWG has referred to profits from policy holder deaths as “policy realizations” and portfolio “seasoning.”)
To boost its profits, GWG Holdings has used biological specimens to reach more accurate life expectancy estimates. “GWG has been sending out cheek-swabbing kits, to capture saliva, to prospective policy sellers since February,” a 2017 Forbes article said. Life Epigenetics, which is owned by GWG Holdings, is “working to commercialize epigenetic technology for the life insurance and related industries,” according to the company’s website. In 2018, GWG collected DNA from Minneapolis residents, paying $100 for blood, urine, and saliva samples to expand its research into life expectancy. The Star Tribune reported at the time that Scientific Testing Partners, which is owned by Life Epigenetics, sought 1,000 participants for its collection of genetic information. A company spokesperson told The Intercept that the subsidiary of GWG that was involved in epigenetic research was spun out last year and is operating as a separate company.
The firm also endorsed a 2018 bill that would have allowed seniors, regardless of health status, to sell their life insurance policies and set aside the proceeds in a tax-free account to pay for some health care costs, including long-term care. In a press release, GWG, which stood to benefit from incentivizing seniors to sell their life insurance policies, suggested that by keeping seniors off Medicaid for their long-term care, the bill would potentially “save taxpayers as much as $2 billion over the next nine years.” The bill floundered in the House with only two sponsors.
Asked about Caruso-Cabrera’s involvement with GWG, and whether she supports that bill, campaign spokesperson Katy Delgado said, “Michelle was proud to be one of the first Latinas to serve on the board of a financial services company. When elected to Congress, Michelle will work with all of her congressional colleagues to write and pass bills to ensure seniors are not forgotten.”


theintercept--2020-05-05--“Capital in the 21st Century”: Finally, a Movie That Tells the Story of How We Got Into This Mess

That makes it unique in popular culture , particularly since it does so not in a dry monotone but often via clips from movies .
The story of capitalism is the central reality of everyone ’ s life .
But it isn ’ t taught in high school .
It ’ s not on TV .
That ’ s truly bizarre if you think about it , yet , as Tett has explained elsewhere , it ’ s unlikely that you will .
All societies maintain what anthropologists call “ social silence ” about the society ’ s most significant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what matters most “ is not discussed because those topics are considered boring , irrelevant , taboo , or just unthinkable.
” There are many other documentaries about the same subject as “ Capital in the 21 st Century ” — i.e.
, the rise of the 0.1 percent and the fall of everyone else .
They ’ re mostly a barrage of graphs and numbers that make you feel like you drank three Heinekens at lunch and want to take a nap .
“ Capital ” doesn ’ t do this .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the centurieslong story of capitalism .
“ Capital in the 21 st Century ” is based on the bestselling 2013 book by Thomas Piketty , a French economist .
The film , directed by Justin Pemberton , undermines that core power of the world ’ s elites — shaping how we think — in a particularly wise , sneaky way .
You may have heard this from a million rose emoji Twitter accounts .
But it sounds different coming from Gillian Tett at the beginning of a new documentary , “ Capital in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ released online .
Tett is the chair of the U.S. editorial board of the Financial Times , the salmon-colored international business newspaper read by Deutsche Bank vice presidents from London to Dubai to Singapore .
( Every month FT publishes a magazine called “ How to Spend It.
” ) “ The way the elite stays in power , and passes on their privilege to the next generation , is by shaping the way that we think.
” “ Capital in the 21st Century ” understands that the daily facts about capitalism seem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most people because they ’ re not part of a story .
They ’ re like baseball scores when you don ’ t know anything about baseball ’ s rules or teams or history .
But understanding the story of capitalism is like understanding all of that about baseball , plus having a team to root for , and realizing that , if your team loses , you ’ re going to die .
This makes the business section much more exciting .
The movie starts by going back to the period 250 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ via the Industrial Revolution .
Until then Europe was feudal , with a swarm of kings , dukes , earls , and marquessates holding most of the wealth in the form of land .
But factories generated new , insurgent wealth .
Both the American and French revolutions were in part fights between old feudal elites and a new business elite struggling to be born .
And while the old and new elites disagreed on who should be in charge , they both agreed that regular people shouldn ’ t be .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Communist Manifesto in 1848 acknowledged the accomplishments of the business class .
“ The bourgeoisie , ” Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote , “ has been the first to show what man ’ s activity can bring about .
It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids , Roman aqueducts , and Gothic cathedrals.
” The problem was that in the pursuit of profit , capitalism also generated spectacular new forms of exploitation .
“ Capital in the 21st Century ” spends time on examples such as the massive expansion of slavery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and “ master and servant ” laws in the United Kingdom that made it illegal for workers to quit .
The movie ’ s key point about this time is that unbound capitalism made countries richer overall , but there was nothing inherent in it that improved life for regular people .
In fact , it was in many ways worse for them than when they were governed by lords and ladies .
Piketty explains that by 1914 in Paris , the top 1 percent owned 70 percent of all wealth , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing .
In the face of this raw brutality , all kinds of alternatives , from communism to socialism to Georgism , gained adherents across Europe .
Capitalists were petrified .
What could they do that wouldn ’ t require them to share any wealth or power ?
“ You have this rise in nationalism and competition between European countries , ” Piketty says .
“ Nationalism is often used by elites to make people forget class conflict and instead focus on national identity.
” It can be debated the degree to which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s rulers to distract from their failures .
If present-day politics are anything to go by , they likely knew exactly what they were doing .
A recent GOP memo for Republican officeholders on how to deal with their coronavirus faceplant told them “ don ’ t defend Trump ” — since he ’ s indefensible — but “ attack China.
” In any case , when World War I came , Europe ’ s leaders thought it was exactly what they needed .
A British politician declared England was “ at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Germany ’ s Kaiser was just as happy , proclaiming , “ I see no parties anymore , I see only Germans.
” The war was such a catastrophe that it generated exactly what Europe ’ s elites feared most : a communist revolution .
Germany ’ s cunning plan to send Vladimir Lenin back to Russia in 1917 was history ’ s greatest own goal , leading directly to the Soviet army occupying Berlin 28 years later .
As “ Capital ” explains , it was only with the worldwide slaughter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was willing to make some changes .
First of all , the upper class had literally blown up much of its capital , and its power was at a low ebb .
Moreover , as Stanford political science professor Francis Fukuyama points out , they were genuinely concerned about losing everything : “ The existence of the communist alternative scared the capitalist world into thinking if it didn ’ t at least address some of the basic inequality issues that they would lose the battle of ideas .
… Unless the state tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do enough redistribution to keep people from starving , you wouldn ’ t have basic social stability.
” This worked .
For about 30 years , the film says , societies realized that “ capitalism must be harnessed like some wild horse.
” This period saw huge increases in wealth for regular workers , and the first widespread middle class in history .
This lasted long enough that many people began to believe this was capitalism ’ s natural state , and earlier times had been an aberration .
But as World War @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mounted a counterattack with the elections of Ronald Reagan in the U.S. and Margaret Thatcher in the U.K. Their message was that the problem of the 20th century hadn ’ t been the refusal of capitalism to compromise with human beings , but instead the problem was the few compromises capitalism did make .
The wholesale collapse of communism emboldened capitalism further .
With hindsight , it now appears that the decades of middle-class capitalism after World War II was the aberration , and since at least the 1990s we ’ ve been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is what frightens Piketty : that we ’ re poised to rerun the 20th century in some hideously mutated form .
“ There are always politicians tempted to exploit the rising inequality , ” he says .
“ You could see this very clearly in the world before 1914 .
And I ’ m very afraid at the beginning of the 21st century , that because we feel we can not regulate international capitalism , we can not properly tax billionaires and multinationals , instead we vent our anger ” at other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is now even clearer than when the movie was filmed , as Congress and the Trump administration use the novel coronavirus as an excuse for “ just shoveling money to rich people ” via complicated but extremely lucrative tax breaks .
That ’ s where the story of “ Capital in the 21st Century ” ends .
“ People on the streets are starting to say , enough .
Enough of the inequality , and enough of not having a story about how this ever gets better , ” says journalist Paul Mason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but limited suggestions for this kind of story about the future .
But they ’ ve done a huge service to everyone by helping us see how we got to where we are today , which is the first step to figuring out where we want to go next .

“The way the elite stays in power, and passes on their privilege to the next generation, is by shaping the way that we think.”
You may have heard this from a million rose emoji Twitter accounts. But it sounds different coming from Gillian Tett at the beginning of a new documentary, “Capital in the 21st Century,” just released online. Tett is the chair of the U.S. editorial board of the Financial Times, the salmon-colored international business newspaper read by Deutsche Bank vice presidents from London to Dubai to Singapore. (Every month FT publishes a magazine called “How to Spend It.”)
“Capital in the 21st Century” is based on the bestselling 2013 book by Thomas Piketty, a French economist. The film, directed by Justin Pemberton, undermines that core power of the world’s elites — shaping how we think — in a particularly wise, sneaky way.
There are many other documentaries about the same subject as “Capital in the 21st Century” — i.e., the rise of the 0.1 percent and the fall of everyone else. They’re mostly a barrage of graphs and numbers that make you feel like you drank three Heinekens at lunch and want to take a nap. “Capital” doesn’t do this. Instead it just tells a story, the centurieslong story of capitalism.
That makes it unique in popular culture, particularly since it does so not in a dry monotone but often via clips from movies. The story of capitalism is the central reality of everyone’s life. But it isn’t taught in high school. It’s not on TV. That’s truly bizarre if you think about it, yet, as Tett has explained elsewhere, it’s unlikely that you will. All societies maintain what anthropologists call “social silence” about the society’s most significant subjects. As Tett puts it, what matters most “is not discussed because those topics are considered boring, irrelevant, taboo, or just unthinkable.”
“Capital in the 21st Century” understands that the daily facts about capitalism seem boring, irrelevant, etc., to most people because they’re not part of a story. They’re like baseball scores when you don’t know anything about baseball’s rules or teams or history. But understanding the story of capitalism is like understanding all of that about baseball, plus having a team to root for, and realizing that, if your team loses, you’re going to die. This makes the business section much more exciting.
The movie starts by going back to the period 250 years ago when capitalism first gained momentum via the Industrial Revolution. Until then Europe was feudal, with a swarm of kings, dukes, earls, and marquessates holding most of the wealth in the form of land.
But factories generated new, insurgent wealth. Both the American and French revolutions were in part fights between old feudal elites and a new business elite struggling to be born. And while the old and new elites disagreed on who should be in charge, they both agreed that regular people shouldn’t be.
While no one remembers this, even the Communist Manifesto in 1848 acknowledged the accomplishments of the business class. “The bourgeoisie,” Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote, “has been the first to show what man’s activity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals.”
The problem was that in the pursuit of profit, capitalism also generated spectacular new forms of exploitation. “Capital in the 21st Century” spends time on examples such as the massive expansion of slavery, the murderous rampages of European colonialism, and “master and servant” laws in the United Kingdom that made it illegal for workers to quit. The movie’s key point about this time is that unbound capitalism made countries richer overall, but there was nothing inherent in it that improved life for regular people. In fact, it was in many ways worse for them than when they were governed by lords and ladies.
Piketty explains that by 1914 in Paris, the top 1 percent owned 70 percent of all wealth, and two-thirds of the population died with nothing. In the face of this raw brutality, all kinds of alternatives, from communism to socialism to Georgism, gained adherents across Europe. Capitalists were petrified. What could they do that wouldn’t require them to share any wealth or power?
“You have this rise in nationalism and competition between European countries,” Piketty says. “Nationalism is often used by elites to make people forget class conflict and instead focus on national identity.”
It can be debated the degree to which berserk nationalism was consciously stoked by Europe’s rulers to distract from their failures. If present-day politics are anything to go by, they likely knew exactly what they were doing. A recent GOP memo for Republican officeholders on how to deal with their coronavirus faceplant told them “don’t defend Trump” — since he’s indefensible — but “attack China.”
In any case, when World War I came, Europe’s leaders thought it was exactly what they needed. A British politician declared England was “at war quite irrespective of party or class.” Germany’s Kaiser was just as happy, proclaiming, “I see no parties anymore, I see only Germans.”
The war was such a catastrophe that it generated exactly what Europe’s elites feared most: a communist revolution. Germany’s cunning plan to send Vladimir Lenin back to Russia in 1917 was history’s greatest own goal, leading directly to the Soviet army occupying Berlin 28 years later.
As “Capital” explains, it was only with the worldwide slaughter of the Second World War that capitalism was willing to make some changes. First of all, the upper class had literally blown up much of its capital, and its power was at a low ebb. Moreover, as Stanford political science professor Francis Fukuyama points out, they were genuinely concerned about losing everything: “The existence of the communist alternative scared the capitalist world into thinking if it didn’t at least address some of the basic inequality issues that they would lose the battle of ideas. … Unless the state tried to do something about jobs, and do enough redistribution to keep people from starving, you wouldn’t have basic social stability.”
This worked. For about 30 years, the film says, societies realized that “capitalism must be harnessed like some wild horse.” This period saw huge increases in wealth for regular workers, and the first widespread middle class in history.
This lasted long enough that many people began to believe this was capitalism’s natural state, and earlier times had been an aberration. But as World War II receded into the distance, capitalism mounted a counterattack with the elections of Ronald Reagan in the U.S. and Margaret Thatcher in the U.K. Their message was that the problem of the 20th century hadn’t been the refusal of capitalism to compromise with human beings, but instead the problem was the few compromises capitalism did make.
The wholesale collapse of communism emboldened capitalism further. With hindsight, it now appears that the decades of middle-class capitalism after World War II was the aberration, and since at least the 1990s we’ve been returning to capitalism’s norm.
This is what frightens Piketty: that we’re poised to rerun the 20th century in some hideously mutated form. “There are always politicians tempted to exploit the rising inequality,” he says. “You could see this very clearly in the world before 1914. And I’m very afraid at the beginning of the 21st century, that because we feel we cannot regulate international capitalism, we cannot properly tax billionaires and multinationals, instead we vent our anger” at other targets. The danger of misdirected rage is now even clearer than when the movie was filmed, as Congress and the Trump administration use the novel coronavirus as an excuse for “just shoveling money to rich people” via complicated but extremely lucrative tax breaks.
That’s where the story of “Capital in the 21st Century” ends. “People on the streets are starting to say, enough. Enough of the inequality, and enough of not having a story about how this ever gets better,” says journalist Paul Mason. The movie and Piketty have real but limited suggestions for this kind of story about the future. But they’ve done a huge service to everyone by helping us see how we got to where we are today, which is the first step to figuring out where we want to go next.


theintercept--2020-05-05--The Inventors of Bluetooth Say There Could Be Problems Using Their Tech for Coronavirus Contact Trac

The Inventors of Bluetooth Say There Could Be Problems Using Their Tech for Coronavirus Contact Tracing

much of its life ignobly associated with crummy headphones , byzantine connection procedures , and car stereo systems that never quite seem to work right .
Now this wireless technology concocted in the ’ 90s to help PCs and mobile phones communicate is being asked to step up and save the planet from a global pandemic .
According to its two co-inventors , there could be some issues .
Named for the 10th century king Harald “ Bluetooth ” Gormsson , famous in Scandinavia for uniting ( and Christianizing ) the Danes , the humble , oft-derided wireless technology included @ @ @ @ @ @ @ device from the past decade and beyond is central to coronavirus contact tracing apps pushed by Apple , Google , and governments across the world .
Banking on the standard ’ s ubiquity , and considerably improved reliability since the ’ 90s , these entities hope to turn billions of Bluetooth-enabled devices into an army of public health automatons that can map anyone who came into contact with someone who tests positive for Covid-19 .
Although the exact plans for using Bluetooth vary between governments , the gist is simple : In order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friend ’ s Bluetooth speaker , it has to essentially shout its existence into the electromagnetic spectrum , sending repeated radio messages that announce that the device is turned on and willing to pair with another .
It ’ s exactly these short , repeating radio wave bursts that tech companies and public health authorities hope can be used for contact tracing , by collecting an anonymized record of every Bluetooth announcement within a certain range .
If one of these “ HELLO , I AM BLUETOOTH !
” messages ends up coming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Covid-19 , the hope is that anyone else whose phone was able to detect that message could then be alerted and tested ( or treated ) accordingly .
It ’ s a fine , if somewhat ambitious , plan on paper , and the Apple/Google partnership is already drawing generally positive commentary from the privacy and civil liberties-minded set for its efforts to mask the identity of a Bluetooth device ’ s owner .
But like many great paper plans , the fundamental nature of the universe presents some complications .
Underneath @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just radio waves , the same chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum that allows for FM radio , Wi-Fi , and cell phones .
And if you ’ ve ever used of these things , you know that getting a reliable signal can be a challenge even under seemingly ideal conditions .
That ’ s because radio waves don ’ t just teleport from transmitter to receiver , but get bonked around and absorbed by objects in the way : Trees , houses , dogs and cats , cars , brick walls , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Bluetooth signal , affecting the strength of that signal when it reaches its destination or stopping it from getting there entirely .
Given that Google and Apple ’ s Bluetooth contact tracing relies on using the strength of a received signal ( Received Signal Strength Indication , or RSSI ) to determine whether you were within coughing distance of a Covid-19 patient that time you walked to the grocery store , this could be a serious problem .
Swarun Kumar , a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Carnegie Mellon University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) that environmental factors could make a Bluetooth device that ’ s 2 meters away appear to another device as if it ’ s 20 meters away , or vice versa .
I asked Jaap Haartsen and Sven Mattisson , who invented Bluetooth together while working at the Swedish telecom Ericsson , whether their tech was up to the task .
While both expressed hope that Bluetooth could be used to save lives , they also noted that problems of accuracy are very real .
Bluetooth Low Energy , or BLE , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a great deal more efficient and accurate , and which is used in the Apple/Google contact tracing system , is still subject to finicky physics .
“ One issue that comes to mind at the physical layer is the uncertainty in the detection range , ” explained Mattisson , “ i.e .
how well can you assess the distance to another BLE device .
… The radio signal ’ s path loss will vary significantly depending on conditions ( i.e .
free space or obscured ) .
Whether knowing the distance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ten is a problem or not , depends on the application .
E.g .
do we get too many or too few contacts… ?
Temporal aspects can be used to reduce this uncertainty but it is easy to forget about the coarse range resolution of a single radio link.
” In other words , Bluetooth ’ s inaccuracy may not be a problem for typical applications ( connecting to that friend ’ s speaker , for example ) , but certainly could be for purposes of determining exposure to a pathogen .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bluetooth-specific portion of the Apple/Google plan , also pointed out that the “ way many BLE devices are built , the RSSI value can be rather crude and not well calibrated.
” Mattisson echoed Kumar ’ s concerns with Bluetooth signals colliding with walls and being absorbed by your pants : “ In addition to this RSSI uncertainty , you will have the path loss variation .
If there is an obstacle , like a human body , between your BLE device and the detected one , there may be some 70dB of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3ft ; e.g .
in a crowd ) but in free space this may well correspond to 10m ( 30ft ) .
Exact numbers vary with objects , signal reflections etc.
, so it is hard to give anything but rough numbers.
” Mattisson added that without tapping other location pinpointing technologies — which privacy advocates say could provide governments and private companies with overly broad maps of our daily movements — false positives and false negatives will be unavoidable .
“ My main concern was that many ( non-radio specialists ) are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strength vs. contact distance .
Since the contacts reported include RSSI , app developers can do something about it .
For example , one can track a contact over ( a limited ) time and get many RSSI readings , giving a better estimate of the range… Further , using the knowledge that a contact may be close , or at some distance , can also be factored in .
All these aspects must be considered by the app developers .
If you want accurate ranging , you need triangularization or timing measurements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first requires multiple units cooperating ( like what is done in cellular networks to locate mobiles dialing e.g .
911 ) and the latter dedicated hardware .
Neither is this is available with vanilla point-to-point Bluetooth links .
So , yes , there may be false negatives and false positives and those have to be accounted for.
” Haartsen , Mattisson ’ s co-inventor , shared his concerns over radio wave wonkiness , but also added that the whole issue is moot unless people end up using the app in great numbers : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in my country , groups are working on smartphone apps for helping us to get back to normal life after the corona lockdown .
Bluetooth is only part of the big puzzle .
Yes , Bluetooth could keep track which other phones have been in range , however the accuracy is not great ( yet ) .
But at least you do not need to use location data like GPS which would be sensitive to privacy issues .
Privacy and data security are very high on the agenda and need to be solved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country ) will use it .
And of course the sheer number of people that will activate the app .
If it is only scarcely used , it will be useless.
” During a joint press briefing , an Apple and Google representative told The Intercept that a recent update to their contact tracing specification called for embedding a tiny fragment of data inside each Bluetooth broadcast that states the strength with which the signal was transmitted , allowing the receiving device to better determine how much of that signal was lost in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The companies believe this process will be refined as it is used .
Bluetooth ’ s reliability problems have never been more than an annoyance because the stakes have been about as low as can be imagined .
Not so with contact tracing , where a false positive could mean a healthy person unduly treated as infected or exposed , with all the anxiety and restrictions that might bring , while a false negative means a person who might need live-saving viral screening could go about their routine as usual , instilled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Jason Bay , the Singaporean government official who helped oversee that country ’ s early app-based contact tracing efforts , has echoed public health authorities around the world who say an army of human contact tracers will be more efficacious than any technology .
He wrote on Medium , “ If you ask me whether any Bluetooth contact tracing system deployed or under development , anywhere in the world , is ready to replace manual contact tracing , I will say without qualification that the answer is , no.
” Daniel Kahn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American Civil Liberties Union , told The Intercept he agrees that erratic Bluetooth signals could cause more problems than good : “ If a [ contact tracing ] scheme has a high false-positive rate , especially for a high-prevalence disease , you might as well just alert everyone .
No need to build a novel in good public messaging to achieve the same effect .
And the stress of getting lots of apparently individualized alerts that turn out to be false can contribute to warning fatigue and general dismissal of the messages.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out to be merely useless as opposed to actively harmful .
Maybe the Apple/Google tag-team approach will be universally adopted and responsibly implemented by every locale in the country .
“ If Bluetooth can play a role in stopping something like the present coronavirus pandemic , that is of course extremely gratifying , ” Mattisson told The Intercept .
“ But , it is smart use of a good technology , not just the technology itself that may see this happen.
” The trouble with looking to the technology sector to save the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , be more technology .
Even if that technology has trouble getting through bushes and trees .

Bluetooth has spent much of its life ignobly associated with crummy headphones, byzantine connection procedures, and car stereo systems that never quite seem to work right. Now this wireless technology concocted in the ’90s to help PCs and mobile phones communicate is being asked to step up and save the planet from a global pandemic. According to its two co-inventors, there could be some issues.
Named for the 10th century king Harald “Bluetooth” Gormsson, famous in Scandinavia for uniting (and Christianizing) the Danes, the humble, oft-derided wireless technology included in some form in nearly every portable device from the past decade and beyond is central to coronavirus contact tracing apps pushed by Apple, Google, and governments across the world. Banking on the standard’s ubiquity, and considerably improved reliability since the ’90s, these entities hope to turn billions of Bluetooth-enabled devices into an army of public health automatons that can map anyone who came into contact with someone who tests positive for Covid-19.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
Although the exact plans for using Bluetooth vary between governments, the gist is simple: In order for your iPhone to connect to your friend’s Bluetooth speaker, it has to essentially shout its existence into the electromagnetic spectrum, sending repeated radio messages that announce that the device is turned on and willing to pair with another. It’s exactly these short, repeating radio wave bursts that tech companies and public health authorities hope can be used for contact tracing, by collecting an anonymized record of every Bluetooth announcement within a certain range. If one of these “HELLO, I AM BLUETOOTH!” messages ends up coming from an individual who later tests positive for Covid-19, the hope is that anyone else whose phone was able to detect that message could then be alerted and tested (or treated) accordingly. It’s a fine, if somewhat ambitious, plan on paper, and the Apple/Google partnership is already drawing generally positive commentary from the privacy and civil liberties-minded set for its efforts to mask the identity of a Bluetooth device’s owner.
But like many great paper plans, the fundamental nature of the universe presents some complications. Underneath its blue runic branding, Bluetooth is just radio waves, the same chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum that allows for FM radio, Wi-Fi, and cell phones. And if you’ve ever used of these things, you know that getting a reliable signal can be a challenge even under seemingly ideal conditions. That’s because radio waves don’t just teleport from transmitter to receiver, but get bonked around and absorbed by objects in the way: Trees, houses, dogs and cats, cars, brick walls, and other human beings all absorb or reflect a Bluetooth signal, affecting the strength of that signal when it reaches its destination or stopping it from getting there entirely.
Given that Google and Apple’s Bluetooth contact tracing relies on using the strength of a received signal (Received Signal Strength Indication, or RSSI) to determine whether you were within coughing distance of a Covid-19 patient that time you walked to the grocery store, this could be a serious problem. Swarun Kumar, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Carnegie Mellon University, recently estimated (see video below) that environmental factors could make a Bluetooth device that’s 2 meters away appear to another device as if it’s 20 meters away, or vice versa.
I asked Jaap Haartsen and Sven Mattisson, who invented Bluetooth together while working at the Swedish telecom Ericsson, whether their tech was up to the task. While both expressed hope that Bluetooth could be used to save lives, they also noted that problems of accuracy are very real. Bluetooth Low Energy, or BLE, a more modern iteration of the tech that’s a great deal more efficient and accurate, and which is used in the Apple/Google contact tracing system, is still subject to finicky physics.
“One issue that comes to mind at the physical layer is the uncertainty in the detection range,” explained Mattisson, “i.e. how well can you assess the distance to another BLE device. … The radio signal’s path loss will vary significantly depending on conditions (i.e. free space or obscured). Whether knowing the distance only within a factor of, say, ten is a problem or not, depends on the application. E.g. do we get too many or too few contacts…? Temporal aspects can be used to reduce this uncertainty but it is easy to forget about the coarse range resolution of a single radio link.”
“It is easy to forget about the coarse range resolution of a single radio link.”
In other words, Bluetooth’s inaccuracy may not be a problem for typical applications (connecting to that friend’s speaker, for example), but certainly could be for purposes of determining exposure to a pathogen. Mattisson, who has read through the Bluetooth-specific portion of the Apple/Google plan, also pointed out that the “way many BLE devices are built, the RSSI value can be rather crude and not well calibrated.”
Mattisson echoed Kumar’s concerns with Bluetooth signals colliding with walls and being absorbed by your pants: “In addition to this RSSI uncertainty, you will have the path loss variation. If there is an obstacle, like a human body, between your BLE device and the detected one, there may be some 70dB of attenuation of the signal at 1m (3ft; e.g. in a crowd) but in free space this may well correspond to 10m (30ft). Exact numbers vary with objects, signal reflections etc., so it is hard to give anything but rough numbers.” Mattisson added that without tapping other location pinpointing technologies — which privacy advocates say could provide governments and private companies with overly broad maps of our daily movements — false positives and false negatives will be unavoidable.
“My main concern was that many (non-radio specialists) are unaware of the large variability in signal strength vs. contact distance. Since the contacts reported include RSSI, app developers can do something about it. For example, one can track a contact over (a limited) time and get many RSSI readings, giving a better estimate of the range… Further, using the knowledge that a contact may be close, or at some distance, can also be factored in. All these aspects must be considered by the app developers. If you want accurate ranging, you need triangularization or timing measurements (like a radar). The first requires multiple units cooperating (like what is done in cellular networks to locate mobiles dialing e.g. 911) and the latter dedicated hardware. Neither is this is available with vanilla point-to-point Bluetooth links. So, yes, there may be false negatives and false positives and those have to be accounted for.”
“Many are unaware of the large variability in signal strength vs. contact distance.”
Haartsen, Mattisson’s co-inventor, shared his concerns over radio wave wonkiness, but also added that the whole issue is moot unless people end up using the app in great numbers:
“All around the world, even in my country, groups are working on smartphone apps for helping us to get back to normal life after the corona lockdown. Bluetooth is only part of the big puzzle. Yes, Bluetooth could keep track which other phones have been in range, however the accuracy is not great (yet). But at least you do not need to use location data like GPS which would be sensitive to privacy issues. Privacy and data security are very high on the agenda and need to be solved before people (at least in my country) will use it. And of course the sheer number of people that will activate the app. If it is only scarcely used, it will be useless.”
During a joint press briefing, an Apple and Google representative told The Intercept that a recent update to their contact tracing specification called for embedding a tiny fragment of data inside each Bluetooth broadcast that states the strength with which the signal was transmitted, allowing the receiving device to better determine how much of that signal was lost in transit, and better estimate its distance. The companies believe this process will be refined as it is used.
Bluetooth’s reliability problems have never been more than an annoyance because the stakes have been about as low as can be imagined. Not so with contact tracing, where a false positive could mean a healthy person unduly treated as infected or exposed, with all the anxiety and restrictions that might bring, while a false negative means a person who might need live-saving viral screening could go about their routine as usual, instilled with a false sense of Bluetooth-enabled confidence.
Jason Bay, the Singaporean government official who helped oversee that country’s early app-based contact tracing efforts, has echoed public health authorities around the world who say an army of human contact tracers will be more efficacious than any technology. He wrote on Medium, “If you ask me whether any Bluetooth contact tracing system deployed or under development, anywhere in the world, is ready to replace manual contact tracing, I will say without qualification that the answer is, no.”
Share Your Coronavirus Story Click here to learn about contacting a reporter securely, or email us at coronavirus@theintercept.com
Daniel Kahn Gillmor, a senior technologist at the American Civil Liberties Union, told The Intercept he agrees that erratic Bluetooth signals could cause more problems than good: “If a [contact tracing] scheme has a high false-positive rate, especially for a high-prevalence disease, you might as well just alert everyone. No need to build a novel in good public messaging to achieve the same effect. And the stress of getting lots of apparently individualized alerts that turn out to be false can contribute to warning fatigue and general dismissal of the messages.”
Perhaps Bluetooth-centric contact tracing will only turn out to be merely useless as opposed to actively harmful. Maybe the Apple/Google tag-team approach will be universally adopted and responsibly implemented by every locale in the country. “If Bluetooth can play a role in stopping something like the present coronavirus pandemic, that is of course extremely gratifying,” Mattisson told The Intercept. “But, it is smart use of a good technology, not just the technology itself that may see this happen.” The trouble with looking to the technology sector to save the world is that their solution will, of course, be more technology. Even if that technology has trouble getting through bushes and trees.


theintercept--2020-05-05--Official Fired for Standing Up to Trump's Coronavirus Corruption Files Whistleblower Complaint

The U.S. government official overseeing the purchase and funding of vaccines , treatments , and tests for the coronavirus was fired in retaliation for his efforts to stand up to the Trump administration ’ s cronyism , according to a whistleblower complaint his attorneys made public today .
Richard Bright , the deputy assistant secretary for preparedness and response in the federal department of Health and Human Services , was already clashing with his political bosses before the coronavirus pandemic hit , according to a 63-page document Bright ’ s lawyers filed with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ignore expert recommendations and award lucrative contracts based on political connections , it was his resistance to the Trump administration ’ s efforts to promote the use of hydroxychloroquine and other drugs to treat Covid-19 , “ even though they lacked scientific merit and had not received prior scientific vetting , ” that cost him his job managing the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority , according to the report .
BARDA is responsible for procuring vaccines , treatments , and other countermeasures for pandemics and other public health emergencies and has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ products meant to respond to the coronavirus pandemic .
Bright ’ s relationship with HHS Secretary Alex Azar and Bright ’ s direct superior , Robert Kadlec , the assistant secretary for preparedness and response , had been tense since at least 2018 .
According to the whistleblower complaint , both Kadlec — who has no scientific training and previously served on the staff of Sen. Richard Burr , R-N.C. — and Azar wanted him fired because Bright resisted what he saw as the outsized influence of industry consultants , including one who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s son-in-law Jared Kushner .
At a 2017 meeting , that consultant , John Clerici , warned Bright about John McManus , the CEO of Aeolus Pharmaceuticals .
McManus is “ a wildcard , and he is the kind of person who would write stories about you for the newspapers , ” Clerici told Bright , according to the report , which also noted that Clerici described McManus as “ friends with Jared ” and someone who “ has Hollywood connections.
” Bright , who has a Ph.D. in virology and had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tensions with his supervisor and details several instances in which procedures designed to ensure scientific integrity fell under political pressure .
In 2018 , Kadlec approved a $ 55 million contract that extended support for a drug that a task force of scientific experts had concluded was not worthy of ongoing funding .
The drug , oseltamivir , was made by Partner Therapeutics , which had hired Clerici to manage its bid to the agency .
Kadlec and Bright also apparently clashed over a drug that was billed as a “ miracle cure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not been subject to clinical trials or tested for safety in humans .
Still , it was the pandemic that brought the conflict to a boil and cost Bright his job .
As coronavirus infections spread across the country , Trump became particularly enamored with the drug hydroxychloroquine , which he heralded as a “ game changer ” despite evidence that it caused fatal cardiac problems .
According to his lawyers , Bright tried to call attention both to the lack of scientific evidence of the drug ’ s benefits and its safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Administration promoted it as a panacea and demanded that New York and New Jersey be ‘ flooded ’ with these drugs , which were imported from factories in Pakistan and India that had not been inspected by the FDA.
” In response to a question on the complaint form asking “ Why do you believe that agency officials would retaliate against you ?
” Bright wrote , “ I insisted on scientifically-vetted proposals , and I pushed for a more aggressive agency response to COVID-19 .
My supervisor became furious when Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office , and when I spoke directly to members of Congress.
” The Department of Health and Human Services and John Clerici did not immediately respond to requests for comment .
On April 22 , the internal conflict exploded and Bright announced that he had been removed from his position .
On the same day , a Veterans Administration study showed that hydroxychloroquine failed to offer a clinical benefit and found that Covid-19 patients who took the drug were more likely to die than those who didn ’ t .
After publication , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Human Services provided the following statement : “ Dr .
Bright was transferred to NIH to work on diagnostics testing – critical to combatting COVID-19 – where he has been entrusted to spend upwards of $ 1 billion to advance that effort .
We are deeply disappointed that he has not shown up to work on behalf of the American people and lead on this critical endeavor .
”

The U.S. government official overseeing the purchase and funding of vaccines, treatments, and tests for the coronavirus was fired in retaliation for his efforts to stand up to the Trump administration’s cronyism, according to a whistleblower complaint his attorneys made public today.
Richard Bright, the deputy assistant secretary for preparedness and response in the federal department of Health and Human Services, was already clashing with his political bosses before the coronavirus pandemic hit, according to a 63-page document Bright’s lawyers filed with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel. They initially said Bright would file his complaint with both the HHS Inspector General and the Office of Special Counsel, which investigates abuses against federal employees. But after Trump fired the inspector general last week, his attorneys filed his complaint only with the Office of Special Counsel.
While Bright had experienced years of pressure to ignore expert recommendations and award lucrative contracts based on political connections, it was his resistance to the Trump administration’s efforts to promote the use of hydroxychloroquine and other drugs to treat Covid-19, “even though they lacked scientific merit and had not received prior scientific vetting,” that cost him his job managing the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, according to the report. BARDA is responsible for procuring vaccines, treatments, and other countermeasures for pandemics and other public health emergencies and has spent more than $1.5 billion on products meant to respond to the coronavirus pandemic.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
Bright’s relationship with HHS Secretary Alex Azar and Bright’s direct superior, Robert Kadlec, the assistant secretary for preparedness and response, had been tense since at least 2018. According to the whistleblower complaint, both Kadlec — who has no scientific training and previously served on the staff of Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C. — and Azar wanted him fired because Bright resisted what he saw as the outsized influence of industry consultants, including one who represented a company with ties to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.
At a 2017 meeting, that consultant, John Clerici, warned Bright about John McManus, the CEO of Aeolus Pharmaceuticals. McManus is “a wildcard, and he is the kind of person who would write stories about you for the newspapers,” Clerici told Bright, according to the report, which also noted that Clerici described McManus as “friends with Jared” and someone who “has Hollywood connections.”
Bright, who has a Ph.D. in virology and had overseen BARDA since 2016, described mounting tensions with his supervisor and details several instances in which procedures designed to ensure scientific integrity fell under political pressure. In 2018, Kadlec approved a $55 million contract that extended support for a drug that a task force of scientific experts had concluded was not worthy of ongoing funding. The drug, oseltamivir, was made by Partner Therapeutics, which had hired Clerici to manage its bid to the agency. Kadlec and Bright also apparently clashed over a drug that was billed as a “miracle cure” for viral illnesses, yet had not been subject to clinical trials or tested for safety in humans.
Still, it was the pandemic that brought the conflict to a boil and cost Bright his job. As coronavirus infections spread across the country, Trump became particularly enamored with the drug hydroxychloroquine, which he heralded as a “game changer” despite evidence that it caused fatal cardiac problems.
According to his lawyers, Bright tried to call attention both to the lack of scientific evidence of the drug’s benefits and its safety. Nevertheless, they say, “the Administration promoted it as a panacea and demanded that New York and New Jersey be ‘flooded’ with these drugs, which were imported from factories in Pakistan and India that had not been inspected by the FDA.”
In response to a question on the complaint form asking “Why do you believe that agency officials would retaliate against you?” Bright wrote, “I insisted on scientifically-vetted proposals, and I pushed for a more aggressive agency response to COVID-19. My supervisor became furious when Congress appropriated billions of dollars directly to my office, and when I spoke directly to members of Congress.”
The Department of Health and Human Services and John Clerici did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Share Your Coronavirus Story Click here to learn about contacting a reporter securely, or email us at coronavirus@theintercept.com
On April 22, the internal conflict exploded and Bright announced that he had been removed from his position. On the same day, a Veterans Administration study showed that hydroxychloroquine failed to offer a clinical benefit and found that Covid-19 patients who took the drug were more likely to die than those who didn’t.
Update: May 5, 2020
After publication, a spokesperson for the Department of Heath and Human Services provided the following statement: “Dr. Bright was transferred to NIH to work on diagnostics testing – critical to combatting COVID-19 – where he has been entrusted to spend upwards of $1 billion to advance that effort. We are deeply disappointed that he has not shown up to work on behalf of the American people and lead on this critical endeavor.”