Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Another Fox News personality has tested positive for COVID-19: report

Fox News is taking precautions after one of its on-air personalities tested positive for COVID-19.

“Juan Williams, a veteran Fox News personality who co-hosts the popular afternoon talk show ‘The Five,’ tested positive for the coronavirus on Thursday and is quarantining, two people who were briefed on his condition said. Mr. Williams taped a live episode of ‘The Five’ on Wednesday afternoon at Fox News’s Midtown Manhattan headquarters, appearing on the set with several of his co-hosts, including the popular conservative commentators Jesse Watters and Greg Gutfeld,” The New York Times reported Thursday. “The hosts, like guests on some other cable talk shows during the pandemic, sat about seven feet apart.

Williams reportedly received this positive test result on Thursday afternoon and was not present for the show, which airs at 5 p.m. eastern.

“Fox News declined to comment about Mr. Williams’s condition, citing employee privacy. But the network said in a statement that the hosts of ‘The Five’ would broadcast from home studios ‘for the foreseeable future.'”

“Bye-bye, Betsy DeVos. You won’t be missed,” says Sanders to billionaire education secretary

Sen. Bernie Sanders late Tuesday called Betsy DeVos “the worst education secretary in the history of America” and made abundantly clear that he’s not mourning her imminent departure after the billionaire school privatization zealot lashed out at popular proposals to cancel student loan debt and make public colleges and universities tuition-free.

“What do you call a billionaire who registered a $40 million, 164-foot yacht in the Cayman Islands to avoid $2.4 million in U.S. taxes, while undermining public schools? The worst education secretary in the history of America,” tweeted the Vermont senator, a leading proponent of student debt cancellation and tuition-free higher education. “Bye-bye, Betsy DeVos. You won’t be missed.”

In a speech at an Education Department financial aid conference on Tuesday, the outgoing education secretary dismissed as “government gift-giving” proposals to forgive crippling student loan debt and eliminate tuition for public colleges and universities.

“We’ve heard shrill calls to cancel, to forgive, to make it all free. Any innocuous label out there can’t obfuscate what it really is: Wrong,” said DeVos, who last year proposed handing the federal government’s $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio over to a “stand-alone government corporation.” Critics slammed the proposal as an attempt to prevent the next president from canceling any of the debt.

President-elect Joe Biden has vowed to forgive a portion of the student debt held by tens of millions of Americans and make public colleges and universities tuition-free for families with incomes below $125,000 a year. The former vice president has not yet announced his pick to succeed DeVos.

In response to DeVos’ remarks Tuesday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., — one of many lawmakers and activists pressuring Biden to use his authority to cancel student loan debt — tweeted sardonically, “Because we were all just dying to know what the unqualified billionaire who made this problem worse thinks about helping people.”

“An acknowledgment of the next generation”: New Zealand declares climate emergency

Climate action campaigners on Wednesday acknowledged New Zealand’s declaration of a climate emergency as a positive step forward, while noting that the move must be backed by decisive action.

The country’s Labour Party, led by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, introduced the proposal in Parliament Wednesday after pressure from Extinction Rebellion and other campaign groups to “tell the truth” about the climate crisis. The measure passed in a 76-43 vote along party lines.

Under the declaration, New Zealand’s government will dedicate $141 million to transitioning to a carbon neutral public sector by 2025. The fund will be used to replace the government’s 200 coal-fired boilers and to purchase only electric or hybrid vehicles for public use. Government agencies will be required to measure and report their emissions and offset any they cannot reduce to zero by 2025.

“This declaration is an acknowledgement of the next generation. An acknowledgement of the burden that they will carry if we do not get this right and do not take action now,” Ardern said. “It is up to us to make sure we demonstrate a plan for action, and a reason for hope.”

The proposal introduced by the Labour Party recognized “the devastating impact that volatile and extreme weather will have on New Zealand and the wellbeing of New Zealanders, on our primary industries, water availability, and public health through flooding, sea level rise, and wildfire.”

The New Zealand Ministry for the Environment reported in 2018 that the country’s “indigenous ecosystems and species [are] in a state of rapid decline,” with the climate crisis negatively affecting bird migration and egg-laying in some species. 

New Zealand’s government is the 33rd in the world to declare a climate emergency, following countries including the U.K., Japan, and France. In 2019 New Zealand passed the Zero Carbon Act, which set up a Climate Change Commission to work towards achieving net zero fossil fuel emissions by 2050. 

That legislation included an exemption for farmers, leading climate campaigners to accuse the government of passing only a symbolic proposal that won’t address the emissions of the agriculture sector, which is responsible for most of the New Zealand’s greenhouse gas pollution — particularly methane.

“When the house is on fire, there’s no point hitting the alarm without fighting the fire as well,” Greenpeace agriculture and climate campaigner Kate Simcock told Al Jazeera on Wednesday after the climate emergency legislation passed. “Fighting the fire in New Zealand means tackling agricultural emissions.”

New Zealand is responsible for 0.17% of global fossil fuel emissions and is ranked 17th out of 32 OECD countries for emissions, with its pollution levels accelerating in the past two decades. 

On social media, climate action advocates emphasized that Ardern’s government must back up the declaration with action that leads to measurable, positive results for the planet. 

“We have not seen these declarations matched with ambitious enough targets or roadmaps to get there,” tweeted Ali Sheridan, a sustainability advisor in Ireland. “Less of the declarations and pledges, more of the measurable action please.”

John Mulaney says he was investigated by Secret Service after “SNL” joke

John Mulaney said comments he made on “Saturday Night Live” in February resulted in the Secret Service opening an investigation into him.

During an interview on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” on Tuesday, the comedian — who got his start as a writer on “SNL” — mentioned that he received backlash for a joke that was, at most, circuitously in reference to the sitting U.S. President, Donald Trump, earning him a probe from the Secret Service.

Read more from Variety: “Lord of the Rings” series at Amazon adds 20 actors to cast

“In February, I did a joke that was not about Donald Trump,” Mulaney said. “The joke was about how it was a leap year, and leap year had been started by Julius Caesar to correct the calendar, and another thing that happened with Caesar was that he was stabbed to death by a bunch of senators because he went crazy. And I said I think that’s an interesting thing that could happen.”

Since the comment being made had no direct mention of Trump and Mulaney had penned no “manifestos” or “rants” against the President online, he was not deemed a threat to national security. But when asked if there was any information pertinent to the investigation, he said he forgot to mention that he had leased out an apartment in Washington D.C. for a year as his wife worked on a project for the Smithsonian.

Read more from Variety: Hillary Clinton, Chelsea Clinton to host Apple docuseries “Gutsy Women”

“The person vetting me was very understanding that the joke had nothing to do with Donald Trump because it was an elliptical reference to him,” he said. “I didn’t say anything about him. In terms of risk assessment, no one who’s ever looked at me thought I registered above a one.”

Read more from Variety: “Fear the Walking Dead” renewed for Season 7 at AMC

Despite the numerous jokes the comedian has made at Trump’s expense, his comedy ultimately did not pose a genuine threat to the investigating team, he said.

“I said I have been making jokes about him since 2007, so I have been making fun of him for 13 years,” Mulaney said. “They said if it’s a joke, then I am cleared by the Secret Service.”

 

“Dune,” “Matrix 4,” and every 2021 Warner Bros. film to debut on HBO Max & in theaters at same time

Warner Bros. Pictures Group has announced its entire 2021 film slate will open via a “distribution model in which Warner Bros. will continue to exhibit the films theatrically worldwide, while adding an exclusive one month access period on the HBO Max streaming platform in the U.S. concurrent with the film’s domestic release.” The strategy is identical to studio’s upcoming release of “Wonder Woman 1984,” which launches in theaters and on HBO Max for a month on December 25. Following the one-month HBO Max streaming run, all films will continue to play exclusively in theaters “with all customary distribution windows applying to the title.”

Read more from IndieWireDecember TV premieres: 13 new shows to look out for

Warner Bros. has the following films included on its 2021 slate for now (release dates could change, of course): “The Little Things,” “Judas and the Black Messiah,” “Tom & Jerry,” “Godzilla vs. Kong,” “Mortal Kombat,” “Those Who Wish Me Dead,” “The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It,” “In The Heights,” “Space Jam: A New Legacy,” “The Suicide Squad,” “Reminiscence,” “Malignant,” “Dune,” “The Many Saints of Newark,” “King Richard,” “Cry Macho,” and “Matrix 4.”

WarnerMedia Chair and CEO Ann Sarnoff said in a statement: “We’re living in unprecedented times which call for creative solutions, including this new initiative for the Warner Bros. Pictures Group. No one wants films back on the big screen more than we do. We know new content is the lifeblood of theatrical exhibition, but we have to balance this with the reality that most theaters in the U.S. will likely operate at reduced capacity throughout 2021.”

“With this unique one-year plan, we can support our partners in exhibition with a steady pipeline of world-class films, while also giving moviegoers who may not have access to theaters or aren’t quite ready to go back to the movies the chance to see our amazing 2021 films,” Sarnoff continued. “We see it as a win-win for film lovers and exhibitors, and we’re extremely grateful to our filmmaking partners for working with us on this innovative response to these circumstances.”

Read more from IndieWireThe 23 breakthrough performances of 2020

An official release from Warner Bros. said this ground-breaking hybrid distribution model “was created as a strategic response to the impact of the ongoing global pandemic.” The model is only being used for Warner Bros.’ 2021 slate at this time.

“This hybrid exhibition model enables us to best support our films, creative partners and moviegoing in general throughout 2021,” Warner Bros. Pictures Group Chairman Toby Emmerich said in his own statement. “We have a fantastic, wide ranging slate of titles from talented and visionary filmmakers next year, and we’re excited to be able get these movies in front of audiences around the world. And, as always, we’ll support all of our releases with innovative and robust marketing campaigns for their theatrical debuts, while highlighting this unique opportunity to see our films domestically via HBO Max as well.”

Read more from IndieWire“The Crown”: Gillian Anderson on the “essential” stridency of Margaret Thatcher

All eyes now move to the “Wonder Woman 1984” release to see how successful the distribution model is for WarnerMedia and movie theaters.

“Christmas Ever After”: Ali Stroker hopes to give disabled girls a romantic heroine

The Lifetime channel gets labeled many things, but revolutionary isn’t one of them. And yet, while watching their latest Christmas romance, “Christmas Ever After,” I kept using that word. The story is simple: Romance writer Izzi Simmons travels to a small-town family lodge for Christmas where she meets a man who looks just like the fictional figure on her book covers. If you think you know where the story goes you’d be absolutely right. The difference is that Izzi is played by Tony winner — and wheelchair user — Ali Stroker.

Read more from IndieWireDecember TV premieres: 13 new shows to look out for

When the script for “Christmas Ever After” came her way, Stroker — who has been a vocal proponent of inclusive casting and casting disabled performers in any role — was immediately drawn to how the role didn’t require a disabled performer specifically. “I was so thrilled to see disability wasn’t necessarily a part of the story,” Stroker told IndieWire. “I believe that is progress. We don’t always need to talk about addressing a disability in a narrative. There can be a love story with somebody with a disability…that maybe doesn’t need to be explained.” Stroker’s casting, according to director Pat Kiely, was a mutual decision by both Lifetime, as well as the feature’s producers. “It was presented to me and I was like ‘Cool, this is a great idea,'” he said.

For Kiely — who has worked as a director for over a decade — working with a disabled performer was uncharted territory. “I grew up in Montreal [and] there was this program where they brought in a few kids each year to a disabled school,” he said, but outside of that he hadn’t interacted much with disability in a professional capacity. He cited Stroker for taking the reins and working with him to make Izzi a character whose disability is never a factor or limitation. “He [Pat] was so open to all my suggestions in ways that I thought would make the story more authentic,” Stroker said.

Read more from IndieWireThe 23 breakthrough performances of 2020

Watching “Christmas Ever After,” especially as a disabled consumer, is refreshing purely for those suggestions that have never been showcased in a movie (unless the story is about how a disabled person overcomes their issues). “I’ve never seen somebody drive with hand controls in a movie,” Stroker said. “It’s so funny, too, because so often people are like, ‘Can you drive? How do you drive?'”

What takes on even more significance is Stroker herself, a disabled woman whose character is presented as confident, ambitious, and desirable. Too often when disabled women are featured onscreen, they’re never given romantic aspirations. To watch Stroker’s Izzi go on a date is to give disabled girls an introduction into how dating and romantic moments are different with a wheelchair. “I really let her [Stroker] take the lead,” Kiely said. “She shared a lot of personal things in her own life. There’s a real romantic scene where Daniel [di Tomasso] takes her hand and pulls her up this ramp. She [Stroker] said her and her fiance, when they have romantic strolls together….that’s how they do that.”

Another element Stroker brought to Kiely’s attention that he didn’t know about was the distinctions in height, which became a key factor in not just blocking but character development. “These movies are often about a couple who are at odds but have a connection,” he said. “[I’d] keep Daniel standing in the first half of the movie but then, slowly, have him sit down more, come down to her level [and] see her more.” Stroker and di Tomasso talked regularly about how he’d be standing and where the camera would be, in the hopes of showing how the figurative dance that takes place between a couple falling for each other can work with a wheelchair. “Those things are just so important because they bring in representation that’s not usually part of the story,” Stroker said.

The fairytale romance of “Christmas Ever After” doesn’t just begin and end with its romantic plotline, but in creating a world free of accessibility concerns. Stroker understands the movie is idealized in having Izzi not run into any physical barriers, but she hopes by watching her character in these spaces that it will spark conversation about changing locations to meet disabled needs. “If we want a world where there are shorter counters shouldn’t we create that to show people that they can have lower desks?” she said. “In order for us to progress we need to see how it can — because somebody who is able-bodied may not recognize that.”

Read more from IndieWire“The Crown”: Gillian Anderson on the “essential” stridency of Margaret Thatcher

Accessibility also extended to the sets as well. “We shot in a brownstone and they built a ramp for me to get into that brownstone,” Stroker said. “They went out of their way to make all the locations and all of the sets accessible, and the reason they did that is because it’s what should be done.” Stroker said she doesn’t worry about advocating for herself on-set because her requests are no different than any other actor on a production; it’s what she needs to be successful as a performer. “When you hire someone who needs certain accommodations it’s not a favor, it’s part of hiring someone,” she said. “Every person who goes to work needs certain things. A ramp is not that big a deal.”

Kiely said it’s certainly compelled him to look at his own sets going forward, with the goal of hiring more disabled talent. In the meantime, he believes young women watching “Christmas Ever After,” especially disabled women, will feel seen. “I hope…that some little girl with a disability sees the movie and it ignites their own romantic fantasy,” he said.

As a former little girl who dreamed of watching a disabled Molly Ringwald get the guy, watching “Christmas Ever After” certainly gave me what I’d been missing all these years.

“Christmas Ever After” airs on Lifetime on Dec. 6. 

 

ACLU sues to find out how and why federal agencies are accessing cell phone location and data

After a series of news reports that have alarmed civil liberties advocates and progressive lawmakers, the ACLU sued on Wednesday to find out how and why federal agencies are buying access to bulk databases of Americans’ cell phone location information and effectively bypassing the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.

“We’re suing to bring some much-needed transparency to these disturbing practices,” Nathan Freed Wessler, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, explains in a blog post about the new lawsuit. “Transparency is the first step to accountability.”

As the complaint details, the legal group filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to force the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and two agencies it oversees, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), “to release records about their purchases of cell phone location data for immigration enforcement and other purposes.”

Freed Wessler notes that “more than nine months after we submitted a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act, DHS, CBP, and ICE have yet to provide us with a single responsive record. DHS has even refused to provide its legal memorandum about these practices to U.S. senators who have requested it.”

Earlier this year, Sens. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, Ed Markey, D-Mass., Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., requested an inspector general investigation into CBP’s warrantless use of commercial databases containing Americans’ cell phone location information — including by paying nearly half a million dollars to the government contractor Venntel.

In a statement Wednesday, those same senators announced that DHS will launch the requested probe, with Wyden declaring that “the public deserves answers and accountability,” and vowing that he “won’t accept anything less than a thorough and swift inspector general investigation.”

“Americans are increasingly concerned that they cannot travel, move, or go about their daily lives without being tracked. Information about where we are and where we have been is highly sensitive, and it’s time for answers about exactly how the Department of Homeland Security is accessing this type of data,” noted Markey. “The right to privacy must not become a thing of the past.”

Warren emphasized that “CBP is not above the law,” that the agency refused to answer their questions about its activities, and that lawmakers “must protect the public’s Fourth Amendment rights to be free from warrantless searches.”

Both the lawmakers and Freed Wessler cited Carpenter v. United States, a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court case argued by the ACLU. As the attorney points out in the blog post:

[The] Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement agencies cannot request personal location information from a cellphone company without first obtaining a search warrant from a judge. As Chief Justice Roberts wrote, these records deserve protection because mapping a cellphone’s location “provides an intimate window into a person’s life, revealing not only his particular movements, but through them his ‘familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations.'”

If law enforcement agencies can buy their way around the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, the landmark protection announced by the Supreme Court in Carpenter will be in peril. Despite federal agencies spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on access to cell phone location databases, those agencies have not publicly explained their legal justifications or internal limitations on access to this invasive information.

The ACLU’s initial public records request to DHS came in February, after the Wall Street Journal reported that according to documents the newspaper obtained and unnamed sources, DHS “has bought access to a commercial database that maps the movements of millions of cellphones in America and is using it for immigration and border enforcement.”

“The location data is drawn from ordinary cellphone apps, including those for games, weather, and e-commerce, for which the user has granted permission to log the phone’s location,” the Journal detailed. “The Department of Homeland Security has used the information to detect undocumented immigrants and others who may be entering the U.S. unlawfully.”

An ICE spokesperson told the Journal that “we do not discuss specific law-enforcement tactics or techniques, or discuss the existence or absence of specific law-enforcement-sensitive capabilities,” but added that the agency “generally” doesn’t use location data for deportation operations.

A CBP spokesperson said at the time that while the agency “is being provided access to location information, it is important to note that such information doesn’t include cellular phone tower data, is not ingested in bulk, and doesn’t include the individual user’s identity.”

The Journal article is just one piece of a growing body of reporting that has shed light on the smartphone tracking industry. Just last month, Motherboard revealed that “the U.S. military is buying the granular movement data of people around the world, harvested from innocuous-seeming apps,” including a Muslim prayer and Quran app that has been downloaded over 98 million times worldwide.

In response to Motherboard’s revelation, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., — one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress — tweeted that “the military industrial complex and the surveillance state have always had a cozy relationship with tech. Buying bulk data in order to profile Muslims is par for the course for them — and is absolutely sickening. It should be illegal!”

More than 40 states plan on suing Facebook next week. Here’s what the lawsuit is likely to do

New York is leading a group of more than 40 states in investigating Facebook for alleged antitrust violations and may file a lawsuit against the Silicon Valley behemoth as early as next week.

There have not been many details about the impending lawsuit, which was first reported by Reuters. At this moment it is unclear what the states will include in their legal complaints. The wire service noted that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may file a related complaint in district court or with an administrative law judge and that both Facebook and the New York attorney general’s office have refused to comment.

“The most likely theory would be that the WhatsApp and Instagram acquisitions thwarted the development of nascent competitors to challenge FB’s social networking hegemony,” Daniel Crane, a professor at University of Michigan Law, told Salon by email. “Best case scenario is court finds those acquisitions not anticompetitive because WhatsApp and Instagram weren’t competitors of FB at time of acquisitions. Worst care scenario: both companies have to be divested.”

Gus Hurwitz, an associate professor of law at the University of Nebraska – Lincoln, had a similar observation.

“It’s hard to read the tea leaves, but most likely the AGs [attorneys general] are going to focus on what they see as anticompetitive acquisitions,” Hurwitz wrote to Salon. “I’d imagine this would include not just things like the Instagram purchase, but [Facebook’s] use of data from its acquisition of Onavo. Worst case is these states push to break up Facebook. That could go beyond trying to unravel specific mergers, but putting in place more substantial, ongoing, structural separation between the company’s various components. But that seems an unlikely outcome.”

He added, “As to why the states and DOJ are going after these companies, in part it’s just politics and response to understandable consumer concern. These companies are large and have made some seemingly concerning moves in recent years.”

Hurwitz pointed out that there is “an enigma at the core of the puzzle of competition law: in order to provide the pro-consumer services that they do, at the prices they offer (free!)” companies like Facebook need to sometimes behave in ways that are problematic.

“These suits aren’t likely to improve upon the status quo, but they are just about the only tool that AGs have to respond to legitimate concerns,” Hurwitz concluded.

If an antitrust lawsuit is indeed filed against Facebook next week, it will be the second instance of high profile litigation of that nature against a tech giant this year. In October the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Google for allegedly violating antitrust laws.

This is not the first time that Facebook has been targeted for potential antitrust violations. The current antitrust investigation was first announced last year, with New York Attorney General Letitia James explaining at the time that the state attorneys general were probing whether Facebook had “endangered consumer data, reduced the quality of consumers’ choices or increased the price of advertising.” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., responded to that antitrust investigation news by linking it to the Justice Department and FTC probes, pointing out that “if my plan to tax excessive lobbying had been in place during that time, Facebook would’ve paid $39 million in taxes—money that could’ve been directed to the FTC’s antitrust efforts.”

Antitrust concerns about Facebook spilled over into 2020 and culminated in an October House Judiciary Committee hearing in which Democrats discussed consumer rights issues and Republicans accused companies like Facebook and Google of suppressing right-wing voices. Zephyr Teachout, associate professor of law at Fordham University School of Law, explained in her testimony at the hearing that “antitrust laws, and strong antitrust laws, are essential for freedom and for a thriving economy. The highly concentrated Big Tech marketplaces and the existing abuses of Big Tech enabled by their dominant positions poses a major democratic threat.”

Franklin Foer, a staff writer at The Atlantic, told Salon last year that “the core problem is that antitrust, over the course of the decades, has withered and narrowed and lost any sense of imagination, and so as a moral matter it would seem to me, and as a moral economic political matter, Google and Facebook are too powerful. They should be held to account by antitrust.”

The question is how would Facebook be held accountable if higher courts ruled that its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp violated antitrust laws.

“Unlike in Europe where agencies can ‘approve’ an acquisition, the only consequence of terminating a pre-merger investigation under Hart-Scott-Rodino and saying that the agency is not going to challenge it is that it’s not challenged for now,” Crane wrote to Salon. The Hart-Scott-Rodino Act requires that the FTC and Justice Department be notified about large mergers and acquisitions before they take place. “Almost always, that means that it will never be challenged, but there is no legal impediment to the agencies (or states or private plaintiffs) going back later and saying ‘actually that was anticompetitive and should never have happened, so now you have to divest.'”

New “Heaven’s Gate” series looks to Christianity to explain the method to the cult’s madness

Many people first became aware of the Heaven’s Gate cult in 1997, when — after an anonymous tip was called into the San Diego Police Department — the bodies of 39 men and women were found in a rented seven bedroom mansion. Each of the bodies were dressed in androgynous outfits with matching haircuts and Nike sneakers. On their arms were “Star Trek”-inspired bands that read “Heaven’s Gate Away Team,” and in their pockets were $5.75. 

The discovery caused an inevitable media frenzy, especially after law enforcement authorities reported it as the largest mass suicide on American soil ( The “Jonestown Massacre,” during which more than 900 Americans died, took place in Guyana in 1978). The group believed that once they shedded their physical “vehicles,” they would ascend to heaven in a spaceship where they would reach the “Next Level. There, they would be transformed from their human shell into an alien form. 

According to group documents, members had taken phenobarbital mixed with applesauce or pudding, followed by vodka, then asphyxiated themselves with plastic bags. The suicides occurred in shifts over three days, with cult founder Marshall Applewhite — known as “Do” — being among the final shift. 

The scene was horrifying, but had enough of an aura of oddity to eventually become fodder for late-night television shows and comedy sketches. For example, in its first live show following the discovery of the bodies, “Saturday Night Live” aired a sketch in which the Heaven’s Gate members actually make it to space, followed by a fake advertisement for Keds, with the tagline, “Worn by level-headed Christians.” 

Inherent to all jokes was a question that tends to underlie many mainstream discussions of cults: “How could someone be so easily taken?” The more fringe the group, the more blunt the question — but one that HBO Max’s new docuseries “Heaven’s Gate: The Cult of Cults,” spearheaded by documentarian Clay Tweel, carefully attempts to dismantle and subvert over four hour-long episodes. It’s a thoughtfully paced series, rich in original source material and striking watercolor animations in place of reenactments.  

The first two episodes aren’t the most salacious (if that’s what you’re looking for, skip ahead to the last two episodes), but they are the most illuminating when it comes to identifying where the tenets of Heaven’s Gate fall in the orbit of culturally accepted religious and spiritual teachings. 

If  — like me — you grew up in or around a Christian church that was heavy on themes of sanctification and purification, some of the cult’s ideologies won’t sound, well, too alien; just replace the hellfire and brimstone with spacecraft and stargazing. 

As this docuseries asserts early in the first episode, a key teaching of both mainstream Christianity and Heaven’s Gate was that growing in one’s spirituality hinges on shedding one’s worldliness. As the Apostle Peter wrote to his followers, “Dear friends, I warn you as ‘temporary residents and foreigners’ to keep away from worldly desires that wage war against your very souls.” 

Meanwhile, archived footage of Heaven’s Gate members — gleaned by Tweel from early videos of recruiting sessions, public access television appearances, and the now-infamous “farewell messages” from group followers — features them espousing similar sentiments. 

“I don’t think people know how deep their humanness goes,” said Dick Joselyn, a one-time Air Force pilot trainee, who was a member of the Heaven’s Gate cult for over a decade, but as another member, Margaret Ella Richter, said, “It’s possible to overcome humanness.” 

“Heaven’s Gate: Cult of Cults” is built on the insight of various sociologists and religious scholars — most notably author and researcher Reza Aslan — who thoughtly weave together this connection, before landing on one of the things that makes a cult a cult. The leaders “break you down and create a new you.” 

Again, this has a Biblical parallel. Ephesians teaches, “Put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and be renewed in the spirit of your minds.” 

Many of the teachings of Heaven’s Gate have a spiritual, though not always Christian, analogue — ideas of ascension (like in the Biblical book of Revelation), a state of enlightenment reminiscent of nirvana, an afterlife. This gospel, if you will, was deeply influenced by New Age concepts, including the idea of “walk-ins,” a person whose original soul has departed his or her body and has been replaced with a modified soul. These teachings were also eventually recorded by Applewhite in a series of videos that are deeply evocative of televangelism. 

How could people be naive enough to join Heaven’s Gate? Well, as one of the featured religious scholars posits, the group was something akin to an errant branch of Christianity (a point that host Glynn Washington made in his popular “Heaven’s Gate” podcast, wherein he details his own upbringing in a Doomsday Christian cult.)

It appealed to members for the same reasons churches continue to fill their pews. People want to find connection, they want to feel like they are destined for something greater and that there is evidence of life beyond our immediate and perceptible surroundings. Some former members — who, like the members who eventually died by suicide, were largely educated with strong family ties — still describe their Heaven’s Gate years as the best time of their lives. For a brief moment in time, they felt like they belonged. 

That said, Heaven’s Gates teachings were ultimately dictated by its leaders. Applegate’s “spiritual partner,” Bonnie Nettles — known as Ti — is presented as the mastermind behind the original recruitment. She was raised Baptist, but her beliefs ultimately became a kind of spiritual grab bag, influenced by New Age teachings, astrology, divination and science fiction. 

And once she eventually died, and Applegate was on his own (and absolutely bereft, it should be noted) those teachings became flexible in order to cope with the cognitive dissonance that her “leaving her vehicle early” sparked. That’s when, Tweel asserts, Heaven’s Gate became more about the messenger than the message, and Applegate transitions from kooky, fringey New Age leader to the leader of the, as he puts it, “cult of cults.” 

That’s when things dip into the salacious — and into more familiar territory for those who already know the story. 

Where “Heaven’s Gate: Cult of Cults” falls a little short is in its explanation or exploration of Applegate and Nettles’ appeal. As leaders, they lack any kind of discernable charisma. While their teachings may have initially been palatable — even appealing — there’s a disconnect when it comes to why their followers stayed, especially when they were asked to forsake their families, mainstream society and any source of income. 

This wasn’t just popping into a church service once a week — it was a full-time commitment, so I was left wondering when things became uncomfortable, what it was about their leadership that compelled their flock to persevere? 

That said, “Heaven’s Gate: Cult of Cults” is a thoughtful assessment of the mechanisms of how otherwise smart, savvy people are attracted to fringe beliefs.It takes a story that is larger than life and brings it solidly back to earth.

All four episodes of “Heaven’s Gate: Cult of Cults” are now available to stream on HBO Max. 

Star witnesses turn Rudy Giuliani’s voter fraud hearing into a “Saturday Night Live” dress rehearsal

Rudy Giuliani, erstwhile spokesperson for LifeLock identity theft protection services and current top lawyer for President Donald Trump‘s slapdash crusade to litigate an electoral win and undermine public trust in the country’s elections, led a motley group of witnesses alleging baseless claims of voter fraud and other malfeasances in a five-hour hearing on Wednesday evening in front of Michigan State lawmakers.

There is no evidence of voter fraud in the presidential election, according to election officials in every state. President-elect Joe Biden won the electoral contest with a record-setting 81 million popular votes — a margin of victory of nearly 7 million votes over Trump, according to the most recent numbers from the Associated Press.

A number of the campaign’s plaintiffs, including several in Michigan lawsuits, present complicated biographies, many of them publicly embracing fringe conspiracy theories. Giuliani’s witnesses on Wednesday appeared to follow an unreliable track, alleging that dead people had voted and tossing out racist terms, but were not required to testify under oath.

Committee Chair Matt Hall, a Michigan Republican, overruled a Democratic colleague’s request to swear in Giuliani, who later called Detroit — a majority-Black city — “one of the most corrupt cities in America.”

Hall would feel compelled to intervene at other points in the evening. He stepped in multiple times with freelance IT worker and Trump campaign witness Melissa Carone, who slurred her way through a series of lies about fraudulently tabulated votes while berating a stoic Republican lawmaker.

Carone had previously made a number of recent appearances in right-wing media, in one interview stunning even Fox Business host and election denier Lou Dobbs with claims that ersatz ballots had been smuggled inside food vans. A Wayne County district judge later deemed Carone’s allegations “simply are not credible.”

But Carone’s erratic exchange with Republican Rep. Steven Johnson immediately went viral on social media, with a multitude of observers — including supporters — speculating about her sobriety. At one point, Giuliani shushed her and grabbed at her arm. By late Thursday afternoon, one clip being circulated on Twitter had racked up more than 15 million views.

“The poll book is completely off,” Carone said. “Completely off.”

“Off by 30,000?” Johnson asked.

“I’d say that poll book is off by over 100,000. That poll book — why don’t you look at the registered voters on there? How many registered voters are on there?” Carone challenged. “Do you even know the answer to that?”

“No,” Johnson replied. “I’m trying to get to the bottom of this.”

“Zero. Zero,” Carone replied. “There’s zero.”

“What about the turnout rate?” she continued, as Giuliani leaned over to tug her arm in an apparent effort to get his witness back on track. 

Carone did not seem to notice: “120%?”

“Let’s let Rep. Johnson ask his question,” Hall said, after which Carone laughed.

When Johnson told Carone the tabulations were not off by 30,000 votes, she accused the state legislature of monkeying with the books.

“What’d you guys do? Take it, and ah, do something crazy to it?” she challenged as she bit her bottom lip and hiked her eyebrows.

“The numbers aren’t off by 30,000,” Johnson responded.

“I know what I saw. I know what I saw,” Carone said. 

“And I singed something saying that if I’m wrong, I can go to prison,” she added. “Did you?”

Hall again interposed on Johnson’s behalf. 

“Don’t interrupt him,” he told Carone. “And if you want to answer him — that’s fine.”

“I just want to keep following up with the poll book,” Johnson said. “Is it either wildly off — or are they filling in names?”

“Wildly off,” Carone said. “It’s wildly off, and dead people voted and illegals voted. So that’s my answer.”

http://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1334311448340795396

Carone also alleged that threats from Democrats had forced her to close her social media accounts, but as of Thursday, her Facebook page was active and featured dozens of publicly viewable posts. She later added that she was not working with Giuliani but rather another attorney. At the end of her time, Giuliani distanced himself.

“For the record, I met her for the first time today,” he volunteered. “Talked to her for the first time yesterday.”

Carone was followed by a naturalized American citizen from India, who had worked as a Republican poll watcher in Detroit on Election Day. Her argument for strict voter ID laws was met with fierce backlash after she described all Chinese people with a racist epithet.

“And the fact that now — as the other representatives said — you can actually show up and vote without an ID. It’s shocking. How can you allow that to happen?” she said. “Like, a lot of people think all Indians look alike. I think all Chinese look alike. So how would you tell? If some Chow shows up, you can be anybody and you can vote. And if somebody with my name — you can’t even tell my name — anybody can vote on my behalf. So ID should be the basic requirement.”

Giuliani, for his part, urged state lawmakers to “take back your power” and ignore the state’s already certified election results. He called President-elect Joe Biden’s 154,000-vote victory in the state a “complete falsehood.” 

“Look, the people who certified your election — what are they worth?” Giuliani asked.

But courts have ruled against Trump and his allies in every lawsuit alleging voter fraud that the attorneys have not withdrawn themselves — though the campaign still holds out hope for appeals, including Michigan.

The day before the hearing, Attorney General William Barr told the Associated Press that a Department of Justice investigation had not found evidence of irregularities which would overturn the results of the 2020 election.

“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr said.

Giuliani and Trump campaign legal adviser Jenna Ellis shot back in a statement.

“With the greatest respect to the Attorney General, his opinion appears to be without any knowledge or investigation of the substantial irregularities and evidence of systemic fraud,” they wrote.

Trump’s outrageous lies used to be terrifying — now they’re just pathetic

Donald Trump was at it again Wednesday, releasing a 46-minute video full of ridiculous lies, claiming that his loss to Joe Biden in November’s presidential election was due to “corrupt forces” operating “on a scale never seen before.” He called on the Supreme Court to throw out enough votes so that “I very easily win in all states.”

It’s the sort of thing that used to be both riveting and terrifying. Indeed, two days after the election, Trump went on national television to give a similar, if blessedly shorter, speech making essentially the same claims: That he’s the victim of a widespread conspiracy, that he’s the real winner, that votes from certain cities — strangely enough, cities with large Black populations — are inherently suspect and illegitimate.

At the time, most experts felt confident that Trump’s coup attempt would fail. Still, watching the president of the United States blatantly attempt to steal an election by telling vicious and racist lies was chilling. For weeks, there was an undercurrent of panic that he might somehow pull it off, as he has managed, in the past, to pull off all manner of illegal and unethical acts without facing consequences. 

Even Stephen Colbert was rattled. And Stephen Colbert never gets rattled. 


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


But as often happens with sequels, Trump’s latest conspiracy theory tirade was bigger and bolder, yet somehow much less impressive. Trump’s self-pitying rant registered as pitiful instead of frightening. The speech barely touched the top headlines at most major news sites. It was driven down in coverage not just by the rapidly worsening COVID-19 pandemic, but also by other political stories, such as the U.S. Senate runoff election in Georgia and even other Trump-related stories, like the fate of Attorney General Bill Barr or the impact of Michael Flynn’s pardon. The tone of most media coverage was more condescending than fearful. Outrage is quickly being eclipsed by annoyance at Trump for being a pest who doesn’t know when to pack it up and go home. 

Stephen Colbert was back to his usual form, dunking on Trump with carefree laughter. 

What has changed? It certainly isn’t Trump himself, who hasn’t changed in his entire life, and will die as the same dumb and miserable narcissist he has been since he first paid someone else to take his SATs for him. His attacks on democracy are just more of the same narcissistic pseudo-ideology that has defined his entire life, a stalwart belief that he can bullshit his way out of anything and that he should be allowed to “win,” no matter what, simply because he was born a Trump. 

No, what has changed is power. Trump may still be president for another 48 days, but his power is receding, and with it his ability to terrorize us with his lies is receding as well. Arguably, Trump accelerated the process of losing his power by attempting a coup in a first place. Every time he loses a battle, in the courts and the statehouses, he illustrates again the limits of his powers. He’s looking less like a dictator and more like a sad guy at an undersized desk every day

With his bad suits, stupid hair and clownish lies, Trump is a living illustration of why authoritarians worship power so much — because only power can imbue a buffoon as ridiculous as Donald Trump with importance.

Liberals wonder constantly why Trump supporters aren’t more embarrassed by the man, who can barely read and who suggested, with a straight face, that doctors might want to treat COVID-19 by injecting bleach into people’s lungs. How do they not cringe in shame to vote for such a person?

Not to get too galaxy-brain about this, the truth is that Trump’s cringeworthiness was part of the pleasure for his supporters. Being able to foist this embarrassment of a president on the nation was quite the flex! It was a demonstration of raw power, being elevate a man so absurdly unqualified to the highest office in the land.

When owning the liberals, subtlety is not required. On the contrary, those who worship power couldn’t get enough of watching the smart people of the world — the Dr. Anthony Faucis and the Nancy Pelosis and the Justin Trudeaus — have to sit in a room with this ignorant tub of self-regarding goo and take him seriously, just because he was legally the president. 

Trump himself understands this dynamic. It’s why his very first act as president was to tell a ridiculous lie, that his inauguration crowd size was bigger than Barack Obama’s. It was a lie he made his then-press secretary Sean Spicer repeat to reporters, as a clear test of Spicer’s skills at keeping a straight face through obvious whoppers. Soon enough, Trump’s supporters were in on the con, insisting to pollsters that they believed Trump’s crowd was bigger than any crowd ever, no matter what the photographic evidence indicated. 


Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.


Many liberals responded by assuming that everyone involved with bolstering this lie had to be a delusional idiot, but experts in authoritarianism saw it differently: Trump was testing his newly obtained power. 

“The absurdity is part of the point,” Megan Garber of the Atlantic wrote about Trump’s silly inauguration lies. “The president lies because, as any autocrat will tell you, lying is its own will to power.”

For four years, liberals held out hope that somehow, one of our many cherished values would save us from Trump. We looked to reason, to decency, to truth and to justice. None of it mattered. In the end, the only thing that took Trump down was power — the power of 80 million voters rising up to kick him out on his butt. There’s a lesson in this, if liberals want to learn it. 

Trump himself understands perfectly well that power is the only thing that really matters. His lies are the same whirlwind of noise that they always were. They’re not meant to be believed or to make sense or to achieve any of the other goals of more prosaic liars. His crackpot legal team led by Rudy Giuliani doesn’t even bother to bring any actual evidence or coherent arguments before the various authorities — judges, state legislatures, election boards, governors — they are seeking to pressure into stealing this election for them. It’s all just an appeal to authority, a plea for those with power to abuse it on behalf of their overlord.

If this election had been closer, that strategy might very well have worked. If it had come down to a narrow margin in just one state, for instance, it’s easier to imagine the Supreme Court or a state legislature or some other Republican-controlled body deciding to leverage their power to give Trump more of it. But because voters used their power, Biden won too many states for Trump to pull off the coup he was anticipating. 

Donald Trump himself is becoming a joke now, but unfortunately the larger Republican Party has fully absorbed these lessons about power. GOP politicians speak openly and shamelessly about their efforts to disenfranchise voters. They’ve become fully authoritarian, uninterested in even pretending to care about fairness or justice, and instead are quite open about their focus on a will to power. Their voters continue to reward them for it, because virtually the entire Republican base has also been radicalized. The situation is grim. 

Still, we can glimpse a ray of hope in Trump’s swift metamorphosis from a direct threat to democracy to the butt of jokes about “massive dumps.” There’s an important lesson here. Authoritarians cannot be shamed or reasoned with, the way believers in democratic norms typically can be. There is no arguing authoritarians down, bargaining with them or laughing them away. But authoritarians do respond to power. Power is how Trump was finally stopped and beaten, and revealed as the small, strange man he always was. And power is what it will take to stop the rise of American fascism. 

Donald Trump is acting like a spoiled toddler — America must give him a permanent timeout

Jan. 20 cannot get here fast enough. Donald Trump is running wild with his disingenuous and false proclamations of a rigged election, rampant voter fraud and a stolen victory. Unbelievably, he is now claiming that the FBI and Department of Justice contributed to his fantastical claims of voter fraud. We have 50 days to go to survive this madman’s deceitful and harmful rhetoric.

Let us be clear: Joe Biden won the election fair and square in what has arguably been the most scrutinized election in recent U.S. history. Trump has filed baseless and frivolous lawsuits and not a shred of evidence of massive voter fraud has been offered. In fact, his attorneys, with their bar licenses on the line, have repeatedly stated on the record, “This is not a fraud case.” Yet Trump persists with his attention-seeking rants and raves.

Trump has lost. His psyche cannot handle the reality of the moment — that he has been repudiated by the American people. He is embarrassed, humiliated and scared, quite likely because he knows he is facing federal and state criminal charges once he leaves office. Trump is desperately trying to hold onto power to save his own hide. This is about his self-preservation. This is about him hiding out in the Oval Office so that he can avoid incarceration. To be sure, Trump’s desperation is a confession-of-sorts of his wrongdoing.

Donald Trump is our outgoing president. He is old news. His voice is irrelevant. He has lost the bully pulpit. He should be packing his bags. He should be out of view. He should be saying goodbye and making plans for his life as a civilian.

We should not be giving Trump air time over the next 50 days. His lies, conspiracy theories and fake assertions are toxic. His Twitter account should be suspended or canceled. Television networks should not air his blather. He should not be quoted in newspapers or on websites. We should stop talking about him at the dinner table at home, with co-workers or in our online interactions. He needs to be out of our minds and out of the public consciousness.

Just like a screaming and defiant young child, Trump needs to be put in timeout — indefinitely. He should be silenced. He should be sequestered. We must not allow him to have the attention he thrives on — and any attention is positive reinforcement to him. The media must not allow his virulent voice to be heard. 

Frankly, the media must stop normalizing his behavior, must stop trying to fit an ordered framework around his mentally disordered mind, and must stop using charming, storytelling descriptions such as “Mad King.” The damage from this reckless and unfit president will be felt for decades. A necessary first step is to cut off the source. 

Joe Biden is our future. He and Kamala Harris are the adults in the room who will provide strong and empathic leadership. The media should attend to their ideas, their plans and their expectations. Unity, inclusiveness and honesty is their mantra going forward. Let’s give them our eyes and our ears. They deserve our full engagement now.

Trump should not be allowed to cause more damage on his way out. It’s not like he is trying to attend to the pandemic or solve our economic woes. It’s not like he is trying to save lives or pass a stimulus package for Americans who are suffering. No, all he is doing is promulgating false and fake conspiracy theories about the election — none of which are even remotely true. Worse than that, he has unsuccessfully tried to subvert democracy by overthrowing our election results.

Donald Trump’s disordered psyche is his own damn problem. We have spent the past four years trying to navigate his erratic, nonsensical and inept behavior. It should not be our country’s concern any longer. Trump needs a psychotherapist and likely some very strong medicine. That’s his business. What we need is for him to leave us the hell alone.

Donald Trump needs to be gone. Short of members of his Cabinet invoking the 25th Amendment — which will not happen — we need to cut off his ravenous desire for attention.

It is obvious that congressional Republicans will not put pressure on the outgoing president to be quiet. They have proven themselves to be spineless cowards who cannot put country over their own political fortunes. They need to tell Trump to abandon his pernicious rhetoric and to focus on the peaceful transfer of power to Joe Biden.

We should demand the silence of this miserable, desperate, pathetic man.

He needs to be put in timeout — indefinitely.

America in 2020: Heard the one about the Jewish doctor, the Black nurse and the Nazi patient?

A thought experiment: Imagine that you are a doctor. Moreover, imagine that you are a doctor who is Jewish or Muslim or Black or brown or gay or lesbian or trans or differently abled, or a member of some other group which the Nazis and other white supremacists are likely to deem subhuman and not worthy of life.

 What would you do if a neo-Nazi or an obvious white supremacist emblazoned with emblems of hate came into your emergency room, critically ill with from COVID-19?

Dr. Taylor Nichols, an emergency room physician at Mercy San Juan Medical Center in Carmichael, California, recently had that experience. On Monday, Nichols shared this on Twitter:

He came in by ambulance short of breath. Already on CPAP by EMS. Still, he was clearly working hard to breathe. He looked sick. Uncomfortable. Scared.

As we got him over to the gurney and his shirt off to switch a a hospital gown, we all noticed the number of Nazi tattoos.

He was solidly built. Older. His methamphetamine use over the years had taken its usual toll and his teeth were all but gone.

The swastika stood out boldly on his chest. SS tattoos and other insignia that had previously been covered by his shirt were now obvious to the room.

“Don’t let me die, doc.” He said breathlessly as the RT switched him over from CPAP by EMS to our mask and machine.

I reassured him that we were all going to work hard to take care of him and keep him alive as best as we could.

All of us being a team that included a Jewish physician, a Black nurse, and an Asian respiratory therapist.

We all saw. The symbols of hate on his body outwardly and proudly announced his views. We all knew what he thought of us. How he valued our lives.

Yet here we were, working seamlessly as a team to make sure we gave him the best chance to survive that we could. All while wearing masks, gowns, face shields, gloves. The moment perfectly captured what we are going though as healthcare workers as this pandemic accelerates.

The plural of anecdotes are not data. But what happened to Dr. Nichols on that day signals to a much bigger story about American society.

Race and class have a disparate impact on health outcomes in America. Social inequality does not take a detour around the country’s hospitals, medical clinics and doctor’s offices. Rather, it drives straight through them.  

In a recent article for Slate, Dr. Uché Blackstock, the founder and CEO of Advancing Health Equity, explains this in detail

What systemic racism has done is limit the opportunities Black Americans have, to the effect that it’s placed us in a situation where we are most vulnerable to this virus. Add onto that the fact that our communities carry the highest burden of chronic disease — which, again, is a result of racism, lack of access to care, lack of quality care, lack of investment in our communities, lack of opportunities for finding healthy food options in our neighborhoods. All of what we’re seeing right now just shows how deeply embedded racism is in this country, in every aspect of the lives that we lead.

While Nichols and his team made the noble decision to treat a Nazi, Black and brown doctors frequently encounter both overt racism as well as other forms of racial hostility by patients reluctant to be treated by someone who is not white. Research also shows that (white) doctors are more likely to believe that Black people have a higher tolerance for pain than other groups. As compared to whites, Black patients are not given the proper drugs to manage their pain. Black and brown people have poorer overall health outcomes, even when class and income are taken into account, than white people. Nonwhite people also report receiving a lower quality of medical care than do white people.

Black women are much more likely to experience severe complications as well as die in childbirth or during pregnancy than are white women.

Of particular note: the coronavirus pandemic is not an equal opportunity killer: Black and brown Americans are at least twice as likely to die from the disease, compared to white Americans.

Dr. Nichols and his team felt bound by professional ethics and human decency to treat a Nazi. But their decision was not made in a political vacuum.

Conservatives and other members of the white right celebrate doctors such as Taylor Nichols as “heroes,” among the “frontline” and “essential” workers, who are helping to save the United States during a plague made many times worse by Donald Trump’s cruelty and ineptitude.

Yet these same disingenuous voices on the right also support a president, a political party and a movement that has become a death cult, and which has directly or indirectly killed hundreds of thousands of people, both through active sabotage and negligence and through a belief in the literal sacrifice of human beings on the altar of “the economy.”

What would have I done if put in the same position as Dr. Nichols and his medical team?

I am not a doctor, of course, and not constrained by the Hippocratic oath. I would have asked that man if he still believed in the white supremacist and other hateful values inscribed on to his body. If he said yes, I would have told him, “You should live and die by your principles. I will not violate your principles by helping you.” At that point I would have told the man that he should find another doctor or hospital to help him, and walked away to attend to one of the many other patients more deserving of my care.

I am not so naïve as to believe that the healing hands of a Black man can save the heart or mind of a Nazi or other white supremacist. If such things are possible, it is not my responsibility to prove them so.

The coronavirus pandemic and its devastation, destruction and death has been a test of the American people’s collective and individual character, beliefs, ethics and morality.

Dr. Nichols is a credit to his profession by living his personal code and values. Like many other people, I try to do the same thing everyday as well.

Ultimately, history and hindsight will decide if the American people, were right or wrong, a success or a failure, in our response to the Age of Trump and his pandemic.

What happened that day in a California emergency room — when a Nazi fighting for life sought help from a Jewish doctor, an Asian respiratory therapist, and a Black nurse — is a moral parable, a microcosm of sorts, for America in the Age of Trump.

GOP planning to use Trump’s fraud lies to make it harder to vote — could it backfire?

President Trump and his allies failed to restrict voting by mail ahead of the election and have waged a highly unsuccessful legal battle to subvert the results of the vote. But some Republican lawmakers are seizing on the president’s baseless claims in an attempt to make it harder to vote in future elections.

Trump and his allies have been unable to produce a shred of evidence to support their unfounded claims of widespread fraud but multiple polls have found that a majority of Republican voters nonetheless believe that Joe Biden’s victory was tainted by fraud. Attorney General Bill Barr said Tuesday that the Justice Department has likewise found no evidence of widespread fraud, drawing attacks from the Trump campaign. With Trump supporters leaning heavily on election officials and elected representatives to back the president’s unsubstantiated claims, most Republican lawmakers have resisted calling on Trump to withdraw his wild allegations or even acknowledge that Biden won the election. Since nothing can be done now to reverse the result of the election, some Republican lawmakers are looking ahead to make it harder to vote in future races.

“Claims of fraud have often been the purported predicate for restrictions on voting, since at least the mid-19th century,” Justin Levitt, a constitutional law expert at Loyola Law School, told Salon. “I wouldn’t expect there to be much of a connection between the fraud asserted and the ‘solution’ proposed,” he added.

“On the rare occasions when the predicate is specific, the legislative ‘solution’ isn’t often tailored to the specific ‘problem,'” Levitt explained. He said he doesn’t expect Republicans to focus on “any individual assertion of fraud,” but rather on “the generic notion that it’s out there somewhere.”

The widespread Republican belief that voting damages their political prospects is strange, given that the GOP did exceptionally well in down-ballot races despite Trump’s defeat.

“If we don’t do something about voting by mail, we’re going to lose the ability to elect a Republican in this country,” Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News early in November, echoing similar claims made by the president. Graham, who reportedly pressured Georgia officials to toss out legal ballots, said he wants his committee to investigate mail voting.

Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, and some Republican legislators in Michigan have called for “election reforms,” which has typically been GOP code for tighter voting restrictions. Republicans in the state have criticized Michigan’s new same-day voter registration and no-excuse absentee voting.

In Wisconsin, where Republicans have worked to make it harder to vote for the last decade, legislative leaders have called for an investigation into “how the election was administrated” and have repeatedly raised concerns about mail-in ballots despite no evidence of fraud. Former Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, has claimed that Trump has a “valid case” against the state’s election laws and, though he said he does not see an immediate court remedy, called for lawmakers to “take action to restore integrity of the voting process” even beyond the voter ID law Walker signed while in office.

In Pennsylvania, state Republican lawmakers have tried to convince courts to throw out late-arriving mail-in ballots for months and have raised questions about the delayed counting of mail-in ballots — a problem created in the first place because Republicans blocked election officials from starting to count ballots before Election Day. Republican lawmakers have called for a committee to investigate the unfounded fraud claims, citing “calls and emails and other messages from constituents who are confused and outraged by the circumstances surrounding this election.”

Some Georgia lawmakers have called on the state to tighten its residency requirements, which one constitutional expert called “grotesquely un-democratic, an abuse of power and a constitutionally suspect form of racial discrimination.” Alhough the state legislature is unlikely to change the rules ahead of Georgia’s Senate runoff elections next month, the state is likely to press forward with numerous reforms in the coming months.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who has drawn praise from Democrats for standing up to Trump’s attacks, has already proposed a series of reforms that would allow his office to intervene in counties with “systemic ongoing problems” and challenge voters suspected of living at an address other than the one on their registration. Raffensperger also wants to tighten absentee ballot rules and require voters to mail a copy of their voter ID with their ballots. Some Republicans have urged him to go further, calling for an end to “no excuse” absentee voting in the state. Again, this is a curious move since Republicans did well in the state’s elections and Raffensperger himself said that Trump likely “depressed” his own turnout by attacking mail-in voting.

“It’s gonna be voter suppression in the way that it seems innocuous when you start, but in the end, it’s going to absolutely damp down the amount of people who vote and how they vote,” Democratic House Minority Leader James Beverly told a local news outlet. “It’s going to make barriers of entry too extreme and folks will give up, or they may not have the resources to do some of the things I think he is going to do.”

The efforts have not been limited to states that Biden won. In Mississippi, which Trump won by about 16 points, Gov. Tate Reeves vowed that he would never allow “universal mail-in voting and no-excuse early voting” while he’s in office. The Mississippi branch of the NAACP accused the Republican of pushing “old and outdated policies and practices aimed to suppress the vote.”

In Texas, where Republican lawmakers successfully limited mail-in voting and ballot drop-off sites ahead of the election, the GOP won big amid record turnout. But in the weeks since the election, Republican lawmakers have continued to push for restrictions on voting, including bills that would bar election officials from sending mail ballot applications to all registered voters, and lawsuits that challenge the state’s ballot drop-off rules.

“Texas Republicans are likely to move forward with efforts to restrict both mail and in-person early voting,” Robert Stein, a voting expert at Rice University, told Salon. “I suspect there will be some efforts to further restrict in-person early voting. … I expect to see efforts to codify limits on where and when mail ballots can be returned.”

Ironically, it is Republican success in an election where nearly half of voters cast ballots by mail that now puts the party in position to impose sweeping new restrictions on voting. The GOP similarly used its state-level wins in the 2010 “Tea Party wave” to pass voter ID laws, restrict early and mail voting, and make it harder to restore voting rights for people with past criminal convictions in 25 states, according to an analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice.

Along with control over the majority of state legislatures and voting laws, Republicans will also have a massive advantage when it comes to redistricting following this year’s census. Republican lawmakers, who swept nearly every state where control of redistricting was at stake, will have the power to redraw 188 congressional districts while Democrats will have control over just 73 districts, not to mention state and local legislative districts.

But some election experts suggest that attempts to restrict voting could still backfire on Republicans.

“Recent polling shows that many of the innovations adopted for the 2020 election are popular with voters of all partisan persuasions, making some changes potentially difficult,” Stein said. “There is ample evidence that states that attempt to adopt restrictive election laws produce a backlash effect, especially among nonwhite voters. The adoption of these laws provides Democrats with a means of mobilizing voters of color and younger voters.”

Levitt agreed that there is little reason to believe that voting restrictions would help Republicans.

“At least some accounts of the election suggest that Trump’s consistent disparagement of mail-in voting actually depressed Republican turnout in states like Georgia, where it might have made a difference,” he said. “In non-pandemic times, it’s not at all clear to me that restricting mail-in voting would hurt Democrats more than Republicans.”

Levitt added that the turnout trends may ultimately dissuade some Republicans from backing further restrictions.

“I’m not ready to assume, for example, that the most widely publicized conspiracy theory about fraud will actually lead to restrictive legislation,” he said. “We’ll have to wait for the new legislative sessions to see what picks up steam.”

What we owe the COVID fallen: Acting as if “essential” workers’ lives mattered

One of the worst consequences of the distraction surrounding how Donald Trump is handling his electoral defeat is that it has relegated the daily loss of essential workers to COVID to a kind of background music we hear in the supermarket.

No one knows for sure how many essential workers have perished from the deadly virus. No one knows what percentage of the 15,000 COVID deaths in New Jersey, my home state, or of the nation’s close to 300,000 virus deaths are attributable to preventable occupational exposures that essential workers sustained while helping others.

Passaic firefighter and EMT Israel Tolentino, age 31, who died on March 31, is believed to be the first uniformed first responder to perish in our state. Just a few days later, Paterson police officer Frank Scorpo, 34, also died from the deadly virus.

Tolentino left behind his wife and two small children, as did Scorpo.

Hidden figures 

But the uniformed first responders are just a fraction of a COVID-19 honor roll that surely has to include transit workers like Robert Elijah, 61, of Cliffwood, a power rail mechanic for the PATH commuter rail line and a member of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 864.

Elijah died on April 23 and was survived by his wife, three children and 12 grandchildren.

Across the country, the carnage wrought by the pandemic in the health care workforce has resulted in hundreds upon hundreds of fatalities like 56-year-old emergency room nurse Pamela Orlando, who worked at Valley Hospital in Ridgewood, New Jersey, and spent the last weeks of her life using video to document her losing battle with COVID.

A joint investigation by the Guardian newspaper and Kaiser Health News has estimated that more than 1,300 health care professionals have lost their lives to the deadly virus and that in some states health care workers might make up 20 percent of cases.

A great squandering

With the complete lack of a unified federal strategy what has developed is a badly fractured state-by-state and even city-by-city response. As a consequence of this federal abdication, there’s been a great squandering of the lives and the health of the essential workforce and their families, depending on the level of denial by their state and local officials.

These workers, who could easily number in the tens of thousands, were in essence deemed expendable by President Trump, who recklessly ignored the guidance of his own CDC. He downplayed the seriousness of the virus, pressing ahead in full campaign mode to open up the economy at any cost.

The Trump-Pence team’s decision to double down with a full campaign schedule not only put an untold number of local first responders, health care professionals and other essential workers at risk, it sidelined 300 Secret Service agents and uniformed officers.

“Trump has frowned on mask wearing at the White House, and some Secret Service personnel have privately complained to colleagues that they were instructed by presidential detail agents not to wear masks in his presence,” the Washington Post reported.

Never forgetting, again

The Trump-Pence wanton disregard for the virus’s life-altering and deadly consequences for those sworn to protect them extended to the entirety of the nation’s essential workforce on a scale that must be fully investigated by a 9/11 commission-type probe.

It can’t be allowed to stand for the ages without a thorough investigation that will also act as an essential after-action report on what history may judge as the most spectacular failure of a modern government to protect its own people and its own civil servants.

Nine months into this once-in-a-century public health crisis, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been totally missing in action and has failed to issue enforceable workplace health standards specific to COVID-19, which has already killed thousands upon thousands of essential workers.

New Jersey residents should take some pride in the fact that our state appears to be leading the nation in filling that massive gap in workplace protections for essential workers with a 13-page executive order signed by Gov. Phil Murphy on Nov. 5.

The how — as important as the what 

Murphy’s directive, which covers both public and private sector employers, was the result of extensive consultations with the CWA and SEIU, as well as grass roots community groups like Make the Road New Jersey, which advocates for immigrant households who are the backbone of the essential workforce.

Under Murphy’s order, employers have an obligation to make sure the workers that have to work outside their home are guaranteed the basics like masks and hand sanitizer they need to keep themselves and their families safe.

The workplace safety mandate also requires that employers routinely clean and disinfect all “high touch areas” as well as require customers to follow basic public health requirements, such as wearing masks.

In addition, prior to each shift, employers are required to conduct daily health checks of employees and to “immediately separate and send home employees who appear to have symptoms” of the highly contagious virus.

The measure, believed to be the first of its kind, builds on New Jersey’s Public Employees Occupational Safety and Health regulations, which established a process for lodging and investigating of health and safety complaints from public workers as well as employer and employee training.

Scaling up prevention 

“The really impressive part of this is that it applies to everyone,” said Hetty Rosenstein, the Communications Workers of America’s state director for New Jerse. “It provides a set of standards and some enforcement for workers who are not represented [by a union], and that is pretty good.”

New Jersey has also taken the lead nationally in extending a workplace presumption to essential workers when it comes to their being able to access the workers compensation system, in the event they are disabled by the virus.

Yet Rosenstein, who leads a union that represents tens of thousands of state, county and municipal workers, notes that even within New Jersey’s public sector there is a wide divergence between how seriously managers take COVID workplace protections, often depending on their political and ideological orientation.

The CWA has lost dozens of members to the virus, Rosenstein said. “We lost a good number in the beginning and I am worried about now especially for our workers” who regularly interface with the public through their jobs and New Jersey’s Department of Children and Families.

“Nobody knew or really understood how bad this was initially and they did not have testing, they didn’t have PPE, they did not have supplies,” Rosenstein recalled. “So we were asking for masks for our workers when health care workers in hospitals didn’t have them. We were told they could not even bring their own because they said then people would start saying, ‘Hey, wait a minute, I need a mask too.'”

Scarcity kills

Consider the tragic fate of Priscilla Carrow, 65, a coordinating manager who worked for New York City’s Elmhurst Hospital, a municipal facility in Queens that was hit especially hard by the virus last spring. She was a shop steward with CWA Local 1180, and was responsible for handing out masks to frontline health care workers. She was not permitted to wear one herself, and died from the virus in April.

“Part of her job was to distribute PPE [masks] to make sure everyone working with the public, with patients, has face masks — everyone but herself, because there wasn’t enough to go around,” testified Gloria Middleton, president of CWA Local 1180, at a recent hearing. “If the city had stricter guidelines on health and safety protocols earlier this year, Priscilla Carrow and hundreds like her might still be with us today.”

What is not widely reported is the swath of death and destruction wrought by the virus, not just through the essential workforce itself, but through their immediate and extended families, as well as increasing medical evidence of lingering and disabling symptoms among those who survive

Paul DiGiacomo, president of the NYPD’s Detective Endowment Association, says his union has had to deal first-hand with the repercussions of the health implications for the family of a detective who was exposed to COVID and died.

Above and beyond

“One of our detectives had a two-year-old and a one-month-old child,” DiGiacomo said in a phone interview. “When he came home from work, unfortunately he gave this virus to his wife and passed it on to the children as well. She had no support system, she was alone with young children, and we had to help her get through that situation.”

He continued, “We still don’t know the long-term effects of this — what’s going to happen moving forward? How is it going to affect our society and policing moving forward?”

For DiGiacomo, the COVID-19 situation for first responders is analogous to what happened to them, and to residents of lower Manhattan, when they were told by the EPA after the 9/11 attack that the air was “safe to breathe” despite government testing that indicated otherwise and was suppressed to facilitate the timely opening of Wall Street.

The historical corollary is not lost on some members of Congress, including Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr., a New Jersey Democrat who chairs the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight. He has been tracking the impact of the virus on the federal workforce.

“I led my colleagues in demanding answers about how the Trump White House’s negligence has likely put federal employees’ health in needless danger,” said Pascrell in a statement. “Any workers sickened by the government’s incompetence, especially our front line first responders, should be adequately compensated, and families who lost loved ones should receive survivor benefits.

“When this government is blessedly ejected on Jan. 20, 2021,” Pascrell continued, “there must be an accounting of how many lives were lost in the rush to reopen. And I’m sure no supporter of Donald Trump clapped for these needless deaths when attending his rallies. But look at the consequences of his actions.”

Back in the spring a bipartisan effort led by Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York, chair of the House Oversight Committee, resulted in drafting a bill to create a 9/11-style victims’ compensation fund for the essential workforce and their families ravaged by COVID-19.

“Now, we need to pass my Pandemic Heroes Compensation Act to ensure that all essential workers and their families can get compensation if they or their loved ones become sick because they were called in to work,” Maloney said in a statement. “Essential workers are keeping this country going, and they need to know that we will be there for them if they get sick.”

In both red and blue states, in our town squares we have plaques and statues to honor fallen soldiers, even if their lives were lost in an unpopular war.

Historians rank armed conflicts by the body count, the dead and the wounded. It’s an exercise that honors the dead but also holds the living accountable for their sacrifice.

Can we afford to do any less for members of our essential workforce killed or disabled by a pandemic for which our nation was so ill-prepared, and which our government at its highest levels denied was a problem, even as the mounting body count daily proved otherwise?

Fox host Lou Dobbs accuses William Barr of joining the “Deep State”: He may be “compromised”

U.S. Attorney General William Barr has been one of President Donald Trump’s most aggressive defenders, but this week, Barr essentially acknowledged Joe Biden as president-elect when he told the Associated Press that there is no evidence showing that widespread voter fraud robbed Trump of a victory. And Fox Business’ Lou Dobbs is furious, accusing the Trump loyalist of joining “the deep state.”

Tuesday night on his Fox Business show, Dobbs made the baseless claim that in “six key battleground states,” there has been “clear electoral fraud” that “nullified the will of the people in the November election.” And he accused Barr of betraying Trump by siding with “insidious RINOs” and “radical Dems.”

“Today, a member of his own cabinet appeared to join in with the radical Dems and the Deep State and the resistance,” Dobbs told viewers. “Attorney General William Barr, who has been absent for weeks and weeks, (told) the Associated Press that the U.S. attorneys and FBI agents who have followed up on complaints of specific voter fraud across the country have produced nothing.”

Dobbs noted that Barr told AP, “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that that could have effected a different outcome in the election” — and Dobbs told viewers, “For the attorney general to make that statement, he is either a liar or a fool or both. He may be, perhaps compromised. He may be simply unprincipled. Or he may be personally distraught or ill. But in no way can he honestly stand up before the American people and say that the FBI has, with any integrity of intensity, investigated voter fraud in this country — and then say it did not amount to anything.”

Here are some Twitter reactions to Dobbs’ over-the-top rant against Barr:

The Federal Election Commission has questions for Sen. David Perdue

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) sent Sen. David Perdue, R-Ga., a lengthy letter last week asking the embattled GOP incumbent to explain a number of apparent violations in his campaign contribution filings this year, including from a banking organization and a major pharmaceutical PAC.

The letter, which covers July through the end of September, notes four types of violations: excessive contributions from both individuals and committees; corporate donations; and a contribution from an unregistered committee.

Perdue must reconcile more than $50,000 in individual contributions, as well as about $23,000 from committees, including the Consumer Bankers Association PAC and AzPac — the employee PAC for pharmaceutical giant Astra Zeneca, which gave the campaign more than the $5,000 limit.

Notices about excessive contributions are not uncommon nor necessarily indicative of wrongdoing — the assumption is that campaigns want to follow the rules but may have made mistakes in the heat of the contest.

For instance, when the FEC notifies a campaign that it has taken too much money from donors, the letter lists the names and donation histories of the supporters who gave too much, so the campaign can isolate the over-limit amounts and refund, reattribute or redesignate that money. Campaigns have 60 days to do so before they must report back to the FEC.

Some of those lists this year, however, have been exceptionally long — a phenomenon which election experts attribute to automated recurring donations over a long and particularly intense campaign season.

The Trump campaign dominates in this arena: In September, the FEC flagged more than 35,000 contributions from 1,045 donors, totaling more than $4.5 million in donations which the campaign must explain and reconcile. That list was 855 pages long. On Oct. 1, the FEC sent the campaign another letter flagging excessive donations, which was 814 pages long. And FEC’s list of excessive Trump donations for the month of August alone was more than 1,000 pages long.

“You have to consider the possibility that some of these serial donors may not have fully appreciated what they were doing when they signed up for recurring contributions,” Brett Kappel, campaign finance expert at Harmon Curran, previously told Salon.

(The Trump and Perdue campaigns happen to share a treasurer, Bradley Crate, who is responsible for clearing up all of this accounting. Crate was listed as treasurer for 25 committees that registered this year alone, including Trump’s new leadership PAC, Save America.)

Typically, with a notice such as Perdue’s, which appears after the election, a candidate would not have to worry about balancing refunds with future expenditures to sustain their campaign. However, Perdue did not lock up a win in the general election, and he now finds himself facing a tight runoff against Democratic rival Jon Ossoff in January.

A focal point of that contest appears in the FEC letter: Perdue’s connections to financial and pharmaceutical interests.

Salon reported last week that Perdue, a multimillionaire former business executive who has recently seen a resurgence of pressure related to numerous accusations of insider trading, dealt in hundreds of thousands of dollars in bank stock while he sat on the Senate Banking Committee. In that time, he sponsored or co-sponsored 14 pieces of pro-bank legislation while accepting more than $1 million in campaign contributions from the financial industry.

The Peach State conservative also drew scrutiny for his investments in pharmaceutical giant Pfizer ahead of the coronavirus pandemic.

Perdue claimed he was not personally involved in his trades, and over the summer federal investigators cleared him of any crimes related to the transactions. However, The New York Times reported last week that Perdue’s public defense did not add up: Email communications show that the senator instructed his Goldman Sachs wealth manager to sell $1 million of stock in a financial firm two days after the company’s CEO sent him a personal email tipping Perdue off to “upcoming changes.” Weeks later, the CEO stepped down and the firm’s stock tanked.

Republicans are pouring money into Perdue’s runoff, which is paired on Jan. 5 with unelected Georgia Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler, another multimillionaire legislator who has been plagued by accusations of insider trading amid the coronavirus pandemic.

The winners will determine which party controls the Senate, and ad spending on the race recently topped $250 million. The Republican National Committee, which has focused fundraising efforts on the runoffs hoping to salvage control of the upper chamber after outgoing President Donald Trump’s stinging upset in the deep-red state, recently accepted a $257,828 infusion — the last of the cash from the 2016 Republican National Convention planning committee.

The Perdue campaign did not immediately reply to Salon’s request for comment.

Ivanka Trump has been deposed in a lawsuit over the alleged misuse of inaugural funds: report

On Wednesday, CNN reported that first daughter Ivanka Trump was deposed this week as part of the D.C. attorney general’s lawsuit probing potential misuse of the Trump 2016 inauguration fund.

“In January, the DC attorney general’s office sued the Trump Organization and Presidential Inaugural Committee alleging they abused more than $1 million raised by the nonprofit by ‘grossly overpaying’ for use of event space at the Trump hotel in Washington for the 2017 inauguration,” reported Kara Scannell. “Depositions of witnesses as part of the lawsuit have been underway over the past several weeks.”

“The attorney general’s office has also subpoenaed records from [Tom] Barrack, Ivanka Trump, first lady Melania Trump, and Rick Gates, the former inaugural committee deputy chairman,” continued the report. “According to the lawsuit, Gates ‘personally managed’ discussions with the Trump hotel about event space.”

Ivanka is also involved in a separate investigation by prosecutors in New York, who are examining tax writeoffs President Donald Trump took on consulting fees paid out to her.

Recently pardoned Michael Flynn calls on Trump to “suspend the Constitution” and re-do the election

One week after receiving a historically broad pardon from President Donald Trump, former national security adviser Michael Flynn on Tuesday endorsed demands for his former boss to “temporarily suspend the Constitution” and declare martial law, warning that “a shooting war is imminent” without a re-do of the federal election.

Flynn’s Twitter account shared a press release from a Tea Party-affiliated organization called the We the People Convention (WTPC), calling for the outgoing president to invoke martial law “to allow the U.S. Military to oversee a new free and fair federal election” if state legislatures, courts and congress do not overturn his defeat.

The press release promotes the group’s recent full-page ad in the conservative-leaning Washington Times, and it compares the context surrounding Abraham Lincoln’s executive actions during the Civil War to “the literal civil war that is dividing our nation today.”

“Today, the current threat to our United States by the international and domestic socialist/communist left is much more serious than anything Lincoln or our nation has faced in its history — including the civil war,” the statement says, citing violence from “antifa” and Black Lives Matter.

The group warns that “a shooting war is imminent” if Trump does not stop “socialists” from “stealing” the election: “Failure to do so could result in massive violence and destruction on a level not seen since the Civil War.”

The statement concludes, “We will also have no other choice but to take matters into our own hands, and defend our rights on our own, if you do not act within your powers to defend us.”

Earlier that day, Trump’s Attorney General William Barr acknowledged that federal investigators had not found evidence of fraud which could change the outcome of the election. Federal and state courts have so far ruled against the Trump campaign and GOP allies in every lawsuit alleging voter fraud that the attorneys have not withdrawn themselves — though the president’s legal team still holds out hope for appeals.

The same day that Flynn shared the statement, Sidney Powell, the red-pilled chief attorney for his former defense team, promoted calls for Trump to “set up military tribunals” to investigate the election.

Powell recently led a short life as a member of Trump’s “elite strike-force” legal team challenging the election results before she was sidelined after repeatedly pushing fringe conspiracy theories in a televised press conference and media interviews.

In August, Powell met with the president and other advisers at the White House, where she advised him not to pardon her client, who had been seeking to overturn his 2017 guilty plea for lying to the FBI about backchannel contacts with the Russian government ahead of Trump’s inauguration.

Last week, Trump issued Flynn a “full and unconditional pardon,” which extended beyond Flynn’s plea to “any and all possible offenses” that might arise in connection to his case, as well as “any and all” possible future offenses related to the Mueller investigation “in any manner” — including grand jury proceedings.

In addition to the Russia-related charges, Flynn faced possible criminal liability for failing to register as a foreign agent for his work on behalf of the Turkish government during the 2016 election — when he was the Trump campaign’s top national security adviser.

The pardon, which heads off possible future charges, appears to be one of the broadest in U.S. history, perhaps surpassing even former President Gerald Ford’s preemptive pardon of former President Richard Nixon.

However, recent reports indicate that Trump discussed a pardon with Rudy Giuliani, the current top attorney of his campaign’s dwindling legal team and the former face of identity theft protection company LifeLock, which could be even more broad.

Watchdog sues Trump, Kushner and White House to prevent records from being illegally destroyed

A government watchdog group filed a lawsuit on Tuesday seeking to prevent President Donald Trump, son-in-law Jared Kushner and the White House from destroying government records before leaving office.

The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and several historical groups in Washington D.C. warn in the lawsuit that Trump might attempt to destroy records in order to avoid legal scrutiny. The groups accuse Trump and his administration of violating the Presidential Records Act by failing to preserve official records as required by the law.

The lawsuit claims that the White House records preservation policy “authorizes the destruction of presidential record material,” because it allows staff to preserve screenshots of messages sent on non-official platforms like WhatsApp as presidential records. The groups argue that the screenshots do not include the metadata associated with each message, and therefore are incomplete records.

The suit calls out Kushner for admitting to “using non-official messaging accounts like WhatsApp to conduct official White House business, relying on screenshots alone to satisfy his record-keeping obligations.”

Kushner has claimed he takes screenshots of his WhatsApp messages, which he has used to discuss issues with Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman and Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg, and sends them to be preserved.

“Given the central role Mr. Kushner has played in implementing the domestic and foreign policies of the Trump administration, the missing information is likely to yield historically important details about what the Trump administration did and why,” the suit said.

The policy allows the “loss and destruction of presidential record material,” CREW said in a statement, describing it as “part of a larger pattern of the president and the White House ignoring, if not flouting, their obligation to create and preserve records memorializing official actions and decisions.” The statement also raised concerns that Trump might seek to destroy records, because he is “facing potential legal and financial exposure once he leaves office.”

“With the approaching onset of a new president, much public attention has focused on the likelihood that President Trump, or White House personnel acting at his behest, will destroy records of his presidency before he leaves office, fearing the consequences to him and his legacy should they become public,” the lawsuit said. “With President Trump’s term in office soon coming to an end, absent judicial intervention this conduct will permanently deprive plaintiffs and the public of records documenting a critical part of our nation’s history.”

The group said the screenshot policy may obfuscate the decision-making process behind the administration’s policies.

“The Presidential Records Act exists for a simple reason: to prevent presidents and their staff from destroying historically valuable records. By deleting or preserving only parts of these records, the White House is destroying essential historical records,” CREW Executive Director Noah Bookbinder said in a statement. “The American people deserve not only to know how their government is making important decisions but to understand what was going on behind closed doors and what we could do better in the future.”

CREW filed a similar lawsuit last year, which was thrown out, according to Bloomberg News. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said in the previous lawsuit that Congress would need to amend the Presidential Records Act before courts could intervene.

“The Trump administration acts in accordance with statutory requirements,” White House spokesman Judd Deere told the outlet.

CREW was joined in the lawsuit by the National Security Archive, the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations and the American Historical Association.

“Presidential records are always at risk because the law that’s supposed to protect them is so weak,” National Security Archive Director Tom Blanton said in a statement, adding that the lawsuit seeks to “prevent any bonfire of records in the Rose Garden.”

James Grossman, who heads the American Historical Association, said historical research into records preserved by the law “provides an unparalleled look inside an administration’s activities that would, if absent, leave the world wholly reliant upon the memoirs and memories of those whose deeds we professionally investigate and evaluate.”

“For the purpose of creating a ‘usable past’ for generations of future citizens, the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations is gravely concerned with preserving the integrity of the Trump administration’s records,” Richard Immerman, the chairman of SHAFR’s Historical Documentation Committee, added. “In light of the administration’s previous violations of the Presidential Records Act, it consequently judges it essential to take legal action to prevent any efforts to destroy records or otherwise fail to retain them in their entirety.”

Nat Geo’s “Trafficked” delves into the criminal underworld, while putting its reporter at risk

With her new National Geographic series “Trafficked” Mariana van Zeller visibly and tangibly places her life and safety on the line for the sake of transporting viewers to the heart of underground criminal enterprises. That’s the hook, and van Zeller makes good on it at every turn. Sometimes seeing her deliver on that promise can be downright unsettling.

In fact, a few scenes show how nearly she comes to real harm in her quest to sit down with dangerous criminals for a one-on-one conversation. All you need to do is scan her face to comprehend what’s at stake when, say, a scam artist who has surrounded himself and her with masked men strapped with pistols admits that he considered robbing her and her crew after they met at their agreed upon clandestine meeting.

Then he takes her hands in his and assures her in a patronizing voice that she has nothing to worry about, an act that is in itself utterly chilling.

Over the 15 years that van Zeller has been reporting on the criminal underworld,  she’s earned awards and enough of a reputation that her ability to infiltrate multiple aspects of trafficking is never in question. Nevertheless, time and again in “Trafficked with Mariana van Zeller” we see the great lengths to which she must go to get information about illegal industries or gain entry to places most people will never see and most journalists fear to tread. Some of this is for show, certainly; this is still television we’re talking about.

Still, by enabling us to accompany her as she cultivates sources and endure long waits in unsafe and unfamiliar places only to be stood up – or worse, to watch her quietly worry when she realizes she’s being followed – “Trafficked” c

Van Zeller’s determination is admirable, and her methods are daring. The series itself, though, tonally zigs and zags to the point of feeling uneven, and at times van Zeller’s efforts at transparency teeter into self-aggrandizement as she touts her career experience and creds, taking us out of the lived experience of the story she’s tracking. When “Trafficked” dives into the world of underground crime, it is fascinating. When it makes the reporter’s bravery central to the story, it takes on a tabloid newsmagazine feel.

In fairness, some of this can’t be helped; most of the people who agree to speak with her do so only on the condition that their identities be hidden or that they aren’t filmed at all. Then again, the overwrought score cheapens a number of these scenes, and that layer of the production absolutely should have been tamed.

Still, while van Zeller and her crew head to some truly off-the-map locations, the production largely remains true to its intended path. “Trafficked” explores eight criminal enterprises largely happening in plain sight, including phone scams, fentanyl production, counterfeiting, steroid abuse and prostitution. Her reporting takes her to multiple countries, including Jamaica, Mexico, Israel and Peru, but the common thread is that Americans are likely to have some personal knowledge or interaction with at least one of these crimes if not several. She does her due diligence as a a journalist, certainly, and she also profiles her subjects with empathy, balanced with acknowledging destructiveness of whatever they’re engaged in.

The “Scams” episode, for instance, takes us to the other side of the phone line to chat with the people who may randomly call your phone or, more likely, that of an older relative. You’re likely familiar with some version of this. Someone calls you or someone you know and claims that millions of dollars are magically waiting for you or them, before soliciting money for a transaction fee to send it to their account. 

The reporter sits with the men and women who makes these calls and discusses how they do it, how much money they make from it, and most pertinently, why they do it. The why of the crime is the intriguing and the infuriating part of these episodes, since their crimes destroy innocent lives (a point van Zeller returns to over and over again) while, according to the participants in these networks, also support entire communities.

Whether she’s talking to scammers, drug runners or counterfeiters, the common responses to van Zeller’s question as to whether they feel remorse are largely along the same lines: the local economy is terrible, straight jobs pay terribly – not to mention, many of them hold legal jobs, but they don’t pay a living wage – and this is easy money that supports their parents, their relatives, their children.

If you didn’t have better options, what would you do?

Out of the five episodes made available for review, the episodes that mainly take place in the United State are among the least surprising. “Steroids” heads into the illicit industry of steroid abuse in the world of body building, specifically focusing on an influencer who has styled himself as a guru of black market enhancement drugs. Most of its subjects are taking these drugs in plain sight, and to nobody’s surprise the main “character” Anthony Hughes, who goes by the stage name Dr. Tony Huge, has no qualms about being filmed as he’s injecting people with cocktails of substances. This includes one scene taking place during a break in a bodybuilding competition, when the “doctor” pushes a steroid created for race horses into the flesh of a young man named Zach.

“I’m not going to lie,” she says in a voiceover. “I’m completely rooting for Zach to win this competition. But I don’t want to see him die in the process.” Fair enough.

It shouldn’t escape notice that this episode of “Trafficked” mainly follows white people who have the time and resources to devote to injecting crazy substances into their bodies. To Tony Huge, it may even double as advertisement for his services.

The other, “Pimps,” is even weaker – although from the way van Zeller describes the process, it also appears to be the most challenging to report out. This episode also takes place in van Zeller’s backyard, since she finds most of her sources in Los Angeles. In this hour, all of them are Black.

This episode doesn’t tell us much that the average “Dateline” or “Frontline” viewer doesn’t already know about the business of illicit sex work. It also makes me wonder why van Zeller chose to solely focus on this aspect of sex trafficking as opposed to international human trafficking, which is only marginally understood by most and still strikes the average American as something happening in places far away from where they live instead of right under their noses.

And yet, like many of van Zeller’s other subjects, the pimps she’s able to speak with on camera emphatically insist that they’re doing a service to the women they exploit.

By and large van Zeller refrains from making the participants in these criminal networks completely sympathetic. Some, as she shows, have zero remorse about what they’re doing and the extent to which they hurt and even kill random strangers they victimize.

Others are somewhere in the middle, floating in a space of denial and professed ignorance. There’s the biochemist in Mexico cooking black market fentanyl who insists that none of the product he makes has ever killed anyone. There are the phone scammers who reframe their acts of fraud as reparations. Given the miserable wages they make at the Jamaican all-inclusive resorts where some of them work, that they would come to that conclusion is fathomable.

The most fascinating moments are those in which personality barely factors in, whether it’s van Zeller’s or the mysterious criminals she’s meeting. These are the scenes where “Trafficked” is most powerful, a standout example being a sequence where she heads out on a boat and meets up with a group of smugglers in the open waters beyond a Mexican port.

They’ve just retrieved barrels of liquid that have dropped of the side of a large freighter, and they don’t say which. On the next leg another person explains that from there the substance is unloaded from the boat in a matter of seconds and into one of many non-descript vehicles that take it to its next location. Link by link she follows the chain, unwrapping a greater understanding of the ingenuity and toll that goes into creating and distributing this poison. One could almost admire their hustle if it weren’t destroying countless lives.

“Trafficked  with Mariana van Zeller” premieres with two back-to-back episodes on Wednesday, Dec. 2 at 8 p.m. on the National Geographic Channel.

McConnell’s COVID plan has business tax breaks but $0 for unemployment boost and direct payments

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Tuesday rejected a bipartisan compromise to break the months-long delay of coronavirus stimulus funding, instead offering a counterproposal which includes few of the priorities economists say are crucial to saving the economy.

McConnell, who has already rejected a $3.4 trillion offer and a $2.2 trillion compromise from House Democrats, shot down a $900 billion short-term deal urged by a bipartisan group of legislators that included GOP Sens. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Bill Cassidy, R-La. The Republican leader alternatively presented another $500 billion proposal providing even less relief for jobless Americans than his previous offers, which will be dead-on-arrival in the House of Representatives. 

Though McConnell’s previous proposal included an extension of a federal unemployment boost at $300 per week, or half of the rate included in the Cares Act, his latest proposal includes $0 for the unemployment boost. McConnell’s spokesman declined to say why the unemployment boost was scrapped entirely.

The plan does include a temporary one-month extension of Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA), which provides unemployment benefits to contractors and gig workers, and the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC), which extends “base” unemployment benefits, The Washington Post’s Jeff Stein reported. The proposal was unveiled after Trump reportedly seemed to lose “interest in the stimulus” following his election loss.

McConnell’s proposal, which is otherwise essentially a rehash of previous offers that went nowhere, also includes no funding for a second round of $1,200 direct payments to Americans, despite bipartisan support, nor much-needed aid to cash-strapped state, local and tribal governments before they are forced to lay off millions of workers.

The proposal does include an “array of tax cuts” for companies, including a 100% deduction on business meals, The New York Times reported. It also includes a legal liability shield for companies, which watchdog groups warned was “breathtakingly broad.”

The bill would provide $300 billion for Paycheck Protection Program loans to small businesses, $31 billion for vaccine distribution and $16 billion for testing. But it would terminate the Federal Reserve’s ability to lend unspent money from the Cares Act and create new barriers for people seeking unemployment benefits, Stein noted.

“Leave it to Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump to propose a bill that creates tax write-offs for fancy lunches and gives the middle finger to working families and 20 million unemployed Americans,” Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., who sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, tweeted. “This is not a serious proposal, it is a slap in the face to people who need help.”

“There are upwards of 150,000 COVID cases per day and miles-long lines at food banks nationwide, and Leader McConnell wants to do tax breaks for three-martini lunches and broad legal immunity for his corporate donors,” Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement. “It’s insulting to the American people.”

McConnell’s proposal came after he shot down the most conservative compromise offer yet. The bipartisan group of senators, which also included Sens. Mark Warner, D-Va., Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Angus King, I-Maine, called for a short-term $908 billion plan that would extend key relief programs through March.

The plan did not include a second round of $1,200 direct payments but extended the federal unemployment boost at $300 per week for four months — roughly half of what Democrats have called for — and would provide $160 billion in aid to state and local governments — which Republicans have staunchly opposed despite many red states being forced to make drastic cuts, because they do not have enough tax revenues to cover their budgets. The plan also included $288 billion for PPP loans to small businesses and a temporary liability shield for businesses sought by the GOP.

“Our action to provide emergency relief is needed now more than ever before. The people need to know we are not going to leave until we get something accomplished,” Manchin said at a news conference on Tuesday. “I’m committed to seeing this through.”

But McConnell quickly rejected the plan.

“We just don’t have time to waste time,” he told reporters. “We don’t have time for messaging games. Ee don’t have time for lengthy negotiations. The issue is: We want to get a result.”

Murkowski rejected McConnell’s comments in a private call with fellow Republicans, saying his plan was just a “messaging” bill that was “offensive” to Americans suffering from the pandemic, according to The Times. Collins also pressed her GOP colleagues to back the bipartisan proposal.

McConnell also told reporters that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., had sent a secret relief offer to senior Republicans. Democratic aides would not say what was in the offer, but Schumer said it was a “private proposal to help us move the ball forward,” according to the Washington Post.

Some Democrats also expressed unease about the $900 billion compromise, arguing that it should not include a liability shield. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, said he was “not happy with a lot” of the funding decisions in the proposal but hoped it would at least come to the floor for debate.

“That’s what it’s all about in this world of the United States Congress,” he said. “You come together, willing to sit down and listen to the other side, and if necessary, compromise.”

Economists have urged Democrats to accept a lower unemployment boost rate than the $600 per week being sought, but many experts said the compromise offer was still not enough given the infection spikes around the country and new business restrictions. Most economists believe the next round of relief needs to be at least $2 trillion to $3 trillion in order to be effective.

Indeed, Democrats who back the bipartisan proposal say the government would still need to pass a larger package by March after President-elect Joe Biden is inaugurated.

“Waiting until next year is not an answer,” McConnell said Tuesday. “I’m focused on accomplishing as much as we can” before Congress heads home for a holiday break.

McConnell has said the stimulus package may be part of a deal needed to avert a government shutdown on Dec. 11, which could further complicate matters.

Though Biden called on Congress to pass a “robust package,” he acknowledged that any bill passed during the lame-duck period would be “at best just a start.”

The back-and-forth comes as the U.S. is deep into the worst wave of coronavirus infections yet, one which medical experts predict will only get worse with the holidays approaching. Hospitals are running out of space, and states have reintroduced business restrictions to contain the spread. As many as 30 million people are at risk of eviction when the current moratorium expires, and 12 million are set to lose unemployment benefits. Failing to pass additional PPP funding would also likely result in untold devastation for small businesses.

“Additional COVID relief is long overdue and must be passed in this lame duck session,” Pelosi said in a Tuesday statement.

Business groups have also warned that the partisan stalemate could severely damage the economy.

“Large parts of the business community are running out of patience,” Kip Eideberg of the Association of Equipment Manufacturers told Bloomberg News. “It is beyond surreal that they are still bickering over politics when they should be focused on policies.”

A group of five Democrats led by Wyden, Schumer, and Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, have introduced a piecemeal bill which would retroactively extend the federal unemployment boost at $600 per week through next October.

“With the economy backsliding as COVID-19 cases explode nationwide, Senate Republicans are set to push millions of American families off a cliff,” Wyden said. “Whether or not you can pay rent or feed your family should not depend on whether or not Mitch McConnell sees it in his political interest.”

CDC panel advises that health care workers, nursing home residents receive COVID-19 vaccines first

A panel that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended that, if and when limited vaccines become available to the American public in the coming weeks, health care workers and residents of retirement homes should have access to them first.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), a group of medical experts that provides advice to the CDC even though they are not part of the organization, convened on Monday to discuss who should receive the first vaccines if they become available in the near future, according to CNBC. The conversation occurred in light of the fact that Pfizer submitted an emergency use authorization (EUA) request to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last month and Moderna did so for its own vaccine candidate earlier this week. Because there will only be limited supplies for each vaccine until the companies can ramp up production, however, the government will need to determine who is given priority access to the initial doses that come out. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar told CNBC last month that in the best case scenario there will be enough vaccine doses available by the end of the year to inoculate 20 million people.

ACIP decided on Monday that those initial doses should go to elderly individuals in long-term care facilities and health care workers who are most likely to be exposed to the disease, according to Science Magazine. The panel’s decision was nearly unanimous with 13 scientists voting in favor of it and only one dissenting. ACIP argued that 21 million health care workers and 3 million adults at long-term care facilities should receive doses during the first phase of vaccination, or phase 1a. The next step is for the CDC to decide on whether it agrees with ACIP’s Phase 1a recommendation and, if so, how to assist state and local governments as they make the final vaccination decisions.

CDC representatives also said that Phase 1b would most likely go to “essential” workers like police officers, school staff and grocery store workers, while Phase 1c would most likely go to adults with high-risk medical conditions or who are over the age of 65. ACIP did not discuss Phase 1b or Phase 1c plans on Monday.

One ACIP member, Grace Lee, MD, MPH of Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford University, said during the meeting that she is happy that the panel’s recommendations will help America’s overburdened healthcare system better cope with the onslaught of COVID-19 patients, according to the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. “It’s been an exhausting 9 months,” she added. ACIP also discussed the logistical challenges in making sure patients at long-term care facilities are vaccinated, given that those institutions often see high turnover and that will make it difficult to guarantee that residents receive two doses (which the vaccines require) and that new residents are vaccinated.

The panel members also discussed how to most efficiently vaccinate healthcare workers, noting that there are advantages to doing so by hospital unit but that they should stagger vaccinations in case workers need to take off after experiencing mild side effects. They may also need to sub-prioritize who receives doses based on different categories of workers; for example, healthcare workers who cannot work from home would be given priority over those who can.

Both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine candidates are mRNA-based vaccines. mRNA is the part of a living creature’s DNA that instructs cells on which proteins to manufacture; mRNA-based vaccines use synthetic mRNA — whose composition is bespoke, based on the virus in question — to train the body’s cells to produce precise proteins that are akin to those already found in the given virus it is trying to fight. Both vaccine candidates need to be distributed at very cold temperatures, with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine candidate needing to be kept at –70°C and Moderna’s vaccine candidate needing to be kept at –20°C, although the company claims it can remain stable for up to one month at consumer refrigerator temperatures of 2°C to 8°C.

Scientists just used CRISPR to cure the simian equivalent of HIV. Here’s why this is a big deal

With multiple coronavirus vaccines being produced as we speak, the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have an end in sight, though the HIV pandemic continues after more than 40 years. That might seem like a head-scratcher: why is HIV, a virus we’ve known about for decades, so much harder to cure than a virus discovered just last year? Part of the reason is that HIV, as a retrovirus, is a more complex virus to vaccinate against than SARS-CoV-2 — hence why a vaccine or other cure has eluded scientists for decades. 

Now, a surprising new study on a related retrovirus shows incredible promise for the potential to develop a cure for HIV, or human immunodeficiency virus. In an article published in the scientific journal Nature Communications, scientists revealed that they had used CRISPR – a genetic technology that can alter DNA and whose developers won the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry — to successfully edit SIV (simian immunodeficiency virus), a virus similar to HIV, out of the genomes of non-human primates.  Specifically, the scientists were able to edit out the SIV genome from rhesus macaque monkeys’ infected cells.

The study was co-authored by a number of scientists including experts from the Temple University, the Tulane National Primate Research Center, the Tulane University School of Medicine and the Texas Biomedical Research Institute. 

“This study used the CRISPR CaS9 system, which has been described as molecular scissors,” Andrew G. MacLean, PhD, wrote to Salon. MacLean is an associate professor at the Tulane National Primate Research Center and the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at Tulane University School of Medicine and was a senior co-investigator of the study. “It uses a highly specific targeting system to cut out a specific portion of DNA that is necessary for HIV to be able to produce more virus.”
 
He added, “Our collaborators at in the Khalili Lab at Temple University have developed a method of ‘packaging’ this within a single so-called vector. A vector is a non-disease causing virus that is used as a carrier for the CRISPR CaS9 scissors to get it into the tissues of interest.”

The experiments with SIV are considered to be a gateway to understanding HIV, as HIV is believed to have evolved from SIV, and is genetically similar.

“The rhesus macaque model of HIV/AIDS is the most valuable model to test efficacy of new interventions or approaches for preventing or treating HIV infection, prior to human clinical trials,” Binhua Ling, PhD, associate professor at the Southwest National Primate Research Center, Texas Biomedical Research Institute, wrote to Salon. “This first proof-of-principal study on the rhesus macaque model indicates that this virus-vehicle-delivered-CRISPR system can reach many tissue sites of the body, and is able to effectively delete virus DNA in infected cells. This paves the way for applying the same technology to the human body, which could lead to a cure for HIV infection.”

Tricia H. Burdo, PhD, another senior co-investigator on the new study who works at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, explained to Salon by email that “HIV is in a class of viruses (retroviruses) that inserts itself into the DNA of the host, so you can really think of this now as a genetic disease” — in other words, the kind of thing that would be ripe for CRISPR’s scissors-like ability to remove errant or unwanted genetic material. Burdo notes that the CRISPR technology discussed in the article “cuts out this foreign viral gene.”

Burdo explained that antiretroviral therapy (ART) is currently used to treat HIV complications, but that these drugs “only keep the virus quiet.” When ART drugs are exhausted, “the virus can come to life” once again.

“Our technology is designed to cut out the viral DNA from the person’s genetic material so once ART is stopped, there is nothing there to reactivate and cause disease,” Burdo added.

Burdo also pointed out that while people can survive while taking ART drugs every day, “there are side effects to the drugs themselves” and that there is still a “stigma” associated with having HIV. Common side effects to ART include redistribution of fat, loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, cholesterol problems, insomnia, rashes, fatigue and mood swings, according to Healthline.

“Our ultimate goal is to cut the virus out of cells and remove the need for ART medicine,” Burdo wrote to Salon. “We still have a long way to go but this study was a step in that direction.”

She said future steps will include experimenting on monkeys, then “remov[ing] ART medications and determine the effect.” “We know we can cut the virus from the DNA but need to see if we can cut it out from enough cells so we stop ART medication forever,” she said.

MacLean echoed Burdo’s observations. “The next step, which is already underway, is a longer follow up (three months instead of the three weeks in the present study),” MacLean told Salon. “We aim to confirm continued safety and efficacy of the technology and determine if the longer treatment leads to even higher levels of viral clearance from key tissue compartments or if there are areas of the body that this particular therapy does not reach as effectively.”

According to the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, there were between 31.6 million and 44.5 million people living with HIV throughout the world as of 2019, with between 25.1 million and 26.2 million having access to ART drugs as of the end of June 2020. Between the start of the epidemic and the end of 2019, between 55.9 million and 100 million have become infected with HIV and between 24.8 million and 42.2 million have died from AIDS-related illnesses.