Paul Manafort, here arriving last year for a New York court session, argued that his health and age made him susceptible to contracting the coronavirus in prison.

Seth Wenig/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Seth Wenig/AP

Paul Manafort, here arriving last year for a New York court session, argued that his health and age made him susceptible to contracting the coronavirus in prison.

Seth Wenig/AP

Updated 12:32 p.m. ET

Paul Manafort was released from federal prison to home confinement early Wednesday morning due to concerns about coronavirus exposure, his attorney Todd Blanche tells NPR.

Manafort, who was once Donald Trump’s presidential campaign chairman, is 71 years old and is serving a 7-year prison sentence.

He had been serving his time in a low-security prison in Pennsylvania after he was convicted of tax fraud, bank fraud and conspiracy. The charges were brought as part of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe on Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Manafort had sent a letter to the Federal Bureau of Prisons asking to be released to home confinement. He argued that his health and age made him susceptible to contracting the deadly virus, which can spread quickly in places such as prisons, where social distancing is difficult to achieve.

Once a globe-trotting lobbyist, Manafort has suffered a series of health challenges recently, including a hospitalization in December due to what his lawyer described as a “cardiac event.”

He was sentenced to prison time by two federal courts. In 2018, a jury in Virginia found him guilty on eight of 18 counts in his tax and bank fraud trial, related to work Manafort did in Ukraine.

He later pleaded guilty to two additional felony counts in Washington, D.C.

Soon after Manafort’s release to home confinement, a legal adviser to Michael Cohen, another former member of the president’s inner circle, bemoaned that Cohen remained in prison.

Lanny Davis, tweeted Wednesday, that while he’s happy for Manafort, Cohen was expected home early this month, but remains incarcerated. “He was expected home on May 1 and then unexplained delay. Why not now? #freeMichael,” Davis said.

Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyers and fixer, who once said he “would take a bullet for the president,” is serving a three-year federal prison term following guilty pleas to a number of financial and political crimes.

In a statement dated May 2, Davis said Cohen “remains in effect in solitary confinement, under quarantine, rather than under home confinement as he was led to believe would occur” on May 1.

Since late March, the Bureau of Prisons has been reviewing which inmates met criteria suitable for home confinement as a way to curb the spread of the coronavirus, after directives from Attorney General William Barr.

As of Wednesday afternoon, BOP said it has placed an additional 2,471 inmates have been placed on home confinement, an increase of 87.5%.

According to the BOP, Cohen remains at the medium-security prison in Otisville, N.Y., with a scheduled release date in November 2021.

NPR Justice Correspondent Ryan Lucas contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/13/855210214/paul-manafort-released-from-prison-to-home-confinement-due-to-coronavirus-concer

Richard Grenell, acting director of national intelligence, has given the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) the names of Obama administration officials involved in identifying then-national security adviser Michael Flynn’s as the Trump campaign official who had a late 2016 conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, a conversation Flynn later lied to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about.

Judge Emmet Gael Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the Washington D.C., has slowed down attempts by DOJ officials to drop the case against Flynn by pledging to schedule a period for soliciting amicus curiae (friend-of-the-court) briefs from outside parties who wish to comment on the federal government’s desire to dismiss its charges against Flynn.

Flynn’s “unmasking” by the Obama Administration turned the former national security adviser from an individual anonymously referred to in an intelligence document to a specifically named person subject to questioning by the FBI. The FBI questioned Flynn on January 24, 2017, and Flynn lied to the bureau about the nature of his conversations with Kislyak.

In the last days of 2016, Flynn told Kislyak to urge the Russian government not to retaliate against the U.S. after President Barak Obamas’ sanctions imposed on Russia for their interference in the 2016 presidential elections. Flynn didn’t realize at the time that he was under federal surveillance, ordered by the Obama Administration, to investigate possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign.

The day after the U.S. Justice Department—under the leadership of Attorney General William Barr—moved to drop all charges against Flynn on May 7, Grenell declassified the list of Obama administration officials involved with unmasking Flynn and provided the names to the U.S. Justice Department, according to The Washington Post.

Grenell’s handing over of the Obama Administration officials’ names could aid Barr’s 2019 appointment of career federal prosecutor John H. Durham to investigate the origins of the Obama administration’s investigation into possible ties between Trump and Russia, according to a Justice Department official who spoke the Post anonymously to candidly discuss the sensitive matter.

The source added that the Justice Department “does not intend to release the list,” but it remains unclear whether Grenell might release the list on his own.

Newsweek reached out to the U.S. Justice Department for comment. This story will be updated with any response.

Flynn’s lawyers on Tuesday filed a court brief giving his consent to the federal case against him being dropped.

“Mr. Flynn agrees that the dismissal of this case meets the interests of justice and requests that this matter be dismissed immediately, with prejudice,” Flynn defense lawyer Sidney Powell and her co-counsel wrote.

However, Judge Sullivan’s solicitation of outside opinions on the case suggests that he may not be ready to drop the federal charges so easily, and may want to consider their potential impact leading into the 2020 U.S. Presidential elections.

p:last-of-type::after, .node-type-slideshow .article-body > p:last-of-type::after {
content: none
}]]>

Source Article from https://www.newsweek.com/michael-flynns-unmaskers-may-soon-unmasked-judge-slows-down-bid-end-his-case-1503594

Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose recommendations on dealing with the coronavirus outbreak have generally been taken as law by U.S. politicians and the American public, is starting to draw doubters. 

Fauci, testifying at a Senate hearing Tuesday, warned of “needless suffering and death” if states attempt to reopen too quickly. That drew criticism from GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and, later, from Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson.

The news isn’t all bad. Some data dashboards appear to show the daily U.S. death toll is flattening. And Los Angeles, despite extending its stay-at-home order, opened its beaches Wednesday.

There are now more than 82,000 deaths and 1.3 million confirmed coronavirus cases in the U.S., according to the Johns Hopkins University data dashboard. Worldwide, the virus has killed roughly 292,000 people. More than 4.2 million people have been infected.

Our live blog is being updated throughout the day. Refresh for the latest news, and get updates in your inbox with The Daily Briefing. Scroll down for more details.

Here are some of the most significant developments from Tuesday:

  • President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort has been released from prison and is now in home confinement as the coronavirus spreads through the federal prison system.
  • During a hearing on the coronavirus Tuesday, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., asked about the prospects for treatments or a vaccine be ready in time for colleges planning to start classes in August. Fauci warned relying on that prospect was “a bridge too far.” 
  • Fauci did say a vaccine was “more likely than not” but cautioned about the prospects of a second wave of the virus in the fall. He said it was critical to develop better testing and to identify and trace who is sick and stock up on emergency supplies.
  • With no end in sight for the coronavirus lockdown and millions of Americans still out of work, House Democrats are proposing another round of stimulus. The bill would spend more than $3 trillion in aid to unemployed and small businesses.

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/05/13/coronavirus-updates-los-angeles-reopening-plans-fauci-rand-paul/3116843001/

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday takes up a “faithless elector” challenge to the Electoral College, a sleeper case with potentially big ramifications for how the country chooses a president and one that could allow just a few people to decide the outcome of a close election.

Opponents of the existing system hope that the legal battle will spur the states to adopt changes that they say would make elections more responsive to the public.

The issue is a simple one: Are the 538 presidential electors free agents, or must they vote in accordance with the election results in their states? If they are free to vote as they wish, a small group of them, or even a single one in a tight contest, could decide who wins the White House.

When voters go to the polls in November, they do not vote directly for a presidential candidate. Instead, they choose a slate of electors appointed in their states by the political parties of the presidential candidates. Those electors meet in December to cast their ballots, which are counted during a joint session of Congress in January.

In more than half the country, electors are required to obey the results of their state’s popular vote and cast their ballots accordingly. The problem of “faithless electors” who disregard the popular vote outcome has not been much of an issue in American history, because when an elector refuses to follow the results of a state’s popular vote, the states usually throw the ballot away. But can the states do that?

The cases before the Supreme Court involve faithless electors during the 2016 presidential election. Instead of voting for Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, who won the popular vote in Colorado, Micheal Baca cast his vote for John Kasich, a Republican and then the governor of Ohio. And in Washington state, where Clinton also won the popular vote, three of the state’s 12 electors voted for Colin Powell, the former secretary of state.

Baca told NBC News that after Donald Trump was declared the apparent winner in November: “I thought we would need electors who would choose a moderate compromise candidate. We wanted to put our country before party and maybe throw the election (into) the House of Representatives.”

Colorado tossed Baca’s vote out and found another elector who voted for Clinton. So he sued, and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ruled that electors can vote for any legitimate candidate.

States are free to choose their electors however they want, the court said, and can even require electors to pledge their loyalty to their political parties. But once the electors are appointed and report in December to cast their votes, they are fulfilling a federal function, and the state’s authority has ended.

In Washington, the state accepted the votes of its rebel electors but fined them for violating state law. The electors challenged the fines, but the state Supreme Court upheld the law requiring them to conform to the popular vote.

The U.S. Supreme Court took both cases to decide which outcome is the correct one. The court ruled in 1952 that states do not violate the Constitution when they require electors to pledge that they will abide by the popular vote. But the justices have never said whether it is constitutional to enforce those pledges.

The states argue that the while Constitution gives them broad powers to decide how electors are appointed, it also authorizes them to attach conditions.

If the electors are right that they are free agents, “a state could not remove or sanction an elector after appointment even if it learned that he was offering his vote to the highest bidder, was being blackmailed by a foreign power, or had lied about his eligibility to serve,” Washington state said in its court brief.

The lawyers for the electors, however, said the states have no power to compel an elector’s choice.

“The structure of the Constitution, as interpreted by this court over our 230-year history, prohibits the states from interfering with the exercise of this plainly federal function,” said Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor involved in both cases.

Lessig has said he hopes the cases will eventually lead to a change in the Electoral College, either through a constitutional amendment or by encouraging more states to adopt a system in which they would assign all of their electors to whoever wins the nationwide popular vote for president. Fourteen states have already agreed to do so. An interstate agreement to make the change would take effect once the participating states represent at least 270 votes, the minimum number needed to be elected president.

Rick Hasen, a professor and an election law expert at the University of California at Irvine, called the decision to bring the cases to the Supreme Court “a well-intentioned, audacious gambit. And it could backfire spectacularly.” Lessig, he said, “is playing with fire.”

Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

Hasen said there’s a chance the Supreme Court could declare electors to be free agents. He and others supporting the challengers note that Alexander Hamilton, writing in the Federalist papers, said presidential electors would be “persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass … most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations” as determining who was qualified to serve as president.

But Hasen says there’s little chance that in the current polarized atmosphere, the country would come together and agree on how to change the system.

Paul Smith, of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit watchdog group, agrees, saying: “It is one thing to upend the election-regulation landscape. It is quite another to do so just months before a hotly contested presidential election.”

The court will likely issue its decision by late June.

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/faithless-elector-supreme-court-hears-cases-could-change-presidential-contests-n1205171

U.S. President Donald Trump, one of the only people in the White House Rose Garden not wearing a mask, on Monday hailed America’s testing capability but abruptly ended his news conference when grilled over why testing is a ‘competition’ when people are still dying.

Subscribe: http://smarturl.it/reuterssubscribe

Reuters brings you the latest business, finance and breaking news video from around the globe. Our reputation for accuracy and impartiality is unparalleled.

Get the latest news on: http://reuters.com/
Follow Reuters on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Reuters
Follow Reuters on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Reuters
Follow Reuters on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reuters/?hl=en

Source Article from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsbyxy68zg8

Republicans appeared on track for a pair of congressional wins on Wednesday, after notching an easy victory in a Wisconsin House seat and appearing poised to take a seat away from the Democrats in California.

The wins would be seen as a boost to the party and President Donald Trump, whose re-election campaign has been battered by outrage over his response to the coronavirus pandemic and whose popularity has been dipping in many recent polls.

The contests were also being watched closely for how Americans deal with the prospect of vote-by-mail contests in the general election in November as the coronavirus pandemic makes in-person voting a public health risk.

Mike Garcia, a former navy fighter pilot endorsed by Trump, was leading in preliminary results from a special election north of Los Angeles. With about 140,000 votes counted, Garcia was ahead of Democratic California state legislator Christy Smith by 55.9% to 44.1% in the state’s 25th congressional district, preliminary results from the California secretary of state’s office said.

If his lead holds up as the results are tallied, Garcia will fill a seat that became vacant after Democrat Katie Hill last year resigned following a scandal in which intimate photos were published of her online and she faced accusations of sexual relations with her subordinate staffers.

But it could take several days for a winner to be declared, because the election was conducted largely by mail-in voting to avoid any novel coronavirus exposure at the polls. As long as they are postmarked by election day, California will accept ballots arriving up to three days later.

A Democratic strategist said that late ballots are likely to favor Smith, because more Democrats than Republicans had not returned their ballots by election day, according to tracking by Political Data Inc.

“It is looking extremely good,” Garcia said on a conference call. “I won’t give a victory speech tonight. We’ll save that for hopefully tomorrow night as the data comes in.”

Hill was the first Democrat to represent the district in 25 years when she was elected in 2018. Garcia, a political newcomer, has described her tenure as “an embarrassment”.

Meanwhile Tom Tiffany, a state senator endorsed by Trump, easily won a special congressional election in a heavily conservative, rural Wisconsin district, cheering Republicans even as Democrats argued the victory revealed vulnerabilities for the president among his base.

Tiffany’s win over Democrat Tricia Zunker in northern Wisconsin’s 7th district comes in the state’s second election amid the coronavirus pandemic in the past five weeks.

Tiffany will replace the former reality TV star Sean Duffy, a Republican who retired in September. The district has been vacant since Duffy’s retirement.

Trump won Wisconsin by less than a point, but carried the district by 20 points, in 2016. Tiffany’s win over Zunker was about six points less than that, based on preliminary results. Tiffany rejected Democrats’ argument that the smaller margin was a sign that Trump’s support was waning.

“Any time you lose by 14 points, I don’t think that’s a moral victory,“ Tiffany said. “This is a decisive victory here.”

The win is in a district that Trump will need to once again win big if he hopes to again carry Wisconsin, a state he won by less than a point in 2016. Tiffany’s big victory also helps to erase the taste of a loss by a conservative Wisconsin supreme court justice in last month’s election, a race that boosted Democrats’ confidence.

The Wisconsin Democratic party spokeswoman, Courtney Beyer, said the results showed a drastic swing for Democrats, even though Zunker lost by about 14 points.
“For Trump to win re-election, red areas have to get redder to balance out blue areas getting bluer,“ she said.

Zunker said the race “laid the groundwork for this seat to turn blue in November”.

Zunker, president of the Wausau school board, was trying to become the first Native American from Wisconsin elected to Congress. She pulled in big-name endorsements including Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, but the numbers were against her. The district has been under Republican control since 2011 and was redistricted to more heavily favor Republicans.

There was uncertainty over whether holding a special election in the middle of the pandemic would affect the outcome. Election clerks said they were prepared, about 20% of registered voters had voted absentee, and there were no calls to delay or alter the election like there were before Wisconsin’s presidential primary last month.

With Tiffany’s win, Republicans hold five of Wisconsin’s eight seats in Congress. Tiffany will serve through the end of the year, but will have to run again in November to serve a full two-year term.

Source Article from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/13/wisconsin-california-republicans-congressional-special-election

Sen. Rand Paul tangled with the nation’s foremost COVID-19 public health expert during a Senate committee hearing Tuesday over sending kids back to school and reopening the economy.

Speaking during a meeting of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, Paul, R-Ky., said it is “ridiculous” to have a national strategy of not sending kids back to school in the fall and attacked Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Paul said that the COVID-19 mortality rate of children is much lower than adults, and he pointed to Sweden, which has kept schools open for children under 16 and is outside the top 10 countries in the world for COVID-19 deaths per capita. Sweden does, however, have the largest number of COVID-19 cases and fatalities in Scandinavia.

“If we keep kids out of school for another year, what’s going to happen is the poor and underprivileged kids who don’t have a parent that’s able to teach them at home are not going to learn for a full year,” Paul said.

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/12/coronavirus-anthony-fauci-squares-off-rand-paul-hearing/3120954001/

California restaurants and shopping malls can soon reopen in counties that meet state standards for testing and success at reducing cases of the coronavirus, but all businesses will have to abide by state guidelines for physical distancing and cleaning regimens, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Tuesday.

Two months after the governor issued a stay-at-home order that closed most businesses, Newsom said restaurants can reopen for dine-in service in counties certified as meeting state benchmarks for addressing the pandemic, but they should implement changes to guard against spreading the virus.

Shopping centers including strip malls and outlet malls will be allowed to reopen with in-store customers in counties certified to have contained COVID-19, while car washes and pet groomers can also resume operating with safeguards.

The governor also said that Californians who cannot work from home will be allowed to work in offices as long as their counties allow it and the offices undergo modifications to prevent the spread of the virus.

“As we begin these modifications — and we already have reopened 70-plus percent of the economy — as we begin to modify with these dine-in opportunities, let’s make sure we do so cognizant not only of our own health but the health of our most vulnerable and those are our seniors,” Newsom said.

The governor said allowing additional firms to reopen will not work if businesses are not engaging in safe practices.

“None of this means anything if customers don’t feel safe,” Newsom said.

Before businesses can reopen, a county must complete a risk assessment and develop protection plans that include training employees in how to limit the spread of the virus, providing screenings of employees, disinfectant protocols and physical-distancing guidelines.

The state said Tuesday that seven counties — mostly rural — have been certified to have met the state’s conditions for additional businesses to reopen: Amador, Butte, El Dorado, Lassen, Nevada, Placer and Shasta counties.

“There are some unique characteristics in some counties where they are hitting on all cylinders,” Newsom said, adding that additional counties may be able to reopen more businesses later Tuesday.

Talks are underway with 23 other counties on whether they can expand the reopenings, the governor said, but he noted that conditions are still too serious in Los Angeles and San Francisco counties to modify the guidelines for resuming business.

Jot Condie, president and chief executive of the California Restaurant Assn., said, “Restaurants are getting ready now to open their doors and enthusiastically welcome their guests.”

The new rules affect a restaurant industry with more than 90,000 businesses in California, the vast majority operated by independent proprietors. The industry employs 1.4 million food service workers, the California Restaurant Assn. reminded the governor in a recent letter asking for help with taxes and evictions.

“After nearly two months of closure, every restaurant owner in California is reaching a critical phase in their ability to survive,” Condie added Tuesday. “Today’s announcement gives us more clarity on what reopening looks like.”

The new guidelines were released against a backdrop of continued concern by health officials about the number of confirmed coronavirus cases in California, which is nearing 70,000, with more than 2,800 related deaths in the state.

Earlier Tuesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the country’s top infectious disease expert, warned Congress that states reopening too quickly could “trigger an outbreak that you may not be able to control.”

The phased reopening of California began Friday when clothing stores, sporting goods retailers, bookstores, music stores, toy stores and florists were allowed to provide customers with curbside service, unless blocked by local restrictions.

At the same time, the state permitted manufacturers, suppliers and logistics services that provide goods to the newly opened retailers to resume operations.

The retail businesses are required to draft a plan to protect customers and employees from becoming infected with the virus, including a method of screening employees to determine if they are sick.

The state plan would allow in-restaurant dining and other businesses to reopen if county health officials can show that the spread of the coronavirus has stabilized in their part of the state.

Counties must have adequate testing and hospital capacity and the ability to trace those who have been in contact with ill people.

Last week, the Newsom administration warned rural counties that were defying the state’s stay-at-home order that they could lose disaster funding if they don’t abide by the state’s restrictions.

Yuba, Sutter and Modoc counties all received warning letters after they relaxed restrictions that had closed gyms, restaurants, shopping malls, hair salons and other businesses.

State Sen. Jim Nielsen (R-Gerber) said Tuesday the governor was right to allow some rural counties to get back to business.

“By following county health guidelines, rural regions can safely reopen [their] businesses,” Nielsen said. “Local economies need to reopen so workers can earn money to pay their rent and mortgage.”

The tension between local businesses and the governor was raised again Tuesday when the conservative Center for American Liberty announced that it is suing Newsom to force the state to allow beauty salons to reopen immediately.

On Friday, Newsom signaled the coming of more formalized guidelines for restaurants, malls and other business this week.

“We have a new checklist that goes through issues around hand-washing, sanitation, how to address the needs of customers through pickups, how we can make the pickup and drop-off process for deliveries, as well as pickups for customers, easier and safer,” Newsom said Friday. “We tried to tailor these guidelines as prescriptive as we can with a frame of flexibility always.”

He said the goal is to encourage businesses to serve customers with innovation.

“That entrepreneurial spirit we also want to see advanced as we work through this next phase,” Newsom said then. “We want to provide the kind of flexibility that we realize is important.”

To prepare for the next phases of reopening, Newsom said Tuesday that testing continues to expand in California.

The state has provided more than 1 million diagnostic polymerase chain reaction tests, and is now exceeding the April goal of 25,000 tests a day, providing tests to an average of 40,000 people daily during the last three days. He said the state is “making progress” toward a goal of testing more than 61,000 per day.

“A million is an important milestone in our efforts, but still not where we need to go,” Newsom said.

Newsom said the state is also adding dozens of testing sites in rural and other underserved areas, as well as planning for roaming tests in those areas, while the state has also given pharmacies authority to begin offering tests.

Times staff writer Emily Baumgaertner contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-12/gavin-newsom-restaurants-malls-offices-guidelines-reopening-california-coronavirus-rules

WASHINGTON — Republican Mike Garcia was leading Democrat Christy Smith on Wednesday in a California special election for the House seat vacated by Rep. Katie Hill.

With 76 percent of the vote counted, Garcia had 56 percent, or 78,701 votes, and Smith had 44 percent, or 62,054 votes.

NBC News projects the race is too early to call.

Democrats flipped California’s 25th Congressional District in 2018 — a district Donald Trump lost by seven points in 2016. A year later, Hill resigned amid an ethics investigation into allegations of a relationship with a staffer, which Hill denies, and after nude photos of her were published online without her consent.

Now Republicans are bullish that Garcia can win the seat back.

The winner will fill out the remainder of Hill’s term and then Smith and Garcia will face off again in November’s general election in a bid for the subsequent two-year term starting in 2021.

The coronavirus epidemic has created more uncertainty in the race, with most voters expected to vote by mail after Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom ordered the state to send ballots to every registered voter’s home.

The vote-by-mail process, one that California had been increasingly embracing even before the pandemic, hasn’t been without controversy.

Trump raised unfounded accusations of voter fraud last month when he endorsed Garcia on Twitter and added, “Turn your Ballots in now and track them, watching for dishonesty.”

Voters were able to cast ballots at a handful of sites if they didn’t vote by mail. But Trump and Garcia criticized the late decision to add a site in Lancaster, a city with a significant minority population. Trump called it proof that the Democrats were pushing for a “rigged election,” while Democrats pointed to the support of the city’s Republican mayor for adding a polling place.

Meanwhile, former Vice President Joe Biden easily defeated Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in the Nebraska Democratic primary on Tuesday, NBC News projected. With 92 percent of the vote in, Biden was leading Sanders by 77 percent to 14 percent and expected to net 27 delegates.

The 25th Congressional seat was vacated by Rep. Katie Hill. Zach Gibson / Getty Images file

Tuesday’s other special House election took place in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District, one that Trump won easily in 2016 and that Republicans were expected to hold. The seat was vacated last year when Republican Sean Duffy retired, pointing to impending health issues with his then-unborn child.

NBC News projects that GOP state Sen. Tom Tiffany will win there against Tricia Zunker, who was hoping to become Wisconsin’s first Native American member of Congress.

Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

One Democratic congressional primary stood out among the rest of the races Tuesday — the clash between Kara Eastman and Ann Ashford in the 2nd Congressional District around Omaha, Nebraska. Eastman won the contest easily, by 30 percentage points, according to the Associated Press.

Ashford’s husband, Brad, held the seat for one term but lost to Republican Don Bacon, the current representative, in 2016. His 2018 comeback bid was foiled by Eastman, who won the Democratic primary that year but ultimately fell short to Bacon by 2 points in the general election.

Eastman had the backing of prominent progressive Democrats like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and supports “Medicare for All,” while Ashford has the backing of two former Nebraska Democratic senators and has cast her plans as more “realistic.”

Source Article from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/republicans-look-win-back-california-house-seat-special-election-overshadowed-n1205571

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox. Sign up here.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., joined “The Story” Tuesday after his public clash with Dr. Anthony Fauci at a Senate Health Committee hearing, during which Paul challenged the health official and argued that his words are not the “end-all” when it comes to the coronavirus pandemic.

“I don’t question Dr. Fauci’s motives,” Paul told host Martha MacCallum.

RAND PAUL DINGS FAUCI DURING TESTIMONY

“I think he’s a good person, I think he wants what’s best for the country, but he’s an extremely cautious person,” the senator added. “I don’t think any of these experts are omniscient. I think they have a basis of knowledge but when you prognosticate about the future or advocate for things dramatic and drastic, like closing all the schools, you should look at all the information.”

“We have to take with a grain of salt these experts and their prognostication.”

— Sen. Rand Paul, ‘The Story’

In one of the more tense moments of Tuesday’s hearing, Paul – the only U.S. senator to have had a confirmed case of COVID-19 – said the public health response to the pandemic has been riddled with “wrong prediction after wrong prediction” and that Fauci should not be the one making decisions on issues outside his purview.

Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and one of the federal government’s most visible faces during the public health crisis, balked at Paul calling him the “end-all” and said his recommendations do not extend beyond the realm of science and public health.

Following up on Paul’s question about reopening schools in the fall, Fauci said that there is still much that researchers don’t know about the novel coronavirus and the country should not be “cavalier” in reopening institutions too quickly.

“The real question I asked him was, ‘Are you aware of the mortality among children?’ And he is,” Paul acknowledged, “but the mortality is exceedingly low, close to zero in the age group 0-18 … so, should we say all of these kids zero through 18 don’t go to school? No. I think we make that part of our decision-making process. But we need to have competition among the experts.”

CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE CORONAVIRUS COVERAGE

Paul,  who is an ophthalmologist, argued that advice from Fauci and other medical experts over when and how to reopen the country should be taken “with a grain of salt.”

“We have to take with a grain of salt these experts and their prognostication,” he said. “The future is very uncertain but turning down and closing the entire economy has been devastating and that is a fact.”

Fox News’ Andrew O’Reilly contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.foxnews.com/media/rand-paul-fauci-clash-coronavirus-reopening-hearing

Even as officials laid out more tentative plans to reopen California’s battered economy, there were growing signs Tuesday that life would not be getting back to normal any time soon.

The 23-campus California State University system plans to all but cancel in-person classes in the fall and instead will offer instruction primarily online, with some limited exceptions that allow for in-person activity. The decision comes as schools throughout the country grapple with how long to keep campuses closed amid the coronavirus crisis.

“Our university when open without restrictions and fully in person … is a place where over 500,000 people come together in close and vibrant proximity,” Chancellor Timothy White said at a meeting of Cal State’s Board of Trustees. “That approach sadly just isn’t in the cards now.”

He also acknowledged that the university system lacks the resources to provide coronavirus testing for everybody and trace the contacts of infected people should there be an outbreak on a campus.

Health officials in Los Angeles County — a coronavirus hot spot in California with more than 1,600 deaths — also signaled that progress toward reopening could be slow, with some stay-at-home orders lasting well into the summer.

Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer told the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday that she didn’t see the timeline shortening without “dramatic change to the virus and tools at hand.” She later added that while the stay-at-home policy would likely remain, some individual restrictions will be “gradually relaxed” under the county’s five-step plan.

“Our hope is that by using the data, we’d be able to slowly lift restrictions over the next three months,” she said. But without widely available testing for the coronavirus or rapid home kits that would allow people to test themselves daily, it seems unlikely that the social distancing directives and stay-at-home orders would be completely eased, she said.

Other local officials said they would support lifting more rules if conditions improved and health experts said it’s safe to do so.

“I am eager to reopen more of L.A. County as soon as it’s safe to do so,” said Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger. “I’m confident that the more our communities continue to comply, the sooner we can resume normalcy.”

Officials noted that Los Angeles County beaches are set to reopen Wednesday — with some restrictions on activities and other rules in place — just days after officials also lifted restrictions on hiking trails, parks and golf courses, and allowed curbside pickup at nonessential businesses. But there is no specific timetable for what rules could be lifted next.

“We’re not moving past COVID-19, we’re learning to live with it,” Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said.

Officials were urging caution in other parts of California as well. Silicon Valley’s health officer announced Tuesday that Santa Clara County has no immediate plans to weaken its strict stay-at-home order, saying she couldn’t take that step without increasing the risk to public safety.

The Bay Area’s most populous county, Santa Clara County, was California’s original hot spot of the COVID-19 pandemic. And while levels of the disease haven’t surged to catastrophic levels, they’ve remained steady, and even a small increase in disease transmission would heighten the risk to vulnerable communities, said Dr. Sara Cody, a key architect of the nation’s first regional shelter-in-place order.

“We’re not there yet,” Cody told the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday. “The conditions really haven’t changed in our county…. We don’t suddenly have a vaccine. We have exactly the same conditions we had in March. If we did ease up, we would see a brisk return of cases, of hospitalizations, and a brisk return of deaths, to be quite blunt.”

There has been a big push in recent weeks to restart the state’s depressed economy. Gov. Gavin Newsom last week announced new protocols for retail stores and some workplaces to reopen.

On Tuesday, Newsom added that California restaurants and shopping malls can soon reopen in counties that meet state standards for testing and success at reducing cases of the coronavirus, but all businesses will have to abide by state guidelines for physical distancing and cleaning regimens.

Counties must have adequate testing and hospital capacity, and the ability to trace those who have been in contact with ill people.

Restaurants can reopen for dine-in service in counties certified as meeting those benchmarks, but they should implement changes to guard against spreading the virus.

Sign up for the latest news, best stories and what they mean for you, plus answers to your questions.

Shopping centers including strip malls and outlet malls will be allowed to reopen with in-store customers in counties certified to have contained COVID-19, while car washes and pet groomers can also resume operating with safeguards.

Some rural counties that have seen relatively few cases are likely to be able to meet those benchmarks more quickly than urban counties such as Los Angeles. Indeed, some rural counties with few coronavirus cases in some cases have defied Newsom’s order and reopened earlier than the state allowed.

A Times data analysis last week found that most big California counties are not close to meeting Newsom’s standards. The analysis looked at which counties could pass just the first two criteria — whether deaths have stopped in the last 14 days, and whether there is no more than one case per 10,000 residents in that same time period.

Most of California failed that test, including Los Angeles County. Newsom has suggested that the guidelines would be later modified on a statewide basis, allowing larger counties hit hardest by the outbreak to also reopen more broadly.

The state said Tuesday that seven of California’s 58 counties — mostly rural — have been certified to have met the state’s conditions for additional businesses to reopen: Amador, Butte, El Dorado, Lassen, Nevada, Placer and Shasta counties.

“There are some unique characteristics in some counties where they are hitting on all cylinders,” Newsom said.

Talks are underway with 27 other counties to discuss whether they can expand the reopenings, the governor said, but he noted that conditions are still too serious in Los Angeles and San Francisco counties to modify the guidelines for resuming business.

Cal State officials said they believe it was best to make the decision about the fall term now rather than wait until the summer.

White, the chancellor, said that for the small number of classes where in-person instruction is “indispensable and can be justified” — such as clinical nursing courses, biology labs or merchant marine training — sufficient resources and protocols will have to be in place to ensure the health and safety of students and teachers.

“The enrollment per section will be less; for instruction and research laboratories the distance between participants greater; the need for personal protective equipment appropriate to the circumstance prevalent; and the need to sanitize and disinfect spaces and equipment between users essential,” White said.

On some campuses and within some departments, course offerings will be exclusively virtual.

McGreevy reported from Sacramento, and Shalby and Agrawal from Southern California. Times staff writers Sarah Parvini and Rong-Gong Lin II contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-12/coronavirus-restrictions-stay-at-home-long-haul-california

A federal judge has put the justice department’s decision to dismiss a criminal case against Michael Flynn, Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, on hold – opening the door for legal experts and other outside parties to oppose the administration’s motion to exonerate Flynn of lying to the FBI.

Judge Emmet Sullivan’s order is the latest development in the high-profile case, which has led critics, including Barack Obama and hundreds of former FBI and justice department officials, to question whether William Barr, the attorney general, was orchestrating favors for Trump.

Flynn, a retired general and a close Trump ally, pleaded guilty to a felony charge amid the special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian involvement in the 2016 US election. The former administration official was charged with lying to the FBI about conversations with the Russian ambassador to the US during the presidential transition period. In exchange for leniency, Flynn cooperated with Mueller’s investigation as part of his plea agreement.

But Flynn sought to change his plea while awaiting sentencing, as the president floated the idea of a pardon.

The justice department said last week that the FBI had had no basis to question him, and federal prosecutors asked Sullivan to throw out their case against Flynn. None of the line prosecutors supervising the case signed the motion and one withdrew from the case.

Though lawyers for Flynn asked Sullivan to immediately toss out the charges, Sullivan said he wanted to hear more arguments. “Given the posture of the case,” he said, he anticipated that many outside parties would want to weigh in.

Sullivan has questioned Flynn in court before. During a 2018 hearing, he rejected a motion supported by the administration for probation, telling Flynn: “Arguably, you sold your country out.”

Flynn’s defense team said Sullivan’s order on Tuesday was prompted by a filing from a group that called itself “Watergate prosecutors” that questioned the justice department’s actions and suggested that political influence was at play.

Disputing the order, Flynn’s defense lawyer Sidney Powell and her co-counsel wrote in a court filing: “There is no place for third parties to meddle in the dispute, and certainly not to usurp the role of the government’s counsel.

“This travesty of justice has already consumed three or more years of an innocent man’s life – and that of his entire family,” Powell wrote. “No further delay should be tolerated.”

In a leaked web talk, Obama reportedly said the “rule of law is at risk” because the justice department dropped charges against Flynn. The chair of the House judiciary committee, Jerry Nadler, a New York Democrat, called the decision “outrageous” and said he intended to call Barr to testify about the handling of the case.

“We do not believe this case should have been brought, we are correcting that and we certainly hope that in the interest of true justice, that the judge ultimately agrees and drops the case against Gen Flynn,” said Kerri Kupec, a justice department spokesperson, in an interview Fox News on Tuesday evening.

The justice department did not immediately respond to the Guardian’s request for comment.

Agencies contributed reporting

Source Article from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/12/michael-flynn-case-justice-department-dismiss

A leaked unreleased White House coronavirus task force report showing cases spiking in areas across the country has undercut President Donald Trump’s claim that cases are declining across the nation.

“You know, the numbers are coming down very rapidly all throughout the country, by the way,” Trump declared at a Monday news conference. “There may be one exception, but all throughout the country, the numbers are coming down rapidly.”

This is, of course, not true. Though cases are decreasing in 14 states, they are rising in nine states, according to The New York Times. A lack of widespread testing in 27 other states, plus Washington and Puerto Rico, suggests that cases in those areas are being undercounted.

But a leaked coronavirus task force report obtained by NBC News shows that some parts of the country — rural counties in Tennessee and Kansas — have seen cases balloon by more than 1,000% in a matter of one week. Other counties in Missouri, Nebraska, Minnesota and Wisconsin saw increases of more than 400%.

Dr. John Ross, a professor at Harvard Medical School, pointed out that all but one of the top 10 counties that saw the largest increases voted for President Donald Trump in 2016.

The top 10 cities in the report, which was produced on May 7, saw cases increases by more than 72% over seven days. Some areas, like St. Louis and Central City, Ky., saw cases skyrocket by 650% over that span. St. Cloud, Minn., saw cases increase by more than 400%. Other cities like Gainesville, Ga., Racine, Wisc., and Nashville saw increases of more than 100% over a single week.

A separate graph listing “locations to watch” include Kansas City, Mo., and Charlotte, which saw increases of more than 200% over the previous week.

The report found that statewide cases in Minnesota increased by nearly 100% over a single week while New Mexico, Tennessee, Wisconsin and the nation’s capital saw increases of more than 40%.

Despite the alarming increases, Trump has continued to publicly and falsely claim that cases are falling nearly everywhere.

“Coronavirus numbers are looking MUCH better, going down almost everywhere,” he tweeted Tuesday.

Medical professionals criticized Trump’s attempts to spin rising death counts.

“Anybody that claims we’re on a downward trajectory nationally is out of touch with reality,” Dr. Irwin Redlener, the director of the Columbia University National Center for Disaster Preparedness, told NBC News, adding that even the rising numbers do not tell the full story. “There isn’t a single state in the union that has sufficient testing.”

Though states like New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, which were hit hard early, have seen numbers decline, the nation has a rising curve when New York’s massive totals are excluded.

“It’s not appropriate to say the U.S. is consistently on a downward trend at all,” Redlener said. “In some places, it might be the direct opposite of that.”

Trump has also complained to advisers about the way that deaths are counted, arguing that the “real numbers are actually lower,” Axios reported last week.

But medical experts, including those on Trump’s own task force, say the opposite is true.

“Most of us feel that the number of deaths are likely higher than” the 80,000 that is currently reported, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testified to a Senate committee on Tuesday. “The number is likely higher. I don’t know exactly what percent higher, but almost certainly, it’s higher.”

Fauci also pushed back on Trump’s optimism and pressure on states to reopen businesses during the hearing.

“If some areas, cities, states or what-have-you jump over those various checkpoints and prematurely open up without having the capability of being able to respond effectively and efficiently, my concern is that we will start to see little spikes that might turn into outbreaks,” Fauci said. “I have been very clear in my message — to try to the best extent possible to go by the guidelines, which have been very well thought out and very well delineated.”

Source Article from https://www.salon.com/2020/05/12/leaked-white-house-data-shows-infections-spiking-more-than-1000-in-rural-areas-that-backed-trump/

If you haven’t gotten your pandemic relief payment yet and would like to receive it by direct deposit, make sure the IRS has your bank account information before noon Wednesday.

Susan Walsh/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Susan Walsh/AP

If you haven’t gotten your pandemic relief payment yet and would like to receive it by direct deposit, make sure the IRS has your bank account information before noon Wednesday.

Susan Walsh/AP

If you’re still waiting for your pandemic payment from the federal government, and you would like to receive it directly into your bank account, head over to the IRS website by noon on Wednesday.

If the IRS doesn’t have your direct deposit information by that deadline, you’ll still get your payment — but you’ll receive it in the form of a paper check, which might not arrive until June.

Citizens and resident aliens earning less than $75,000 in individual adjusted gross income are generally eligible for a $1,200 relief payment. Individuals earning more may be eligible for a partial payment.

For most people, the payments were automatic and no action was necessary. The IRS has sent payments to some 130 million people already. The new deadline only applies to people who have not received a payment yet and who have not confirmed that the IRS has their bank account information.

“We want people to visit Get My Payment before the noon Wednesday deadline so they can provide their direct deposit information,” IRS Commissioner Chuck Rettig said. “Time is running out for a chance to get these payments several weeks earlier through direct deposit.”

If you filed a federal tax return and received a refund via direct deposit — or if you receive other benefits to your account, like Social Security or Supplemental Security Income — the IRS should already have your bank account information. You can use the “Get My Payment” online tool to confirm your bank account is on file and check the status of your payment.

If you are not required to file a federal tax return, you can use this IRS page to request your payment electronically.

Remember, the IRS will not contact you directly for information, and you will never have to provide any money to receive your stimulus check. Any calls, texts or emails asking for information are scams.

Source Article from https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/12/854747461/want-your-stimulus-check-direct-deposited-sign-up-by-noon-wednesday

On Tuesday, in his second appearance on CNN in 4 hours, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said that online, phone order and curbside pickup would expand to “all retail establishments” sometime this week.

“In the coming week,” he said, “it’ll be opened up to all retail establishments.”

On May 6, officials announced that select retail sectors would be allowed to offer online/phone orders and curbside pick-up. Those select businesses included florists (before Mother’s Day), toy stores, music stores, bookstores, clothing and shoe stores and sporting goods stores. Car dealership showrooms were also allowed to open with proper social distancing.

This comes after a day of conflicting signals from elected officials.

First, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced that restaurants could reopen for dine-in service, so long as they follow guidelines.

Newsom also said that malls and strip malls could reopen for pickup service.

Then, Dr. Barbara Ferrer, the Director of the L.A. County Public Health Department said safer at home restrictions would go on until August.

Shortly thereafter, Garcetti called in to CNN, telling Jake Tapper, “I think there was a lot of panic suddenly the headlines said we’re all going to stay exactly as we are for three more months when that is not the case.” Garcetti insisted that Ferrer simply meant that the county would not “fully reopen” by August.

Later in the afternoon, Ferrer issued a press release clarifying her remarks. “While the Safer at Home orders will remain in place over the next few months,” she said, “restrictions will be gradually relaxed.”

Finally, Garcetti made a second appearance on CNN, telling Anderson Cooper that, despite the seemingly conflicting messages, “It’s important not to overreact…to not freak out.”

It was in that interview that Garcetti made the announcement about all retail establishments.

“Workspaces, maybe manufacturing comes next,” he said.

The mayor’s announcement landed nearly simultaneously with the announcement by L.A. City Attorney Mike Feuer that his office has filed criminal charges against 60 businesses that failed to close under the mayor’s Safer at Home order.

The full list of those businesses can be found here.

At the end of the CNN interview, Cooper asked Garcetti if students in the massive L.A. Unified School District would return to campus soon.

Garcetti said, “I certainly hope so. It’d be a pity [not to]. It’s all about compliance.”

Then, “In the fall,” said the mayor, at “the K-12 level, we should figure out some way.”

The mayor, however, has little control over LAUSD. The district is governed by a Board of Education elected directly by voters.

Source Article from https://deadline.com/2020/05/l-a-coronavirus-mayor-eric-garcetti-all-retail-reopen-for-curbside-pickup-this-week-1202933137/

Garcia and Smith are facing off in a highly watched race, one of two held Tuesday that will provide one of the first indicators of the electorate’s mood since the coronavirus gripped the nation.

Earlier Tuesday, Republicans easily held onto a rural district in northwestern Wisconsin vacated by former GOP Rep. Sean Duffy. The more telling battle was in California 25th District, where Democrats were at risk of losing a seat they won handily two years ago.

The winner will succeed former Rep. Katie Hill (D-Calif.), who resigned late last year after admitting to an inappropriate sexual relationship with a campaign staffer.

In a statement Tuesday night, Smith, a state assemblywoman, said the race was too close to call and that she was not yet conceding.

“It is critical that every ballot cast is counted and the voice of every CA-25 voter is heard,” she said.

Though Democrats have a voter-registration advantage of nearly 30,000, the health crisis has created conditions ripe for a GOP upset. Turnout in the runoff is on track to surpass most recent special elections in the region, but the electorate has skewed older and less diverse and thus more favorable to Republicans.

Source Article from https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/12/gop-seeks-victory-in-california-special-election-253346

WASHINGTON – Top public health officials, as well as a few Democratic and Republican senators, painted a much starker picture Tuesday of the coronavirus challenges still facing the nation than the rosier outlook offered by President Donald Trump.

A day after the president declared the nation has “met the moment, and we have prevailed,” top members of his coronavirus task force sent a different message at a Senate hearing on how the nation can safely reopen.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease specialist, said that while containment is moving in the right direction, the virus is not under control.

Easing restrictions too quickly will lead to “some suffering and death that could be avoided,” he warned, adding that it could also paradoxically set back attempts to recover the economy.

“It would almost run the clock back rather than going forward,” said Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “That is my major concern.”

Source Article from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/05/12/coronavirus-fauci-issues-stark-warning-disease-odds-trump/3117983001/

After Mueller’s investigation into 2016 campaign interference closed last year, Flynn changed defense teams, began attacking prosecutors, and gained Trump’s support, claiming he was entrapped in a partisan FBI and Justice Department conspiracy.

Source Article from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/us-judge-puts-on-hold-justice-dept-move-to-dismiss-michael-flynns-guilty-plea-to-hear-outside-groups-challenges/2020/05/12/2fb4e356-949d-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html

Los Angeles County’s stay-at-home orders will “with all certainty” be extended for the next three months, county Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer acknowledged during a Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday.

Ferrer later added that even if the orders remain in place through the summer, restrictions will be “gradually relaxed” under a five-step plan.

“We are being guided by science and data that will safely move us forward along the road to recovery in a measured way—one that allows us to ensure that effective distancing and infection control measures are in place,” Ferrer said, adding that the county is counting on the public’s compliance with the orders to be able to relax restrictions.

Testifying before the Board of Superviros, Ferrer stressed further progress will be guided by efforts to contain the virus. Los Angeles County is now the Calfornia epicenter of the coronavirus, with more than 1,300 deaths so far.

“Our hope is that by using the data, we’d be able to slowly lift restrictions over the next three months,” she said. But without widely available testing for the coronavirus or rapid home kits that would allow people to test themselves daily, it seems unlikely that the social distancing directives and stay-at-home orders would be completely eased.

On Tuesday afternoon, Los Angeles County Supervisor Kathryn Barger also expressed hope there could be more easing in coming weeks.

“I am eager to reopen more of L.A. County as soon as it’s safe to do so, in collaboration with our health experts, community leaders, businesses and residents, with best practices in place to ensure our overall health and well-being. These decisions will be guided by the latest science and data collected,” she said in a statement.”I’m confident that the more our communities continue to comply, the sooner we can resume normalcy.”

L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti echoed Barger’s comments, saying that the city will continue to adjust orders to stay home gradually in order to allow more activities and more businesses to operate.

“We’re not moving past COVID-19, we’re learning to live with it — and we will keep taking measured steps toward a new, safer reality in the days and weeks ahead,” he said in a statement.

Ferrer’s comments came shortly before Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that he was modifying the state’s stay-at-home orders to allow individual counties to approve the reopening of malls for curbside pickup service only. The order also allows for the reopening of some offices if teleworking is not feasible.

“We aren’t out of the woods yet,” Newsom reminded residents.

In L.A. County, confirmed cases and deaths have continued to rise.

When beaches reopen this week, how people can use the sand will look different. Face coverings will be required when not in the water, and sunbathing won’t be allowed. Only active recreation — surfing, running, walking and swimming — will be permitted. Coolers, chairs, umbrellas and any of the other accessories that typically dot the shoreline should be left at home.

The update to L.A.’s stay-at-home orders comes as officials try to meet two needs: restarting the economy under a new normal while also ensuring that the resurgence in activity doesn’t upend progress in the fight against the coronavirus.

There has been a big push in recent weeks to reopen the state’s economy, which has been hurt by the stay-at-home orders. Newsom last week announced new protocols for retail stores and some workplaces to reopen.

Under the plan, some in-restaurant dining, car washes and shopping malls could also be allowed to reopen in coming weeks if public health officials in a county are able to demonstrate that the spread of the virus has stabilized and that they have adequate testing and hospital capacity.

Some rural counties that have seen relatively few cases are likely to be able to meet those benchmarks more quickly than urban counties such as Los Angeles.

A Times data analysis last week found most big California counties are not close to meeting Newsom’s standards. The analysis looked at which counties could pass just the first two criteria — whether deaths have stopped in the last 14 days, and whether there is no more than one case per 10,000 residents in that same time period.

Most of California failed that test. In fact, 95% of Californians live in counties that don’t meet that standard, the Times analysis found. Not a single county in Southern California nor the San Francisco Bay Area met the criteria.

Newsom suggested Friday that the guidelines would be later modified on a statewide basis, allowing larger counties hit hardest by the outbreak to also reopen more broadly. “Over the next few weeks, we’ll be making subsequent announcements for the entire state, not just those that meet those more restrictive criteria,” he said.

On Tuesday, he also explained the guidelines for restaurants in some counties to open for dine-in service, including disposable menus and an emphasis on outdoor seating. He also suggested that customers be screened for symptoms.

Also on Tuesday, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, warned members of the U.S. Senate that states that push too quickly to ease orders could undo progress that would trigger an outbreak. Fauci said a 14-day decline in cases is the major benchmark that states should meet before reopening.

As other California regions have seen a decline in the number of reported infections and COVID-19-related deaths, L.A. County, the state’s most populous, continues to see growth on both fronts. The county reported Tuesday an additional 961 people who tested positive for the virus, and an additional 45 deaths, bringing the death toll to 1,613. L.A. County’s COVID-19 deaths account for more than half of the state’s total.

Officials have noted that the numbers reported at the start of the week are typically lower, largely because testing is not at full capacity on weekends.

Nearly 253,000 individuals of L.A. County’s 10 million residents have been checked for the virus and roughly 11% — more than 32,000 — have been infected. Officials have been encouraging all residents, even those without symptoms, to get tested.

Officials have said that social distancing has helped slow the spread of the virus, but also have warned that it remains contagious.

“It’s safer to stay at home. COVID-19 has not changed,” Ferrer reminded residents Monday.

Some neighboring counties that are easing restrictions also continue to see increases in cases and deaths. Riverside County, where officials voted Friday to lift requirements for face coverings, reported 150 new cases Monday and 12 additional deaths.

In Orange County, 45 more cases and one death were reported Tuesday as the number of hospitalizations — a count that fluctuates by the day depending on how many of the county’s eligible 25 hospitals report statistics — rose to 230.

Meanwhile in Santa Clara County, which was once the hottest spot for infections in the state, the number of cases has declined. Officials reported two additional cases Monday and zero deaths. Santa Clara is one of six Bay Area counties that have extended shelter-in-place orders.

Also Tuesday, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors debated whether to extend the county’s eviction moratorium to help renters who may be struggling financially because of the pandemic. Supervisors Sheila Kuehl and Hilda Solis proposed extending it until Aug. 31.

Kuehl said she based her proposed date off the Department of Public Health’s guidance that at least some of the stay-at-home restrictions would be extended for the next three months. She added that the board’s need to vote on the moratorium every month would create “amazing anxiety” for renters.

“Obviously our tenants are suffering extreme pain right now,” Solis said.

Supervisors Kathryn Barger and Janice Hahn submitted an amendment to extend the rent eviction moratorium until only the end of June. The board passed that amendment, 3-2, with Kuehl and Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas voting against it.

Times staff writer Jaclyn Cosgrove contributed to this report.

Source Article from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-12/coronavirus-beaches-reopen-los-angeles-county-move-toward-new-normal