Sunday, October 11, 2020

FBI sent a team to 'exploit' Portland protesters' phones

VIOLATING FIRST AND FOURTH AMENDMENTS

Jon Fingas Associate Editor, Engadget•October 10, 2020


Federal law enforcement officials aim at protesters outside a fence during a demonstration against police violence and racial inequality in Portland, Oregon, U.S., July 24, 2020. REUTERS/Caitlin Ochs TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY


Federal agents tend to focus their phone cracking efforts on terrorists, but they appear to have shifted their attention to civil disobedience. NYR Daily has learned that the FBI sent its “Fly Team” counterterrorism unit to Portland in mid-July to conduct the “initial exploitation” of phones and other devices used by people protesting police racism and violence. The email revealing the plan, from now-retired special agent George Chamberlain, also asked for help with the “investigative follow up.”

There’s a concern that the FBI may have been pushing the limits of its device search powers in the process. Fly Team co-creator Raymond Holcomb told NYR that it’s unclear what authority the FBI unit had to search the phones, and whether or not agents had consent or warrants. The Fly Team was formed to tackle counterterrorism with a “different set of tools,” not everyday protesters.

Members of the House Committee on Homeland Security have lately worried that federal agents have held on to seized phones for months.

The FBI declined to comment on the details of the operation, citing the “ongoing nature” of cases like this. It maintained that the Portland activity met “all of our legal requirements,” and that it had “not been focused on peaceful protests.”

Those claims might not be enough to satisfy some critics. Senator Ron Wyden has demanded clarity on FBI and Homeland Security activity in Portland, saying that it would be “outrageous” if Oregon residents faced federal surveillance like phone exploits due solely to their politics. Without transparency, it’s not certain that the FBI or DHS respected protesters’ digital rights.
Ivory Coast opposition rallies against President Ouattara's third term bid

Loucoumane Coulibaly, Reuters•October 10, 2020




Ivory Coast opposition rallies against President Ouattara's third term bid
A supporter of Ivory Coast's opposition coalition parties holds a sign during a stadium rally, in Abidjan

By Loucoumane Coulibaly

ABIDJAN (Reuters) - Thousands of opposition supporters rallied in the Ivory Coast's commercial capital on Saturday to protest against President Alassane Ouattara's plan to seek a third term in the Oct. 31 presidential election.

By early afternoon around 20,000 people had packed a 35,000 capacity stadium in Abidjan, chanting and dancing. Some held banners saying "The people say no to an illegal third term."

Ouattara announced in August that he will seek another term following the sudden death of his handpicked successor.

The constitutional council has cleared him and three other candidates to run, but the opposition says Ouattara is violating the constitution by seeking another term and has called for a civil disobedience campaign.

The 78-year old president, in power for a decade, says a 2016 constitutional change means his two-term limit has been reset.

Over a dozen people have been killed in violent protests, sparking memories of 2010-11, when 3,000 people died in the civil war following a disputed election that Ouattara won. Ivory Coast is the world's top cocoa producing nation.


"My advice to President Ouattara is that Ivorians should sit down to discuss. We want peace. We don't want war," Eve Botti, a supporter of the FPI opposition party, told Reuters at the rally.

Sie Coulibaly, a supporter of former rebel leader Guillaume Soro, whose candidacy was rejected, said he came to the rally to say no to Ouattara's third term. Soro is in exile in France.

The opposition has called for the election to be postponed, but have stopped short of saying they will boycott the poll, while the ruling party has said the election will take place regardless of whether they participate.

Campaigning is expected to start on Oct. 15.

(Editing by Frances Kerry)
International Coalition Backs Embattled Expert on Chinese Foreign-Influence Operations
NR THE VOICE OF THE RIGHT IN AMERIKA

Jimmy Quinn, National Review•October 9, 2020


Nearly 150 China-focused experts and academics signed on to a letter this week expressing their support for Anne-Marie Brady, a professor at New Zealand’s University of Canterbury, whose work on the Chinese Communist Party’s foreign political interference has been the target of a review by the school’s vice chancellor.

The paper that triggered the review is “Holding a Pen in One Hand, Gripping a Gun in the Other,” Brady’s investigation of how China’s People’s Liberation Army has infiltrated civil society and higher education in New Zealand for the purposes of military research. The CCP “is preparing China for what the Chinese leadership believes is an inevitable war,” Brady writes in the paper. “The New Zealand government needs to work with businesses and universities to devise a strategy to prevent the transfer of military-end-use technology to China.” The report asserts that New Zealand universities — including the Victoria University of Wellington, Massey University, and Lincoln University — have partnerships with Huawei, in addition to alleging the participation of academics in Beijing’s Thousand Talents Program.

The University of Canterbury’s vice chancellor, Cheryl de la Ray, ordered a review into the report after Brady presented it to New Zealand’s parliament this past summer. De la Ray put the paper under review because it has “manifest errors of fact and misleading inferences,” Canterbury’s deputy vice chancellor of research Ian Wright told Stuff, the biggest news website in the country. A number of the academics and universities mentioned in the document have denied Brady’s claims.

Brady declined a request for comment, saying that she has been instructed by university administrators not to discuss the inquiry. But the academics who signed onto this week’s letter have defended the integrity of her scholarship and maintained that the accusations against her are baseless. Among them are Adrian Zenz, the researcher who has spurred a public reckoning with the CCP’s drive to eradicate its Uyghur population in Xinjiang, and Clive Hamilton, the Australian professor who wrote a book that brought widespread public attention to Chinese political interference in his country.


Describing the “ground-breaking” nature and “profound impact internationally” of Brady’s work, the letter states:

We, who know this area, can see no manifest errors or misleading inferences based on the evidenced material provided in the report. The paper does not make “inferences.” People who study it may draw some, but that does not mean the paper made them, misleading or otherwise. Since Professor Wright publicly voiced the allegations a group of us peers again went through Professor Brady’s Parliamentary submission. We find in it no basis for the allegations. Some of the links in its comprehensive sourcing have gone stale since she submitted it but those URLs all still work if put into Wayback or archive.today.

We are disappointed to see no prompt follow-up, explanation or clarification of the University’s position concerning the allegations. The impression left by that published report should have been corrected to show that the University did not intend any endorsement of the complaints, nor an approval or acceptance of complaints to the University as the appropriate way to criticise academic work. The silence has been interpreted as collaboration in slander against a very distinguished scholar whose work has been consistently based on sound social scientific methodology.

Brady has previously faced harassment for her work on Chinese influence. Over the past couple of years, she has been the target of break-ins, mail tampering, and theft of banking information, she told the New Zealand Herald in 2019. The reason for this is no secret: Her work on China’s political influence in New Zealand paints the picture of a country whose participation in international organizations, close access to Antarctica, dairy industry, and research on technologies with military applications has made it an enticing target. New Zealand’s value to Beijing is also “as a soft underbelly through which to access Five Eyes intelligence,” she has written of the intelligence partnership that also includes the United States, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom.

Brady’s travails raise further questions about the true level of CCP influence in New Zealand and around the world, and about how people who stand to be embarrassed by their ties to the Chinese regime work quietly to deter dissent. Charles Burton, a senior fellow at the MacDonald Laurier Institute in Canada who was one of the letter’s organizers, called it “unfortunate that this matter is being addressed in a secret university tribunal” without due process or public scrutiny. Burton also says he worries that some human-resources departments could see this situation as an invitation to take similar Beijing-friendly steps going forward.

There’s no evidence that Canterbury undertook its review of Brady’s work at the behest of the Chinese government, which makes the episode even more worrying. After all, when foreigners with an interest in preserving their ties to the CCP suppress scholarship inconvenient to its strategic aims on their own, the regime’s aggressive, malignant foreign policy becomes that much harder to counteract.
More from National Review


China Bullies Foreign Companies into Espousing Its Worldview


The Strange Attempt to Stop a New Book on China’s Global Influence


Senator Josh Hawley Reveals the Nasty Truth Behind Confucius Institutes
Massive 3,500-pound shark spotted off coast of North America

CBS News•October 10, 2020

A 3,500 pound great white shark dubbed Nukumi — meaning "Queen of the Ocean" — has been spotted off the coast of Nova Scotia. The massive 50-year-old shark was tagged and released by Ocearch, a research and exploring team that hopes its latest trip out to sea provides new clues to unravel the mysteries of great whites.

"When you see these big females like that that have scars from decades over their lives and multiple mating cycles, you can really kinda see the story of their life unfolding across all the blotches and healed wounds on their body," team leader Chris Fischer told CBS News' Jeff Glor. "It really hits you differently thank you would think."
A 50-year-old, 3,500-pound shark nicknamed Nukumi, meaning "Queen of the Ocean." 

Tagging Nukumi, one of the largest great white sharks ever seen, was the crowning achievement of Ocearch's month-long trip off the North American coast that had them running from storms for 21 days in the middle of an unprecedented Atlantic hurricane season.
Tagging Nukumi, one of the largest great white sharks ever seen, was the crowning achievement of Ocearch's month-long trip. / Credit: CBS News / Ocearch

At the end, Ocearch was successfully able to sample and release a total of eight great white sharks, including the so-called "Queen of the Ocean."

Fischer explained that tracking Nukumi comes with a "great opportunity" to show the researchers "where the Atlantic Canada white shark gives birth" — something that has never been witnessed before.

Along with gathering more information on their birth, Ocearch's goal is to learn more about the apex predators that keep the ocean in balance.

"If they thrive, the system thrives," Fischer explained. "The white shark is the balance keeper, and the path to abundance goes through them."

Without white sharks in the ocean, fish supplies that humans depend on could be wiped out by overpopulations of seals and squids.

"If we understand their lives, we can help them thrive," he said.
They try to keep each shark out of the water for no more than 15 minutes, during which the animal is sustained by a rush of seawater. / Credit: CBS News / Ocearch

Ocearch's satellite tags allow researchers to track sharks for five years. The practice of tagging involves hooking the shark with a smaller boat, then gliding it onto a large lift, and allowing scientists to take blood samples and attach a tag to the dorsal fin, which they say does not cause pain due to a lack of blood and nerve connections. They try to keep each shark out of the water for no more than 15 minutes, during which the animal is sustained by a rush of seawater.

Fischer defended the team's methods, which have been criticized for being too invasive.

"When you look at the blood data and the stress data, it doesn't indicate that," he said.

He said Ocearch's mission is "orders of magnitude greater" than anything previously done in white shark research, which he claims intimidates the "traditional science community that's using really primitive methods."

"We're studying the biology of the white shark, getting a complete picture of that as well as the ecology of the white shark at the same time," Fischer said.

While sharks around North America are in "much better shape than they were decades ago," Fischer said, the real challenge will be tackling decreasing shark populations worldwide.

"Try to get the white sharks moving in the right direction, start creating awareness, and hope that that impacts the fish stocks, the marine mammal stocks," he said. "I think there, you're lookin' at more like you gotta have a 100-year vision."
Pakistan cleric killed in apparent sectarian attack

Associated Press•October 11, 2020

KARACHI, Pakistan (AP) — Gunmen riding on a motorcycle shot and killed a religious scholar who belongs to a little-known branch of Islam in Pakistan's bustling city of Karachi, police said on Sunday.

The killing of Maulana Adil Khan was immediately condemned and seen as an attempt to trigger sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shiites in the country. Prime Minister Imran Khan termed it “an attempt by India to create sectarian conflict across the country,” though no immediate evidence was given that India was behind the attack.

Khan is the son of late prominent scholar Maulana Saleemullah Khan, who founded the grand seminary, Jamia Farooqia, decades ago. The seminary adheres to the Sunni Muslim teachings of the Deobandi sect, whose scholars have been the target of killings in the past.

Khan held a doctorate in religious studies, received training in his father's seminary and had taught in Malaysia.

Police chief Ghulam Nabi Memon said the cleric and his driver were both killed in the attack Saturday evening, which took place in the middle class neighborhood of Shah Faisal Colony.

Police said that when the cleric’s vehicle stopped in front of a busy shopping area, gunmen opened fire targeting the driver before firing three bullets that struck Khan’s head, neck and chest. The three attackers then fled on the back of a shared motorcycle.

Khan was rushed to a private hospital where he was pronounced dead upon arrival, said the hospital's spokesperson Anjum Rizvi. Police said the driver died before reaching a government hospital.

Pakistan has a history of sectarian enmity between Sunni and Shiite extremists. Attacks by both sides have claimed hundreds of lives, including those of religious scholars.

Counter-terrorism police officer Raja Umar Khitab said the attack appeared to be a “conspiracy to trigger sectarian violence.”

Taking Page From Authoritarians, Trump Turns Power of State Against Political Rivals

David E. Sanger, The New York Times•October 11, 2020
The south side of the White House in Washington, on Saturday, Oct. 10, 2020, as viewed from the Ellipse. (Stefani Reynolds/The New York Times)

President Donald Trump’s order to his secretary of state to declassify thousands of Hillary Clinton’s emails, along with his insistence that his attorney general issue indictments against Barack Obama and Joe Biden, takes his presidency into new territory — until now, occupied by leaders with names like Putin, Xi and Erdogan.

Trump has long demanded — quite publicly, often on Twitter — that his most senior cabinet members use the power of their office to pursue political enemies. But his appeals this week, as he trailed badly in the polls and was desperate to turn the national conversation away from the coronavirus, were so blatant that one had to look to authoritarian nations to make comparisons.

He took a step even Richard Nixon avoided in his most desperate days: openly ordering direct immediate government action against specific opponents, timed to serve his reelection campaign.

“There is essentially no precedent,” said Jack Goldsmith, who led the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel under President George W. Bush and has written extensively on presidential powers. “We have a norm that developed after Watergate that presidents don’t talk about ongoing investigations, much less interfere with them.”


“It is crazy and it is unprecedented,” said Goldsmith, now a professor at Harvard Law School, “but it’s no different from what he has been saying since the beginning of his presidency. The only thing new is that he has moved from talking about it to seeming to order it.”

Trump’s vision of the presidency has always leaned to exercising the absolute powers of the chief executive, a writ-large version of the family business he presided over. “I have an Article II,” he told young adults last year at a Turning Point USA summit, referring to the section of the Constitution that deals with the president’s powers, “where I have the right to do whatever I want as president, but I don’t even talk about that.”

Now he is talking about it, almost daily. He is making it clear that prosecutions, like vaccines for the coronavirus, are useless to him if they come after Nov. 3. He has declared, without evidence, that there is already plenty of proof that Obama, Biden and Clinton, among others, were fueling the charges that his campaign had links to Russia — what he calls “the Russia hoax.” And he has pressured his secretary of state to agree to release more of Clinton’s emails before the election, reprising a yearslong fixation despite having defeated her four years ago.

Presidential historians say there is no case in modern times where the president has so plainly used his powers to take political opponents off the field — or has been so eager to replicate the behavior of strongmen. “In America, our presidents have generally avoided strongman balcony scenes — that’s for other countries with authoritarian systems,” Michael Beschloss, the presidential historian, wrote on Twitter after Trump returned from the hospital where he received COVID-19 treatment and removed his mask, while still considered contagious, as he saluted from the White House balcony.

Long ago, White House officials learned how to avoid questions about whether the president views his powers as fundamentally more constrained than those of the authoritarians he so often casts in admiring terms, including Vladimir Putin of Russia, Xi Jinping of China and Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey. They have something in common: Trump’s State Department has criticized all three for corrupting the justice systems in their countries to pursue political enemies.

Pompeo has always bristled when reporters have asked him to explain what the world should believe when it reads Trump’s most authoritarian-sounding tweets. He answers that what distinguishes the United States is that it is a “rule of law” nation, and then often turns the tables on his questioners, charging that even raising the issue reveals that the reporters are partisans, not journalists, intent on embarrassing Trump and the United States.

But his anger is often wielded as a shield, one that keeps him from publicly grappling with the underlying question: How can Washington take on other authoritarians around the world — especially China, Pompeo’s nemesis — for abusing state power when the president of the United States calls for political prosecutions and politically motivated declassifications?

“We’ve never seen anything like this in an American election campaign,” said R. Nicholas Burns, a former undersecretary of state who is now an informal adviser to Biden. “It reduces our credibility — we look like the countries we condemn for nondemocratic practices before an election.”

“I have worked for nine secretaries of state,” Burns said. “I cannot imagine any of them intervening in an election as blatantly as what we are seeing now. Our tradition is that secretaries of state stay out of elections. If they wanted to release Hillary Clinton’s emails, they could have done it in 2017, 2018 or 2019. It is an abuse of power by Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo.”

Another career diplomat who served as both ambassador to Russia and deputy secretary of state, William J. Burns, said that what Trump had ordered is “exactly the kind of behavior I saw so often in authoritarian regimes in many years as an American diplomat.”

“In dealing with Putin’s Russia or Erdogan’s Turkey, we would have protested and condemned such actions,” he said. “Now it’s our own government that’s engaging in them.

“The result,” said Burns, now the president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “is the hollowing out of our institutions at home and deep corrosion of our image and influence abroad.”

In the current cases, it is unclear whether Trump will get his wish — or whether his loyal appointees will slow-walk his requests. There is some evidence they are already looking for escape hatches.

Pompeo, the administration’s most conspicuous ideologue, Trump’s most vocal loyalist and a lawyer, was clearly taken aback when the president expressed displeasure, saying he was “not happy” that the State Department had not released emails sent through Clinton’s home server.

“You’re running the State Department, you get them out,” the president told Fox Business in an interview this week. “Forget about the fact that they were classified. Let’s go. Maybe Mike Pompeo finally finds them.”

Pompeo, one of his aides said Saturday, was in a box: The complaint about Clinton’s home server was that she was risking exposing classified emails by not using the State Department email system — a system Russia had already infiltrated — yet Trump was demanding that they be released in full. Just days before, he had announced, over Twitter, that he was using his executive power to declassify all of them, without redactions.

“We’ve got the emails,” Pompeo responded on Fox News. “We’re getting them out. We’re going to get all this information out so the American people can see it.”

But he also hinted that many of Clinton’s emails, mostly those that were stored on the State Department’s own system, have already been posted on the agency’s website, after an unusually diligent effort by the department to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests from Trump’s supporters. (They are often heavily redacted — to the point of containing no content — despite the president’s order to the contrary.)

“We’re doing it as fast as we can,” Pompeo told Dana Perino, a Fox News anchor who once served as President Bush’s press secretary. “I certainly think there’ll be more to see before the election.”

Pompeo clearly understands the problem: Even if he makes all of them public, they are unlikely to satisfy the president. Last year, the State Department’s own inspector general found that while Clinton had risked compromising classified information, she did not systematically or deliberately mishandle her emails.

William Barr may face an even greater challenge in satisfying the president. No attorney general since John Mitchell, who served Nixon and brought conspiracy charges against critics of the Vietnam War, bent the Justice Department more in a president’s direction. And Nixon himself, while urging the IRS to audit political opponents, stopped short of publicly calling for individual prosecutions. Yet in February, Barr told ABC News that Trump “has never asked me to do anything in a criminal case.” At the same time, he complained that the president’s tweets about the Justice Department “make it impossible for me to do my job.”

Now, clearly, the president has asked Barr to act in a criminal case — and not in a quiet phone call. Instead, he did it on Twitter and Fox News, expressing his deep disappointment with his second attorney general, for essentially the same reason he fired his first one, Jeff Sessions: insufficient blind loyalty.

His complaint appears to have been driven by Barr’s warning to the White House and other officials that there are likely to be no indictments before the election from the investigation being run by John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut. Durham is searching for evidence that the inquiry into Russia was a politically motivated effort to undercut his presidency.

Trump says the case is clear-cut. He told Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio host to whom he gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the last State of the Union address, that Durham has had “plenty of time to do it.”

“Unless Bill Barr indicts these people for crimes — the greatest political crime in the history of our country — then we’ll get little satisfaction, unless I win,” Trump said on Fox Business.

“If we don’t win,” he said, “that whole thing is going to be dismissed.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2020 The New York Times Company
Immigration impasse, coronavirus clobber iconic US crab industry


Chris Stein, AFP•October 10, 2020



4 / 4
Immigration impasse, coronavirus clobber iconic US crab industry
Blue crabs from Maryland's Chesapeake Bay are known across the United States

As crab season arrived in Hoopersville, Maryland, locals began asking where Jose Bronero Cruz was. For two decades, he'd traveled from Mexico to the remote town to pick crab meat, but this spring, he did not arrive.

Nor did any of the other foreign workers Janet Rippons-Ruark relies on to process meat from the blue crabs Maryland is famous for, exacerbating a worker shortage that ballooned into a crisis for the eastern US state's iconic industry.

"We've survived Covid. But we're in an area where there is just not local help," Rippons-Ruark said.

A shortage of visas for foreign workers combined with disruptions caused by the coronavirus pandemic paralyzed parts of Maryland's crab industry this year, forcing two-thirds of the major seafood processors to scrape by on the few employees they could find, or close entirely.


A batch of visas issued at the start of October finally allowed Cruz and other guest workers to enter the country, but amid the prolonged deadlock over immigration policy in Washington that shows no sign of abating soon, crab industry leaders fret for their future.

"Whether we'll survive the staffing thing... That remains to be seen," said Jack Brooks, president of the Chesapeake Bay Seafood Industries Association.


- Backbones of industry -


Blue crabs pulled from the waters of the Chesapeake Bay are perhaps Maryland's best-known export, with the state the second-largest producer of the 2018 US harvest valued at $188.4 million, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The industry is at the mercy of weather -- as well as regulations intended to protect crab habitats, but processors can also enjoy booms during years like 2020, when prices rose as the pandemic's arrival seemed to increase crab's popularity.

"We're not in what you call a growth industry at this point, but we do have a domestic product that a lot of people want," Brooks said.

Less desirable is the work of processing crab, which involves steaming them, cracking open their shell, removing their gills and picking out the meat for sale -- a job industry leaders say few Americans want to do, particularly since workers are employed for only part of the year.

Processors rely on guest workers from Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America entering on temporary H-2B visas to extract the crabs, though migrant rights groups have also accused the industry of giving workers poor housing and insufficient health care access.

For Cruz, journeying all the way from Tabasco state in southern Mexico to Hoopersville, located on a dead-end road so low-lying that waves splash onto it, is better than trying to find work back home.

"In Mexico, you don't make money," Cruz, 46, told AFP. "Here, you do."


- 'Nothing has improved' -


US law allows 66,000 H-2B visas to be issued each year and Brooks said the Maryland crab industry needs only around 450, but in the face of competition from industries such as forestry and landscaping, even getting those is tough.

More than 99,000 requests for visas were received at the start of 2020, according to the Department of Labor.

But Brooks said a change in the procedure for allocating the visas caused disaster when only three processors were given the authorizations they needed as the season began in April.

The government in March said it would give out 35,000 more visas, but the plan was abandoned when the pandemic descended.

That meant for the six months until the next batch of visas were given in October, six plants had to make due with what workers they could find, and some closed.

"We want it fixed," said Rippons-Ruark, who sold only live crabs until her workers arrived, and is now scrambling to fill orders for meat in the season's two remaining months. "It's hard being in business with no permanent solution."

Overhauling the US immigration system has been discussed for years but no proposal has made it through Congress, and as the November elections approach, processors are skeptical that President Donald Trump would relieve the visa shortage if given a second term.

Nor do they expect changes should his challenger, former vice president Joe Biden, unseat him.

"Biden was there all those years. He did nothing to help the situation," said Jay Newcomb, president of the county council who also owns a crab business, adding that under Trump, "nothing has gotten done."

Joe Spurry has managed to keep his business, Bay Hundred Seafood, staffed by bussing in workers from a distant Washington suburb.

But the group he's employed for years is nearing retirement, and Spurry has resigned himself to soon applying for H-2B visas.

"It's not the business that's holding us up," he said. "It's the labor force."

cs/mdl

Regeneron CEO: Trump 'is a case of one' and 'weakest evidence' for Covid-19 treatment

By Connor O’Brien, Politico•October 11, 2020

Regeneron chief executive Leonard Schleifer on Sunday said President Donald Trump's treatment with the company's experimental antibody cocktail is "a case of one," but stressed ongoing clinical trials still need to show its efficacy.

"The president's case is a case of one, and that's what we call a case report, and it is evidence of what's happening, but it's kind of the weakest evidence that you can get," Schliefer said in an interview on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Schleifer added that there were "some very interesting aspects" in Trump's case, such as his age. He also noted that the president "had some risk factors," and that Trump "did not have his own immune system in gear when he was sick and he got treated" with Regeneron's treatment.

He added that Trump‘s case is "perhaps the most analyzed case report ever" but is "just low down on the evidence scale that we really need."

He noted that clinical trials are the standard for whether it's effective.

"The real evidence has to come about how good a drug is and what it will do on average has to come from these large clinical trials, these randomized clinical trials, which are the gold standard. And those are ongoing," Schleifer said. "We've got some preliminary evidence that we've talked with the FDA, and we're going for an emergency use authorization, because we think it's appropriate at this time."

Trump, who was hospitalized at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center after being diagnosed with coronavirus, was treated with the experimental antibody drug and touted it as a "cure."

In an interview Sunday with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo, Trump said he's beaten Covid-19 and claimed immunity from the virus.

Asked on CBS by host Margaret Brennan whether Regeneron's drug creates immunity, Schleifer said, "It does."

"If you get it in our vial, if you will, that's probably going to last you for months," Schleifer said.
The rise of Gen Z could foretell the fall of Trumpism

By Laura Barrón-López, Politico•October 11, 2020

The evidence all points in one direction: Americans born after 1996, known as Generation Z, could doom not only Trumpism but conservatism as the country currently knows it.


Members of Generation Z who are of voting age — 18- to 23-year-olds — want more government solutions. They rank climate change, racism and economic inequality consistently in their top issues, according to polls, and they participated in greater numbers during their first midterm (in 2018) than previous generations did theirs.

As Republicans espouse “family values” and “religious liberty,” data finds that Generation Z, also known as Zoomers, are less likely than older Americans to be a member of a religious group — 4 in 10 don’t affiliate — and appear to care more about systemic racism and an equitable future than upholding traditional nuclear family structures, based on polling of their policy priorities.


To members of Generation Z, who have come of voting age in the past five years, President Donald Trump and Republicanism are one and the same. And most pollsters and experts on voting behavior agree that patterns are developed early — how a person votes in their early years, and the impressions they form from high school into young adulthood, stick with them in one form or another for decades.

Generation Z’s leftward tilt is already impacting the presidential race. A Harvard Youth Poll conducted between Aug. 28 and Sept 9, found Joe Biden’s support at (60 percent) among those aged 18 to 29 — ahead of Hillary Clinton’s (49 percent) in 2016 and Barack Obama’s (59 percent) in 2008.


For now, this generation remains a small part of the electorate. But as more Gen Zers reach voting age, they could force a different kind of conservatism to take root as Republicans compete for their votes, according to a POLITICO study of polling data and interviews with more than 15 experts. Gen Z’s beliefs in diversity, equality and social justice are likely to guide them for decades, pushing the Republican Party to either embrace a more inclusive, possibly libertarian message built around social and economic freedoms or lose with increasing regularity. Though some political prognosticators have viewed aging as a factor that could move younger generations toward Republicans eventually, there’s stronger evidence suggesting the imprint left on a given generation by early political encounters is more indicative of how they’ll vote over their lifetime than changes due to age.

“If you look at what the priorities are of younger voters, the Republican Party is really going to be at a crossroads in a few election cycles,” said Melissa Deckman, a Washington College political science professor who is writing a book about Generation Z, gender and political engagement. “The long-term trend is pretty clear: They definitely will guide our policies in a more leftward way going forward.”

As Trump-era Republicans double down on their appeals to a white base, Deckman said, the reality is “demographically, younger America looks very different than the base of the GOP.”

Most people who have studied the politics of Generation Z, and their older brother and sister millennials, say some version of the same thing: A political realignment is already underway, a realignment is coming, or that the opportunity exists for a seismic one driven by young voters.

By all accounts, the political ideology of Generation Z looks a lot like millennials — and millennials haven’t moved to the right as they’ve aged.

Pollsters, nonpartisan data scientists and former Republicans who’ve found themselves outside the party of Trump, told POLITICO that one of two things will happen. Either Republicans adapt, shifting their positions on climate change, racial injustice and social tolerance, or they lose. The cold assessment isn’t that different from the dire warnings of the 2012 Republican Party, which ultimately nominated a candidate four years later who took the opposite route, focusing on older white voters.

But the underlying threat posed by young people to the Republican Party is still there and the entrance of Generation Z into the electorate compounds it.

Deckman’s surveys of likely voters reveal that from 2019 to 2020 the percent of Generation Z women who identify as Democratic increased by 12 points from 57 to 69 percent. Women who identify as Republican or independent fell. Roughly half of Generation Z men identify as Democratic but a similar gender gap found among older voters exists within younger generations as well — more men within Generation Z are likely to identify as Republican than their female peers.

One of the defining differences between Gen Z and millennials is temperament. Generation Z is more combative, willing to engage in confrontation and unwilling to wait for change. When they first flexed their potential political power in the lead-up to 2018, gun control took center stage. Students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School led national marches and stormed Washington.
UNITED STATES - MARCH 25: David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez, survivors of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Fla., assemble on the East Front of the Capitol during a rally to organize letters to be delivered to congressional offices calling for an expansion of background checks on gun purchases on Monday, March 25, 2019. The Letters for Change event was held in commemoration of the one year anniversary of the March For Our Lives DC. 

“Politicians who sit in their gilded House and Senate seats funded by the NRA telling us nothing could have been done to prevent this,” said Stoneman Douglas student Emma Gonzalez, then 17 years old. “We call BS.”

“No millennial would say that,” said Morley Winograd, co-author of three books about millennials with fellow Democrat and former pollster Michael Hais.

Winograd and Hais refer to Generation Z by a different name, “Plurals” or the “Pluralist Generation.” It’s inspired by one of the defining characteristics of the young Americans: their racial and ethnic diversity. Nearly 1 in 5 are Latino — a notable shift from millennials.

Diversity defines a generation

Gen Z is inclusive and intolerant of discrimination at similar if not higher levels than millennials, said Winograd. For instance, half of Gen Z says society isn’t accepting enough of people who don’t identify as a man or woman, according to Pew Research Center.

Winograd’s theory of realignment goes like this: It started in 2008 when Barack Obama dominated with young voters and people of color. Yes, Trump won eight years later by coalescing white voters, but that doesn’t refute the case, he said. From 1968 to 2008, Republicans were the dominant party, winning seven of the 10 presidential elections to Democrats' three. The next 40 years, Winograd and Hais predict, will see a parallel tilt toward Democrats.

The “underlying demographic change” that started in 2008 has continued, said Chase Harrison, professor of survey research at Harvard.

“For ethnically and racially diverse young people, there isn't a whole lot to see in the Republican Party,” Harrison said.

The Republican National Committee’s 2013 autopsy report after Mitt Romney’s loss to Obama is “ever more prescient,” he added. “The demographic change isn't going away.”

At the time, the report put the outlook for Republicans bluntly: “Young voters are increasingly rolling their eyes at what the Party represents, and many minorities wrongly think that Republicans do not like them or want them in the country. When someone rolls their eyes at us, they are not likely to open their ears to us.”

But Republicans‘ Senate domination in 2014, and Trump’s victory in 2016 — through a base strategy that doubled down on white grievance — made it easy for Republicans to forget all about that 2013 autopsy. As Stuart Stevens, a veteran Republican strategist for Romney and other leading Republicans, wrote in his book “It Was All a Lie,” the GOP has long sought victory by ignoring voters of color.

“After [Republican presidential candidate Barry] Goldwater carried only Southern states and received a record-low of 7 percent of the Black vote, the party faced a basic choice: do what was necessary to appeal to more nonwhite voters, or build a party to win with white voters,” Stevens wrote. “It chose the latter, and when most successfully executed a race-based strategy was the foundation to many of the Republican Party’s biggest victories, from Nixon to Trump. And fittingly, absent serious change, race will define the demise of the Republican Party to a regional, Sun Belt-based party.”

The historically diverse Generation Z following directly behind the similarly liberal generation of millennials could be the final straw — forcing the Republican Party to reshape its foundations or lose.

Kristen Soltis Anderson, a Republican pollster, has been warning about a possible realignment for the past decade. Republicans hoped that as millennials aged they would become more conservative through marriage, having kids, or homeownership. But as they’ve started doing those things, Soltis Anderson said, they haven’t moved in their political preferences.

“Millennials got older and they did not become markedly more Republican in the process, which was kind of the gamble Republicans had always made,” she said.

All the data Soltis Anderson has scoured over, she said, suggests Generation Z is “very similar” to millennials. But she argued there’s still time for Republicans to make connections with Gen Zers because they are “new” and not all of them have entered their voting years.

To do that, however, will require a major shift by Republicans.

“The Republican Party will face a reckoning perhaps as early as this November,” former Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) said. “Does Trumpism survive Trump?”

There are days Dent thinks “Republicans are on a demographic death march.” He’s worried that even if Democrats win the White House and flip the Senate, Republicans might continue to turn a blind eye to young voters. Republican lawmakers will say “we didn’t yell loud enough,” he said.

In Dent’s view, “the Republican Party has to become much more socially tolerant and sensible.” That means meeting young voters where they are on LGBTQ rights, marriage equality and climate change, he said. Dent told CNN in August that he’s voting for Biden.

As then-RNC Chair Reince Priebus said in the aftermath of Romney’s 2012 loss, “there’s no one solution” to get young voters and people of color to feel welcome in the party. “There’s a long list of them.”

They are more focused on concrete policy, and how far the policy goes in eradicating inequities, than they are tethered to any political party, religious, or corporate institution.

Former Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.) sees Generation Z and its policy priorities as “warning signs for Trumpism” but not necessarily Republicans.

“Most millennial and Gen Z voters don't identify with the culture war-based paradigm that Trumpism proposes for the country,” Curbelo said. “If Trump loses there will be a vacuum in the Republican Party and who fills it and what ideas fill it will depend on whether or not Republicans can start courting young voters again, something they're not doing now.”

“Every day that the Republican Party embraces Trumpism is a day where they're losing young voters,” he added.

Climate change and BLM looms large

Since he lost his seat to a Democrat in 2018, Curbelo said, Republicans in Congress have been “evolving rapidly” on climate change “in Trump’s shadow.” Curbelo argued the trend of Republicans “accepting the science” is “irreversible.”

Trump, the leader of the party, and many people in his White House and across the GOP share his stated view that climate change is a “hoax.” And despite a push by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy earlier this year to introduce narrow and modest measures to combat climate change, a number of Republicans within the House opposed that effort and powerful GOP outside groups attacked it.

Generation Z, however, isn’t looking for half-measures.

Climate change is consistently one of the top three issues named by young people age 18-29, according to surveys conducted by Tuft’s Tisch College Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, or CIRCLE. And according to Pew Research Center, Gen Z and millennials are the most likely to see a link between human activity and climate change.

In the recent Harvard Youth Poll, the economy, coronavirus and racial justice were selected the most as the top three issues of those aged 18 to 24, followed closely by health care and climate change.

And more and more young Americans are participating in protests to express their policy wants. Protest participation among those 18 to 24 has increased, said Kei Kawashima-Ginsberg, director of CIRCLE. Participation went from 5 percent in 2016 to 16 percent in 2018 and then 27 percent in 2020, according to CIRCLE’s data, she noted. “The issue priorities among youth overall suggest that a lot of the energy and activism is focused on issues that are often supported by Democrats,” Kawashima-Ginsberg said.

The recent summer of Black Lives Matter protests against the killings of Black people by police could further entrench the views of Generation Z.

In a POLITICO/Morning Consult poll of members of Gen Z, support for Black Lives Matter remains high at 68 percent, with 51 percent strongly supporting the movement. By comparison, 54 percent of all registered voters support the BLM movement, with just 32 percent strongly backing it. Among older generations, only 26 percent of Gen X support the movement, and 44 percent of baby boomers, those born between 1946 and 1964. Similarly, 56 percent of Gen Z strongly agree that racism is a “major problem” in the country compared with 43 percent of Gen X and 39 percent of boomers.

The BLM movement has evolved from one that was predominantly Black just four years ago, to one that in 2020 became the largest multiracial movement in the country’s history. Terrance Woodbury, a Democratic pollster for HIT Strategies, views that evolution as one of “Black people versus the police” to a movement of “young people versus racism.”

BLM protests in 2020 are far more diverse but predominantly young. Republicans, Woodbury asserts, are “positioning racism as a partisan issue.”

“As long as Democrats are on the right side of the No. 1 issue for young people, they have an opportunity to attract those young people into the coalition,” he said.

Transgender rights strike a chord

Deckman, the Washington College professor, sees a similar collision course between Republicans and youth like Generation Z on issues of LGBTQ rights, transgender rights and countering the traditional values of the religious right.

Deckman said her surveys reveal that though a majority of Generation Z identify as cis-male and cis-female — meaning their gender identities match their sex assigned at birth — roughly 1 in 4 identify as queer, either transgender or “genderqueer.” A third of Gen Zers say they know someone who uses gender-neutral pronouns to refer to themselves and nearly 6 in 10 say forms or online profiles should allow more options than “man” or “woman,” according to Pew Research Center.

Though Trump says he’s pro-LGTBQ, boasting that he’s the first president to enter office as a supporter of marriage equality, his administration instituted a transgender ban in the military and revoked an Obama-era guidance protecting trans students in public schools. And days after a Supreme Court ruling in June provided workplace protections for gay, lesbian and transgender under federal civil rights law, the Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services moved to roll back health care protections for transgender people — a regulation blocked in August by a federal judge.

And many members of the religious right have made opposition to transgender rights a battle cry, opposing such policies in public schools across the country. Trump’s campaign didn’t announce an LGBTQ coalition until August and blamed the coronavirus as the reason for the delay.

Republicans’ idea of religious liberty, particularly as it relates to discrimination against LGBTQ people, said Deckman, “does not at all resonate with younger Americans.”

In the POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, 49 percent of voting-age Gen Z respondents identified as agnostic or atheist.

A realignment isn’t destiny


Broadly, Gen Z also views Republicans in Congress more unfavorably (51 percent) than Democrats in Congress (34 percent), according to the POLITICO/Morning Consult poll of voting age members of the youngest generation.

But while survey after survey has found that members of Generation Z identify far more as left of center, Democrats and progressive outside groups warn that a realignment won’t just magically manifest without a targeted effort.

Linnea Stanton, 21, Midwest regional director for March for our Lives, plans to vote for Biden despite having preferred Elizabeth Warren in the primary. But Stanton offered a stinging critique of the Biden campaign’s efforts to appeal to younger, more diverse, voters, saying they smacked of pandering.

“Biden played [the wildly popular Spanish-language song] ‘Despacito’ off of his phone at a rally — and that's the thing that went viral from his rally, not him talking about his policy points,” Stanton said. “I can tell you that [Kamala] Harris was wearing timbs [Timberland boots] off of the plane last week, but I can't tell you what she actually stands for.”

Stanton wants to see more from Harris on the “bold and holistic approach” she outlined as a presidential candidate on gun violence. Though Stanton is a registered Democrat, many members of her generation register as independents or unaffiliated — a decision pollsters ascribe to young voters’ aversion to institutions rather than a marker of their political persuasions.

About half of the young Americans, primarily of Gen Z, who registered to vote through NextGen America, a progressive group founded by billionaire Tom Steyer, selected no party preference. According to data provided by NextGen, from 2019 to 2020 roughly 51 percent of those they registered chose to be unaffiliated, 41 percent selected a Democratic affiliation, and 8 percent Republican. The group noted that its results could lean more Democratic as it actively tried to register more people during the primaries, which in some states are closed to independents.
Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., arrives to speak at Shaw University during a campaign visit in Raleigh, N.C., Monday, Sept. 28, 2020. (AP Photo/Gerry Broome)

“The Democratic Party is going to have a lot of work to do over the next five, 10, 15 years to ensure they're giving these young people, a reason to put a D next to their name,” said Ben Wessel, executive director of NextGen America.

Jeff Weaver is well aware of the opportunity Generation Z presents for Democrats. And that’s what he sees it as: an opportunity, not destiny. Weaver, former senior adviser to Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign, saw the senator’s support among young Americans remain strong even as they aged from 2016 to 2020.

“Gen Zers [are] the most progressive generation in a long time,” Weaver said. But Democrats will have to bring in and empower them within the party structure, he said, something not all local party chairs are keen on doing.

Weaver also offered a word of caution to Democrats who think a realignment is foretold. Not long after Obama won the White House in 2008, a pollster briefed chiefs of staff in the Senate; Weaver was one of them at the time. The pollster said the 2008 election marked a major shift in the electorate and predicted Republicans wouldn’t win the White House “for the next 25 years.”

“That's what they said, literally what they said,” Weaver recalled.

Obama’s strength with young voters, which propelled him over the edge in key states, undoubtedly “shows the power of being in coalitions with young people,” Weaver said. But “anyone who thinks it’s on autopilot is fooling themselves.”
TED
Earth 'squeezed like an orange': 
Call for climate action

AFP•October 10, 2020


This handout photo courtesy of TED shows Pope Francis speaking at Countdown Global Launch 2020 on October 10, 2020, in which he warned that Earth is being squeezed "like an orange"More

Celebrities from filmmaker Ava DuVernay to Britain's Prince William to the Pope himself issued powerful calls Saturday calling for people to mobilize and unify to confront the climate crisis.

Here are some quotes from the free, streamed TED event

"The Earth must be worked and nursed, cultivated and protected. We cannot continue to squeeze it like an orange."
-- Pope Francis

"I want to cast my vote in favor of the planet."
-- Filmmaker Ava DuVernay

"Young people no longer believe that change is too difficult. They believe that the climate crisis and the threat to our biodiversity deserve our full attention and ambition."
-- Prince William

"We let capitalism morph into something monstrous. The truth is business is screwed if we don't fix climate change."
-- US economist Rebecca Henderson

"The fossil fuel industry knows how to stop global warming, but they are waiting for someone else to pay and nobody is calling them out on it."
-- Oxford professor and climate science scholar Myles Allen

"What happens in the next 10 years will likely determine the state of the planet we hand over for future generations. Our children have every right to be alarmed."
-- Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research director Johan Rockstrom

"We must make sure each country has a plan to zero emissions. Billions of people around the world are already suffering from our failure to act."
-- UN secretary general Antonio Guterres

"We can and need to be a part of this movement: eat local food, ride your bike more, understand what you are spending your money on, vote for people who share our vision. Let's change the world.
-- Music star Prince Royce




"Black people breathe in the most toxic air relative to the general population, and it is people of color who are more likely to suffer in the climate crisis. It gives all new meaning to the Black Lives Matter slogan 'I can't breathe.'"
-- British Parliament member David Lammy


"We can do nothing and hope the problem goes away; we can despair and fall into paralysis, or we can become stubborn optimists and rise to the challenge."
-- Christiana Figueres, former executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

"California uses more electricity playing video games than the entire country of Senegal uses overall. There is a mind-blowing gap between the energy haves and the energy have-nots."
-- Kenyan energy researcher Rose Mutiso

"What about committing to never buying a car or two-wheeler again with an internal combustion engine?"
-- Climate activist Xiye Bastida

"Tree restoration is not a silver bullet, there is no silver bullet. It is part the solution."
-- Ecology professor Thomas Crowther

"The good news is it is now clearly cheaper to save the planet than to ruin it. The bad news is we are running out of time."
-- Prominent Silicon Valley investor John Doerr

gc/st/acb