On Monday, Max Fisher, international reporter and columnist for The New York Times, posited that Americans should stop blaming the Communist Chinese government for the coronavirus and instead take lessons from the brutally repressive Chinese Communist regime as to how to deal with it.
Fisher tweeted, “US outbreaks may be too far along for the South Korea model to work. The only thing left is the China model. It’s the only known success at subduing a full-blown epidemic. Instead of working with Beijing on finding lessons, the US is scapegoating China to deflect political blame.”
He continued, “I get why no one wants to hold up the China model as laudable, given Beijing&#8217;s failures, propaganda, and authoritarian methods. But none of those are necessarily needed to reproducing China’s real successes, which could at least potentially save hundreds of thousands of lives. If your well-grounded concern is that official Chinese data can never be trusted, it’s worth considering that the WHO is vouching firsthand for the country having achieved a major turnaround. Is it worth even looking for lessons?”
Fisher referenced Dr. Bruce Alyward, a senior adviser to the director-general of the World Health Organization, in his last tweet, which is notable as Alyward blew off a journalist who politely asked him if the WHO would consider allowing Taiwan as a member of the organization, which Communist China has opposed. Taiwan had reportedly attempted to alert the WHO to the severity of the coronavirus early on, but the WHO rebuffed their effort to offer information.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
US outbreaks may be too far along for the South Korea model to work. The only thing left is the China model. It’s the only known success at subduing a full-blown epidemic. Instead of working with Beijing on finding lessons, the US is scapegoating China to deflect political blame.
&mdash; Max Fisher (@Max_Fisher) <a href="https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/status/1244608510073147392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I get why no one wants to hold up the China model as laudable, given Beijing&#39;s failures, propaganda, and authoritarian methods. But none of those are necessarily needed to reproducing China’s real successes, which could at least potentially save hundreds of thousands of lives.
&mdash; Max Fisher (@Max_Fisher) <a href="https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/status/1244610807457030147?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
If your well-grounded concern is that official Chinese data can never be trusted, it’s worth considering that the WHO is vouching firsthand for the country having achieved a major turnaround. Is it worth even looking for lessons? <a href="https://t.co/231xWZ5rqT">https://t.co/231xWZ5rqT</a>
&mdash; Max Fisher (@Max_Fisher) <a href="https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/status/1244614226401951745?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-senior-who-official-avoids-taiwan-question-talks-about-china-abruptly-ends-interview">The Daily Wire</a> reported, Alyward abruptly ended a video interview with Hong a Kong-based journalist, Yvonne Tong, who asked him if the WHO would consider Taiwan’s membership. Alyward would not answer; Tong had to check to see if he was still there, He finally responded, “I’m sorry I couldn’t hear your question, Yvonne,” prompting Tong say she would repeat the question, prompting Alyward to deflect, “No that’s okay, let’s move on to another one then.”
The Daily Wire continued:
<blockquote>Tong pressed for him to answer the question, saying “I’m actually curious on talking about Taiwan as well, Taiwan’s case.” Less than a second later, Dr. Alyward leaned forward in his chair and the screen froze – the video call ended abruptly. The narrator of the interview then provides a voice-over, saying they “decided to give Dr. Alyward another call to follow up.”
Tong managed to reach Dr. Alyward again, and said that she just wanted “to see if you can comment a bit on how Taiwan has done so far, in terms of containing the virus.” The WHO official deflected the question and implied that Taiwan is actually a part of China, and not its own government –a talking point that China’s authoritarian regime has worked hard to maintain.</blockquote>
Alyward has stated that Communist China has done an “extraordinary” job reversing the outbreak of coronavirus, <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/03/08/813401722/who-official-says-coronavirus-containment-remains-possible">NPR</a> reported, saying, &#8220;As long as you have these discrete outbreaks &#8230; there is the opportunity to control them – to get on top of these and contain them and prevent a lot of disease and ultimately death. They actually changed the course of a respiratory-borne outbreak without a vaccine, which was extraordinary.”
Despite Fisher’s protestations, there is ample evidence Communist China is lying about the number of deaths the Chinese people have suffered from COVID-19. On Sunday morning Senator Tom Cotton told <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen-cotton-chinese-government-still-lying-about-coronavirus-as-evidence-indicates-rising-death-tolls">Fox News</a>:
<blockquote>The Chinese Communist Party is still lying … You see it again today. So, for instance, China says they have no more new cases, no more new deaths, yet they just closed all movie theaters nationwide only a few days after having opened them up … They say they’ve only had 2,500 cases that resulted in deaths or so, yet a single mortuary has ordered more than 5,000 urns. You can look at these basic facts to know that the Chinese Communist Party is still lying today, as they were in December and January, and that’s why what could have been a local problem in Wuhan turned into a global pandemic from which more than 2,000 Americans have now died.</blockquote>
&nbsp;

New York

NYT Writer: Americans Should Stop Blaming Communist Chinese Government, Learn From Them Instead

China

Coronavirus

New York Times

As Americans across the country face health risks and economic fallout due to the COVID-19 pandemic, The New York Times editorial board is calling for <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/26/opinion/abortion-law-coronavirus.html">even more access to abortions</a>.
The Times editorial board accuses states who have declared abortion clinics a &#8220;non-essential&#8221; business as &#8220;exploit[ing] a pandemic that’s already cost hundreds of American lives&#8221; in order to &#8220;restrict women’s bodily autonomy.&#8221;
Texas, Ohio, and Louisiana have all made that declaration, sparking the ire of abortion advocates. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists even issued a <a href="https://www.acog.org/news/news-releases/2020/03/joint-statement-on-abortion-access-during-the-covid-19-outbreak">joint statement</a> at the start of the pandemic urging states to treat abortion clinics as essential businesses:
<blockquote>Abortion is an essential component of comprehensive health care. It is also a time-sensitive service for which a delay of several weeks, or in some cases days, may increase the risks or potentially make it completely inaccessible. The consequences of being unable to obtain an abortion profoundly impact a person’s life, health and well-being.</blockquote>
&#8220;The &#8216;nonessential&#8217; bit is obvious nonsense and the delay a transparent attempt to put abortion out of reach for those who need it,&#8221; the editorial reads. &#8220;&#8230;These state leaders know that once an abortion clinic closes for any significant period, it becomes difficult to reopen.&#8221;
According to the Times editorial board, if states restrict abortion access during the pandemic (and other potential crises), certain radical solutions should be adopted: abortion pills in the mail, taxpayer-funded birth control, and taxpayer-funded abortions.
&#8220;Given the coronavirus pandemic, it is incumbent on the F.D.A. to relax its regulation on mifepristone, at least temporarily,&#8221; the Times said of abortion pills by mail. &#8220;Doing so would allow many women to get a prescription for abortion-inducing drugs from a doctor via telemedicine, at which point the medications could be mailed to the patient. Unfortunately, 18 states effectively ban abortion care via telemedicine — measures that also ought to be lifted, at least for the time being.&#8221;
<div class="css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn">
<div class="css-53u6y8">
After advocating that Americans have &#8220;birth control for all,&#8221; the editorial concludes by calling for the abolishment of the Hyde Amendment, allowing the government to fund abortions with taxpayer dollars.
&#8220;It’s long past time to end America’s bans on government funding for abortions, like the federal Hyde Amendment and similar state measures,&#8221; the Times&#8217; editorial board concludes. &#8220;These bans mean that poor women already struggle to afford reproductive health care — an issue that’s sure to be exacerbated during the coronavirus crisis and the economic fallout from it.&#8221;
The historic $2 trillion stimulus bill recently passed by Congress will not be helping abortion providers conduct their business during this unprecedented time. Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund, denounced President Trump and the GOP for not allowing abortion clinics to benefit from the package.
“It has become shamefully clear that not even a global pandemic will stop the Trump administration or Republican Congressional leaders from attacking access to reproductive care,” said McGill Johnson in a <a href="https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/pressroom/senate-covid-19-response-package-leaves-much-to-be-done-for-our-families-and-public-health-response">statement</a>. “Our leaders should be working to support the nation’s full network of safety-net health care providers during these uncertain times. Instead, the Senate bill targets Planned Parenthood and expands the harmful and discriminatory Hyde amendment, putting up even more barriers to care for women, people with low incomes, and communities of color.”
</div>
</div>

US-POLITICS-TRUMP-MEDIA

New York Times Editorial Board Calls For More Access To Abortions During Pandemic

Abortion

Retired Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) passed away on Saturday following a years-long battle with cancer.
Coburn was, as the Associated Press described him in their obituary, a “Conservative Political Maverick.” As a senator, Coburn published the famous yearly “wastebook,” showing ridiculous expenditures from the federal government, including a 2014 payment of $171,000 to <a href="http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2014/10/wastebook-2014-what-washington-doesn-t-want-you-to-read">study how monkeys gamble</a>.
Though Coburn was a steadfast steward of taxpayer dollars and a conservative hero to many, The New York Times’ obituary for him made sure to paint him in a negative light. The headline for the Times’ obituary reads: “Tom Coburn, the ‘Dr. No’ of Congress, Is Dead at 72.”
Coburn received the nickname because he voted against so many spending bills, but “Dr. No” is also the name of one of James Bond’s most notorious villains, and the way the Times framed its headline, the impression one walks away with is that Coburn is the Bond villain.
Further, the Times’ obituary begins: “<a href="https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/thomas_coburn/400576">Tom Coburn</a>, an ultraconservative Oklahoma Republican and family physician who in 16 years in Congress crusaded for limited government, using a rule-book technicality to block so many bills that frustrated legislators called him “Dr. No,” died on Saturday in Tulsa. He was 72.”
Conversely, the Times described Cuban dictator Fidel Castro at the time of his death as a “fiery apostle of revolution who brought the Cold War to the Western Hemisphere in 1959 and then defied the United States for nearly half a century as Cuba’s maximum leader, bedeviling 11 American presidents and briefly pushing the world to the brink of nuclear war, died on Friday.”
Notice the use of more positive descriptive words like “bedeviling” and “defied” rather than “frustrated.”
The headline the Times used for Castro’s obituary read: “Fidel Castro, Cuban Revolutionary Who Defied U.S., Dies at 90.”
The Times on Twitter was no different. After Coburn died, the Times tweeted the opening paragraph of his obituary about the “rule-book technicality.” For Castro, the Times used its same spin, including a tweet that said: “Success in baseball and boxing helped give Fidel Castro grounds to taunt and defy the U.S.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Here are the <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a> wrote about two dead men. One massacred people; the other delivered thousands of babies free of charge.
Guess which is which. <a href="https://t.co/BSE0VXn5wQ">pic.twitter.com/BSE0VXn5wQ</a>
— F. Bill McMorris (@FBillMcMorris) <a href="https://twitter.com/FBillMcMorris/status/1244089851550588936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 29, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The NYT, everybody. <a href="https://t.co/yL5ITkoea9">pic.twitter.com/yL5ITkoea9</a>
— James Hasson (@JamesHasson20) <a href="https://twitter.com/JamesHasson20/status/1244084587673923584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 29, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Times even posted a lengthy <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/29/insider/fidel-castros-obituary.html">article</a> about how sixteen of its journalists worked on Castro’s obituary. In an article published months before Castro’s death, the Times talked about the fashion trends he inspired in the U.S., in an article titled, “Chanting Crowds and Camo Chic.” The article gushed that Castro “mesmerized” crowds.
The different takes from the Times is reminiscent of just last week when the outlet <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-york-times-changes-headline-about-democrats-blocking-coronavirus-stimulus">changed a headline</a> to protect Democrats from criticism after they blocked a coronavirus relief bill – a courtesy the Times has never shown Republicans.
The Times is not the only outlet to go easy on mass murderers. In October, The Washington Post called terrorist leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi an “austere religious scholar,” before changing it to say he was the “extremist leader of Islamic State.” Quite a difference.
The body of these articles are no different. While Coburn’s legacy is repeatedly described in negative terms, dictators and terrorist leaders get glowing praise while their misdeeds are buried or downplayed.

Fidel Castro

NYT AT IT AGAIN: Gives Republican Worse Obituary Than Fidel Castro

Media Bias

Tom Coburn

Writing in The New York Times, author and journalist Katherine Stewart wrote a rather <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/opinion/coronavirus-trump-evangelicals.html?action=click&amp;module=Opinion&amp;pgtype=Homepage">nasty and oblivious op-ed</a> that essentially lays the blame for the COVID-19 pandemic at the feet of Evangelical Christians, whom she denounces as a bunch of anti-science dogmatists.
&#8220;Donald Trump rose to power with the determined assistance of a movement that denies science, bashes government and prioritized loyalty over professional expertise,&#8221; writes Stewart, the author of “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism.&#8221; She continues, &#8220;In the current crisis, we are all reaping what that movement has sown.&#8221;
Even as leftists deny the basic science that an unborn child in the womb is a human being, promote the idea that men can be women, favor political correctness over sound border enforcement policy, and practice <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/wellnes-brands-gwyneth-paltrow-s-goop-wage-war-science-ncna801436">thoroughly unscientific</a> wellness routines, Stewart characterizes the religious Right as the engine of anti-science nationalism in this country. Her proof: various quotes from pastors who dismissed the COVID-19 pandemic as a media invention:
<blockquote>
On March 15, Guillermo Maldonado, who calls himself an “apostle” and hosted Mr. Trump earlier this year at a campaign event at his Miami megachurch, <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article241209151.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">urged</a> his congregants to show up for worship services in person. “Do you believe God would bring his people to his house to be contagious with the virus? Of course not,” he said.
Rodney Howard-Browne of The River at Tampa Bay Church in Florida mocked people concerned about the disease as “<a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/03/pastor-laid-hands-trump-says-avoiding-coronavirus-pansies/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pansies</a>” and insisted he would only shutter the doors to his packed church “when the rapture is taking place.” In a sermon that was live-streamed on Facebook, Tony Spell, a pastor in Louisiana, said, “We’re also going to pass out anointed <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.newsweek.com/pastor-holds-service-over-1000-parishoners-defiance-large-gathering-ban-1493113" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">handkerchiefs</a> to people who may have a fear, who may have a sickness and we believe that when those anointed handkerchiefs go, that healing virtue is going to go on them as well.”
</blockquote>
Fair enough, but one can easily cite such examples on the left, even from the so-called government &#8220;experts&#8221; that Stewart seems to regard so highly, such as this little gem of a tweet from New York Health Commissioner Oxiris Barbot back in February, a little over a week after President Trump instituted his travel ban:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Today our city is celebrating the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LunarNewYear?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LunarNewYear</a> parade in Chinatown, a beautiful cultural tradition with a rich history in our city. I want to remind everyone to enjoy the parade and not change any plans due to misinformation spreading about <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/coronavirus?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#coronavirus</a>. <a href="https://t.co/bwCnIb7j8H">https://t.co/bwCnIb7j8H</a>
&mdash; Commissioner Oxiris Barbot (@NYCHealthCommr) <a href="https://twitter.com/NYCHealthCommr/status/1226508570646269954?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 9, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Keeping her focus exclusively on Evangelical Christians, Stewart, of course, has nothing to say about how Mayor De Blasio <a href="http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-02/16/c_138787253.htm">visited Chinese restaurants</a> in New York City to dispel fear about the coronavirus prior to the shutdown. Nor does she have anything to say about presidential candidate Joe Biden denouncing President Trump&#8217;s travel ban from China as &#8220;<a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/488668-trump-leads-the-battle-against-coronavirus-while-biden-makes-excuses-for">xenophobic</a>&#8220;.
Stewart goes on to assert that Trump routinely flouts the medical experts in charge of the COVID-19 task force as a deliberate play to his base, such as when he expressed hope that the American economy could be opened by Easter.
&#8220;He could, of course, have said, &#8216;by mid-April.&#8217; But Mr. Trump did not invoke Easter by accident, and many of his evangelical allies were pleased by his vision of &#8216;packed churches all over our country,'&#8221; argues Stewart.
After citing many more examples of Trump cabinet members supposedly favoring religion over science, Stewart&#8217;s article then blames Evangelical Christians for the lack of centralized response to the pandemic, seemingly unaware of the fact that this country has a federalist system.
&#8220;For decades, Christian nationalist leaders have lined up with the anti-government, anti-tax agenda not just as a matter of politics but also as a matter of theology,&#8221; she concludes. &#8220;When a strong centralized response is needed from the federal government, it doesn’t help to have an administration that has never believed in a federal government serving the public good. Ordinarily, the consequences of this kind of behavior don’t show up for some time. In the case of a pandemic, the consequences are too obvious to ignore.&#8221;
Stewart published this one day after the government&#8217;s leading infectious disease expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci, said that private sector is dramatically helping the government produce needed test kits. “We have hundreds of thousands of tests that are out there now, mostly because we got the private sector involved, of the companies who know how to make it well, make large amounts,” <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/dr-fauci-private-sector-saved-us-on-testing-govt-system-cant-handle-it">he said. </a>

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

NYT Op-Ed: ‘Road To Coronavirus Hell Was Paved By Evangelicals’

Christianity

evangelical

On Wednesday, the New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/opinion/coronavirus-trump-lockdown.html?referringSource=articleShare">editorial board</a> urged President Trump to &#8220;pressure&#8221; a national lockdown, stopping shy of telling him to use his executive power to order one.
As the president&#8217;s two-week call for social distancing nears its end, the NYT editors believe that America needs a &#8220;coherent national strategy&#8221; to better handle the crisis. Rather than just order an outright lockdown, the board suggested that he provide political cover to mayors and governors and use the &#8220;bully pulpit&#8221; to advocate it.
&#8220;Once he does, and governors follow his request, there will be time to debate how soon some controls might be lifted, or how soon certain people, like those under a particular age, might be free to resume something like normal life,&#8221; said the Times. “There will be more time then to develop palliative treatments, and more time for the federal government to order up the test kits and ventilators needed nationwide. There will be more time to gather data about which regions, and which people, are most at risk.&#8221;
Ultimately, the Times felt that &#8220;voluntary&#8221; social distancing has not yielded the needed results, considering that people, like the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/us/coronavirus-florida-desantis.html">spring breakers</a> in Florida, have been openly flouting such orders.
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="4" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
&#8220;Some cities and states, and even entire nations, <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.wired.com/story/whats-shelter-place-order-whos-affected/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">already have lockdowns in place,&#8221; </a>the Times continued. &#8220;On Tuesday, India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/world/asia/india-coronavirus-lockdown.html">ordered</a> a &#8216;total ban&#8217; on leaving home for the population of 1.3 billion, for the next three weeks. He <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/world/coronavirus-news-live-updates.html">warned</a>, &#8216;If you can’t handle these 21 days, this country will go back 21 years.&#8217; Other countries have opted for narrower restrictions, and enforcement has varied. But patchwork approaches, like the one the United States defaulted to in the absence of a national plan, have proven inadequate.&#8221;
The Times called for &#8220;sweeping&#8221; and uniform restrictions across the states and various jurisdictions. On the issue of the economy, while the board shared the president&#8217;s concerns about a pending crash, they ultimately chided him for giving people a false hope by saying he&#8217;d like to have the country &#8220;<a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/24/politics/trump-easter-economy-coronavirus/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">raring to go by Easter.&#8221; </a>
Rather than raise people&#8217;s hopes, the Times had a different plan: &#8220;announce that, within 24 hours, all nonessential businesses should be shut and residents directed to remain in their homes except for vital trips out, such as to obtain food or medical care.&#8221;
</div>
Should the country go on lockdown, that would better allow health officials to assess the situation and find the infection hotspots, according to the Times. The board also encouraged the president to use the defense production act to streamline the process of creating needed ventilators and other medical equipment.
While the New York Times editorial board largely disapproves of the president&#8217;s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, a recent poll from Gallup showed that Americans are largely in agreement with Trump&#8217;s strategy.
&#8220;Gallup’s new study finds that Trump’s approval among U.S. adults has jumped 5 points since earlier this month, surging from 44 to 49% approval,&#8221; <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/gallup-trump-approval-spikes-majority-of-americans-approve-of-his-handling-of-crisis">reported</a> James Barrett on Wednesday. &#8220;That approval rating is the best of his presidency, matching previous highs experienced in late January and early February as the Senate conducted the impeachment trial that ultimately acquitted the president of both of the Democrats’ impeachment articles.&#8221;
<div class="css-53u6y8">

</div>

White House Coronavirus Task Force Holds Daily Briefing

New York Times Editorial Board Urges President Trump To ‘Pressure’ A National Lockdown

Donald Trump

An analysis published by <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/world/asia/coronavirus-south-korea-flatten-curve.html">The New York Times</a> this week takes a close look at South Korea&#8217;s successful efforts to &#8220;flatten the curve&#8221; of COVID-19 infections without shutting down the nation&#8217;s economy and presents four key lessons from the country&#8217;s response. The study concludes by addressing the question of whether South Korea&#8217;s response is transferrable to other countries, including the U.S.
The report, written by Max Fisher and Choe Sang-Hun, begins by highlighting just how successful in comparison to other countries South Korea&#8217;s response to coronavirus has been.
&#8220;At the peak, medical workers identified 909 new cases in a single day, Feb. 29, and the country of 50 million people appeared on the verge of being overwhelmed,&#8221; the journalists write. &#8220;But less than a week later, the number of new cases halved. Within four days, it halved again — and again the next day. On Sunday, South Korea reported only 64 new cases, the fewest in nearly a month, even as infections in other countries continue to soar by the thousands daily, devastating health care systems and economies. Italy records several hundred deaths daily; South Korea has not had more than eight in a day.&#8221;
So how has South Korea pulled it off so far? It was not through draconian or economy-crushing measures implemented by the likes of China and now an increasing number of countries across the globe, including the U.S.
The answer is four key measures: 1) rapid intervention before the pandemic is a full crisis; 2) implement widespread testing; 3) contact tracing and isolation; and 4) get the public to help.
The Times piece breaks down how South Korea implemented each of these measures, the first: &#8220;Intervene Fast, Before It’s a Crisis&#8221; (formatting adjusted):
<blockquote>
Just one week after the country’s first case was diagnosed in late January, government officials met with representatives from several medical companies. They urged the companies to begin immediately developing coronavirus test kits for mass production, promising emergency approval. Within two weeks, though South Korea’s confirmed cases remained in the double digits, thousands of test kits were shipping daily.
</blockquote>
Officials also imposed strategically targeted emergency measures on a particularly hard-hit city, Daegu.
Early, frequent, safe and centralized testing is another key response measure:
<blockquote>South Korea has tested far more people for the coronavirus than any other country, enabling it to isolate and treat many people soon after they are infected. The country has conducted over 300,000 tests, for a per-capita rate more than 40 times that of the United States.
“Testing is central because that leads to early detection, it minimizes further spread and it quickly treats those found with the virus,” Kang Kyung-wha, South Korea’s foreign minister, <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-51897979/coronavirus-south-korea-seeing-a-stabilising-trend?te=1&amp;nl=the-interpreter&amp;emc=edit_int_20200321" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">told the BBC</a>, calling the tests “the key behind our very low fatality rate as well.”
</blockquote>
The Times notes that South Korea opened up some 600 testing centers to minimize the burden on hospitals and clinics. Thermal image cameras were also widely used to help detect symptoms, with restaurants and other establishments often scanning customers.
A third step was tracing the contact of those who were infected and then isolating and surveilling those who were in contact with the infected persons. South Korea&#8217;s approach to this was heavily informed by the MERS outbreak, which taught the country to aggressively track contacts by &#8220;retrac[ing] patients’ movements using security camera footage, credit card records, even GPS data from their cars and cellphones.&#8221;
When the outbreak expanded too much to do this effectively, the Times explains, government officials turned to increased mass messaging via emergency alerts to residents when new cases were discovered in their districts. The government ordered self-quarantines for those who believed they might have had contact with infected individuals and fines for failure to do so were imposed.
Finally, South Korea also effectively enlisted the public&#8217;s help, the Times explains:
<blockquote>
Leaders concluded that subduing the outbreak required keeping citizens fully informed and asking for their cooperation, said Mr. Kim, the vice health minister. Television broadcasts, subway station announcements and smartphone alerts provide endless reminders to wear face masks, pointers on social distancing and the day’s transmission data.
</blockquote>
The big question is how much of South Korea&#8217;s response is transferrable to other countries. For the U.S. some of the early detection and widespread testing is coming potentially too late to be as effective as South Korea&#8217;s response, a sentiment expressed by former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb in a ten-part Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/ScottGottliebMD/status/1238058027510575107">thread</a> on March 12 (below).
In an update on the testing situation on Wednesday, President Trump announced significant progress on that front. &#8220;Just reported that the United States has done far more &#8216;testing&#8217; than any other nation, by far!&#8221; Trump tweeted. &#8220;In fact, over an eight day span, the United States now does more testing than what South Korea (which has been a very successful tester) does over an eight week span. Great job!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Just reported that the United States has done far more “testing” than any other nation, by far! In fact, over an eight day span, the United States now does more testing than what South Korea (which has been a very successful tester) does over an eight week span. Great job!
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242824631230308353?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 25, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Below is Gottlieb&#8217;s outline of how America should aggressively address the pandemic (formatting adjusted):
<blockquote>
In U.S. we face two alternative but hard outlooks with [COVID-19]: that we follow a path similar to South Korea or one closer to Italy. We probably lost chance to have an outcome like South Korea. We must do everything to avert the tragic suffering being borne by Italy.
It starts with aggressive screening to get people diagnosed. While testing capacity expands its not evenly distributed to places most needed, we’re far behind current caseloads. To many people still can’t get screened. So we can’t identify clusters and isolate disease.
In some respects our fate rests on the entities that are capable of sharply ramping testing and distributing the services nationally. Academic labs can serve their institutions. Only big national clinical labs like LabCorp and Quest can fill the void. A lot rides on them now. These are great American companies led by outstanding management teams, staffed with deeply committed, public health mind people who live in communities hurt by this virus. The national interest turns on their efforts. We must scale their ability to sharply expand screening.
That means getting diagnostic kits approved that the companies can run on their automated platforms to dramatically scale testing. Only these big national chains have throughput, scale, and ordering systems to fill the void that was created. We look to them now. We need them.
Public health labs have been an outstanding pillar. They’re working around the clock. They’re the nation’s backbone of response. But they aren’t richly funded and are being maxed out against current facilities. Only clinical labs have ability to sharply scale the efforts.
Business is leading the way on mitigation and social distancing, filling a void left by policy makers. But shutting down NBA games is not enough. This must be practiced in places large and small. Small gatherings, parties, all should be postponed for the next month or two.
We need to create surge capacity in hospitals. Congress must support the effort. Patients and providers can too. Elective procedures should be postponed for next few months. Hospitals should lower volumes everywhere they can. We need to prepare for an influx of cases.
Social separation works. Every day we delay hard decisions, every day leaders don’t demand collective action, the depth of epidemic will be larger. We must act now. We have narrow window to avert a worse outcome. The virus is firmly rooted in our cities. We’re losing time.
We’ll get through this. It’ll end. We have two hard months ahead of us. We need to sacrifice some of the trappings of normal life to reduce the scope and severity of what’s ahead. We must protect the vulnerable. We must act collectively in common interest. We must work together.</blockquote>
This article has been updated to include President Trump&#8217;s tweet on testing.

Seoul, South Korea

Analysis: How South Korea Flattened The Curve Without Shutting Down Its Economy

South Korea

As I wrote <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-york-times-changes-headline-about-democrats-blocking-coronavirus-stimulus">yesterday</a>, Democrats have it good. They blocked a coronavirus relief bill that had been constructed with bipartisan support, knowing that the media would provide them cover. That cover has come especially from The New York Times.
On Monday, in addition to changing its headline to protect Democrats in a way the outlet would never do for Republicans, the Times’ editorial board published its <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/opinion/coronavirus-bailout-mcconnell-congress.html">editorial</a> blaming House Majority Leader Mitch McConnell – a Republican – for Democrats blocking the $1.8 trillion relief bill. In an editorial titled, “The Coronavirus Bailout Stalled. And It’s Mitch McConnell’s Fault,” the Times claims “Senate Republicans are blocking passage of an economic bailout plan that protects jobs and wages.”
Yes, the Times actually claimed that Republicans blocked the bill.
They list several provisions in the bill that the editorial board – and, coincidentally, Democrats – don’t like, such as providing “a lot of help for corporate executives and shareholders.”
“It would let the Treasury Department hand out hundreds of billions of dollars to corporations — potentially including businesses owned by President Trump — without requiring a binding commitment to preserve jobs and wages. And the bailouts could remain secret for six months,” the Times editorial board wrote.
“Senate Democrats, refusing to play along, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/us/politics/coronavirus-economic-rescue-plan.html">blocked the bill</a> in a procedural vote on Sunday night and again on Monday afternoon. But responsibility for the deadlock rests squarely on Mr. McConnell’s shoulders,” board continued.
The Times then laid out the good measures in the bill that help small businesses and American families, but claims “the urgency of the moment does not justify the egregious misuse of public resources.”
As a reminder, the Times’ editorial board was all in on President Barack Obama’s trillion-dollar stimulus back in 2009, even though it provided funds to the president’s donors, friends, and pet projects while failing to help working Americans. We all remember the claim about “shovel-ready jobs” that Obama now flippantly jokes about at speaking engagements.
The Times notes some reasonable objections to the coronavirus relief bill, including a lack of restrictions on big businesses that would receive money from the federal government.
But Democrats blocked a procedural vote on the bill, even though, as McConnell <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mcconnell-explodes-on-pelosi-for-ruining-stimulus-bill-that-protected-economy-families">said on the Senate floor Monday</a>, had Democrats voted to advance the bill, it would have been opened to at least 30 hours of debate and edits.
“This obstruction achieves nothing. Nothing whatsoever other than prevent us from getting into a position where there are literally 30 more hours that they could use to continue to dicker,” McConnell said. “So at a time when the country is crying out for bipartisanship and cooperation — and we saw that over the last 48 hours when regular members of Senate, not in the leadership office, not in the speaker’s office for goodness sakes, she’s the Speaker of the House, not the speaker of the Senate. We don’t have one. We were doing just fine until that intervention.”
Also on Monday, the Times changed its headline accurately stating that “Democrats Block Action on $1.8 Trillion Stimulus” to say “Democrats Block Action on Stimulus Plan, Seeking Worker Protections.” The Times further watered down the headline by changing it to read, “Partisan Divide Threatens Deal on Rescue Bill,” before yet another change to “Emergency Economic Rescue Plan in Limbo as Democrats Block Action.”
The editorial board, however, appears to be all in on blaming Republicans for Democrat obstructionism.
So far, the editorial board has not published a similar editorial calling out House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for loading up her <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/senator-highlights-pelosis-absurd-coronavirus-bill-that-is-unrelated-to-the-crisis">own version of a coronavirus relief bill</a> with unrelated Democrat policies, such as requiring early voting and offsetting airline emissions.

New York Times Blames Mitch McConnell For Democrats Blocking Coronavirus Relief Bill

On Monday, President Trump slammed The New York Times for changing the headline of its story about Democrats blocking the coronavirus stimulus bill, asserting that it did so to &#8220;satisfy the radical Left.&#8221;
Trump wrote, &#8220;The New York Times changed headlines 3 times in order to satisfy the Radical Left. What should have been a good story got &#8216;worse &amp; worse,&#8217; until the headline alone made it very unfair. Fake &amp; Corrupt News that is very dangerous for our Country!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The New York Times changed headlines 3 times in order to satisfy the Radical Left. What should have been a good story got “worse &amp; worse”, until the headline alone made it very unfair. Fake &amp; Corrupt News that is very dangerous for our Country!
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1242095933296443395?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 23, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The article in question dealt with Senate Democrats voting against a stimulus package that would provide checks to Americans.
As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-york-times-changes-headline-about-democrats-blocking-coronavirus-stimulus">The Daily Wire</a> reported earlier on Monday, the original headline for the article read: “Democrats Block Action on $1.8 Trillion Stimulus.” But then the Times changed the headline to read, “Democrats Block Action on Stimulus Plan, Seeking Worker Protections,” eschewing any notion that the Democrats were acting in a partisan fashion. The Times appeared to change the headline yet once again, this time to “Partisan Divide Threatens Deal on Rescue Bill,” which elided the fact that Democrats were responsible for the failure of the bill. The Daily Wire noted, “The <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/us/politics/coronavirus-economic-rescue-plan.html">headline</a> at the time of this writing reads, “Emergency Economic Rescue Plan in Limbo as Democrats Block Action,” which posited that Democrats blocked the bill as they were “seeking stronger protections for workers and stricter rules for bailed-out businesses.”
Last August, President Trump ripped the Times after it changed its headline of its front-page story on his televised statement responding to the horrific mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio.
The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-calls-out-nyt-changing-headline-after-james-barrett?ref=patrick.net">reported</a> at the time, “In his prepared remarks on Monday, Trump condemned white supremacy and all forms of racial hatred, called for Americans to come together, and urged congressional leaders to work toward bipartisan solutions to help prevent future tragedies.”
Trump had stated:
<blockquote>The shooter in El Paso posted a manifesto online, consumed by racist hate. In one voice our nation must condemn racism, bigotry and white supremacy. These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America. Hatred warps the mind, ravages the heart and devours the soul … We cannot allow ourselves to feel powerless. We can and will stop this evil contagion. In that task, we must honor the sacred memory of those we have lost, by acting as one people. Open wounds cannot heal if we are divided. We must seek real bipartisan solutions — we have to do that, in a bipartisan manner — that will truly make America safer and better for all.</blockquote>
The Daily Wire continued, &#8220;The Times initially gave its coverage of Trump&#8217;s speech the headline &#8216;TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM,&#8217; as shown in a preview of Tuesday&#8217;s edition circulated online.&#8221;
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/50277/democrats-blast-nyt-after-outrageous-trump-speech-james-barrett">The Daily Wire</a> added, &#8220;After a flood of complaints from the Left, including several Democratic presidential hopefuls, the Times altered the headline to &#8216;ASSAILING HATE BUT NOT GUNS.'&#8221;
Trump responded with a Twitter thread in which he wrote:
<blockquote>&#8220;&#8216;Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism,&#8217; was the correct description in the first headline by the Failing New York Times, but it was quickly changed to, &#8216;Assailing Hate But Not Guns,&#8217; after the Radical Left Democrats went absolutely CRAZY!&#8221; &#8220;Fake News — That’s what we’re up against&#8230;&#8221;</blockquote>
Trump quoted former Bill Clinton advisor Mark Penn asserting, &#8220;This is an astounding development in journalism. I’ve never seen it happen before, I’ve just never seen anything like this! Is that journalism today? I don’t think so!&#8221;
&nbsp;

Trump Blisters NY Times After Times Changes Headline About Democrats Blocking Coronavirus Stimulus Bill

Democratic Party

Democrats have it good. They know that they can do things that if done by Republicans would cause media outlets to lose their minds. Democrats know that the media will run cover for them in the same situations.
The latest example comes from The New York Times, which keeps changing its headline regarding Democrats in the Senate voting against a stimulus package that would provide checks to Americans to help mitigate the effects of the coronavirus quarantine, which has shut down businesses and cost people their paychecks.
The original headline for the article read: “Democrats Block Action on $1.8 Trillion Stimulus.” Right-leaning people would notice that this is how the Times would have titled the article had Republicans blocked a Democrat bill, though it probably would have gone further to describe the bill as helping families during the coronavirus.
The Times, however, changed the headline to read, “Democrats Block Action on Stimulus Plan, Seeking Worker Protections,” which adds a vague qualifier meant to make it look like Democrats were not simply acting with partisan bitterness – a qualifier Republicans rarely get from left-leaning media outlets.
For example, just one week ago, media outlets in their headlines blamed Republicans for blocking a coronavirus relief bill. NBC News, for example, ran with the headline, “<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/rep-louie-gohmert-delays-house-coronavirus-relief-bill-moving-senate-n1160681">House sends coronavirus relief bill to Senate after delay by Rep. Gohmert</a>.” Why did Gohmert delay the bill? Because he wanted to read the technical corrections made to the bill over the weekend. Yet the wording from the media made it sound like this was a bad thing.
Back in May 2019, a Washington Post headline read, “House Republicans block $19.1 billion nationwide disaster aid bill for third time.” The reason Republicans held up the bill is that they wanted to debate it rather than passing it by voice vote. The bill would have provided billions of dollars in disaster relief to areas hit by hurricanes, flooding, and wildfires. Republicans wanted to make sure the relief was being spent correctly, but you wouldn’t know that from the headlines.
The Times appears to have changed the headline regarding the coronavirus stimulus bill a second time to read: “Partisan Divide Threatens Deal on Rescue Bill,” a headline that does not note that it is Democrats who are creating the divide. The <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/us/politics/coronavirus-economic-rescue-plan.html">headline</a> at the time of this writing reads, “Emergency Economic Rescue Plan in Limbo as Democrats Block Action.” The dek of the article explains that Democrats blocked the relief bill because they were “seeking stronger protections for workers and stricter rules for bailed-out businesses.”
The Times has a coronavirus outbreak vertical that collects their reporting on the virus, and a headline regarding the relief bill on that <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/world/coronavirus-updates-world-usa.html#link-661a3d00">page</a> still reads, “Senate Democrats block action on a trillion-dollar stimulus plan.”
Left-leaning media outlets have been caught changing headlines in the past in ways that irritate conservatives. For example, in October 2019, The Washington Post infamously changed its headline regarding a terrorist leader’s death from “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Islamic State’s ‘terrorist-in-chief,’ dies at 48,” to “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48.”
After a backlash, the Post again changed the headline to read: “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, extremist leader of Islamic State, dies at 48.”

New York Times Changes Headline About Democrats Blocking Coronavirus Stimulus

Former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson had her lawyers send a letter to the New York Times demanding they correct the “false and defamatory” article titled “From Jerry Falwell Jr to Dr. Drew: 5 Coronavirus Doubters,” which painted Attkisson as one of those doubters.
Attkisson published the legal threat to her <a href="https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/03/read-attkisson-demands-nyt-retract-false-libelous-report/">personal website</a>, saying her attorney would “pursue legal redress” if changes were not made. Attkisson’s attorney, G. Taylor Wilson of Wade, Grunberg &amp; Wilson, LLC, says in the letter that she had attempted to get the article corrected previously, but was provided a “cavalier response” from the Times.
“Through a combination of discrete statements of fact, the defamatory headline, and the juxtaposition of defamatory statements concerning a small group of individuals with whom you have lumped Ms. Attkisson, the article conveys the false and defamatory gist that my client, among other things, lied to her readers and listeners, reported as fact lies that endanger the lives of the public, and otherwise violated the litany of ethical standards by which responsible journalists conduct themselves,” Wilson wrote.
Wilson then outlines 10 examples from the Times article that were false and defamatory toward Attkisson:
<ol>
<li>
<blockquote>The false and defamatory headline, “From Jerry Falwell Jr to Dr. Drew: 5 Coronavirus Doubters.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“While public health experts warn people to take precautions, these popular media figures insist that the virus is overhyped.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“Misinformation about the coronavirus continues to circulate across swaths of the American media – on popular podcasts, in blog podcasts, in blog posts, in online videos and on prime-time cable news shows – as recently as this week.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“Some are conservatives who insist the virus is being hyped for political purposes.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“Even as President Trump and the federal government’s top public health officials warn that the virus is not something to be taken lightly – and the authorities reported more coronavirus deaths in the United States on Wednesday – these commentators make misleading comments, cherry-pick facts and go so far as to claim that the virus could be a hoax or a North Korean Plot.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“One of Mr. Hannity’s top sources [Ms. Attkisson] selectively picks facts.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“In the past, she [Ms. Attkisson] has promoted the debunked theory that vaccines cause autism.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“The facts she has chosen recently to highlight falsely leave the impression that the deaths are not all that significant in number and largely contained to one facility.”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“‘Look at those 30-some-odd deaths – most of them were from Washington State,’ Ms. Attkisson said last week on her podcast, adding that most of those were in an assisted-living facility. ‘The vast majority of those who passed away were from one cluster in the United States – almost none anywhere else.’”</blockquote>
</li>
<li>
<blockquote>“And yet visitors to Ms. Attkisson’s website this week might have come away confused about the severity of the virus, as there were several ads for high-grade protective masks.”</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
As Attkisson’s attorney noted, the Times did not always specifically state how the investigative reporter dismissed the coronavirus, instead lumping her in with four other individuals and claiming things like “these popular media figures insist that the virus is overhyped.” Wilson also took issue with the claims directly written about Attkisson.
“[I]t bears noting that the portion of the Article directly referencing Ms. Attkison is equally problematic and actionable. In it, the Times chose in its editorial discretion to affix defamatory labels to otherwise accurate and fair reporting conducted by Ms. Attkisson. For instance, the Times reiterated its “cherry-picking” accusation by asserting that my client highlighted selective facts that ‘falsely leave the impression that the deaths are not all that significant in number and largely contained to one facility,’” Wilson wrote. “It comes as no surpise that my client’s accurate and factual reporting in this regard mirrors the Times’ own reporting on the virus, including that at the time of publication the deaths in the United States numbered approximately 30 and that they were concentrated in Washington State, and a nursing home facility in particular.”
Wilson noted that the Times is using Attkisson’s past accurate statements to discredit her now that new information has come to light. Attkisson even noted that what she was reporting was current information that was subject to change and directed her listeners to go to cdc.gov for the most accurate and updated information.

Sharyl Attkisson

Ex-CBS Reporter Sharyl Attkisson Demands New York Times Correct ‘False And Defamatory’ Article

defamation

Lawsuit

In an <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/20/opinion/coronavirus-pandemic-social-distancing.html">op-ed</a> for The New York Times published Friday, David L. Katz, the founding director of the Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center, suggests that &#8220;our fight against coronavirus&#8221; may end up being &#8220;worse than the disease.&#8221; By taking an &#8220;at war&#8221; approach to fighting COVID-19 — widespread shutdowns and isolation of the entire population — rather than a &#8220;surgical strike&#8221; approach focusing on the truly vulnerable, Katz argues, we have set ourselves on the path to &#8220;uncontained viral contagion and monumental collateral damage to our society and economy.&#8221; 
&#8220;We routinely differentiate between two kinds of military action: the inevitable carnage and collateral damage of diffuse hostilities, and the precision of a &#8216;surgical strike,&#8217; methodically targeted to the sources of our particular peril. The latter, when executed well, minimizes resources and unintended consequences alike,&#8221; Katz begins.
The same dichotomy applies here, Katz argues. &#8220;This can be open war, with all the fallout that portends, or it could be something more surgical. The United States and much of the world so far have gone in for the former,&#8221; he states.
&#8220;I write now with a sense of urgency to make sure we consider the surgical approach, while there is still time,&#8221; he warns.
The &#8220;unique&#8221; nature of COVID-19 — that it results in only &#8220;mild&#8221; symptoms in 99% of cases and that it appears to only pose a high risk to the elderly — Katz contends, makes it particularly suited for a more strategic containment effort, rather than our current unsustainable, society-wide approach that threatens to upend the economy. &#8220;What we know so far about the coronavirus makes it a unique case for the potential application of a &#8216;herd immunity&#8217; approach, a strategy viewed as a desirable side effect <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2020/03/group-immunity-not-main-aim-of-dutch-anti-corona-measures-says-health-chief/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">in the Netherlands,</a> and briefly considered in <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/38E7EDF6-663A-11EA-BBAF-956FCC553CE3?fbclid=IwAR3w1k-9bFPe1-rjyhBfiD0RfG44LSkEmIHAFKOsYHDuCjBzqXkV2U8vS5Q" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the United Kingdom</a>,&#8221; Katz explains.
Katz provides the following summary of the evidence from South Korea, China and the famous Diamond Princess Cruise Ship cases to back up his assessment of the risk the virus poses:
<blockquote>The <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-death-rates-by-age-south-korea" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">data from South Korea</a>, where tracking the coronavirus has been by far the best to date, indicate that as much as <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-korea/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">99 percent</a> of active cases in the general population are “mild” and do not require specific medical treatment. The small percentage of cases that do require such services are highly concentrated among those age 60 and older, and further so the older people are. Other things being equal, those over age 70 appear at three times the mortality risk as those age 60 to 69, and those over age 80 at nearly twice the mortality risk of those age 70 to 79.
These conclusions are corroborated by the data from Wuhan, China, which show a higher death rate, but an almost identical distribution. The higher death rate in China may be real, but is perhaps a result of less widespread testing. South Korea promptly, and uniquely, started testing the apparently healthy population at large, finding the mild and asymptomatic cases of Covid-19 other countries are overlooking. The experience of <a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the Diamond Princess cruise ship</a>, which houses a contained, older population, proves the point. The death rate among that insular and uniformly exposed population is roughly 1 percent.</blockquote>
The data from the U.S. is &#8220;entirely aligned with the data from other countries,&#8221; Katz writes, noting that only around 200 people have died in the U.S. thus far from complications related to the virus. The point, Katz explains, is that all of the available evidence and the limitations of our health care system points to focusing our containment efforts on the elderly and chronically ill, not society at large.
&#8220;The clustering of complications and death from Covid-19 among the elderly and chronically ill, but not children (there have been<a class="css-1g7m0tk" title="" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/health/coronavirus-childen.html"> only very rare deaths in children</a>), suggests that we could achieve the crucial goals of social distancing — saving lives and not overwhelming our medical system — by preferentially protecting the medically frail and those over age 60, and in particular those over 70 and 80, from exposure,&#8221; Katz explains.
The reason this is so dire, he underscores, is that our current approach is rapidly causing severe damage socially, economically and in terms of public health.
&#8220;I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near total meltdown of normal life — schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned — will be long lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus itself,&#8221; Katz writes.
While the stock market might rebound, many businesses and thus many jobs, may never come back, a result that has massive societal ramifications. Meanwhile, by stretching our limited health care resources &#8220;so widely, so shallowly and so haphazardly,&#8221; we are likely setting ourselves up for failure on multiple levels.
If we do not &#8220;pivot&#8221; now, Katz warns, we are likely heading for &#8220;uncontained viral contagion and monumental collateral damage to our society and economy.&#8221; (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/20/opinion/coronavirus-pandemic-social-distancing.html">Read the full opinion piece here</a>.)
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/stanford-professor-data-indicates-were-overreacting-to-coronavirus">Stanford Professor: Data Indicates We’re Severely Overreacting To Coronavirus</a>

NYC Coronavirus

Prevention Expert: Data Shows Our Fight Against Coronavirus May Be Worse Than The Disease

On Tuesday, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/business/media/china-expels-american-journalists.html">The New York Times</a> reported that the Chinese government announced that it would revoke the press credentials of American journalists for major news outlets while demanding that the media outlets for which the journalists worked tell the Chinese government what they were doing. The news outlets included The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, the Voice of America and Time magazine.
The Times wrote, “China instructed American journalists ‘whose press credentials are due to expire before the end of 2020’ to ‘notify the Department of Information of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs within four calendar days starting from today and hand back their press cards within ten calendar days.’” The government also said the journalists “will not be allowed to continue working as journalists in the People’s Republic of China, including its Hong Kong and Macao Special Administrative Regions.”
A Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman said the decisions “are entirely necessary and reciprocal countermeasures that China is compelled to take in response to the unreasonable oppression the Chinese media organizations experience in the U.S. They are legitimate and justified self-defense in every sense. What the U.S. has done is exclusively targeting Chinese media organizations, and hence driven by a Cold War mentality and ideological bias.”
The move by the Chinese government is the latest salvo in the battle between the Trump administration and China. On Feb. 18, the Trump administration declared that employees of Xinhua, CGTN, China Radio, China Daily and The People’s Daily, the major Chinese news outlets, were government operatives. On February 19, China announced it was expelling three members of The Wall Street Journal; TIME noted, “Beijing blamed the expulsions on an editorial headline that called China the ‘sick man of Asia,’ but the expelled reporters had also written hard-hitting investigative stories about alleged human rights violations in Xinjiang, where Beijing has been detaining members of the Muslim Uighur minority in camps, and alleged abuses of power by Chinese leaders.”
The Trump administration <a href="https://time.com/5794166/the-trump-administration-has-put-new-restrictions-on-chinese-journalists-in-the-u-s-will-it-work/">cut the number of Chinese nationals</a> working for China’s state-run media outlets in the U.S. by almost 50% on March 2. On March 3, Hua Chunying, a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, wrote on Twitter, “Now the U.S. has kicked off the game, let’s play.” China then demanded an apology for the Wall Street Journal article.
As the Times reports, the Foreign Correspondents’ Club has stated that China has increased its targeting of journalists, writing, “Chinese authorities are using visas as weapons against the foreign press like never before, expanding their deployment of a longtime intimidation tactic as working conditions for foreign journalists in China severely deteriorated in 2019.”
<a href="https://techcrunch.com/2020/03/17/report-china-clamps-down-further-on-dissent-as-it-expels-journalists-from-nyt-wsj-and-wapo/">TechCrunch</a> noted:
<blockquote>China’s suppression of external dissent is also being mirrored with regard to its own citizens. While there was a bit of an open window for discussion as the government attempted to <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51409801">moderate blowback over its response to the novel coronavirus pandemic</a>, internet censors <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/business/china-coronavirus-internet-police.html">according to The New York Times</a> are now once again clamping down hard on negative conversations and adding additional reinforcements to police online discussions</blockquote>
&nbsp;

Chinese Foreign Ministry resumes offline briefings in Beijing

China Expels Journalists From Major American Media Outlets

Wall Street Journal

Washington Post

The New York Times has issued a significant correction to its 1619 Project, a series of articles that has prompted fierce backlash from historians for revising the historical relationship between slavery and the founding of the country. 
In the August article titled “Our Democracy’s Founding Ideals Were False When They Were Written. Black Americans Have Fought To Make Them True,” Nikole Hannah-Jones, an investigative journalist who is not a professional historian, makes the following sweeping claim: 
<blockquote>Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.</blockquote>
In the correction <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/magazine/an-update-to-the-1619-project.html">announcement</a>, the news agency reports that the specific passage has “elicited criticism from some historians and support from others,” and that the article has been amended to add two words — “some of” — in order to prevent the impression that all of the colonists were fighting to protect slavery. 
The update passage now states “the primary reason some of the colonists decided to declare independence &#8230;”
According to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/03/06/1619-project-new-york-times-mistake-122248">Politico</a>, one historian has publicly admitted that before the article was published, she was asked by the Times to fact-check the passage in question and was subsequently ignored even though she “vigorously disputed the claim.”
“Weeks before, I had received an email from a New York Times research editor. Because I’m an historian of African American life and slavery, in New York, specifically, and the pre-Civil War era more generally, she wanted me to verify some statements for the project,” Leslie M. Harris, a history professor at Northwestern University, wrote in an op-ed for Politico. 
“Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution, the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war,” Harris recalled telling the Times’ fact-checker, who she says, after some back and fourth, eventually stopped replying. 
“Overall, the 1619 Project is a much-needed corrective to the blindly celebratory histories that once dominated our understanding of the past—histories that wrongly suggested racism and slavery were not a central part of U.S. history,” writes Harris, who says she supports the goal of the project. 
James McPherson, one of the United States’ foremost historians on the civil war, has lambasted the project for reducing the complexities of American history, saying that he was “disturbed by what seemed like a very unbalanced, one-sided account, which lacked context and perspective on the complexity of slavery,” reports the <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/01/24/scholars-are-eviscerating-the-new-york-times-1619-project/">New York Post</a>. 
James Oaks, an authoritative historian on the Reconstruction era, has blasted the historical revisionism required to assert that slavery is “built into the DNA of America,” saying that people who claim so are “not only ahistorical, they’re actually anti-historical. The function of those tropes is to deny change over time,” reports the news agency. 
The Pulitzer Center for Investigative Reporting, which is not affiliated with the Pulitzer Prize, currently offers a host of lesson plans and information for teachers who want to integrate the 1619 project into the school curriculum.

Inside the New York Times

After Backlash From Historians, NYT Forced To Issue Significant Correction To 1619 Project

On Tuesday morning, The New York Times reported that critics had singled out conservatives such as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and  Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) for using the term &#8220;Wuhan&#8221; when describing the coronavirus that has affected various parts of the world. The Times tweeted:
<blockquote>Some conservatives, including Mike Pompeo, Sen. Tom Cotton and Rep. Paul Gosar, are using the term “Wuhan virus” to describe Covid-19. Critics accused the term, which goes against the recommendation of health officials, of being racist and xenophobic.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Some conservatives, including Mike Pompeo, Sen. Tom Cotton and Rep. Paul Gosar, are using the term “Wuhan virus” to describe Covid-19. Critics accused the term, which goes against the recommendation of health officials, of being racist and xenophobic. <a href="https://t.co/z31zlTHCaL">https://t.co/z31zlTHCaL</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1237417952955305987?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 10, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Times may have taken satisfaction in seeing prominent members of the GOP come under fire for alleged racist and xenophobic language, but it should take a look at its own house first. Check out these tweets from the paper that has boasted it featured &#8220;All the news fit to print&#8221;:
January 21: “Breaking News: The first U.S. case of the Wuhan coronavirus has been confirmed in Washington State, federal officials said. The virus has spread from China to at least 4 other countries.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Breaking News: The first U.S. case of the Wuhan coronavirus has been confirmed in Washington State, federal officials said. The virus has spread from China to at least 4 other countries. <a href="https://t.co/ahjgXTS9sM">https://t.co/ahjgXTS9sM</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1219690544936431616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 21, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
January 21: “Maps: Where the Wuhan coronavirus has spread.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Maps: Where the Wuhan coronavirus has spread<a href="https://t.co/vmgMbfsjgY">https://t.co/vmgMbfsjgY</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1219816978451439616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
January 23: “A Texas A&amp;M University student is being examined for a suspected case of the Wuhan coronavirus. Officials say they&#8217;re keeping the patient isolated at home while they do additional testing.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
A Texas A&amp;M University student is being examined for a suspected case of the Wuhan coronavirus. Officials say they&#39;re keeping the patient isolated at home while they do additional testing.<a href="https://t.co/5NeFbKq4KD">https://t.co/5NeFbKq4KD</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1220481391361712129?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 23, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
January 23: “A look at China&#8217;s battle with the Wuhan coronavirus, in photos.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
A look at China&#39;s battle with the Wuhan coronavirus, in photos <a href="https://t.co/3sWfHBDnKJ">https://t.co/3sWfHBDnKJ</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1220325349575266304?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 23, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
January 24: &#8220;The latest on the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak: France has become the first country in Europe to report infections. Authorities confirmed one case in Bordeaux and another in Paris.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The latest on the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak: France has become the first country in Europe to report infections. Authorities confirmed one case in Bordeaux and another in Paris. <a href="https://t.co/aGBQGOciRx">https://t.co/aGBQGOciRx</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1220795757156012032?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
January 27: “The death toll of the Wuhan coronavirus climbed to at least 80 &#8211; Nearly 3,000 people have so far contracted the virus &#8211; China extended its Lunar New Year holiday by three more days to discourage people from traveling Latest updates here:”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&#8211; The death toll of the Wuhan coronavirus climbed to at least 80 &#8211; Nearly 3,000 people have so far contracted the virus &#8211; China extended its Lunar New Year holiday by three more days to discourage people from traveling
Latest updates here: <a href="https://t.co/oRy57fXbf8">https://t.co/oRy57fXbf8</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1221694345520152576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 27, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
January 27: “Videos circulating on Chinese social media show doctors straining to handle the enormous workload and hospital corridors loaded with patients, some of whom appear to already be dead. Here are the latest updates on the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Videos circulating on Chinese social media show doctors straining to handle the enormous workload and hospital corridors loaded with patients, some of whom appear to already be dead.
Here are the latest updates on the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak. <a href="https://t.co/thOFNwafla">https://t.co/thOFNwafla</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1221719508882161664?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 27, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
January 29: “China now has more cases of the Wuhan coronavirus than it had of SARS, but comparing the two is tricky —170 people have died. More than 7,711 cases have been confirmed. —Mask hoarders may raise the risk of an outbreak in the United States.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
—China now has more cases of the Wuhan coronavirus than it had of SARS, but comparing the two is tricky —170 people have died. More than 7,711 cases have been confirmed. —Mask hoarders may raise the risk of an outbreak in the United States
Live updates: <a href="https://t.co/LYRZ4OWir9">https://t.co/LYRZ4OWir9</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1222767316250873856?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 30, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
February 2: “The Wuhan coronavirus spreading from China is now likely to become a pandemic that circles the globe, according to experts. But scientists do not yet know how lethal the new coronavirus is.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The Wuhan coronavirus spreading from China is now likely to become a pandemic that circles the globe, according to experts. But scientists do not yet know how lethal the new coronavirus is. <a href="https://t.co/u1KezmOoq2">https://t.co/u1KezmOoq2</a>
&mdash; The New York Times (@nytimes) <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1224067508107386882?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 2, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/10/republicans-face-backlash-racist-labeling-coronavirus-china-wuhan">The Guardian</a> reported on Tuesday in a piece titled, &#8220;Republicans face backlash over racist labeling of coronavirus,&#8221; that the Chinese government took umbrage with politicians using the term Wuhan to describe the virus:
<blockquote>China reacted furiously on Monday, with a spokesman for the foreign ministry <a class="u-underline" href="https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/t1753656.shtml" data-link-name="in body link">criticizing US elected officials</a>. “Despite the fact that the WHO [<a class="u-underline" href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/world-health-organization" data-link-name="in body link">World Health Organization</a>] has officially named this novel type of coronavirus, certain American politician[s], disrespecting science and the WHO decision, jumped at the first chance to stigmatize China and Wuhan with it. We condemn this despicable practice,” said Geng Shuang.</blockquote>
The Guardian then issued its partisan shot: &#8220;Republicans’ attempts to associate Covid-19 overtly with China repeats a common theme of associating epidemics with certain countries, such as 1918 influenza pandemic being branded &#8216;Spanish flu.&#8217;”
No mention of The New York Times.

Oops computer keyboard close up

NY Times Notes GOP Leaders Get Accused Of Racism For Calling Coronavirus ‘Wuhan.’ Check Out These NY Times Tweets.

Mike Pompeo

Racism

Tom Cotton

A history professor who helped fact-check The New York Times’ debunked 1619 Project said her edits were ignored.
Leslie Harris, a history professor at Northwestern University and an author, took to Politico to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/03/06/1619-project-new-york-times-mistake-122248">explain</a> her experience with the Times’ 1619 Project and its claim that the American Revolution was fought to preserve slavery. Harris said she previously had argued against the idea to include that claim. She said she received an email from a Times research editor asking her to verify the following assertion: “One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.”
<blockquote>I vigorously disputed the claim. Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution, the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war.
The editor followed up with several questions probing the nature of slavery in the Colonial era, such as whether enslaved people were allowed to read, could legally marry, could congregate in groups of more than four, and could own, will or inherit property—the answers to which vary widely depending on the era and the colony. I explained these histories as best I could—with references to specific examples—but never heard back from her about how the information would be used.
Despite my advice, the Times published the incorrect statement about the American Revolution anyway, in Hannah-Jones’ introductory <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/14/magazine/black-history-american-democracy.html">essay</a>. In addition, the paper’s characterizations of slavery in early America reflected laws and practices more common in the antebellum era than in Colonial times, and did not accurately illustrate the varied experiences of the first generation of enslaved people that arrived in Virginia in 1619.</blockquote>
Harris, however, tried to minimize in her essay the Times’ adherence to that claim and the central theme of trying to rewrite American history. Harris suggests that the “one sentence about the role of slavery in the founding of the United States has ended up at the center of a debate over the whole project.” Harris, however, acknowledges that five academic historians signed a letter claiming “that the 1619 Project got some significant elements of the history wrong, including the claim that the Revolutionary War was fought to preserve slavery” but that the Times refused to correct the errors.
There are more errors than just that one, glaring, misrepresentation of our nation’s founding, yet supporters of the project have coalesced around that issue (which is a much bigger problem for the project than they let on) to pretend the rest of it is sound and necessary. Harris, for example, points to the fact that the Times’ 1619 Project is “a strong Pulitzer contender” as if the award means anything anymore.
Still Harris acknowledges just how wrong the Times got its Revolutionary era facts wrong, and the fact that her concerns were ignored shows just how little the paper cared to be factually right – rather than politically right – in regards to the entire project.

A Fact-Checker Warned NYT About Their Inaccurate 1619 Project. The Times Didn’t Listen.

MSNBC&#8217;s Brian Williams and New York Times Editorial Board Member Mara Gay made an embarrassing math error late on Thursday night regarding the amount of money that Mike Bloomberg spent on his failed Democratic presidential campaign.
&#8220;Somebody tweeted recently that actually with the money that he spent, he could have given every American a million dollars,&#8221; Gay said.
Williams&#8217; show aired the tweet on national television.
&#8220;I’ve got it. Let’s put it on the screen,&#8221; Williams said. &#8220;When I read it tonight on social media, it kind of all became clear.&#8221;
Williams then read the tweet: &#8220;Bloomberg spent $500 million on ads. The U.S. Population, 327 million. He could have given each American $1 million and have had lunch money left over.&#8221;
&#8220;It’s an incredible way of putting it,&#8221; Williams said.
&#8220;It’s an incredible way of putting it,&#8221; Gay said. “It’s true. It’s disturbing.&#8221;
There&#8217;s only one problem: $500 million divided by 327,000,000 people is $1.53 per person, not over $1 million per person.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
MSNBC’s Brian Williams reads a tweet: &quot;Bloomberg spent $500 million on ads. U.S. Population, 327 million. He could have given each American $1 million&quot;
NYT Editorial Board Member Mara Gay: “It’s an incredible way of putting it. It’s true. It’s disturbing”
It&#39;s $1.53 per person <a href="https://t.co/dIiwCESgh8">pic.twitter.com/dIiwCESgh8</a>
&mdash; Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1235802419734269952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Patrick McMullan Archives

WATCH: MSNBC’s Brian Williams, New York Times’ Mara Gay Make Embarrassing Math Error

Michael Bloomberg

MSNBC

President Donald Trump&#8217;s campaign took legal action against The New York Times on Wednesday, filing a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-campaign-files-lawsuit-against-new-york-times-times-responds">defamation suit</a> against the paper for “knowingly&#8221; publishing &#8220;false and defamatory statements&#8221; with regard to the Russian &#8220;collusion&#8221; conspiracy theory back in 2019.
Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday to address the coronavirus, reporters pressed the president about the lawsuit.
“They did a bad thing,&#8221; Trump said of the Times. &#8220;And there will be more coming,&#8221; he promised, as reported by <a href="https://deadline.com/2020/02/donald-trump-new-york-times-1202869170/">Deadline</a>.
“If you read it, you will see that it is much more than opinion,” the president defended the suit. “It is beyond an opinion.”
As noted by <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-campaign-files-lawsuit-against-new-york-times-times-responds">The Daily Wire</a>, the defamation suit takes aim at a Times piece published on March 27, 2019, penned by former Times executive editor Max Frankel. The piece, titled, &#8220;<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/27/opinion/mueller-trump-russia-quid-pro-quo.html">The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo</a>,&#8221; was published in the Times&#8217; &#8220;opinion&#8221; section, but posits that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to help beat 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton &#8220;for a new pro-Russian foreign policy.&#8221;
The Trump campaign claims the Times “knowingly published false and defamatory statements” about the campaign having an “overarching deal” with Russian President “Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy” to “help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton” in exchange for “a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration’s burdensome economic sanctions.&#8221;
“The Defamatory Article does not allege or refer to any proof of its claims of a ‘quid pro quo’ or ‘deal’ between the Campaign and Russia,” the complaint reads. “Rather, the Defamatory Article selectively refers to previously-reported contacts between a Russian lawyer and persons connected with the Campaign.&#8221;
The suit continues: &#8220;The Defamatory Article, however, insinuates that these contacts must have resulted in a quid pro quo or a deal, and the Defamatory Article does not acknowledge that, in fact, there had been extensive reporting, including in The Times, that the meetings and contacts that the Defamatory Article refers to did not result in any quid pro quo or deal between the Campaign and Russia, or anyone connected with either of them.”
“The Times’ story is false,” the lawsuit asserts.
Backing their case, the Trump campaign highlights the findings of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-cleared-no-collusion-no-obstruction-no-ryan-saavedra">Special Counsel Robert Mueller</a>, whose investigation did not find collusion with Russia during the 2016 election.
The bias against the Right and President Trump is seemingly pervasive at the Times. In 2019, for example, the newspaper was forced to issue a correction to a piece smearing Trump-nominated Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
“An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book’s account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party,” read a glaring correction issued from the Times, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-new-york-times-adds-correction-kavanaugh-ryan-saavedra">The Daily Wire</a> noted. “The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.”
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-campaign-files-lawsuit-against-new-york-times-times-responds">Trump Campaign Files Lawsuit Against New York Times; Times Responds</a>

President Donald Trump

Trump Responds To Legal Action Against The New York Times: ‘There Will Be More Coming’

Trump Campaign Files Lawsuit Against New York Times; Times Responds

On Tuesday, a member of The New York Times editorial board who is known for her anti-Trump views blamed President Trump, not any official of New York City or New York state, for a water main break in East Harlem.
Mara Gay of the Times was triggered by a tweet reporting, “DAY 2 NO RUNNING WATER: Hundreds of families in 3 buildings still don’t have running water at the Taft Houses in East Harlem. A water main break caused 9 buildings 3,000 people lost water service. Live at 5:15 with the latest on when water will be restored.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
DAY 2 NO RUNNING WATER: Hundreds of families in 3 buildings still don’t have running water at the Taft Houses in East Harlem. A water main break caused 9 buildings 3,000 people lost water service. Live at 5:15 with the latest on when water will be restored. <a href="https://twitter.com/PIX11News?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@PIX11News</a> <a href="https://t.co/3VlDFGWQI9">pic.twitter.com/3VlDFGWQI9</a>
&mdash; Monica Morales (@monicamoralestv) <a href="https://twitter.com/monicamoralestv/status/1232047492088373249?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Gay responded, “But make America great again, right?”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
But make America great again, right? <a href="https://t.co/PfDXcZ2wBA">https://t.co/PfDXcZ2wBA</a>
&mdash; Mara Gay (@MaraGay) <a href="https://twitter.com/MaraGay/status/1232085835610230784?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Social media ripped Gay for blaming Trump:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Are you blaming Trump because a waterpipe in NYC is not working? 
And you are actually part of the editorial board at the <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a>? 
WOW! <a href="https://t.co/2bYsAvYRg9">https://t.co/2bYsAvYRg9</a>
&mdash; Reagan Battalion (@ReaganBattalion) <a href="https://twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/status/1232087833109782528?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
New York Times editorial board member does not realize that New York and New York City are all run by Democrats <a href="https://t.co/3sx2pBcggU">https://t.co/3sx2pBcggU</a> <a href="https://t.co/xo3tmrJNc9">pic.twitter.com/xo3tmrJNc9</a>
&mdash; (((Jason Rantz))) on KTTH Radio (@jasonrantz) <a href="https://twitter.com/jasonrantz/status/1232100257124634624?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 25, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Hey <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a>, could you pop by and see if you can get the **water main** on the street here fixed?
Clearly you are the only one capable. <a href="https://t.co/UcLwEacf3V">https://t.co/UcLwEacf3V</a>
&mdash; Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) <a href="https://twitter.com/chadfelixg/status/1232090098642161665?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The federal government doesn&#39;t control the public utilities in Harlem. If you&#39;re looking to blame someone, you might consider the&#8230;
&#8211;mayor (D) &#8211;city council (D) &#8211;governor (D) &#8211;state assembly (D) &#8211;state senate (D) &#8211;NYT editorial board (D) for endorsing all those people
&mdash; Michael Knowles (@michaeljknowles) <a href="https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles/status/1232090224206856192?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
At the end of January, Gay <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/news/new-york-times-editorial-board-member-compares-gop-opposition-to-impeachment-to-defense-of-jim-crow/">compared Republicans’ behavior</a> during the impeachment trial of President Trump to the way politicians had defended the Jim Crow South, stating on MSNBC, “I have to say, as somebody who grew up with a father who grew up in the Jim Crow South and in Jim Crow Detroit, a lot of what this has looked like from the Republican side, the kind of imagining and the farcical nature of this, the lack of good faith argument sounds very familiar to me, and it’s actually quite scary. I think we’re in a very scary moment.”
As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nyt-editorial-board-member-attacks-cruz-over-ryan-saavedra">The Daily Wire</a> reported in July 2019, Gay issued a brutal comment to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) after Cruz corrected Colin Kaepernick over a misleading quote from Frederick Douglass that Kaepernick tweeted on the 4th of July that did not capture the full context of Douglass’ speech.
Kaepernick tweeted, &#8220;&#8216;What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? This Fourth of July is yours, not mine…There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of these United States at this very hour.&#8217; &#8211; Frederick Douglass.&#8221;
Cruz fired back this fusillade:
<blockquote>You quote a mighty and historic speech by the great abolitionist Frederick Douglass, but, without context, many modern readers will misunderstand. Two critical points: This speech was given in 1852, before the Civil War, when the abomination of slavery still existed. Thanks to Douglass and so many other heroes, we ended that grotesque evil and have made enormous strides to protecting the civil rights of everybody.
Douglass was not anti-American; he was, rightly and passionately, anti-slavery. Indeed, he concluded the speech as follows: “Allow me to say, in conclusion, notwithstanding the dark picture I have this day presented, of the state of the nation, I do not despair of this country.”</blockquote>
Cruz quoted Douglass:
<blockquote>There are forces in operation, which must inevitably, work the downfall of slavery. The arm of the Lord is not shortened, and the doom of slavery is certain. I, therefore, leave off where I began, with hope. While drawing encouragement from the Declaration of Independence, the great principles it contains, and the genius of American Institutions, my spirit is also cheered by the obvious tendencies of the age.</blockquote>
Gay ranted at Cruz, &#8220;Frederick Douglass is an American hero, and his name has no business in your mouth.&#8221;
Cruz had a ready answer, responding, &#8220;Let’s see. You’re on the editorial board of the NYT. You respond to any view you don’t like, not with facts or reason, but w/ ad hominem attack. And you seem dismayed that I linked to Douglass’s entire speech, so readers can judge for themselves.&#8221;
&nbsp;
&nbsp;

East Harlem Gentrification Gets Boost From Rezoning, Tax Breaks

NYT Editorial Board Member Blames TRUMP For NYC Water Main Breaking. She Gets Slammed.

On Thursday, The New York Times, which in the past refused to print an op-ed by former senator John McCain in 2008 when he was running for president of the United States, published an op-ed written by the deputy leader of the Taliban who is the chief of the Haqqani network, a U.S.-designated terror group responsible for the savage murder of hundreds of people in Afghanistan. That provoked an outcry from many people familiar with the group’s bloody history and the massacres it has committed.
In the op-ed, titled <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/opinion/taliban-afghanistan-war-haqqani.html">“What We, the Taliban, Want,”</a> Sirajuddin Haqqani wrote, “The long war has exacted a terrible cost from everyone. We thought it unwise to dismiss any potential opportunity for peace no matter how meager the prospects of its success. For more than four decades, precious Afghan lives have been lost every day. Everyone has lost somebody they loved. Everyone is tired of war. I am convinced that the killing and the maiming must stop.”
Even The New York Times’ Afghanistan correspondent Mujib Mashal was furious about his paper publishing the op-ed, writing on Twitter, “&#8217;The piece by Siraj Haqqani in @nytopinion &#8211; which&#8217;s independent of our news operations &amp; judgment &#8211; omits the most fundamental fact: that Siraj is no Taliban peace-maker as he paints himself, that he&#8217;s behind some of most ruthless attacks of this war with many civilian lives lost.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The piece by Siraj Haqqani in <a href="https://twitter.com/nytopinion?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytopinion</a> &#8211; which&#39;s independent of our news operations &amp; judgment &#8211; omits the most fundamental fact: that Siraj is no Taliban peace-maker as he paints himself, that he&#39;s behind some of most ruthless attacks of this war with many civilian lives lost
&mdash; Mujib Mashal (@MujMash) <a href="https://twitter.com/MujMash/status/1230450886033453056?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
He then linked to a number of articles describing the carnage inflicted by Haqqani and his network:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
And to know what our <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a> news reporting has on Siraj Haqqqani, and what the Haqqani Network is accused of over the years, just read our years and years of reporting. Some samples:<a href="https://t.co/CW0k9I7Il1">https://t.co/CW0k9I7Il1</a><a href="https://t.co/DcTDVtro8z">https://t.co/DcTDVtro8z</a><a href="https://t.co/p1MURtNXNF">https://t.co/p1MURtNXNF</a> <a href="https://t.co/jktbWgmHCG">https://t.co/jktbWgmHCG</a>
&mdash; Mujib Mashal (@MujMash) <a href="https://twitter.com/MujMash/status/1230455047080771584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Mashal was echoed by many others:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The NYT has decided to amplify and effectively promote the messages of the world’s most notorious terrorist (and Al Qaeda affiliate)-a man who has the blood of hundreds of thousands. An interview is one thing but to allow such a man to express himself unchallenged is a disgrace. <a href="https://t.co/u3kJOnUo2v">https://t.co/u3kJOnUo2v</a>
&mdash; Saad Mohseni (@saadmohseni) <a href="https://twitter.com/saadmohseni/status/1230483178961260545?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The guy who kidnapped and held New York Times reporter <a href="https://twitter.com/RohdeD?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RohdeD</a> now gets to write oped in <a href="https://twitter.com/nytopinion?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytopinion</a> 🤦🏽‍♂️ Will Ayman Al-Zawahiri be next? <a href="https://t.co/DfXe4S1v2K">https://t.co/DfXe4S1v2K</a>
&mdash; Husain Haqqani (@husainhaqqani) <a href="https://twitter.com/husainhaqqani/status/1230485861336219650?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Extraordinary. The desire for a workable peace deal with the Taliban in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Afghanistan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Afghanistan</a> now means terrorists are legitimized with op-eds in the pages of the prestigious NYT. <a href="https://t.co/yf7TDzn7mL">https://t.co/yf7TDzn7mL</a>
&mdash; Maya Mirchandani (@maya206) <a href="https://twitter.com/maya206/status/1230479855491280896?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
For the <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a> benefit- here are screnshots from <a href="https://t.co/aWnR52rwnO">https://t.co/aWnR52rwnO</a> still online showing Sirajuddin Haqqani as one of America’s most wanted. To interview him and challenge him is one thing, to give him a free pass in an unchallenged oped, quite another <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Afghanistan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Afghanistan</a> <a href="https://t.co/vBB1O9z7Go">pic.twitter.com/vBB1O9z7Go</a>
&mdash; Maya Mirchandani (@maya206) <a href="https://twitter.com/maya206/status/1230496440008396805?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Yet The New York Times refused to print McCain’s op-ed in 2008, despite the fact they had run an op-ed by Barack Obama about his plans for Afghanistan only days before. As The Los Angeles Daily News (via AP) <a href="https://www.dailynews.com/2008/07/22/ny-times-wont-publish-mccain-op-ed/">reported</a> in 2008:
<blockquote>The New York Times defended its decision not to publish an op-ed article as submitted by Republican John McCain about the Iraq war on grounds it customarily reviews such pieces with the author. McCain’s presidential campaign submitted the op-ed Friday. In it, the Arizona senator describes how the buildup of U.S. forces in Iraq has helped curb violence. He also chides Democratic rival Barack Obama for outlining his plan for Iraq before his current meetings there with commanders and Iraqi leaders.
In an e-mail to the campaign Friday, David Shipley, an op-ed editor at the newspaper, said he could not accept the piece in its current form, but would look at another version. In the e-mail, released by McCain’s campaign, Shipley wrote that McCain’s article would “have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory – with troops levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate. And it would need to describe the senator’s Afghanistan strategy, spelling out how it meshes with his Iraq plan.”
Commenting Monday on the Times’ request, McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said, “John McCain believes that victory in Iraq must be based on conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables. Unlike Barack Obama, that position will not change based on politics or the demands of The New York Times.” </blockquote>

Menu