Gov. Andrew Cuomo also announced that five regions in upstate New York have reopened.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATES: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/Coronav…

SUBSCRIBE to ABC NEWS: https://bit.ly/2vZb6yP
Watch More on http://abcnews.go.com/
LIKE ABC News on FACEBOOK https://www.facebook.com/abcnews
FOLLOW ABC News on TWITTER: https://twitter.com/abc

#ABCNews #NewYork #Cuomo #Sports #Reopen #Coronavirus #COVID19 #Pandemic #Health

Source Article from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPT6gN6QyDI

Reporting was contributed by Iliana Magra, Hisako Ueno, Ben Dooley, Sameer Yasir, Jeffrey Gettleman, Jason Farago, Mike Ives, Elian Peltier, Jason Horowitz, Elisabetta Povoledo, Emma Bubola, Megan Specia, Steven Erlanger, Aurelien Breeden, Katrin Bennhold, Christopher Schuetze, Andrew Jacobs, Michael D. Shear, Edward Wong, Anatoly Kurmanaev, José Maria León, Safak Timur, Melissa Eddy, Dan Levin, Maria Abi-Habib, Keith Bradsher and Victor Mather.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/19/world/coronavirus-news.html

BREVARD COUNTY, Fla. – The scientist who created Florida’s COVID-19 data portal wasn’t just removed from her position on May 5, she was fired on Monday by the Department of Health, she said, for refusing to manipulate data.

Rebekah Jones said in an email to the USA TODAY Network that she single-handedly created two applications in two languages, four dashboards, six unique maps with layers of data functionality for 32 variables covering a half a million lines of data. Her objective was to create a way for Floridians and researchers to see what the COVID-19 situation was in real time.

Then, she was dismissed. 

“I worked on it alone, sixteen hours a day for two months, most of which I was never paid for, and now that this has happened I’ll probably never get paid for,” she wrote in an email, confirming that she had not just been reassigned on May 5, but fired from her job as Geographic Information Systems manager for the Florida Department of Health.  

After USA TODAY Network first reported Jones’ removal from her position in charge of the Florida COVID-19 Data and Surveillance Dashboard she created, she confirmed, as reported by CBS-12 in West Palm Beach that she was fired because she was ordered to censor some data, but refused to “manually change data to drum up support for the plan to reopen.”

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/05/19/florida-covid-19-coronavirus-data-researcher-out-state-reopens/5218897002/

The House passed a bill Friday (The Heroes Act) which provides a second round of stimulus checks, and the questions are flying in. Here are the facts on five key areas of stimulus check details that I keep getting. Let’s dive right in with the facts.

1. Did Congress really just pass a bill for another stimulus check?

Yes, one side of Congress (the House) passed a bill that does include a second stimulus check, but Congress has two different chambers—the Senate and the House—and the Senate has not yet agreed to pass another stimulus check.

Here’s the deal: The House passed a $3 trillion stimulus relief package Friday; it’s called The Heroes Act. It does provide for a second stimulus check in addition to a whole lot of other things including $200 billion in hazard pay for essential workers, six more months of COVID-19 unemployment, housing and food assistance, money for the U.S. Postal Service, etc. You can check out what’s included in The Heroes Act here.

So yes, the bill passed in the House, and now it’s being presented to the Senate with Speaker Nancy Pelosi urging the Senate to begin negotiations so they can get something put forward that both chambers will agree to pass.

2. The Senate says it’s dead on arrival so does the House bill really matter?

Yes, it definitely matters. A lot is being made of the fact that Senator Mitch McConnell said the House bill is dead on arrival. Don’t believe the hype. All signals are that the Senate will end up negotiating with the House to pass yet another stimulus relief package.

See, the economy is reeling—still, and Republicans and Democrats know it. Ignore declarations about what people won’t do. Pay attention to the economy because Senate Leader Mitch McConnell certainly is, and even he is now telling Fox News, “I think there’s a high likelihood we’ll do another bill.” So don’t believe the hype. Leader McConnell doesn’t want to be pressed on a timeline, but even he indeed acknowledges that something more needs to be done.

Also, the White House indicates that it is also on board with a second round of stimulus checks. So again, just ignore any bluster from either side of the political aisle. Just listen to the economy because this is what members of the House and Senate are doing. This—the struggling economy—is why the Democratic House just passed the Heroes Act. It is why the bill includes a second $1,200 stimulus check, and it is why the Republican Senate will, more than likely, pass something more too. The question remains about what kind of stimulus check—if any—would be included in the final deal, but all signs point to yet another coronavirus stimulus relief deal getting done.

3. How much is the second stimulus check, and when will I get it?

As things stand today, the second stimulus check is for $1,200—the same amount as the first $1,200 stimulus check. Individuals would get $1,200, while married couples who file joint tax returns would get $2,400. Children (up to three) would also get the $1,200 amount with this new round of stimulus checks as opposed to the $500 they got with the first round. For example, a family of five (a married couple who files joint taxes can claim up to three children) would get a maximum of $6,000 if this second round of stimulus checks becomes law.

Remember, you’ll only get this money if the Senate signs on with the House to provide more stimulus checks. The economy is reeling, and the Senate knows it. Senate Leader Mitch McConnell and other Senate Republicans already agree that another stimulus relief package is necessary. They just want more time to get it done, and they are communicating that they will start work on it in June.

4. What are the income requirements for the second stimulus check?

Based on what the House passed, income requirements would be the same for the second stimulus check as they were with the first one.

Individuals who earn $75,000 or less and married couples (joint filers) who earn $150,000 or less per year would be eligible for the full $1,200/$2,400 stimulus check. Those who earn more than this would receive reduced dollar amounts until it all phases out completely for individuals above $99,000 and married earners above $198,000.

Again, the House passed this bill and the Senate has not yet signed on. But if after all negotiations, everyone agrees to go with the second stimulus check the way it’s currently presented, these could hold as the income requirements.

5. What about the $2,000 monthly stimulus check? Is that happening?

No, not likely. The $2,000 stimulus check is apparently off the table (at least for now). Some serious proposals for $2,000 a month stimulus checks were put forward by Democrats in the House. However, given the fact that the House just passed The Heroes Act which provides for another one-time $1,200 stimulus check, it’s safe to conclude that the $2,000 monthly stimulus checks are less and less likely now. If the Democratic House didn’t go for passing it, the Republican Senate is certainly not likely to do so.

The only way this becomes a possibility again is if the House passes it or if, in the process of negotiating with the Senate in the coming weeks, there are tradeoffs that provide an opening for House Democrats to put forward more on stimulus checks. But as it stands now, it seems that another $1,200 stimulus check is the most you can hope for. When the House voted Friday, this is what they passed. They did not pass any of the monthly $2,000 stimulus check proposals.

Recommended reading:

This Is The Most Important Question Leaders Ask During A Crisis

Will The Senate Include Stimulus Checks And Hazard Pay In Next Relief Package?

$200 Billion In Hazard Pay: These Essential Workers Must Get Their Fair Share

3 Bitter Truths About Coronavirus Job Losses And The Economy

Depression Is On The Rise With High Unemployment And Career Instability

The Bill Passed For Second Stimulus Check And Hazard Pay For Essential Workers

Source Article from https://www.forbes.com/sites/terinaallen/2020/05/19/5-facts-on-the-second-stimulus-check-that-you-need-to-know-now/

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., chastised President Donald Trump on Monday for his decision to take hydroxychloroquine, saying health experts have warned about its effects and that it could be harmful to the president because he’s “morbidly obese.”

“As far as the President is concerned, he’s our president and I would rather he not be taking something that has not been approved by the scientists, especially in his age group and in his, shall we say, weight group, morbidly obese, they say. So, I think it’s not a good idea,” Pelosi said in an interview about the coronavirus with Anderson Cooper on CNN.

Pelosi’s comment came after Trump said at the White House a few hours earlier that he started taking the drug after consulting with the White House physician.

“A lot of good things have come out about the hydroxy. A lot of good things have come out. You’d be surprised at how many people are taking it, especially the front-line workers — before you catch it,” Trump said at the White House. “I happen to be taking it…I’m taking it — hydroxychloroquine — right now.”

The FDA issued a warning last month that cautioned against the use of the medicine outside of a hospital setting or a clinical trial due to risk of heart rhythm problems.

In 2018, the White House physician at the time, Dr. Ronny Jackson, said that Trump had an LDL cholesterol level of 143, well above the desired level of 100 or less. CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta said at the time that the information indicated that Trump has a common form of heart disease. Last year, the White House said that based on Trump’s annual physical, he weighed 243 pounds, gaining four pounds from the previous year. At Trump’s height of 6 feet 3 inches, his weight last year was considered obese on the body mass index scale.

In a statement late Monday, White House physician Sean P. Conley said that he had discussed the drug with Trump. “After numerous discussions he and I had for and against the use of hydroxychloroquine we concluded the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relative risks,” Conley wrote.

Conley noted that one of Trump’s staffers, a valet, tested positive for COVID-19 recently, though the president is tested daily and he said that they have all been negative.

in an interview with Steve Kornacki on MSNBC, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., suggested that the president may not be telling the truth about his use of hydroxychloroquine.

“Who knows if it’s true? He may not have been taking it for all we know. He just likes to make a splash,” Schumer said on Monday. “And I want to make a comment on that, Steve. What the president did with hydroxychloroquine was reckless, simply reckless.”

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-slams-trump-taking-hydroxychloroquine-calls-him-morbidly-obese-n1210136

This article is republished here with permission from The Associated Press. This content is shared here because the topic may interest Snopes readers; it does not, however, represent the work of Snopes fact-checkers or editors.

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — A judge in rural Oregon on Monday tossed out statewide coronavirus restrictions imposed by Democratic Gov. Kate Brown, saying she didn’t seek the Legislature’s approval to extend the stay-at-home orders beyond a 28-day limit.

Baker County Circuit Judge Matthew Shirtcliff issued his opinion in response to a lawsuit filed earlier this month by 10 churches around Oregon that argued the state’s social-distancing directives were unconstitutional.

Brown filed paperwork within hours seeking an emergency review by the Oregon Supreme Court and a hold on the ruling until the high court could take it up. Her attorneys had asked the judge to stay his ruling until that time, but he declined.

In a statement, Brown said: “The science behind these executive orders hasn’t changed one bit. Ongoing physical distancing, staying home as much as possible, and wearing face coverings will save lives across Oregon.”

In a seven-page opinion, Shirtcliff wrote that the damage to Oregonians and their livelihood was greater than the dangers presented by the coronavirus. He also noted that other businesses deemed essential, such as grocery stores, had been allowed to remain open even with large numbers of people present and have relied on masks, social distancing and other measures to protect the public.

“The governor’s orders are not required for public safety when plaintiffs can continue to utilize social distancing and safety protocols at larger gatherings involving spiritual worship,” he wrote.

Courts in other states have ruled against similar orders. The Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down Gov. Tony Evers’ stay-at-home order last week, ruling that his administration overstepped its authority when it extended the order for another month without consulting legislators.

A federal judge in North Carolina on Saturday sided with conservative Christian leaders and blocked the enforcement of restrictions that Gov. Roy Cooper ordered affecting indoor religious services during the pandemic.

The order from Judge James C. Dever III came days after two churches, a minister and a Christian revival group filed a federal lawsuit seeking to immediately block enforcement of rules covering religious services within the Democratic governor’s executive orders.

In Louisiana, however, a federal judge refused a minister’s request to temporarily halt Gov. John Bel Edwards’ stay-at-home order, which expired that same day.

The ruling in Oregon turns on the legal mechanism Brown used to issue her orders. The plaintiffs allege — and the judge agreed — that they were issued under a statute pertaining to public health emergencies, not an older provision that addresses natural disasters such as storms, earthquakes or floods.

The public health statute contains the 28-day time limit, while the other would give Brown broader powers but is not relevant in the current situation, said Kevin Mannix, who is representing business owners in the case.

California, Washington state and New York — other states where governors have repeatedly extended coronavirus restrictions — give their governors more power in public health emergencies, but Oregon law puts a specific clock on those “extraordinary powers,” he said.

“Maybe other states will take a lesson from us in the future about what to do about public health emergencies,” Mannix said. “We’ve thought about it, we’ve balanced the powers of the governor with the powers of the people and their representatives.”

Brown declared a statewide state of emergency due to the virus on March 8 and has issued multiple executive orders since then, including the closure of all schools, non-essential businesses and a ban on dine-in service at restaurants and bars.

Earlier this month, Brown extended the order another 60 days until July 6. All but a handful of Oregon counties, however, got the state’s approval to begin loosening those restrictions last Friday.

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum urged residents to abide by the stay-at-home orders while the ruling is appealed.

“We will argue that the judge erred in his construction of the relevant statutes and that he abused his discretion in issuing the preliminary injunction,” she said in a statement. “We will also be asking for an immediate stay of his order.”

The top Republican in the Oregon House applauded the judge’s ruling but cautioned people to continue to follow federal guidelines so as not to undo the progress the state has made against the virus.

“This ruling will be appealed but the need for the governor to create the least possible harm in the exercise of extraordinary power remains, “she said. “There has been no accountability throughout this emergency declaration, until now.”

Attorney Ray Hacke, who represented the plaintiffs in the case, said the ruling was a vindication not just for freedom of religion, but for all freedoms of people in the state.

“Praise God. I’m excited, and I’m glad that the judge saw that there are limitations on the governor’s power, even in the midst of emergencies,” he said. “If people want to get their haircut, they can. They can leave their home for any reason whether it’s deemed essential in the eye of the state or not.”

Source Article from https://www.snopes.com/ap/2020/05/18/judge-rules-that-oregon-virus-restrictions-are-invalid/

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday said that the U.S. condemns Taiwan’s exclusion from the WHA.

“No one disputes that Taiwan has mounted one of the world’s most successful efforts to contain the pandemic to date, despite its close proximity to the original outbreak in Wuhan, China,” Pompeo said in a strongly worded statement.

Pompeo, a vocal China critic, also criticized Beijing’s handling of the coronavirus outbreak.

“Taiwan is a model world citizen, while the PRC (People’s Republic of China) continues to withhold vital information about the virus and its origins, deny access to their scientists and relevant facilities, censor discussion of the pandemic within China and on Chinese social media properties, and casts blame widely and recklessly,” said Pompeo.

Taiwan has been praised globally for its virus containment measures that included early control measures at the borders, in the community and in healthcare settings. It also uses a sophisticated contact tracing and quarantine network, Lo told CNBC’s “Street Signs” on Tuesday. The island has not posted any domestic cases for more than a month and is confident that there is “zero” community spread at the moment, said Lo.

He told CNBC the island shares concerns that China was not transparent with information about the outbreak at its onset. The Taiwan CDC deputy director general also said the WHO did not seriously regard information from Taiwan in December that suggested possible human-to-human transmission. The WHO has disputed Taiwan’s claims, saying that the island had not explicitly communicated that information.

Source Article from https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/19/taiwan-says-it-is-disappointed-and-angry-being-excluded-from-who-meeting.html


Managing member at Crustacean Restaurant wears a face mask while speaking on the phone at the restaurant. | AP Photo

OAKLAND — Californians could attend church services and get their hair trimmed in the coming weeks, while the vast majority of counties can allow restaurant dining soon, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Monday as he eased reopening standards due to continued improvements in California’s coronavirus trend lines.

The governor cited declining hospitalization and intensive care unit rates as indicators that California can move deeper into its nascent economic reopening. Newsom said the state is prepared to allow roughly 53 of 58 counties to enter the next phase of reopening, which include restaurant dining and in-store shopping with social distancing recommendations.

Advertisement

Newsom also said California could allow pro sporting events to resume by June, although games would be without spectators and with “very prescriptive conditions.” In the preceding months, Newsom has been wary of major sporting events functioning as hubs for transmission.

Newsom also said relief could come to reeling cosmeticians and shaggy-headed residents in the weeks ahead if the trend lines of declining cases hold. His reopening framework put cosmetology services in a later phase, after manufacturing and curbside retail, but Newsom said encouraging numbers could accelerate the process.

Churches and other religious institutions could also start welcoming back the faithful for in-person services in the coming weeks, Newsom said, if trend lines hold. Defiant religious leaders have opened their doors and sued Newsom for halting such services.

Under the new regional guidelines, counties would need a test positivity rate of less than 8 percent or a rate of 25 cases per 100,000 residents or less. Newsom said the state would account for “hot spots within counties” like skilled-nursing facilities that are often viral epicenters driving up counties’ overall numbers.

Newsom did not name the five counties that would remain ineligible, but said he believes Los Angeles will be more cautious.

“We are empowering our local health directors and county officials,” Newsom said, noting that areas with more dire outbreaks like Los Angeles and the Bay Area can retain tougher controls.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2020/05/18/newsom-dining-to-begin-soon-in-most-california-counties-haircuts-and-church-a-few-weeks-away-1284509

Santa Clara County, Northern California’s most populous county, will join the rest of the San Francisco Bay Area in moving into Phase 2 of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s reopening plan, allowing for curbside pickup at many retail stores.

Health officers in the Bay Area said they have seen a number of positive signs since the last loosening of stay-at-home orders executed on May 4, which allowed all construction and certain businesses that primarily do work outdoors, like gardening and landscaping, to resume.

The improving indicators include:

  • The trend of new cases is either stable or dropping, even with increased testing;
  • The number of hospitalized patients infected with the coronavirus is stable or declining;
  • Supply of personal protective equipment, like masks, gowns and gloves, is improving, although some shortages do persist in certain situations; and,
  • There is increased ability to do disease investigation and locate close contacts of newly infected people.

Besides allowing retail stores to reopen for pickup service only, the order also allows manufacturing, warehousing and logistical operations that support them to reopen.

“We are counting on these businesses to consistently follow social distancing protocols and public health guidance to protect their employees and customers as these activities resume,” said a joint statement from health officers in Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, as well as the city of Berkeley, which has a health department independent of Alameda County. “COVID-19 continues to pose a very significant risk to our communities, and that continued vigilance is necessary to ensure that we do not see an increase in spread as more activities resume.”

Napa, Solano and Sonoma counties were the first in the Bay Area to move into this phase, doing so on May 8, the same day that much of the state, including L.A. County, did so. Marin, Alameda and San Mateo counties had already announced plans to begin doing so on Monday, and Alameda and Contra Costa counties had already expressed an intent to do so this week.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-18/silicon-valley-easing-stay-at-home-restrictions-amid-positive-signs

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley slammed the media for widely dismissing the recent revelations of the unmasking requests of former national security advisor Michael Flynn.

In a column published on Sunday, Turley pointed out the “unsettling” details surrounding the declassified list of top Obama officials, including former Vice President Joe Biden, who had requested Flynn’s name to be revealed from his conversations with the Russian ambassador in the final weeks of the Obama administration, which followed the “chilling details” of released transcripts showing that the most prominent figures who pushed the Russian collusion narrative admitted to investigators that they never saw evidence that the Trump campaign worked with the Kremlin during the 2016 election.

“There is very little question that the response by the media to such a story would have been overwhelming if George Bush and his administration had targeted the Obama campaign figures with secret surveillance,” Turley wrote. “That story would have been encompassing if it was learned that there was no direct evidence to justify the investigation and that the underlying allegation of Russian collusion was ultimately found to lack a credible basis… But the motives of Obama administration officials are apparently not to be questioned.”

GLENN GREENWALD RIPS ‘RESISTANCE JOURNALISM’ IN TRUMP ERA THAT FUELED ‘RUSSIAGATE’

Turley, the constitutional scholar who is widely known for his congressional testimony opposing President Trump’s impeachment during the Ukraine scandal, pointed out how the media “universally mocked” Trump in 2016 for claiming that the Obama administration placed campaign officials under surveillance, saying “that statement was later proven to be true,” referencing the  Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants that were issued against Trump campaign officials like former advisor Carter Page.

“Yet none of this matters as the media remains fully invested in the original false allegations of collusion. If Obama administration officials were to be questioned now, the coverage and judgment of the media may be placed into question, as even this latest disclosure from the investigation of the unmasking request of Biden will not alter the media narrative,” Turley continued.

He then explained the significance of unmasking American citizens from surveillance of foreigners but noted that the “importance of this privacy protection is being dismissed by media figures,” citing MSNBC anchor Andrea Mitchell who suggested that anyone sounding the alarm on the Flynn revelations is “gaslighting.”

“The media portrayed both Obama and Biden as uninvolved. But now we know they both actively followed the investigation,” Turley wrote. “Yet none of this matters. A Democratic administration using a secret court to investigate the opposing political campaign does not matter to many in Congress or in the media anyway. An investigation continuing despite the lack of credible information supporting collusion does not matter to them either. A president and a vice president who take personal interest in the surveillance of their political opponents also does not matter.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

He argued, “There was a time, however, when all of this did matter. There was once a time when this would be viewed as the story of the century, including the unmasking of Biden himself in this investigation. But these are not those times, and this cannot be the story. Russian collusion is the story and, as Biden stressed, the rest is just a diversion. It is up to the public to decide who has been ultimately unmasked by the Flynn investigation.”

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/media/jonathan-turley-slams-media-for-avoiding-flynn-unmasking-revelations-to-fit-a-narrative

Fox News medical contributor Dr. Marc Siegel defended President Trump‘s use of hydroxychloroquine Monday after the president announced he was taking the antimalarial drug as a preventive measure against contracting the coronavirus.

“This drug hydroxychloroquine, which we’ve used in millions of people against malaria [as a] prophylaxis so that you don’t get malaria, it’s used for lupus and other rheumatological problems,” Siegel said on “Tucker Carlson Tonight“. “A top rheumatologist told me that in the lab, it shows anti-viral activity against COVID-19, and it prevents uptake in the cells and it also decreases the inflammation that we’re seeing with this virus.”

TRUMP REVEALS HE’S TAKING HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE IN EFFORT TO PREVENT CORONAVIRUS SYMPTOMS

Siegel said he was looking at the issue “medically” not politically.

“Does it work in humans? We’ve seen some studies from Italy, from France and from China that show it might work early in the course of it [coronavirus],” Siegel said. “And there’s a big study in Spain right now and a huge study from the NIH looking at this. Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit has given it to three thousand health care workers, Tucker, to see if it prevents them from getting COVID-19.”

Trump revealed to reporters earlier Monday that he’s been taking a hydroxychloroquine pill every day for about a week and a half.

“I’m taking it – hydroxychloroquine,” the president told reporters during a roundtable with restaurant industry figures in the White House’s State Dining Room.

CLICK HERE FOR FULL CORONAVIRUS COVERAGE

Dr. Siegel, who has said hydroxychloroquine saved his father’s life, said the president’s physician should “not be challenged.”

“When Dr. Sean Conley, the president’s physician, who I have met with and think is quite reasonable, weighs the options back and forth, he decides to prescribe it for the president,” Siegel said. “It is a doctor-patient decision. It should not be challenged. It is a medical decision made between a doctor and a patient. You can prescribe off-label. So I don’t think it’s wild or anything like that. I think it’s reasonable.”

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/media/dr-siegel-trump-hydroxychloroquine-doctor-patient-decision

“I cannot allow American taxpayer dollars to continue to finance an organization that, in its present state, is so clearly not serving America’s interests,” Trump’s letter read.

Trump had suspended U.S. funding to the World Health Organization last month, offering similar complaints to the ones in Monday’s letter. The move was widely panned as a way to deflect attention from Trump’s own slow response to the virus. Prior to the suspension, the United States was the largest donor to the WHO.

The WHO did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Trump administration had also made its displeasure with the WHO known during the organization’s annual meeting Monday. Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said that the World Health Organization “failed at its core mission,” adding that “at least one member country made a mockery of its transparency obligations,” an apparent reference to China.

Xi, on the other hand, expressed support for a WHO inquiry into the global pandemic response during Monday’s meeting. He also supported offering global access to a Chinese-developed vaccine if the country were to successfully create one.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/19/trump-world-health-organization-funding-267590

U.S. Attorney General William Barr, here at a White House briefing in March, appointed a U.S. attorney in 2019 to look into the origins of the Russia probe.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

U.S. Attorney General William Barr, here at a White House briefing in March, appointed a U.S. attorney in 2019 to look into the origins of the Russia probe.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Updated at 4:48 p.m. ET

U.S. Attorney General William Barr told reporters Monday he does not expect a Justice Department probe examining the origins of the inquiry into Russian election interference will result in criminal investigations into either former President Barack Obama or his vice president, Joe Biden.

A year ago, Barr tasked John Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, with investigating the origins of the Russia probe. The review, which was upgraded to a formal criminal investigation later in 2019, seeks to determine whether there was impropriety in the FBI’s investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 White House race in Trump’s favor.

“Under the longstanding standards of the department, criminal charges are appropriate only when we have enough evidence to prove each element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the standard we’re applying,” Barr said in response to a question about whether the department would investigate Obama and Biden.

“There’s a difference between an abuse of power and a federal crime. Not every abuse of power — no matter how outrageous — is necessarily a federal crime,” Barr said at an unrelated news conference to discuss last year’s shooting at a U.S. military base in Pensacola, Fla. “Now, as to President Obama and Vice President Biden, whatever their level of involvement, based on the information I have today, I don’t expect Mr. Durham’s work will lead to a criminal investigation of either man. Our concern over potential criminality is focused on others.”

Barr said the investigation into the underpinnings of the Russia investigation will not be a “tit-for-tat exercise.” When asked if the Justice Department would investigate Obama or Biden — President Trump’s political rivals — Barr said the department would not be used for “partisan political ends.”

Speaking at the White House later Monday, Trump said he “was surprised” by his attorney general’s remarks about possible investigations into Obama and Biden.

“I have no doubt they were involved,” Trump said. He added that he relies on Barr, whom he called an “honorable man.”

The attorney general’s comments come as Trump has promoted a conspiracy theory he has dubbed “Obamagate” in which he and his allies push the unfounded allegation that toward the end of his presidency, Obama engaged in various crimes to thwart Trump’s political success, including spying on the Republican’s campaign and wiretapping him.

Trump recently expanded the claim to imply that the Obama administration, through some malpractice, had set up former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Flynn admitted to lying to the FBI about conversations he had had with Russia’s then-ambassador to the United States during the probe into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election. Despite this admission, the Justice Department earlier this month was looking to drop the charges against the former Army lieutenant general.

Trump and his allies have pounced on the recent disclosure that Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, was among a group of Obama administration officials who may have sought to “unmask” Flynn when they saw that an unnamed official was in contact with the Russian envoy. It later emerged that the official was Flynn.

U.S. intelligence agencies get thousands of unmasking requests every year, and the Biden campaign has said the effort to tie him to impropriety regarding Flynn is just a political stunt to try to distract Americans from Trump’s failed leadership during the coronavirus pandemic.

With reporting by NPR’s Franco Ordoñez

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/2020/05/18/858047249/barr-doesnt-expect-russia-probe-to-lead-to-criminal-investigation-of-obama-biden

California Gov. Gavin NewsomGavin Christopher Newsom12 things to know today about coronavirus Newsom loosens rules on when California communities can reopen Add the death of common sense to the coronavirus’s toll MORE (D) on Monday loosened restrictions for areas of the state seeking to reopen nonessential businesses amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Updated orders detailed on the governor’s website indicated that counties will no longer be blocked from entering phase two of the state’s reopening plan if they have seen a fatality from a coronavirus case in the past two weeks.

In order to move into phase two, counties in California must now show “[s]table hospitalizations of COVID individuals on a 7-day average of daily percent change of less than 5% OR no more than 20 COVID hospitalizations on any single day in the past 14 days,” according to the website.

“We recognize the conditions across the state are unique and distinctive depending where you are,” Newsom said Monday at a press conference, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Newsom’s new guidance comes as California has seen just over 80,000 cases of coronavirus and reported more than 3,300 deaths from the disease. The governor has been facing pressure from local leaders for weeks over issues such as allowing tourists to resume visits to beaches.

Some sectors of the state’s economy, including bars, nightclubs and nail salons, have not yet been granted permission to reopen.

Newsom revealed earlier this month that researchers believe the state’s outbreak of coronavirus originated in nail salons.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/498390-newsom-loosens-rules-on-when-california-communities-can-reopen

Beachgoers crowded the Virginia Beach oceanfront over the weekend as temperatures in the region reached the high 70s, despite restrictions Gov. Ralph Northam’s (D) temporarily implemented on beaches in the state amid the COVID-19 pandemic, The Virginian-Pilot reports

Photos captured by the local paper showed droves of beachgoers, many whom could be seen not wearing masks, swarming the sands and waters at the oceanfront on Saturday. According to the newspaper, many also crowded gift shops at the oceanfront, buying items like snow cones and hermit crabs.

As the paper notes, the report comes as the region has begun to see a rise in temperatures recently. However, the sight of crowds at the oceanfront also comes as certain restrictions in Virginia that were implemented in an effort to curb the spread of COVID-19 remain in place at state beaches.

According to The Virginian-Pilot, under Northam’s current stay-at-home order, beaches in the state remain closed to the public for recreational purposes. But residents are still able to visit beaches to exercise or fish, so long as they adhere to social distancing guidelines. 

However, after large crowds were at the Virginia Beach oceanfront over the weekend, Northam has announced that the beach will soon be reopened to the public in the coming days as the state continues to ease coronavirus restrictions amid the pandemic.

NBC station WWBT, in Richmond, Va., reports that Northam announced the state will be reopening Virginia Beach for recreational purposes on May 22. But, according the station, beachgoers will be required to follow social distancing guidelines and temporarily avoid certain activities that include items like tents, alcohol and speakers in order for the beach to remain open during the state’s first phase of Northam’s “Forward Virginia” reopening plan.

The station reports that remaining beachfront areas in the state will continue to be considered closed, however, until the state enters the second phase of the governor’s plan.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/498394-beachgoers-flock-to-virginia-beach-oceanfront-amid-warm-weather-despite

Two-thirds of them have lived in the United States for more than a decade. Collectively, they have five million American-born children and pay billions of dollars in taxes, yet most states have not moved to provide any assistance through the current economic collapse. A few other states, including Oregon, Washington and Massachusetts, are starting or implementing programs for undocumented immigrants affected by the pandemic. New York City, Austin, Texas, and Tulsa, Okla., have either city-funded or privately funded initiatives.

Source Article from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/us/coronavirus-undocumented-california.html

Nearly 3 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits in early May due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Department of Labor reported, bringing the two-month total to around 36.5 million unemployed.

While workers of all ages have been affected by layoffs and furloughs, older workers might be particularly vulnerable. And although job loss at any age can be devastating, losing your job later in life can potentially wreck your retirement plans. Here’s what to do if it happens to you.

Image source: Getty Images.

Millions of older Americans are out of work

The unemployment rate among workers age 55 and older has skyrocketed over a relatively short period of time, jumping from 3.3% in March to 13.6% in April, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Of all age groups, the 55-and-older crowd is one of the hardest hit when it comes to unemployment. Roughly 5 million people in this age group were unemployed in April, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, with most other age groups experiencing unemployment numbers of around 3 million to 4 million.

If you lose your job in your late 50s or early 60s, it could spell disaster for your retirement plans. Nobody knows exactly how long this pandemic will last, and with jobs scarce right now, there’s no telling just how long it will be before you’re able to find another job if you’re laid off. This means you have a few options if you lose your job: try to hold out for another one, choose to retire early, or do both.

Weighing your retirement options

There is a chance the economy can bounce back within a couple of years, but whether that happens depends on how quickly the virus can be contained. If businesses are able to safely reopen, jobs might be plentiful in the near future. But there’s a chance social distancing measures and stay-at-home orders could remain in place for a while.

If you have a healthy emergency fund, you might choose to live off those savings for as long as you can in hopes you’ll be able to find another job soon. This way, you can avoid tapping your retirement savings, allowing your investments to continue to grow.

Not everyone can afford to live on their emergency savings for several months or years, however, so you might have no choice but to retire now and dip into your retirement fund. If you’re at least 62 years old, you might also choose to start claiming Social Security benefits. Although your checks will be smaller if you claim benefits early, this income can make forced early retirement a little easier.

Keep in mind, too, that you can continue looking for work even after you retire. If you start working again after you’ve started claiming Social Security benefits, your monthly checks might be reduced if you haven’t yet reached your full retirement age (FRA) — which is either age 66, 67, or somewhere in between depending on the year you were born. These reductions are only temporary, though, and once you reach your FRA, your checks will be recalculated to account for the money that was withheld.

Which option you choose depends on your financial situation and the future of the economy. Having a strategy in place for how you’ll handle a job loss can make these difficult times a little easier.

Source Article from https://www.fool.com/retirement/2020/05/18/the-unemployment-rate-among-older-adults-is-skyroc.aspx

Beachgoers crowded the Virginia Beach oceanfront over the weekend as temperatures in the region reached the high 70s, despite restrictions Gov. Ralph Northam’s (D) temporarily implemented on beaches in the state amid the COVID-19 pandemic, The Virginian-Pilot reports

Photos captured by the local paper showed droves of beachgoers, many whom could be seen not wearing masks, swarming the sands and waters at the oceanfront on Saturday. According to the newspaper, many also crowded gift shops at the oceanfront, buying items like snow cones and hermit crabs.

As the paper notes, the report comes as the region has begun to see a rise in temperatures recently. However, the sight of crowds at the oceanfront also comes as certain restrictions in Virginia that were implemented in an effort to curb the spread of COVID-19 remain in place at state beaches.

According to The Virginian-Pilot, under Northam’s current stay-at-home order, beaches in the state remain closed to the public for recreational purposes. But residents are still able to visit beaches to exercise or fish, so long as they adhere to social distancing guidelines. 

However, after large crowds were at the Virginia Beach oceanfront over the weekend, Northam has announced that the beach will soon be reopened to the public in the coming days as the state continues to ease coronavirus restrictions amid the pandemic.

NBC station WWBT, in Richmond, Va., reports that Northam announced the state will be reopening Virginia Beach for recreational purposes on May 22. But, according the station, beachgoers will be required to follow social distancing guidelines and temporarily avoid certain activities that include items like tents, alcohol and speakers in order for the beach to remain open during the state’s first phase of Northam’s “Forward Virginia” reopening plan.

The station reports that remaining beachfront areas in the state will continue to be considered closed, however, until the state enters the second phase of the governor’s plan.

Source Article from https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/498394-beachgoers-flock-to-virginia-beach-oceanfront-amid-warm-weather-despite

Undocumented Californians may begin applying for disaster assistance payments of $500 per person and up to $1,000 per household.

The state government has made available $75 million to help a projected 150,000 undocumented immigrants weather the coronavirus crisis.

To qualify, applicants must show that they are ineligible for federal assistance programs stemming from the coronavirus pandemic, such as the CARES Act or federal unemployment benefits, and that they have endured a hardship from the pandemic. Only adults may apply. A state guide to common questions and answers about the program can be found here: https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/immigration/covid-19-drai

Twelve nonprofit groups are working with the state government to disburse the aid. The groups help applicants determine if they’re eligible for the assistance, apply for it and deliver payment cards to those who receive it. Applicants must contact the group administering the assistance in their home county.

In Los Angeles County, three groups are administering the relief: the Central American Resource Center, which can be reached at (213) 315-2659; the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, (213) 201-8700 or (213) 395-9547; and Asian Americans Advancing Justice, (213) 241-8880.

The funds are available on a first-come, first-served basis until they are spent or June 30 at the latest.

In what the state calls a “separate but complementary effort,” nonprofit groups have launched a “California Immigrant Resilience Fund” that aims to raise $50 million. These funds will be distributed in cash payments to undocumented immigrants who qualify for neither federal nor state relief.

A conservative group, the Center for American Liberty, sued Gov. Gavin Newsom over his plan to offer relief to undocumented immigrants. The group’s attorney said the $75 million represented taxpayer money to be disbursed as the Legislature decides, “not a slush fund for the governor to spend as he sees fit.”

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-18/undocumented-immigrants-can-begin-applying-for-state-coronavirus-relief

Nearly 3 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits in early May due to the coronavirus pandemic, the Department of Labor reported, bringing the two-month total to around 36.5 million unemployed.

While workers of all ages have been affected by layoffs and furloughs, older workers might be particularly vulnerable. And although job loss at any age can be devastating, losing your job later in life can potentially wreck your retirement plans. Here’s what to do if it happens to you.

Image source: Getty Images.

Millions of older Americans are out of work

The unemployment rate among workers age 55 and older has skyrocketed over a relatively short period of time, jumping from 3.3% in March to 13.6% in April, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Of all age groups, the 55-and-older crowd is one of the hardest hit when it comes to unemployment. Roughly 5 million people in this age group were unemployed in April, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, with most other age groups experiencing unemployment numbers of around 3 million to 4 million.

If you lose your job in your late 50s or early 60s, it could spell disaster for your retirement plans. Nobody knows exactly how long this pandemic will last, and with jobs scarce right now, there’s no telling just how long it will be before you’re able to find another job if you’re laid off. This means you have a few options if you lose your job: try to hold out for another one, choose to retire early, or do both.

Weighing your retirement options

There is a chance the economy can bounce back within a couple of years, but whether that happens depends on how quickly the virus can be contained. If businesses are able to safely reopen, jobs might be plentiful in the near future. But there’s a chance social distancing measures and stay-at-home orders could remain in place for a while.

If you have a healthy emergency fund, you might choose to live off those savings for as long as you can in hopes you’ll be able to find another job soon. This way, you can avoid tapping your retirement savings, allowing your investments to continue to grow.

Not everyone can afford to live on their emergency savings for several months or years, however, so you might have no choice but to retire now and dip into your retirement fund. If you’re at least 62 years old, you might also choose to start claiming Social Security benefits. Although your checks will be smaller if you claim benefits early, this income can make forced early retirement a little easier.

Keep in mind, too, that you can continue looking for work even after you retire. If you start working again after you’ve started claiming Social Security benefits, your monthly checks might be reduced if you haven’t yet reached your full retirement age (FRA) — which is either age 66, 67, or somewhere in between depending on the year you were born. These reductions are only temporary, though, and once you reach your FRA, your checks will be recalculated to account for the money that was withheld.

Which option you choose depends on your financial situation and the future of the economy. Having a strategy in place for how you’ll handle a job loss can make these difficult times a little easier.

Source Article from https://www.fool.com/retirement/2020/05/18/the-unemployment-rate-among-older-adults-is-skyroc.aspx